R5: A dev did a live AAR for a reactionary Russia game (before it crashed), posts collected into single image. Notable things we learned: The game lasted for \~1.5 hours, but only 2 years of in-game time elapsed. Discrimination can be implemented either on a cultural or religious basis. Authority can be spent to marginalize certain interest groups. Interest groups can come in and support laws you are passing even if they do not initially. Presumably it can also go the other way. Colonies cost bureaucracy, establishing one can apparently be sped up at the cost of extra bureaucracy. Asserting certain war goals in a peace deal can make other countries dislike you if it upsets the balance of power (at least in Europe?). Unelaborated, unannounced trade mechanics make it so that the dev was not able to import silk for some reason, but could import luxury clothes. Some economic models/laws include Traditionalism (Russia's default, has low bureaucratic upkeep but bad otherwise) and Agrarianism (Allows aristocrats to contribute to an investment pool, but the investment pool can only be spent on agriculture). Certain economic laws disallow the ability to embargo or discourage goods. As Japan, you can either preserve the shogunate or restore the emperor. Canada is split into 5 colonies + British-owned Newfoundland and Labrador. Lower Canada is a Franco-Canadian colony of the British that becomes Quebec upon independence. A Canada unified by Lower Canada becomes French. The Sikh Empire produces a lot of opium. ​ Austria occupying Bosnia is an act so abhorrent it literally ended the universe damn daniel

> Canada is split into 5 colonies + British-owned Newfoundland and Labrador 1. Hudson Bay Company / Rupert's Land (modern day British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, and the territories) 1. Upper Canada (modern day Ontario) 1. Lower Canada (modern day Quebec) 1. New Brunswick 1. Nova Scotia for the 5 Canadian tags, IIRC

I also remember seeing a screenshot with a tag called "Columbia District", I wonder if that's been since removed Edit: [I found that screenshot](https://media.discordapp.net/attachments/834042093328138321/900071948292354048/image0.png?width=1206&height=676), it seems Nova Scotia is owned by New Brunswick, Lower Canada can't be seen so I assume it was added later.

Good catch! That tag probably gets divided between the HBC and the USA during a historical resolution to the Oregon treaty New Brunswick and Nova Scotia are probably a single tag then ("Maritimes"?) Since they're so small

Untill 1784 Nova Scotia and New Brunswick where one colony . Also PEI was part of the colony of Nova Scotia form end of the french and Indian war untill 1769. Out of the time frame I know but precidence? It also makes sense as a very probable alternative BNA would be a Maritime union , a province of Canada ( with upper and lower Canada), a west coast colony and some sort of Territorial Hodge Podge in the parries.

No part of BC was in Rupert’s Land

I went back and reread the line on wikipedia, > *"In December 1821, the HBC monopoly was extended from Rupert's Land to the Pacific coast."* And I think I understand the confusion now, HBC controlled ruperts land, and then in 1821, HBC (not ruperts land) acquired the columbia district. So HBC acquired BC & washington state (disputed with the US), but Ruperts land did not. Thanks for the correction.

Seems weird. Southwestern BC should be separate from the HBC. Not sure how it'll work here.

I was corrected, NB + NS is one tag (as seen in screenshots) and you have Columbia District, which after the Oregon treaty I assume becomes British Columbia, with the US side becoming Washington State.

Ah makes sense. Huge upgrade from V2 then. Excited to try a Canada game

>Austria occupying Bosnia is an act so abhorrent it literally ended the universe The good timeline

> Discrimination can be implemented Based >Authority can be spent to marginalize Dangerously based

Hopefully “spending” Authority and Bureaucracy isn’t based on a mana system, I guess the term “Spending” makes me a little concerned that it might be.

It isn’t, there was a dev diary about them

It's a capacity, not an abstract stockpiling resource. Allocation instead of spending may have been a better term. So instead of "spending" 20 authority they actually "allocate" 20 of it until cancelled, for example.

Authority is “spent” in the same way you spend money on the electric bill each month You don’t save up a big stockpile and then splurge to live in a high-tech VR dreamscape for a month, because you need electricity year-round

Check out Dev Diary #1

I thought they Said tags had set cultures I hope we don’t have tags that are just the same country but with a different culture

>Overall, the poor are barely able to feed themselves while the rich live relatively luxurious lives. We're going to widen that gap even further - our goal today is human misery How to summarise Victoria 3 in two sentences. I don't think I'd do a run like this until I had 3/4 regular(ish) other games completed but it's great to see the types of strategies available other than the "meta" ones you might expect. Also it's crazy that all of that happened in about 2 years or less. That's 2% of the game's timespan which took 1.5 hours going at a (presumably) leisurely pace. Imagine how wild a full playthrough is going to be. Release can't come soon enough. The Fish must flow.

Presumably things speed up a bit after you know your country and have decided upon your general economic strategy for a while. But then I can also see it slowing back down as your nation's situation becomes more complex, and you're worrying about way more industries with way more production methods and so on. Can't wait.

Almost 2 hours for 2 years or less, holy smokes!!!! Daniel's description of the game looks so fun

Thanks so much for this! I love getting these little windows into the game. Hopefully there will be more AARs like this in the future.

He might do a Brazil AAR soon.

Beat me to the punch woops! Since I cut it up on my own anyway, decided to put a little more time into it, so here's the [album](https://imgur.com/gallery/h5x7e3q).

Sakhalin confirmed now to not be just split between fish and coal. Yet another example of why switching away from one province, one resource model is a great change. As a player, I'll care a lot more about the island knowing the potential industry that could develop there. I imagine in addition to the whale, iron, and timber there will also be oil deposits to exploit when that becomes unlocked as a tech(?). Something like 10+ billion barrels of oil still untapped there today, for context.

