• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.

Dev Diary #40 - Opium Wars

16_9.jpg


Good evening, and welcome to this week’s instalment of the Victoria 3 Dev Diaries! To cap off this month’s theme of trade, I’ll be talking about the Opium Wars and introducing the concepts of Cultural Obsessions and Religious Taboos.

In the 1830’s China was ravaged by opium addiction. The impact was severe and broad in its effects, with myriad social, economic and even military consequences. Despite attempts by the Qing government to restrict imports, British merchants continued to illegally flood the market. The situation came to a head when Qing officials ordered the seizure and destruction of opium in Canton, to which the British responded with force - the First Opium War resulted in crushing defeats for the Qing government and began an era of unfavourable and humiliating treaties with the Western powers.

In Victoria 3 we represent the Opium Wars through Journal Entries and Events. Qing China begins in the midst of this crisis, but it is also possible for other unrecognised countries to experience this content if the in-game conditions are appropriate.


The Opium Crisis event applies harsh negative modifiers to Standard of Living throughout your country, to your Mortality Rate, and to the effectiveness of your military forces.
opiumwarsstart.png

This is a good time to talk a little more about Cultural Obsessions. A culture can become obsessed with a specific Good - Pops of that Culture, regardless of where they are in the world, will spend significantly more on Goods they are obsessed with compared to other goods in the same Pop Needs category. So in the case of Opium in China, Han pops will spend a lot more of their wealth buying Opium than they do on Liquor or Tobacco. This naturally drives up demand for Opium, and therefore makes it more expensive within the Chinese market. The foreign powers selling Opium to China are making a killing exploiting this demand and feeding the addiction. Cultures can develop new Obsessions over time, and you’ll need to react to changes in pop demands as a result.

On a mechanically related note (though unrelated to the Opium Wars), Religions have Taboos against certain goods. For instance Muslim faiths have a Taboo against the consumption of Liquor and Wine. This has the opposite effect from a Cultural Obsession - pops following these religions will spend much less on purchasing that Good compared to other Goods in that category. So Muslims will typically buy Tobacco and Opium instead of Liquor, and they will buy Tea or Coffee instead of Wine. Just as in real life, not everybody completely adheres to the tenets of their faith, and so these act as powerful modifiers on purchasing decisions rather than total “bans” on consumption. Unlike Obsessions, Taboos are static throughout the game.


Beijing is one of the most populated States in the world in 1836. Besides its 19 million people, it is also home to the Forbidden City Monument, a massive Government Administration sector, as well as a large section of the now defunct Great Wall.
opiumwarsnew.png


Back to the Opium Wars!

If China (or whichever country is the target, but we’ll keep things simple and refer to China from here on out) chooses to confront the issue head on, the Opium Crisis Journal Entry will describe the conditions for successfully resolving the issue, as well as the conditions that will cause immediate failure. China must avoid at all costs enacting the Free Trade law as well as resist the attempts of the Great Powers to establish a Treaty Port - both of these are potential war goals which the AI will strongly prioritize when starting Diplomatic Plays against China. While resisting the Western powers, China must maintain a total ban on the Opium trade.


Playing as Great Britain (or any major opium exporter), you'll have the opportunity to thwart the opium ban through all the usual diplomatic and coercive means at your disposal. It could even be an opportunity to make inroads into China.
opiumwarsgbrevent.png

China’s attempts to halt the flow of opium will not go unchallenged. All Great and Major powers exporting Opium to China will receive an event prompting them to decide their stance on the matter - though there is some chance that they will let the issue slide, it is much more likely that they will take an opposing stance. This will add the Opium Wars Journal Entry to that country, in which their success conditions match the failure conditions for China. Opium-trading countries must either force China to adopt the Free Trade law, or else acquire a Treaty Port in that nation that allows them to bypass goods bans. Rather than immediately creating a Diplomatic Play with predefined war goals, the AI (and indeed the player!) is strongly encouraged to start a Play with wargoals that would complete the Journal Entry.


Free from the ravages of opium addiction and the interference of froeign powers, the strengthened Qing dynasty might avoid or avert the crises that would historically bring them to ruin.
opiumwarsgoodend.png

If China succeeds in suppressing the flow of opium while withstanding the onslaught of the Great Powers, the course of history is altered and the addiction crisis will be resolved. All its primary cultures will lose their Opium Obsession, and the negative modifiers representing the effects of widespread addiction will be removed. With foreign powers repulsed, China has not been forced into the unequal treaties that would lead to further conflict and turmoil.


