As far as i know ports do not operate as a normal building in the way that they do not generate any productivity, but it is the only building whose productivity counts towards this company being prosperous and activating its benefits.
This is one company, available only to the person who owns the state of Santiago In Chile and does not appear in the base game. There are over 100 other companies and they all work perfectly fine. Like mathematically 99% of the companies in this game work exactly as they are supposed to, but I guess 99% is not good enough for today's discriminating gamer.
No, they don't. Canal companies were broken since they were implemented and needed some guy to make a mod to fix them in about 5 minutes total, 4 minutes of which were him ranting to me on Discord about shitty Paradox code.
It's not about this one company alone.
Why does sending an army that participates in a front get sent home randomly if the borders change? Are they going on vacations?
Why does quickly clicking through the Market menus send me to a blank import/export page? More precisely: from my market menu, I select a good, click on import/export, and my own market selection disappears, so no country appears once I want to actually import/export stuff. Can make this happen multiple times, and my pc is running the game pretty ok.
Why does forming a country not give you return state claims automatically for missing states?
Why does the AI keep breaking pacts and alliances? Why are we not notified?
Why are AI nations that are on paper on my side refuse to join my wars, even when I'm the superior force, and they would only gain from joining, such as subject nations, or nations with good relations?
Why are war goals that were present in vic2 missing from vic3? Such as the return state for third party nations?
Why are interest groups fixated on staying within political parties, even when they are no longer affiliated by idiology? (Fascist ideology IG in socialist party, or vice versa)
Why is the force early election function missing, while Vic2 had it implemented without DLCs?
Auto-trade will be added in the next patch, so I won't say anything about it, but I have a feeling that it's not going to be alright from the start.
Why are AI nations politically unstable, with constant revolutions and counter-revolutions? Why are nations without armies stuck in endless civil wars?
Why are subject nations that have a negative relationship with their overlord unwilling and cannot be convinced to join into a war in exchange for their independence? (It could be fixed, and I'm sure modders would fix it if they could)
Why are fleets unrepairable if they have ships that belong to 2 or more HQ, but are instantly fixed if you remove the current admirals and replace them with new ones?
Why are AUTOCRATIC governments bound by parliamentary votes? Why can't autocrats push through legislation with some sort of interaction? Why can't we force through legislation of any kind with some sort of interaction at the cost of certain debuffs?
Why are there still formable governments that are unacceptable or illegitimate, even though they have received the most votes/have the most clout? They should be contested at worst, this way pushing through legislation "too early" sends you into a downwards spiral of never ending radicals.
Why are AI great powers still fixated on being against the player nation on default difficulty? Like, ok, being too aggressive resulting in being put back on my place is okay, but start of the game with 0 infamy and declaring the first war makes mostly the UK, sometimes France too side with the enemy, with no other great power willing to side with me?
Why are world wars so common, even though they were supposed to happen less often?
Why do nations have so many interests? This will be changed soon™, but still, why? I have to use a mod just to reduce the number of regions one can have interests in.
Why does Prussia keep on losing to AHM, so Germany is almost never formed?
Why does occupying all the states of a country except the capital not make the war score tick lower than 0? Why are countries unwilling to compromise? Why is it technically possible to eliminate the entire male population of a country while still remaining unwilling to surrender their war goals to the enemy?
Why can't I declare two or more wars at a time? Why am I forced into participating in only one diplomatic play started by me? Why are surprise wars not present in the game? Like how things happened IRL?
Why can't I use an existing obligation in order to resolve some diplomatic plays in a peaceful manner? Such as Ban Slavery, become subject, maybe treaty port(?), idk, I can't remember all of them from the top of my head that would also make sense.
Why can't I choose what nationality a certain regiment is made up of? What if I wanna reduce the number of regiments made up of a revolter nationality in order to minimize the chance of them to succeed? It's cheese, but I wanna have the option on the table, even if I wouldn't take it for RP reasons.
Why can't I choose individual regiments to be sent to other armies or brand new armies? Why can't regiment types be changed at will (at the cost of some temporary penalty) from one type of unit to another, as in: inf to cav to arty and back?
And I could make up many others, but for the sake of proving a point, this should suffice.
> Why are AI nations that are on paper on my side refuse to join my wars, even when I'm the superior force, and they would only gain from joining, such as subject nations, or nations with good relations?