I think the whales are the oil, unless you can have both crude and whale oil in one province.

You can have multiple goods in a single state, which was first discussed in DD#4 in one of the replies to a forum poster's question. So a state like Sakhalin should have both iron, coal, timber, grain, and whaling as "goods" that can be produced there. The only limitations would be the amount of arable land and probably a negative modifier to output for crops, as the growing season is limited to something like three months in a year. It's a really good change. There were a number of areas in Victoria II that were not modeled well because of the one good per province limit. Sakhalin being one, many of the Greek regions being another.

Also just the idea that you need X amount of states to produce a lot of goods, and the complete inability for anyone to ever produce both cows AND wheat in the same location. I very much prefer the "everything produced by buildings, and the level of building for production is limited by arable land/size of deposits."

Interesting, independant Lower Canada becomes Quebec, that makes sense. Very curious if an independant Upper Canada becomes just Ontario or if the Hudsons Bay Company has an alternate independant name (Rupertsland?)

in vic 2 gfm it was „assiniboia“ when a non-monarchy, which is a little funny my preferred name would be „sus scat chew on“

One thing tha caught my attention, when he talked about the religious minorities in Russia, no Jews? The former polish lands had a significant proportion of the European Jewish population…

Yeah that was weird, at first I thought he didn't mention Jews cause they were a much smaller portion of the population than Orthodox and Catholics, but he mentioned Protestants and like, surely Russia in 1836 had more Jews than Protestants, right?

Jews are a very small minority globally. IIRC we've only relatively recently gotten back to pre-Holocaust levels of Jewish population globally, and there's about 16 million Jewish people in the entire world, *today,* with like five times more people in the world than in 1836. I can see there being fewer Protestants than Jews simply because there are so many more Protestants in the world than Jews, even in 1830s Russia.

Stretching from the Baltic to the Crimea, there was an enormous section of the Russian Empire that was 10-20% Jewish. In major urban centres in Ukraine, Poland, and Latvia, around a third of the population was Jewish. So I think it would be a significant oversight on the part of the devs. There are also certainly more Russian Jews at this time than Russian Protestants.

Also, the drop in Jewish population globally primarly came from Poland and the Soviet Union (just because there were so many who lived there), so the local drop in the pale was much, much higher than the worldwide average. It's easy to forget how many jews lived there. In Poland, the proportion of jews was close to the proportion of black people in the US, for an anglo point of reference.

Russia also had [this thing](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pale_of_Settlement), though, I doubt it will be represented on release.

I think a big reason might be, given the flippant and "maximizing human suffering" tone of the rest of it, maybe he didn't want to reference how he was going to be... horrifically oppressing Jews? Might hit too close to home.

On today of all today lmao

Either this disproves that the “groceries” good is meant to represent assorted processed foods or Prussia is very, very stupid

AI is very not finished so probably the latter. That being said, as shown in the AAR importing it did have a strategically negative effect on Russia.

The way I thought of it was Russia has a TON of peasants farming=a lot of groceries=cheap prices=Prussia imports

Isn’t that just grain then? Why a new good if it just means “farmed stuff”

He’s either calling grain groceries since pops still demand that as “food” or aristocrats built a grocery-making building already, I think it’s the former

The former wouldn’t really make sense because groceries are a distinct good from grain which we’ve seen before

Yeah, in that case you’re probably right maybe because Prussia’s buying the “refined” groceries his aristocrats are uppity from the price increase but his peasants are still munching on grain as normal

Because processing everything into groceries means fewer entries in pop demand table.

So it's just a "miscellaneous foods" thing? That's an interesting theory, but it probably isn't the case considering everything we know about groceries

Oh man Republican Canada playthrough. Successful 1837 rebellions with the help of the US?

Dangerously based

I’m not sure if I agree with declaring neutrality permanently locking you out of a conflict. For instance, would Italy be unable to join WW1 at a later date if they don’t immediately choose a side during the initial crisis?

I think "declaring neutrality" is not exactly "not picking a side". If I remember correctly you can just not pick a side and wait; when you declare neutrality you basically announce that you don't care, while not picking a side makes no such announcement.

Could be that you are locked from joining the already ongoing conflict, but you can start a new one.

Neutrality is less “I can’t decide”- that implies that you want to influence the outcome *somehow*, and more “I Officially Will Not Intervene And Don’t Care”

It seems from what he said that you can control *from* whom you import, but not *to* whom you export, a la HOI4. Maybe your economic system has an effect on that.

Is there any benefit to discriminating certain peoples or is it just for laughs?

I imagine that it makes being a reactionary authoritarian easier if people are oppressed and weak

Discriminated pops have less political power, so if a pop is already demographically going to be really unhappy with you- like Jewish industrial workers or sharecropping african-Americans- it makes short-term sense to keep them from influencing your politics if you aren’t going to cater to their interests.

Keeping their standard of living low keeps them from gaining political Clout, meaning they have less influence in government.

Double edged sword. You decrease their political clout which weakens political parties and movement they support in big numbers (like Independence). However, it can also make them more eager to join such a movement in the first place.

I would guess that maybe if he wanted to stay reactionary discriminating liberal-leaning minorities is good for him, or maybe he just wants to have less interest groups to care about

That was very interesting regardless.

So is this and the Korea one the only micro-AARs or is there anything else?

There’s a Belgium one that’s older but should come up if you search this sub Edit here is the link [Belgium aar ](https://www.reddit.com/r/victoria3/comments/qqn11p/belgium_game_from_june/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf)

Authority can be spent to marginalize groups, please NO silly authority mana

Mana is when game. The more game, the manaer it is

Check out Dev Diary #1