Fragile Unity is the “broadest” Journal Entry in Victoria 3, encompassing content that can emerge at all stages of the game - for instance while the stage is already set for the Opium Wars in 1836, the Boxer Rebellion will not happen until later in the game when a stronger sense of Han nationalism has appeared.
gE4v5cypPs5v30cmQhBn6Z9SFE1f486XcG7t--MAeZHQ-Iodde8iiRddfZ5U82CIKngkaqBd1uQuihiiJvRTNcuh8PYkA8d8lnQ0lTi6uH-CfFkCZWyrVlqo1wu3Nx4dN8TI2zwM

Failure, however, may have dire consequences. The government will lose Legitimacy, Radicals will rise across the nation, and Turmoil will engulf your states. But that is not the worst of it; failing the Opium Wars Journal Entry increases your fragmentation, tracked by the Fragile Unity Journal Entry. If your fragmentation rises to 100%, it will herald the end of a unified China, with the nation breaking up into a dozen warlord states. Failing the Opium Wars Journal Entry will indirectly lead to an influx of missionaries into China which may spark radical uprisings on a scale never seen before. And if exploitative foreign presence in China continues into the era of Han nationalism, the people’s demands for sovereignty will shake the foundations of the state and threaten the survival of the Qing Dynasty. One great failure can lead to a chain reaction of disaster.

That’s all for today! Next week we’ll be moving on from trade to a month of focus on the theme of strife. Join us next week where Mikael Andersson will introduce Victoria 3’s Revolutions.
 

Attachments

  • opiumwarsfragileunity.png
    opiumwarsfragileunity.png
    297,4 KB · Views: 0
  • opiumwarsgbrevent.png
    opiumwarsgbrevent.png
    1,6 MB · Views: 0
  • opiumwarsgoodend.png
    opiumwarsgoodend.png
    2,3 MB · Views: 0
  • opiumwarsnew.png
    opiumwarsnew.png
    1,9 MB · Views: 0
  • opiumwarsstart.png
    opiumwarsstart.png
    1,4 MB · Views: 0
  • 181Like
  • 52Love
  • 13
  • 7
  • 3
  • 1Haha
Reactions:
If there is one thing EU4 did very wrong, it was to introduce mission trees in the first place. It is an abomination that fortunately seems to be avoided in Vic 3. Mission trees serves two purposes, and have ever since they were introduced: Sell DLCs and railroad playthroughs.


EU4 disasters are basically the same as some of the Vic 3 journal entries. The most significant difference is that EU4 requires the additional 'skill' of knowing how to find the information about them in the wiki/game files to understand how to avoid them or resolve some of them, instead of having the information presented in game. The Castilian Civil War disater in EU4 is a prime example of how to not design disasters. If you get it at the wrong time it will can pretty much ruing your run, unless you go to the the game files/wiki (https://eu4.paradoxwikis.com/Castilian_Civil_War), and if you replay it you still don't really have any idea of what you could do better to resolve it unless you check the wiki/game files first. To top it all off, the game suggests playing Castille for new players!
Is your problem with mission trees as a concept themselves? OR that the mission trees only had one path built-in with no agency or choices on which path to take? In Vic 3, the journal system is essentially a fancy mission tree. The key difference is that there are multiple paths available based on what the player chooses and how successful the player is in that choice of path.

And the Ottoman journal entries are a form of railroading as well. There is nothing wrong with mission trees and railroading if it is done with the right amount of care and attention, as Vic 3 seems to be doing. EU4 is an older game and there have been lessons learned in game design, UI, and balancing since then.
 
Last edited:
  • 2
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
So why are you so upset by someone asking what you seem to agree is a legitimate question?
I don't like your tone and attitude. I think you're unnecessarily negative and hostile in how you ask your questions and make your points and I think you make the forum a worse off place for it. You can disagree with decisions without making snide comments.
 
  • 7
  • 1
Reactions:
Is your problem with mission trees as a concept themselves or that the mission trees only had one path built-in with no agency or choices on which path to take?
Neither, but rather how they are applied as a reward system for reaching certain milestones. In EU4 they even reward players for not taking advantage of opportunities that arises while playing. Mission trees in EU4 are by design static, and they replaced a random, dynamic mission system. Static missions leads to railroading regardless of how many paths they have, and the rewards used in EU4 makes other aspects of the game less fun.