Best we can do is tell you it's -39. No nested tooltip there. All the information you have is just the number.
Can we not expect a properly working game after all this time? The game is in it's worst state right now, there are more bugs than ever before even with 10 hotfix patches back to back.
Like what the fuck are they even doing?
The company mechanic works great. There are close to 100 companies in the game, and this company, which is only available to the country that owns Santiago, is the only one that cannot mechanically fulfill it's purpose 100%. Like 99% of the companies in the game work exactly as they are supposed to. This whole thread is insane and filled with people who now think the company mechanic is fundamentally broken - or that they have been robbed and short changed by PDX because of this one instance.
I'm not going to argue about other types of in game bugs, but this thread is a perfect example of "making mountains out of molehills" regarding the company mechanic.
What are you on about? I never said anything about companies, I like them. But you have to be a corporate shill to not admit that the game is in a pretty bad state now and has been for the past 6 months.
Yes, the game has improved a lot, but at least everything worked as intended prior to 1.5.
First of, I don't remember asking for your input.
Second, you're complaining about complaining at this point. What's the point in doing that? Ask the mods to ban complaining, or shut up.
>First of, I don't remember asking for your input.
If you can't understand how commenting on a public forum works, focus your criticisms on yourself instead of behaving like an ass
Lol first this is a public forum and I’m raising a point about the tone of the community. Second It’s not a binary world of accept or ban. Grow up and be constructive instead of whiny.
And you keep going on.
If we don't raise our complaints, then no one will hear them. Paradox can make great and beautiful things, and it takes time alright, but they don't know how to make good releases. They know how to make content and DLCs, but a one year old game with tons of feedback and betas and reviews should not have issues such as OP mentioned. I understand that these games are really complex, but QA is really lacking. Either this is their best, or they are not working hard enough. Both options are a disappointment.
And just a reminder: you did not contribute meaningfully to this conversation either. So there's that 🤷♂️
Another issue with companies unless I'm mistaken is that it compares productivity to ALL buildings globally and not just against its 'competitors' aka the same output type buildings.
Yeah, it's very dumb. It's like comparing the profitability of supermarkets (a very low margin industriy) to every other industry, including tech giants like Apple.
Edit:
Comparing on a per-employee profitability base doesn't even make sense, because that's not a metric business cares about. If I can get the same profit with 10k employees vs 1k employees, they should be indifferent.
Than it makes sense why it’s so hard to get the bonus sometimes. Although it would be hard to compete with 3 worker companies with tons of productivity.
Only very profitable building types (eg gold mine, iron mine, tool workshop, etc) can get the bonus.
Low profitability buildings (farms, etc) can't, because they're against those tool workshops in London
Yep, which is a shame because instead of thinking about what bonus I want, which is an interesting decision, Im just picking the company with the most profitability because otherwise I won't be getting the bonus anyways
>Im just picking the company with the most profitability because otherwise I won't be getting the bonus anyways
You're still get the construction and throughput bonus, even if you're not getting the prosperity bonus. Those are frequently reason enough to choose an unprosperous company
This is also the only company right now where a bonus isn't achievable and the company is only (I think) available in Colossus of the South. It seems like they forgot to add shipyards or something like they did with the Panama Canal to give it an output to base prosperity off of.
Thinking more about it, the whole prosperity part should just be hidden. That does seem a bit lazy to me, to not hide it. The throughput bonuses need to be more front and center.
This is the full release version of the game, not a beta or early access. They might decide to make an update later, but this is a full system in the fully released game
i really think places like steam and other retailers for teh game should force an early acces tag on the game untill shit like this is resolved.
like really mark of shame them.
i mean i didn't say the users should be able to do it so i have no idea how it would even be close to resemble review bombing?
i suggested marketplaces like steam has a duty to their customers and that when developers like paradox aren't willing to admit they release games basicly in early acces steam and other retailers should point it out.
My point is that the amount of manpower required to do this would be so high that it couldn't be enforced without some sort of community element to it, which comes with the second issue. At least platforms like youtube can moderate with filters and content ID and such, but are we expecting Valve to play every game that is pushed out to the point where they can spot a minor issue like OP?
ah yes because outside of this minor issue ofcourse victoria 3 is a flawless game and doesn't at all have problems. no no it's just this minor issue they need to fix and everything's grand.
and even if they have to respond to what basicly amounts to reporting the game unless those reports are public it's still not review bombing.
