Victoria 3: Agriculture Industries Strategy
Vložit
- čas přidán 2. 06. 2024
- The spreadsheet is WIP, but you can find it here:
docs.google.com/spreadsheets/...
Check out my main CZcams here:
/ @generalistideas
Other Strength/Fitness CZcams, Generalist Strength:
/ @generaliststrength7578
Instagram:
/ peter.curtiss
0:00 Intro
0:45 General Strategy & Tech Inflection Point
3:15 Migration & Subsistence Farms Opportunity Cost
5:12 Spreadsheet Explanation
7:02 Grain
9:00 Livestock Ranches
10:05 Plantations & Grain Prices
11:12 Cotton Throughput Bonus
12:14 Opium is Most Efficient
13:49 Synthetic Plants
17:04 A Strategy for Throughput
18:56 A Strategy for Incorporation
20:55 Summary
Tags:
Strategy Games, Victoria 3, Vicky 3, Interest Groups, Economics, Production Methods, Colonization, Playing Tall, Grand Strategy Games, Paradox Interactive, Laws, Passing Laws, Production Methods, Politics, Authority, IG Approval, Vic 3, Which is Best, Best, Better, How to, Mistake
Production Method Efficiency, Sulfur, Opium, Trading, Logging Camps, Chemical Plants, Goods Pricing, Base Price of Goods, Subsistence Farms, Rural Resources, Rural Farming, Rural Plantations, Manufacturing Industries, Consumer Industries, Consumer Goods, Clothing, Tailors,
Economies of Scale, Investment Pool Transfer, Publicly Traded, Improved Fertilizer, Opportunity Cost, Farms, Plantations, Pumpjacks, Rye, Wheat, Rice, Maize, Millet, Grain, Livestock, Fabric, Cotton Plantations, Coffee Plantations, Dye Plantations, Opium Plantations, Tea Plantations, Tobacco Plantation, Sugar Plantations, Banana Plantations, Silk Plantations, Synthetic Plants - Hry
CORRECTIONS:
As Grzegorz points out, rice also has worse labor saving PMs, which knocks it down a bit. I haven't mathed this out, so I'm not sure, but I think it comes out ahead in terms of efficiency still.
It's kinda dumb you get punished for developing subsistence farms into real farms. Hope they change that in the future, farming seems to have too many drawbacks.
Yeah, they need to go back to the drawing board a little, esp w/ how it is for rice countries. The nerf hits pretty bad. At the same time, I think 1400 arable land was way too much, so SOME kind of nerf was needed. They have to, to some extent, divorce pops from arable land potential I think.
@Generalist Gaming But keeping subsistence farms is bad no? You say it deprives particular goods and nukes migration but removing peasants and making agriculture improves SoL. High standard of living means more migration and having too many many farms that are orchards or produce multiple goods can be less efficient. You'll need the value of goods over others so having dedicated states for specialised goods and some diversified states would be more efficient right?
Especially with the changes to agriculture in the next update that's coming. Also socialist economy means it pays the workers more which increases income, taxes and SoL.
It kind of interesting that this was a major reason that India took so long to industrialize historically. Its immense population meant that more efficient farming or manufacturing methods would have caused mass unemployment.
@@andrewgreenwood9068 actually wrong tho, the british just forcefully deindustrialized india czcams.com/video/gIzQxNZfGM4/video.html
Really like these tutorials, the idea to import grain etc was a massive game changer for my games where I look to rapidly industrialise and trade has definitely become much more important to me generally after watching your videos!
Glad you find them helpful! Yeah, grain import is HUGE
I just finished working through your tutorial playlist- it's like drinking information through a fire hose, but damn is it worth it. I went from struggling to do well in this game (even if I really enjoy it) to doing very, very well. Keep up the good work!
Glad you're enjoying them/putting them to good use!
This is a great guide. I simplify the throughput bonus importance to: raw goods: throughout is generally excellent. Manufacture goods: throughput is unimportant, though occasionally good, also occasionally bad. Basically the larger percentage of a building’s expenses are from labor costs the better throughput bonuses are.
