Store Page
Victoria 3
All Discussions Screenshots Artwork Broadcasts Videos Workshop News Guides Reviews

Victoria 3

Store Page
Victoria 3 >  Workshop > vflower's Workshop
540 ratings
Historical Population Growth & Resources (1.8.7)
Description Discussions21 Comments1174 Change Notes
19
5
10
4
3
5
4
2
3
2
   
Award
Favorite
Favorited
Unfavorite
Balance, Economy and Buildings, Gameplay, Historical, Map
File Size
Posted
Updated
2.677 MB
Oct 29, 2022 @ 1:01am
May 6 @ 1:45pm
147 Change Notes ( view )
Created by
vflower
Online
See all 631 collections (some may be hidden)
65,934 Unique Visitors
16,085 Current Subscribers
1,276 Current Favorites

Subscribe to download
Historical Population Growth & Resources (1.8.7)

Description
This mod strives to align gameplay more with the historical realities of the time period, making it less arcade, so it's not for everyone! It makes the following changes:

[Note: Some updates have been made recently in preparation for 1.9 which might not be ideal for the current patch, such as the high amount of starting ports and higher scarcity of resources, but it's perfectly playable right now and I want to keep it up to date]

  • Arable land in states replaced by Population Capacity which is based on population that was reached historically. States get higher birth rates and migration attraction when below their historical capacity, while birth rates and migration attraction are lowered when above capacity (this is a scaled modifier).
  • Full rework of all resources on the map, based on extensively researched historical production and known reserves during the game's time period. Agricultural resources are capped individually as well now.
  • Starting setup (buildings, trades) completely reworked.
  • Population growth, migration and starvation modifier adjusted
  • New state traits added and existing ones rebalanced. Many state traits provide powerful bonuses to encourage specialization in a more resource-scarce world.
  • Malaria is present in all states where it's historically appropriate and its effects can be removed by researching Malaria Prevention, but states that still struggle with malaria today keep the Severe Malaria trait for the whole game.
    States with Severe Malaria can be colonized after researching Quinine, states in the Congo and Sahara with Malaria Prevention
  • Different parts of the world get unique subsistence farms with different outputs, peasant consumption increased, so subsistence matters more for GDP
  • Various adjustments to production methods, chiefly for agriculture: less scaling with more technology, so building levels matter more
  • Adjusted pop needs to match historical production and consumption better and generate more food demand

You can find a more detailed list of changes in the changelogs to the right, I list them there whenever I make an update!

I made this mod because I enjoy modding. I don't take money for it and I don't have a team, so if I'm busy with other things or lack motivation, then the mod may not get updated in the future. I don't actually play the game other than to test my mod, but my current plan is to keep updating it for new patches on the day they release - until EU5 comes around!

If you want to use any part of this mod for any other mod, go ahead.
Popular Discussions View All (21)
3
Apr 26 @ 8:40pm
Russian localisation
DarkSition
13
Sep 21, 2024 @ 3:46pm
Game crashing following last update
ricardo!
1
Apr 16 @ 4:42am
It is not possible to produce agricultural products
Algo aqui
1,174 Comments
< >
vflower  [author] May 26 @ 6:43am 
Yes, but that's down to balance in completely different areas of the game, such as construction sector output, construction costs, snowballing of construction, etc.
It's also not possible to represent the fact that the phosphorus-rich iron ore in Lorraine was only useful on an industrial scale after the invention of the Siemens-Martin process...
ZMF May 26 @ 6:33am 
But this mod does touch lots of balance issues of the game. So I'd say this is a serious matter. Imagine Lorraine area taking over iron and steel production in 5 years and Minnesota in 10. That's just a lot faster than what's historically plausible.
vflower  [author] May 26 @ 5:41am 
The total potential for resources is weighted towards the end of the timeframe, yes. Because that's what the potential ultimately represents.
New York and Pennsylvania start out with decent iron production and a high population, which makes it attractive to max out their iron mines first. Later on, more iron can be produced in the Iron Range. I think that's perfectly historical.