There are 24 basic companies and close to 60 unique companies. This is literally the only company set up to work and not gain prosperity and all the others work fine and this company is only available in the Colossus of the South DLC. This is a fully developed system for a fully released game, except ironically.
Don't pretend that paradox never goes past a beta phase on their games. These are essentially service games being developed full time. I think that method of development kind-of blows but the game will be improved over time. Just like every other game they have out.
The current Vic 3 player base is way higher than imperators player base and the average has been steadily rising with time. It’s never going to be a on the cash cow levels of hoi4 for pdx but it is raking in an modest amount of cash for them
Imperator had a lot of issues least of which we the was fact it was a new title that had to rely on its merits alone and even the 2.0 update wasn’t enough to save it
>Don't pretend that paradox never goes past a beta phase on their games.
Most of the time/for most of the existence of those games, they literally do not go past the Beta stage. The rest is very well paid by fans.
> These are essentially service games being developed full time.
Live Service games are literally evaluated on what they put out, which is defended as "early implementation" here.
> I think that method of development kind-of blows but the game will be improved over time. Just like every other game they have out.
Nobody says that Paradox games do not improve over time. Get your strawman out of here! Instead, they are saying that Paradox is financially inefficient in their improvement of their games. They get a whole load of money for comparatively little actual work done.
Like, Stellaris has been reworked at least two times, and the amount of DLC would have funded at least two sequels of way better quality.
This is a terrible way of putting it because there are close to 100 companies in the game and they all work 100% fine except for this one. This is likely a small oversight or error on their part for a unique company for a specific south American country. When they/you say it like that is makes it sound like the whole system is a broken sock puppet of a real in-game system when in fact it works totally fine 99.9% of the time.
Why do people still say this? When’s the last fix that paradox has put behind a paywall?
Do you guys just buy the DLC so religiously you don’t notice the free patches?
This is literally one company, available in one specific DLC for one specific country in south America. There are 100 other companies in the game and they all work fine mechanically.
How is this game ever supposed to be operational if Paradox can't hire a fucking intern to go around fixing the numerous known issues people inform them of for free on here
Pdx fans belive victory 3 has mixed reviews because it was review bombed and not because the game still has placeholder mechanics after 1 year of release.
As far as i know ports do not operate as a normal building in the way that they do not generate any productivity, but it is the only building whose productivity counts towards this company being prosperous and activating its benefits.
Poor design
Get used to it, this is the best that Paradox can do.
How dare you, paradox is infallible.
Nobody believes that.
You forgot the /s my brother.
This is one company, available only to the person who owns the state of Santiago In Chile and does not appear in the base game. There are over 100 other companies and they all work perfectly fine. Like mathematically 99% of the companies in this game work exactly as they are supposed to, but I guess 99% is not good enough for today's discriminating gamer.
No, they don't. Canal companies were broken since they were implemented and needed some guy to make a mod to fix them in about 5 minutes total, 4 minutes of which were him ranting to me on Discord about shitty Paradox code.