Heavy manufacturing can actually suffer from too much throughput if your input goods are already nearing a shortage. For manufacturing I think it’s more important to spread industries so you can change PMs gradually so you don’t spike the cost of input goods.
I respectfully disagree with your analysis on the manufactured goods. Throughput is always good - the building will produce more goods with the same labor/ the same amount of goods with less labor, which means the equilibrium employment is lower, freeing workers for other jobs and pulling down the cost of labor (bugs aside) making everything more profitable. You can also generally get more throughput on manufactories.
I do agree it is better the larger a percentage of the expenses are coming from labor.
I think it's better to overbuild sell orders proactively before you get the next tier tech, so that the swap is less uncomfortable. It makes the manufactories less profitable sure, but it makes the resource industries more profitable and (as long as you don't have shortage) it has increased efficiency/output into your economy.
I know it is inefficient, but playing as traditional values, peaceful, agrarian Qing was the most pleasent experience, I had in Victoria 3. Every interest group is happy, no revolts, no conflicts after Opium wars. Life is good🎉
Thanks for all the advice you give. I really appreciate it.
Glad I can be helpful!
Interesting thing that I realized recently. Subsistence farms provide aristocrats by themselves and are rarely filled to capacity. So when you build agriculture, while you are definitely adding new aristocrat jobs, you aren't actually _creating_ new aristocrats. In reality, one of the main reasons the land-owner IG diminishes so quickly when industrializing, is because most capitalist jobs are actually being taken up by pops who had aristocrat jobs. So industrializing doesn't just take more of the pie from the landowners by inflating the industrialst IG's clout, it also deprives the landowner IG of it's primary pops.
That being said, most of the pops employed in subsistence farms, including many aristocrats, are politically inactive and so are not contributing clout to anyone. What's more, plantation, farm, and ranch jobs are all more profitable than subsistence farms, and wealthier pops provide more clout, so the landowners do definitely get more clout.
In the end, this changes nothing about how we should approach agriculture, I just think it's an interesting thing to note
Yeah, this is an excellent point (and why you can have aristocrat powerful with literally no farms), but these buildings are super unprofitable relative to constructed ones. It is interesting though.
I generally like your analyses however I somewhat disagree with this one.
In my opinion the grain farms are fairly good for early economy development (after choppy boys) simply because they deprecate the price of grain which means the lower classes are able to buy more advanced products such as clothes or furniture or perhaps simply more grain and wood which further pushes consumption created by simply lowering the price of food. Furthermore you can also cut the profits of the landowners by simply tying up their farms to tool consumption which will transfer this wealth to the capitalists which also frees up some of the labor that will just go back to working on the substinence farms.
On the opposite end: while the plantations seem good they have a really bad impact on interest groups: they are almost entirely self serving. They produce luxury goods and in a pre-industrial economy it means that you will only serve the upper classes, the aristocrats and to lesser degree the middle class, the priests. Neither of these groups you want to support if you want to reform your country but there is a bit caveat to this: if you want to create an economy focused on exporting agricultural goods (if you are playing in South America or some such) then this is might just be a fairly okay idea to ship these cash crops to wealthier countries while you yourself tax them by the way of tarrifs. This is especially good pre per-capita taxation reform.
tl;dr: Thinking solely about ideal impact of GDP is probably not the best idea and in my opinion its more optimal to simply stimulate the market in a way to acheive optimal long term growth.
I'm having a hard time replying to this (in terms of practice) because I really value dissenting opinions and I don't know how to put this in a way that doesn't sound standoffish, but I really think you're mistaken, and that building grain industries, before you even have Soil-Enriched Farming, is really bad. Will it wreck the economy? No. But buildings in general will have a positive effect. But, other than goods that have no buy orders, I can't really think of a (non gov) building I'd want to actively build less than grain farms (maybe, as you point out, luxury plantations, but I think those scale better into the lategame, and will generally be a lot more profitable early).
I agree with you that having grain cheap is really good, but I think it's extremely preferable that as many sell orders are coming from trade routes, in terms of proportion, and as few as possible are coming from local buildings. I think it's essential to conceptually divorce the idea of having sell orders (ie you want cheap grain) from the idea of producing something yourself. Maybe in MP if everyone is protecting the domestic supply of grain this will be good?