In Vic 3, the journal system is essentially a fancy mission tree.
Journal entries are much closer related with event chains than mission trees. Journal entries can cause you problems, mission trees in EU4 cannot (beyond not getting free money, monarch points and AE reduction. Some jouranl entries even straight up says that reaching a certain milestone triggers an event. Hiding the trigger for those events in the game files and the wiki doesn't necessarily make the events any better.

The key difference is that there are multiple paths available based on what the player chooses and how successful the player is in that choice of path.
No. Paradox could add a thousand paths to the EU4 mission trees, it would still be a bad system as long as it is static and has no risk/cost to it, only rewards.

And the Ottoman journal entries are a form of railroading as well.
Yes, there will be bad journal entries, just like there are bad event chains and disasters in EU4 (and most likely Vic 3 as well). That isn't a flaw with the journal entries mechanic though, but rather those specific journal entries/events.

EU4 is an older game and there have been lessons learned in game design, UI, and balancing since then.
Mission trees were introduced in EU4 about 4 years ago, and every gameplay related DLC since have exploited them. The game still has event chains and a disaster system which have more similarities to journal entries than mission trees does. It does not appear to be a matter of having learned anything, but rather decided that the mission tree design concept doesn't fit the internal country building focus of Vic 3.

I don't like your tone and attitude. I think you're unnecessarily negative and hostile in how you ask your questions and make your points and I think you make the forum a worse off place for it.
Feel free to use the ignore feature then. It is most likely there for a reason. Instead you made up a nonesense answer on behalf of the devs. What a great contribution to the forums!
 
  • 4
  • 2
Reactions:
A historical question - could somebody knowledgeable please explain - why China did not grow its own opium?

They eventually did. It helped the outflow of silver, but not the problem of opium addiction.

It might have been less of a problem if they had done it earlier and of their own volition, but the Qing court could decide on a coherent policy that didn’t empower local officials to grow rich off bribes, until tensions with the Brits boiled over.
 
So pops that have had little or no contact at all with their original homeland for decades will be guaranteed to become obsessed with a goods they may never even have seen or heard about before just because it's popular where they come from? I'm sorry, but that sounds like complete nonesense. What's the reasoning for adding such a mechanic to a game claiming to aim to be a 'society sim' set in the 19th century?

Pops usually have contact with their original homeland. It's not that difficult by the 19th century. Often migration from one place to another was an ongoing process which brought fresh people from the homeland to the new country constantly. And with steamships, international postal systems, railroads, telegraphs, telephones etc international communication got easier and easier during the period. If the people have not assimilated to some other culture yet, they should probably still be affected to how their culture changes in the homeland.
 
  • 4
Reactions:
They did! At least in several areas. After the opium wars, local administrators came to rely on opium taxes and domestic opium production. In some places opium even became an ad hoc currency! By the start of the 20th century imperial efforts to curtail opium production was not primarily opposed by the British, but by the local farmers who relied on opium sales to survive.

The cultivation of opium was finally stamped out by the communists after the conclusion of the Civil War.
From a French perspective, towards the end of the XIXth century, the French government decided to rely on nationalized official opium trade in Indochina to finance their south-east asian colonies. They had to rely at first on Yunnan (i.e. Chinese) imports of opium.
By the time Communist China banned opium, it had become a strategic trade so the French military (in the Indochina war) , but also the CIA, used the infamous Golden Triangle south of the border to sustain their business model. It's the (equally infamous) CIA "French connection.", and that is how the CIA financed its breaking of the communist strikes in France in 1949.
 
  • 2
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Pops usually have contact with their original homeland. It's not that difficult by the 19th century. Often migration from one place to another was an ongoing process which brought fresh people from the homeland to the new country constantly. And with steamships, international postal systems, railroads, telegraphs, telephones etc international communication got easier and easier during the period. If the people have not assimilated to some other culture yet, they should probably still be affected to how their culture changes in the homeland.
Yeah, but in reality to a lesser degree. Like, my home regions emigrants still have communities in the US and speak our local dialect in an old timey fashion while here the local language is being replaced by the national standard language.

So the immigrants would be some mix of old-origin-culture, updated-origin-culture, and new-home-culture.

That would be a massive pain to model though, dynamically changing hybrid cultures would be possible to simulate, but if the only feature tied to culture is the binary decision "obsessed with X yes or no" it makes no sense to model this at all.
 