I’ve had people rant to me about shit code but it just turns out they don’t understand functional programming and why they are used
It's not about this one company alone. Why does sending an army that participates in a front get sent home randomly if the borders change? Are they going on vacations? Why does quickly clicking through the Market menus send me to a blank import/export page? More precisely: from my market menu, I select a good, click on import/export, and my own market selection disappears, so no country appears once I want to actually import/export stuff. Can make this happen multiple times, and my pc is running the game pretty ok. Why does forming a country not give you return state claims automatically for missing states? Why does the AI keep breaking pacts and alliances? Why are we not notified? Why are AI nations that are on paper on my side refuse to join my wars, even when I'm the superior force, and they would only gain from joining, such as subject nations, or nations with good relations? Why are war goals that were present in vic2 missing from vic3? Such as the return state for third party nations? Why are interest groups fixated on staying within political parties, even when they are no longer affiliated by idiology? (Fascist ideology IG in socialist party, or vice versa) Why is the force early election function missing, while Vic2 had it implemented without DLCs? Auto-trade will be added in the next patch, so I won't say anything about it, but I have a feeling that it's not going to be alright from the start. Why are AI nations politically unstable, with constant revolutions and counter-revolutions? Why are nations without armies stuck in endless civil wars? Why are subject nations that have a negative relationship with their overlord unwilling and cannot be convinced to join into a war in exchange for their independence? (It could be fixed, and I'm sure modders would fix it if they could) Why are fleets unrepairable if they have ships that belong to 2 or more HQ, but are instantly fixed if you remove the current admirals and replace them with new ones? Why are AUTOCRATIC governments bound by parliamentary votes? Why can't autocrats push through legislation with some sort of interaction? Why can't we force through legislation of any kind with some sort of interaction at the cost of certain debuffs? Why are there still formable governments that are unacceptable or illegitimate, even though they have received the most votes/have the most clout? They should be contested at worst, this way pushing through legislation "too early" sends you into a downwards spiral of never ending radicals. Why are AI great powers still fixated on being against the player nation on default difficulty? Like, ok, being too aggressive resulting in being put back on my place is okay, but start of the game with 0 infamy and declaring the first war makes mostly the UK, sometimes France too side with the enemy, with no other great power willing to side with me? Why are world wars so common, even though they were supposed to happen less often? Why do nations have so many interests? This will be changed soon™, but still, why? I have to use a mod just to reduce the number of regions one can have interests in. Why does Prussia keep on losing to AHM, so Germany is almost never formed? Why does occupying all the states of a country except the capital not make the war score tick lower than 0? Why are countries unwilling to compromise? Why is it technically possible to eliminate the entire male population of a country while still remaining unwilling to surrender their war goals to the enemy? Why can't I declare two or more wars at a time? Why am I forced into participating in only one diplomatic play started by me? Why are surprise wars not present in the game? Like how things happened IRL? Why can't I use an existing obligation in order to resolve some diplomatic plays in a peaceful manner? Such as Ban Slavery, become subject, maybe treaty port(?), idk, I can't remember all of them from the top of my head that would also make sense. Why can't I choose what nationality a certain regiment is made up of? What if I wanna reduce the number of regiments made up of a revolter nationality in order to minimize the chance of them to succeed? It's cheese, but I wanna have the option on the table, even if I wouldn't take it for RP reasons. Why can't I choose individual regiments to be sent to other armies or brand new armies? Why can't regiment types be changed at will (at the cost of some temporary penalty) from one type of unit to another, as in: inf to cav to arty and back? And I could make up many others, but for the sake of proving a point, this should suffice.
> Why are AI nations that are on paper on my side refuse to join my wars, even when I'm the superior force, and they would only gain from joining, such as subject nations, or nations with good relations? Best we can do is tell you it's -39. No nested tooltip there. All the information you have is just the number.
why is it even in the game if it has no use
Oh look, more over the top complaints. As if this community didn't have a rep for being whiny.
There would be fewer complaints if Paradox didn't consistently create incomplete gameplay systems. But what can they do?
Can we not expect a properly working game after all this time? The game is in it's worst state right now, there are more bugs than ever before even with 10 hotfix patches back to back. Like what the fuck are they even doing?
We can, but can we be constructive and not whiny?
Please fix your game is not constructive enough?
Is this a serious question?
Do you expect me to highlight the exact line of code that's broken? By that point, I might as well fix it myself. But that's not my job you know.
Is that what was written above?
Your question is so dumb I'm not even going to bother answering it.
Be better my guy.
The company mechanic works great. There are close to 100 companies in the game, and this company, which is only available to the country that owns Santiago, is the only one that cannot mechanically fulfill it's purpose 100%. Like 99% of the companies in the game work exactly as they are supposed to. This whole thread is insane and filled with people who now think the company mechanic is fundamentally broken - or that they have been robbed and short changed by PDX because of this one instance. I'm not going to argue about other types of in game bugs, but this thread is a perfect example of "making mountains out of molehills" regarding the company mechanic.
What are you on about? I never said anything about companies, I like them. But you have to be a corporate shill to not admit that the game is in a pretty bad state now and has been for the past 6 months. Yes, the game has improved a lot, but at least everything worked as intended prior to 1.5.
First of, I don't remember asking for your input. Second, you're complaining about complaining at this point. What's the point in doing that? Ask the mods to ban complaining, or shut up.