On top of lower IPT considerations, farms also employ clergy (and aristocrats) which means, from an IG perspective, it will be longer until you can get the double bonus from both the Intelligentsia and the Industrialists if you lean really grain heavy. I think that these bonuses are pretty important for long term growth. But, if you're thinking especially long term, it's REALLY bad to have a lot of your arable land dedicated to grain because eventually grain floods the market and the price becomes EXTREMELY depressed, and there is no way to stimulate it back up. You can create demand for dyes, silk, fabric, and to a lesser extent the luxury goods. Grain will just stay cheap (food industry demand gets gated by fish), and as SoL climbs this cheap grain will have a smaller and smaller positive effect on propping up SoL higher than what you'd expect for a given normal wage (people consume other goods for food). Also if you look at the labor profile of condensing pump engine, relative to soil enriched farming let's say, the avg wage multiplier is much higher (farms are mostly laborers), and will do much better at pulling up SoL longer term than the farms (which admittedly produce a lot more of the lower jobs faster) because the avg wage is higher.
Plantations are notably making dyes, fabric, and silk, which are pretty important for clothes, which is also really good for raising SoL (I think you should just go clothes if you want to push SoL, rather than grain). Opium is also just an insane PM once you are on pub traded and pumpjacks. I don't think you should really build any actively before these two tho.
I do think that an exporting agrarian society might become optimal depending on the numbers of the ownership changes that appear to be coming in 1.3. Capitalist owned grain farms would be fantastic.
I think there are maybe some timing windows where it's okay (or even good), but wood into grain prioritization is a tough sell for me.
Edit: If you're going to push an arable good early, I think the one to push is Cotton Plantations, because of the throughput bonus is significantly stronger in the early game and it is also a good used for construction as well as the clothing industries.
@@generalistgaming Just curious if your thoughts on this have still stood the recent updates?
I’m unable to play on 1.5 without it crashing so I’ve no way of testing
Alright, I'm subscribing. Your details are exactly what I'm looking for in Vicky3
Glad you enjoyed!
Thanks for the video, man! Really helped put some of the math into perspective for me
Glad it helped!
Hey, I have noticed in your series your impeccable way of following an order regarding your actions and plan of the moment, what do you recommend to have that more integrated? I tend to forget my next steps, even more when there is a day without playing a save. Its just experience and hours or you have like annotations or something like that?
I've got a piece of paper in front of me w/ like 6 topics written on it, and no other notes. You can probably see me glance at it when I change topics, or when I'm introing what I'll talk about/summarize. Sometimes I forget things, and try to put them in a pinned comment.
I notably do all my vids in one shot, so sometimes I scrap like 20 mins of recording because I flub something and need to do another take. Generally the vids tend to be a little bit better if I scrapped a really long one beforehand (and I won't really need to refer to the notes).
Best guides to vic 3 man
Glad you enjoy!
Amazing video!
Glad you enjoyed it! Thanks for the algo juice!
Do you think a video on when and how to use autoexpand would be an idea? I have seen you use it, but I don't really know when to do so.
It's an idea, but I have to test first. I think you might just do it when you get publicly traded actually (and another of pumpjacks/the grain tech), which is kind of a period where you can still be depressing the autoque the trading, but not for long.
Also- is that a mega-germany that formed in the Italy game? Did the AI manage that or did they have help from you?
Austria did that all by themselves, other than we traded w/ them? I think I've seen Austria pull that off in like 3-4/4 of my 1.2.7 runs now lol. Prussia DoWs them and gets slapped
I couldn't focus because of the cursed Byzantium with Ottos vassal.
*blursed, truly, this is one of the timelines of all time
That germany tho
Hi, can you make tutorial on how to spread industry within your country?
I presonally come with conclusion that it is best to centralize your industry in small numbers of provinces. That is because these provinces will gather huge bonuses to migration needed to fullfil factories jobs.
Centralized under a encourage manufacturing decree at first, yeah. Then having each state specialize in one industry, then spread a bit more. The informing heuristic is you want to get your highest lvl buildings that are currently under the economies of scale cap up to it
@@generalistgaming I agree on making one specific factory in your empire and expanding it endlessly.