So pops that have had little or no contact at all with their original homeland for decades will be guaranteed to become obsessed with a goods they may never even have seen or heard about before just because it's popular where they come from? I'm sorry, but that sounds like complete nonesense. What's the reasoning for adding such a mechanic to a game claiming to aim to be a 'society sim' set in the 19th century?

Doesn't the game distinguish pops by heritage/culture/religion? Since obsessions will be linked to culture, rather than heritage, a pop that hasn't had contact with their ancestoral homeland for generations might not experience that obsession because their culture may have changed.

Edit: I agree with your later point that EU4's mission trees are bad game design, by the way. I've never liked them, or how much developer time seems to go into creating them.

For me, the biggest issue with the tree is how uninteractive it is. The tree is preset and static, the player can do nothing to change it, foreign nations don't have a way to influence or even respond to it, and, as you said, and it is entirely ignorable. I literally never even look at the tree unless I have accidently fulfilled on of the mission's requirements.

V3's journal entries seem better built. Other nations can involve themselves in the events, they can be more reactive, and, ultimately, more interesting. Individual chains might be poorly made, but the underlying system is a significant improvement.
 
Yeah, but in reality to a lesser degree. Like, my home regions emigrants still have communities in the US and speak our local dialect in an old timey fashion while here the local language is being replaced by the national standard language.

So the immigrants would be some mix of old-origin-culture, updated-origin-culture, and new-home-culture.

That would be a massive pain to model though, dynamically changing hybrid cultures would be possible to simulate, but if the only feature tied to culture is the binary decision "obsessed with X yes or no" it makes no sense to model this at all.

Seems easy enough to model: pops assimilate into the majority culture.
 
Pops usually have contact with their original homeland. It's not that difficult by the 19th century. Often migration from one place to another was an ongoing process which brought fresh people from the homeland to the new country constantly. And with steamships, international postal systems, railroads, telegraphs, telephones etc international communication got easier and easier during the period.
Often they did, yes, but far from always. Letters don't make you instantly obsessed with opium (or any other goods for that matter) though...
The game has a migration system which identifies where pops move to and from. Why not expand the migration system to allow modifiers like this to spread with pops that are migrating? Why does an important part of 19th century society such as migration have to be so barebone?

If the people have not assimilated to some other culture yet, they should probably still be affected to how their culture changes in the homeland.
Any such effect should under no circumstance be instant and guaranteed just because they are from the same culture. Even a flat monthly chance to spread would be better than just straight up instant and guaranteed.

Since obsessions will be linked to culture, rather than heritage, a pop that hasn't had contact with their ancestoral homeland for generations might not experience that obsession because their culture may have changed.
As long as they are flagged as the culture in queqstion, the way it is phrased in the dev diary it will be guaranteed an happen at the same time for all pops of that culture.
 
  • 4
Reactions:
So pops that have had little or no contact at all with their original homeland for decades will be guaranteed to become obsessed with a goods they may never even have seen or heard about before just because it's popular where they come from? I'm sorry, but that sounds like complete nonesense. What's the reasoning for adding such a mechanic to a game claiming to aim to be a 'society sim' set in the 19th century?
Well, they wouldn't. If a population has no contact with their original homeland for decades and is not maintaining their cultural traditions, then they by definition are assimilating into whichever culture they have now moved to. So what you want is already in the game. We're talking about populations that have maintained enough of a connection to their original culture to still be defined in game terms by their original culture.
 
  • 8
  • 1
Reactions:
Well, they wouldn't. If a population has no contact with their original homeland for decades and is not maintaining their cultural traditions, then they by definition are assimilating into whichever culture they have now moved to. So what you want is already in the game. We're talking about populations that have maintained enough of a connection to their original culture to still be defined in game terms by their original culture.
In Vic2 cultural assimilation was so slow though. Let's see how that works in Vic3.
 
From a French perspective, towards the end of the XIXth century, the French government decided to rely on nationalized official opium trade in Indochina to finance their south-east asian colonies. They had to rely at first on Yunnan (i.e. Chinese) imports of opium.
By the time Communist China banned opium, it had become a strategic trade so the French military (in the Indochina war) , but also the CIA, used the infamous Golden Triangle south of the border to sustain their business model. It's the (equally infamous) CIA "French connection.", and that is how the CIA financed its breaking of the communist strikes in France in 1949.
Often they did, yes, but far from always. Letters don't make you instantly obsessed with opium (or any other goods for that matter) though...
The game has a migration system which identifies where pops move to and from. Why not expand the migration system to allow modifiers like this to spread with pops that are migrating? Why does an important part of 19th century society such as migration have to be so barebone?
The above mentioned opium monopoly was not only present in French Indochina but throughout European Southeast Asia and was one of the most important sources of state revenue there. While they were definitely not the only customers, the overseas Chinese present in all these communities were the most important ones. In this case the spread of Opium use from China to the overseas Chinese was very important and should definitely be modeled. Likewise, I very much hope that we will get something like the opium or alcohol monopolies for (certain) colonies.
 