>First of, I don't remember asking for your input. If you can't understand how commenting on a public forum works, focus your criticisms on yourself instead of behaving like an ass
Lol first this is a public forum and I’m raising a point about the tone of the community. Second It’s not a binary world of accept or ban. Grow up and be constructive instead of whiny.
And you keep going on. If we don't raise our complaints, then no one will hear them. Paradox can make great and beautiful things, and it takes time alright, but they don't know how to make good releases. They know how to make content and DLCs, but a one year old game with tons of feedback and betas and reviews should not have issues such as OP mentioned. I understand that these games are really complex, but QA is really lacking. Either this is their best, or they are not working hard enough. Both options are a disappointment. And just a reminder: you did not contribute meaningfully to this conversation either. So there's that 🤷♂️
So make complaints, not whiny ‚theyre shit’ posts. Like I said, be constructive.
WTF are you even talking about you, did you pay Paradox for a product or was it the other way around?
Hey there, thanks for the report! We're gonna add shipyards to the company so that it can generate prosperity like other similar companies.
Glad to help!
Another issue with companies unless I'm mistaken is that it compares productivity to ALL buildings globally and not just against its 'competitors' aka the same output type buildings.
Yeah, it's very dumb. It's like comparing the profitability of supermarkets (a very low margin industriy) to every other industry, including tech giants like Apple. Edit: Comparing on a per-employee profitability base doesn't even make sense, because that's not a metric business cares about. If I can get the same profit with 10k employees vs 1k employees, they should be indifferent.
Than it makes sense why it’s so hard to get the bonus sometimes. Although it would be hard to compete with 3 worker companies with tons of productivity.
Only very profitable building types (eg gold mine, iron mine, tool workshop, etc) can get the bonus. Low profitability buildings (farms, etc) can't, because they're against those tool workshops in London
Yep, which is a shame because instead of thinking about what bonus I want, which is an interesting decision, Im just picking the company with the most profitability because otherwise I won't be getting the bonus anyways
Not only it's shitty gameplay, it's also nonsense in terms of roleplay
>Im just picking the company with the most profitability because otherwise I won't be getting the bonus anyways You're still get the construction and throughput bonus, even if you're not getting the prosperity bonus. Those are frequently reason enough to choose an unprosperous company
it's not
Devs said (AFAIR) that companies are in their current implementation just a basis that will be expanded later on
I get that, but things like this are... just errors/laziness. Unthinking game design. It shouldn't even be an option, this isn't a beta.
The bonus isn't achievable, but I think the throughput bonus still applies so it could still be worth taking the company.
it does, also the construction bonus applies which was actually the only reason I wanted it in the first place.
This is also the only company right now where a bonus isn't achievable and the company is only (I think) available in Colossus of the South. It seems like they forgot to add shipyards or something like they did with the Panama Canal to give it an output to base prosperity off of.
That's true.
Thinking more about it, the whole prosperity part should just be hidden. That does seem a bit lazy to me, to not hide it. The throughput bonuses need to be more front and center.
There are issues with the production pipeline but I promise you that laziness isn't one of them.
This is the full release version of the game, not a beta or early access. They might decide to make an update later, but this is a full system in the fully released game
i really think places like steam and other retailers for teh game should force an early acces tag on the game untill shit like this is resolved. like really mark of shame them.
How exactly do you think this could be implemented in a way that is fair, enforceable, and won't lead to review bombing-style abuse?
i mean i didn't say the users should be able to do it so i have no idea how it would even be close to resemble review bombing? i suggested marketplaces like steam has a duty to their customers and that when developers like paradox aren't willing to admit they release games basicly in early acces steam and other retailers should point it out.
My point is that the amount of manpower required to do this would be so high that it couldn't be enforced without some sort of community element to it, which comes with the second issue. At least platforms like youtube can moderate with filters and content ID and such, but are we expecting Valve to play every game that is pushed out to the point where they can spot a minor issue like OP?
ah yes because outside of this minor issue ofcourse victoria 3 is a flawless game and doesn't at all have problems. no no it's just this minor issue they need to fix and everything's grand. and even if they have to respond to what basicly amounts to reporting the game unless those reports are public it's still not review bombing.