But If you want to have Laissez-faire law it isn't good to make only one specific industry in province because if this industry is low profit (chemical plant) then ppl will not come here (low margin for wage increase). Also this low wargin can evolve into loss, this in turn make factory fire workers, which generate turmoil. Turmoil especialy can kill migration attraction so this can force fired workers to move out and make difficult for factory to find new.
I usually make two specific factories in province and make them expand.
Hello Mister Generalist Gaming very nice work thanks
Glad to be helpful!
You don't consider taxes in your calculations. Taxes significantly change the calculation. In most situations, the best economic strategy early game is going to have maximum tax rates, and full consumption taxes. This nets you ~20% of a building's earnings on landed tax, and ~45% on proportional. Early game, tier-1 buildings (200 construction point cost) usually have a 50% profit margin. Thus on interventionism and landed tax, tax + investment pool contribution for capitalist-owned buildings is ~30% of a building's earnings, and tax + investment for aristocrat-owned buildings is ~25% of a building's earnings. Thus, on landed tax, as long as an aristocrat-owned building earns at least 1/5 more per construction point than the best available capitalist-owned building, agriculture is better for your fiscal balance. For proportional and per-capita taxation the margin is even smaller.
The real reason to be wary of agriculture in the early game is political economy. Every construction point invested into aristocrat-owned buildings is a point not invested into capitalist-owned buildings. This strengthens the landowners and weakens the industrialists, which delays political reform, including growth-accelerating economic reform. This is a nuanced point though since wages rise once we run out of peasants. Since aristocrat-owned buildings generally have lower labor productivity than tier-2+ capitalist-owned buildings, aristocrats' wealth and political power is reduced more by rising wages than capitalists'. Thus, if building agriculture helps us de-peasant faster, it may actually accelerate reform.
Also, your analysis doesn't consider the impact that building has on market prices, and by extension the cost of government goods. Landed tax in particular is bad enough that for goods that are demanded primarily by the government (like iron, small arms, cannons, clippers, and man-o-wars), depressing the price through overbuilding and export duties/isolationism is better for the government's fiscal balance than optimizing for tax revenue and investment pool contribution. While fabric is a government good, a significant portion of your fabric is consumed by your pops, and so overbuilding fabric to depress the price rarely delivers a better ROI for the state than building whatever has the highest tax and investment pool contribution per construction point. The downside of price manipulation is that it only works if the player abstains from significant customs unions and trade agreements. These are usually more valuable than price manipulation. I've only ever found price manipulation useful when playing countries that start off backwards and isolationist.
I wish one day they can patch the game good enough so i can actually apply what i learn from the video and enjoy the game.
1.3 drops May 22!
Does this logic hold up for Qing? Statistically, all humans on earth live in Qing and if you, as Qing, don’t produce agriculture there probably won’t be enough in the world to satisfy your needs
It brutally and extra holds up for Qing, since every time you build over one of their rice subsistence farms (which has more output and employment than a regular one) you delete it, and with it a ton of grain output. You have to build double the amount of normal jobs per farm building in order to not net cause unemployment.
IMO there is too much food in Vic3. There is no real potential for famines, no motivation to build farms or conquer/colonise fertile land. Subs farms are too productive and the land is too plentiful. Europe and Asia should struggle to feed themselves like irl.
The drought events (and other events that can reduce throughput) are now almost meaningless, because throughput in 1.2 doesn't go negative anymore, due to a bug I guess, it did so in 1.1.
Def too much food. Idk, they need more systems overlayed over their robust base. I think they'll get there in time though
"Destroy, nuke, kill". Your econ guides sound like a war movie 😂
Wouldn't it be better to have less owners pops? They have highest wage, so playing 50 pop per level extra should decrease money going in dividends? Isn't better to let 100 owners get more in dividends then have 150 but losses some for extra wages?
The point of Publicly Traded for farms and plantations is to shift the dividends towards capitalists which have twice the re-investment of aristocrats. Yes your business will be less profitable but it is still worth it.