It's similar with the UK, it starts out with the highest iron production in the world, and potential to increase that production a bit more. But just as in real life, it will eventually fall behind France and Germany(with Alsace-Lorraine), since England doesn't have the same potential for iron production as Lorraine does.

Now it might be that these developments can happen faster in the game than they did IRL, but that's a question of game balance and how fast you can industrialize in the game when minmaxing - not something that my mod deals with.
ZMF May 26 @ 4:55am 
So again, it's a comparative scale problem and how things should be weighted.

This way of representing the potential sorta renders the historical importance of New York and Penn almost non-existing and urges non-historical gameplay. Ofc I realize this is a hard balance but maybe gating it like some other mods behind tech could be a solution here.


For the arable land thing it was my bad. I missed cotton in Louisiana. But for the iron thing I'd argue it requires some sorta consistency
ZMF May 26 @ 4:53am 
While the great lakes certainly took off after 1890 and reached a level unprecedented, it was very late for the game's time span. And for that matter why Is Wisconsin also high up there. That production should be attributed to mainly Michigan and Minnesota with Minnesota doubling Michigan somehow if we weight late-game periods highly.


As for Lancashire, it does have its own Iron production.

By 1854 Total Produce of Furness District - - 464,853 of iron.


Ofc that's dwarfed by Total produce for Yorkshire - 1,197,417 + 242,100 but yorkshire in the mod is also only just two times Lanchashire sitting at 20, and even we spread some to Midlands, it's low to represent its pre-1895 volume, which was defly on par with the Great Lakes or even the Lorraine area.
ZMF May 26 @ 4:52am 
So thats why I am really wondering how you did the comparisons and what "historical" means here.

If we are talking about really the late 19th century production and use that as the yard stick

Then,New York wasn't just some iron; it was a major national supplier for a long time. And this also is the case for Pennsylvania, which I have found is also having a very low importance in terms of Iron production in the mod.

"In 1880, when the United States Bureau of the Census officially recognized the region as one of the ten leading iron regions of the country (Pumpelly, 1886), Clinton and Essex counties together produced 724,000 tons of iron ore (slightly over nine per cent of the national total). This represented 30 percent of the Nation’s magnetite production. In 1870 and 1880, New York was the third most productive iron-ore-producing state, surpassed only by Pennsylvania and Michigan (Moravec, 1976)."
vflower  [author] May 25 @ 2:57pm 
New York does have some iron, but in this time period, the Iron Range became the most important source of iron in the US. Easy access to this iron through the Great Lakes, together with coal from the Appalachians, is what made the Steel Belt so productive.
Also there wasn't that much iron produced in Lancashire, most of the English iron in this time period came from the area around Middlesbrough (the city was basically founded for iron production in the 19th century).

Louisiana has 20 maize farms, 8 rice farms, 3 livestock ranches, 46 cotton plantations and 20 sugar plantation. Clearly a lot more arable land than Lancashire with its 14 rye farms and 18 livestock ranches (the Lancashire numbers are a bit different in the current version of the mod because I made some local changes that I haven't uploaded yet).
ZMF May 25 @ 9:44am 
I'm not sure about the the method with which you conducted the research. But I picked a couple of them and found them sometimes more accurate, but sometimes vastly under-representing some resources. I picked New York, Louisiana, Lancashire for instance. Ironl was huge for New York and Lancashire. Louisiana should have huge arable land while Lanchashire shouldnt.
vflower  [author] May 9 @ 2:43pm 
Well everyone would consider different things as "baggage" so I could in theory make 5 different mods. Just keeping one mod updated is enough work,so no, I won't make different versions.
eztoom May 8 @ 6:17pm 
If you have the time, I graciously and humbly request you create a seperate mod for thos who don't want the extra baggage, just population improvements.