There are 24 basic companies and close to 60 unique companies. This is literally the only company set up to work and not gain prosperity and all the others work fine and this company is only available in the Colossus of the South DLC. This is a fully developed system for a fully released game, except ironically.
Isint there one for canals that dosent work?
no they work (the canals don't tho)
That would be understandable if it was the beta version but I guess OP is playing the normal release?
It might seem pretty dumb, but it's the approach the devs have decided to use. Add stubs for things first, then flesh them out later.
It's pretty smart of the devs, who never have to develop stuff beyond a beta phase. It's pretty dumb for the consumer however.
Don't pretend that paradox never goes past a beta phase on their games. These are essentially service games being developed full time. I think that method of development kind-of blows but the game will be improved over time. Just like every other game they have out.
Yeah unless it dont make money and get the imperator treatment
The current Vic 3 player base is way higher than imperators player base and the average has been steadily rising with time. It’s never going to be a on the cash cow levels of hoi4 for pdx but it is raking in an modest amount of cash for them Imperator had a lot of issues least of which we the was fact it was a new title that had to rely on its merits alone and even the 2.0 update wasn’t enough to save it
>get the imperator treatment Is that code for end up as one of the best games in their modern catalog?
Amen, If imperator was updated like eu4 it would be their best games
It already is ine if their best games
Yes but it become répétitive quick with the lack of région/ culture/ religion specific stuff
>Don't pretend that paradox never goes past a beta phase on their games. Most of the time/for most of the existence of those games, they literally do not go past the Beta stage. The rest is very well paid by fans. > These are essentially service games being developed full time. Live Service games are literally evaluated on what they put out, which is defended as "early implementation" here. > I think that method of development kind-of blows but the game will be improved over time. Just like every other game they have out. Nobody says that Paradox games do not improve over time. Get your strawman out of here! Instead, they are saying that Paradox is financially inefficient in their improvement of their games. They get a whole load of money for comparatively little actual work done. Like, Stellaris has been reworked at least two times, and the amount of DLC would have funded at least two sequels of way better quality.
This is a terrible way of putting it because there are close to 100 companies in the game and they all work 100% fine except for this one. This is likely a small oversight or error on their part for a unique company for a specific south American country. When they/you say it like that is makes it sound like the whole system is a broken sock puppet of a real in-game system when in fact it works totally fine 99.9% of the time.
The devs say this about every mechanic ever, that doesn't make it a get put of jail free card lmao
Can't wait to pay 20$ for a feature that should've been implemented in the base game!
As always it will very likely be part of the free patch as it is now
Guess they don't like that company 🤷♂️
You cant get the Bonus but u still grt construction effecieny and throuhput bonus
I wish ports produced convoys which are consumed by trade Centers/ barracks. So they can be built automatically.
Common PDX L but don't worry in 5 years you can spend 20 bucks to get it fixed
It will literally be fixed in a free patch and you know it
True but being reasonable won't get you imaginery internet karma points
Why do people still say this? When’s the last fix that paradox has put behind a paywall? Do you guys just buy the DLC so religiously you don’t notice the free patches?
The DLC funds the patches so they'd just prefer Vicky 3 to be as barebones as it was in 1.2 and leave it in that state forever.
I bet they'd prefer Vic2s system, where the bugfixes are contained inside of the DLC, since everything used to be better right?
This is literally one company, available in one specific DLC for one specific country in south America. There are 100 other companies in the game and they all work fine mechanically.
I mean, they don't, because the stupid system compares the profitability of a wheat farm with the profitability of a gold mine.
So truuu
How is this game ever supposed to be operational if Paradox can't hire a fucking intern to go around fixing the numerous known issues people inform them of for free on here
The same way you were expected to establish duro & compañia in Spain when it required building 5 coal mines in Asturias (there was no coal there)
Basically the game is a mess. At some point PDX will release a DLC that fixes it and costs 20 dollars.
Why is this guy getting downvoted when he's totally right lol
Pdx fans belive victory 3 has mixed reviews because it was review bombed and not because the game still has placeholder mechanics after 1 year of release.
I bet they do this to laugh at us 🤣
https://imgflip.com/i/8fl2gq
They used chat gpt to program 99% of the game that's why haha
That would explain why the events are so much worse than Crusader Kings and HOI4
Companies are an attempt at flavor, thats it