For everything else the usefulness of Publicly Traded is debatable. It's mainly used for inflating the Industrialist clout.
Mainly what The Grouch pointed out, although there are some more subtle effects of the pub traded PM. An example of the subtle one is by having more owners you dilute the dividends and you change the consumption profile of capitalists so that they consume less fine art.
Fun fact playin as qing now its nearly impossible because later on your pop growth is so fast and huge that you become like 2.0 bilion and you cant even produce that much consumer goods , and of course your country explodes in radicals by side i am playing with a mod that allow me to creat new arable lands and now playing qing is playable again ...
I think they're still quite strong, just that the beginning is pretty uncomfortable - but I'd need to take a closer look
@@generalistgaming with 1300 construction sector in 1860-70 you simply can not produce industry/resource jobs fast enough to keep up with the rate of spawning unemployed people (natural growth rate). Colonizing africa with colonial resettlement helps a bit (so your massive unemployed workforce moves to africa for substance farm jobs)... but it is a really _really_ hard country to play in 1.2 with a ton of micro and math involved they are still strugling. also they start with welfare institution which is really crippling your eco, canceling poor laws (combined with high taxes) will create a _huge_ amount of radicals to deal with
Hilariously enough Millet is the worst historically. Rye makes great whiskey and bread. Wheat is calorie dense and easy to grow. Rice is ridiculously calorie dense. And millet just exists… I really wish they added more nuance to the game than just “imperialize the world”
But imperializing is what we gamers do best :/
I feel like in a multiplayer game agriculture may actually be more interesting because most players will create significantly less agriculture than the ai and without the absolute glut of food the game has now being a grain exporter should be more viable.
Maybe? I think there might be more along the lines of joining a customs union, rather than exporting, and playing kingmaker by going agrarian
@@generalistgaming I was thinking more be an exporter and then cut everyone you don't want to do well off destabilizing their entire country.
@@andrewgreenwood9068 I've thought that subsidizing paper (as a good, this seems to be the worst to run a sudden shortage in) for this reason might be decent, and then dumping it. The problem is if a player notices they can just build up some paper themselves, despite it not being profitable because of the dumping, so that it can employ up when the embargo goes through.
They really need to make rice farms twice as "big". As in twice the input, workforce and output. It's beyond silly that you create 5k unemployed people when you build a farm in Eastern Asia. Especially since they already start with terrible unemployment with the arable land nerf.
It's like super pronounced on China and Japan. They need a better system for crowding and migration that is divorced from arable land (at least partially) in order to balance better. Cuz I also wasn't a huge fan of like 1400 arable land Jianxi and 100 arable land Cali
"Farms only contribute %10 percent to investment pool so don't build it"
This makes 0 sense. You are not building farms for investment pool. You are building farms for grain. Investment pool is side bonus.
This was a lot more important on the patch when this came out, where IP represented a larger share of your income and trade was better. The idea very much isn't/wasn't get no grain, just get it through trade and don't build it. I still think you want to avoid building grain generally in the early game, but there are some situations where it makes sense. Notably rice is a bit of a weird one since it's super op rn, and should probably be built in small amounts even in the early game if you have a lot of labor. Rye is also a lot better now than it was then and can make sense to build.
Man the pains of being a paradox gamer and having to rely to mods to revert half of every patch. Why do peasants become unemployed instead of workers? Why is throughout so strong? Why are socialist economics so weak? Why is their no bonus to producing domestically instead of shipping literally across the world? Thanks for the analysis though!
I mean, to be fair, I def thought Jianxi having over 1,400 arable land and California only having a 100 was a bit of a problem - their rework was an attempt to balance this. They'd need to detatch, or partially detatch, migration from arable land to have a satisfactory rework
millet and rice have shitty automation, they feel like a waste of manpower, if u syphon mapower china or st like that its fine but still sounds bad for me.
Edit. Mistake on my part millet have regular automation.
Millet has access to the regular grain automation, and I think the rice's lack of it is made up by the increased efficiency, but this is a good call and I forgot about this. In general though, yeah, shouldn't build agri
Bro you’re so thoughtful, you deserve more than to be drowned out by bad music. Turn it down