  • 2Like
Reactions:
Outsie of events, how are obsessions started? Is it random or can environmental factors affect it?

Also, are the negative effects of the Opium addicition unique to the Opium Crisis event chain or do they apply in any case? Do similar negative modifiers exist for alcohol obsessions?
 
Outsie of events, how are obsessions started? Is it random or can environmental factors affect it?

Also, are the negative effects of the Opium addicition unique to the Opium Crisis event chain or do they apply in any case? Do similar negative modifiers exist for alcohol obsessions?
They mentioned that if a luxury good is very available to a country it can become an obsession. So like, if Coffee is the cheapest of the luxury drinks for a decade then your culture will become obsessed with coffee (because they bought it over tea and wine for such a long time) that increasing prices won't make them switch anymore.

(And I kinda like that this is a way to encourage diversifying your luxury supply)

How they are dynamically removed is so far unknown afaik.

For negative modifiers I'd assume those are event based, and only happen where it mattered politically (opium in china, liquor in the US)
 
They mentioned that if a luxury good is very available to a country it can become an obsession. So like, if Coffee is the cheapest of the luxury drinks for a decade then your culture will become obsessed with coffee (because they bought it over tea and wine for such a long time) that increasing prices won't make them switch anymore.

Should be noted that this happens on a cultural level, so eg. if Sweden develops a taste for coffee, the fika culture will carry on to Swedish immigrants in eg. the United States. This might mean countries that attract a lot of immigrants might have a lot of different obsessions in them, though each being individually smaller in impact.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Should be noted that this happens on a cultural level, so eg. if Sweden develops a taste for coffee, the fika culture will carry on to Swedish immigrants in eg. the United States. This might mean countries that attract a lot of immigrants might have a lot of different obsessions in them, though each being individually smaller in impact.
The impact will propably neglectible for minority cultures, even if it's a large minority. If 10% of your pops prefer coffee and are ready to pay higher prices, the increased demand will mostly be compensated by your other less picky pops who will switch to tea and wine if coffee prices increase slightly.
 
  • 1
  • 1Like
Reactions:
一个历史问题 - 有知识的人可以解释一下 - 为什么中国不种植自己的鸦片?
我可以回答你的问题。I can answer your question, in fact, the Qing Dynasty has multiple reactions to the poppies, the first reaction is what you said "Chi Jin"(驰禁), but in the end, this is still given up。If your children go to the disadvantages and you don't care?
 
If there is one thing EU4 did very wrong, it was to introduce mission trees in the first place. It is an abomination that fortunately seems to be avoided in Vic 3. Mission trees serves two purposes, and have ever since they were introduced: Sell DLCs and railroad playthroughs.
Mission trees were always an optional piece of content that one could engage with. Just as you could conquer the world with Ulm you could also conquer with Russia. Optional content that gives countries flavour is not an issue.

The problems instead began with Hoi 4 where focus trees (that evolved from mission trees) were extremely railroady and where a fundamental portion of the game simply wouldn't function without.
EU4 disasters are basically the same as some of the Vic 3 journal entries.
No, the Vic 3 journal entries are extremely similar to the Imperator Missions. Both in their design and presentation.
The most significant difference is that EU4 requires the additional 'skill' of knowing how to find the information about them in the wiki/game files to understand how to avoid them or resolve some of them
The Castilian Civil War disater in EU4 is a prime example of how to not design disasters. If you get it at the wrong time it will can pretty much ruing your run, unless you go to the the game files/wiki (https://eu4.paradoxwikis.com/Castilian_Civil_War), and if you replay it you still don't really have any idea of what you could do better to resolve it unless you check the wiki/game files first. To top it all off, the game suggests playing Castille for new players!
The conditions for starting or ending disasters are neatly presented within' the UI when hovering over the disasters and finding the conditions required. When was the last time you played EU4?
 
  • 3
Reactions: