• 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 #47 - Conversion and Assimilation

16_9.jpg

Happy Thursday! Today our topic returns to Pop mechanics, with a discussion around some of the finer details on how Pops may change their religion and culture over time depending on your nation’s legal system. The mechanics themselves are quite straightforward, but as always in Victoria 3, the applications of them can have quite different outcomes in different situations.

Let’s begin by reviewing the mechanics around Discrimination, since this will be important later in the discussion. We’ve already talked about most of this in other dev diaries but some details here may be new.
dakotaculture.png

Discriminated Pops have barely any Political Strength and cannot vote. This means the only way they can impact your country’s politics is by agitating for change through Political Movements, or by starting a civil war for self-rule through a Cultural Secession. In addition to being hamstrung politically, they also get paid substantially less than their non-discriminated counterparts, have a harder time developing Qualifications for certain Professions, and their presence in your country is a potential source of radicalism and Turmoil.

Whether a Pop is discriminated against or accepted depends on who they are, the national identity of the country they live in, and the laws of that country. Both culture and religion are potential reasons for discrimination, and these are controlled by different laws. Your Citizenship laws determine which Pops are discriminated against on the basis of their culture, while your Church and State laws determine which forms of worship are considered acceptable in your country. To be considered non-discriminated by these laws, Pops must pass a more or less stringent selection criteria based on how much they differ from the primary culture(s) and state religion in the country.

For example, under the Racial Segregation Citizenship law, only Pops whose culture’s heritage trait matches that of their primary cultures heritage trait will be accepted. The heritage trait indicates which region of the world the culture originates from (e.g. European, African, Indigenous American), and under this law that is the only thing that matters - whether the Pops speak the same language, or are both transplants in the New World, is unimportant in determining their status. By contrast, under Cultural Exclusion, any similarity between a Pop’s culture and one of the primary ones qualifies them as equal under the law.

The total set of options are:

Ethnostate: only Pops of primary cultures are accepted
National Supremacy: Pops whose cultures share both heritage and another trait are accepted
Racial Segregation: Pops of the same heritage are accepted
Cultural Exclusion: Pops whose cultures share any similarities are accepted
Multiculturalism: no cultures are discriminated against

State Religion: only Pops who adhere to the state religion are accepted
Freedom of Conscience: Pops who adhere to a religion in the same family as the state religion are accepted (e.g. any branch of Christianity, any form of Buddhist)
Total Separation: no religions are discriminated against

citizenshiplawsus.png

The practical impact of these laws therefore depends on what the state religion and primary cultures of your country are, as well as who actually lives in your country. An Ethnostate operates no differently in practice than a Multicultural state if only Pops of primary cultures live there. Since Pops are unlikely to mass migrate to your country if they’d be oppressed there once they arrived, until you expand your borders and populace by force you may not see a practical difference (except for a curious lack of immigrants). But if you were to form a Customs Union with a poorer neighbor, resulting in a lot of economic migration within the market to your country, you might have to deal with substantial political strife until you take steps to loosen up your Citizenship laws. If the option exists for you, as an alternative you might consider attempting to unify your nations instead (which we’ll learn more about next week) in order to accept both cultures as “primary”.

Alright, now that we’ve cleared up how countries can adapt to the Pops, we will consider how Pops might adapt to their country.

culturesus.png

First let’s tackle Religious Conversion. Pops who are discriminated against on the basis of their religion will always be in the process of converting to an accepted religion. The religion they convert to is not necessarily the state religion, though - it could be any accepted religion that is dominant in the state where they live. An Indigenous American following an Animist religion in a United States with Freedom of Conscience instead of Total Separation is eventually going to convert to some form of Christianity to avoid religious persecution, but if they live in a Nebraska that has been settled by predominantly Catholic rather than Protestant Pops, they would convert to Catholicism even though Protestantism is the dominant religion in the nation as a whole.

Pops convert at a percentage-based rate, currently set to a base of 0.2% / month (as usual, numbers such as these are subject to balancing and change before release, and are always moddable). A percentage-based conversion rate naturally means a diminishing number of actual converts over time, so at this rate it would take almost 30 years for ½ of your discriminated population to convert. If you find this rate too ponderous for your strategic goals, you have two primary tools at your disposal to speed it up.

The Religious School System law + institution combination increases this rate by +20% per investment level, up to a potential maximum of +100% (i.e. twice the speed). It also increases the Education Access of Pops overall and increases the Clout of the Devout Interest Group.

The other method is the Promote National Values decree. Like all decrees, it is issued in a certain state and costs Authority for each state it is issued in, so in a larger country you will have to focus your efforts. Promote National Values doubles the rate of both conversion and assimilation.

berbersunniconversion.png

Using a combination of both methods, you could speed up religious conversion such that ½ of a minority population can be converted to an accepted religion within the span of a 10 years. Of course, your school system only extends to incorporated states, so if you’re trying to mass convert Pops in conquered land or colonies you will have to do so by decree - or embark on the often lengthy and painstaking process of incorporating a part of the world that’s culturally alien to your country.

This leads us to cultural assimilation. The conditions for assimilation are a little more complex than conversion, and in some ways operate by the reverse logic. In order to start assimilating, a Pop must already be culturally accepted. After all, if they can’t get citizenship, can’t vote, can’t participate in politics, can’t get paid a fair wage on the basis of who they are, there simply is no way for them to assimilate - by which we mean, integrate themselves into a primary culture such that they are both accepted as such by others and genuinely consider themselves part of that culture. Renouncing one’s religious beliefs and practices can be a very practical and concrete choice, but adopting and being adopted by a different culture is not a utilitarian decision.

In addition, Pops will never change culture if they live in a state they consider their Homeland. A Franco-Canadian in Ontario might over time adopt the ways and tongue of their Anglo-Canadian neighbors, but a Franco-Canadian who resides in Quebec?! Plutôt mourir!

(And of course, if a confederated Canada has been created with both Anglo- and Franco-Canadian as primary cultures, none of those types of Pops would be changing cultures in the first place.)

If a Pop should be assimilating, the culture they will be assimilating into will always be a primary culture. This is because, again, this is not a practical decision that’s just up to the Pop in question, but a two-way-street of assimilation into the dominant national identity. In the case of countries with multiple primary cultures, the one selected will be the Homeland of the state the Pop lives in, or in case none or several apply, the dominant one among Pops who already live there. A Czech Pop living in a unified Germany (North + South German) in the state of Silesia (North German and Polish Homelands) will assimilate into the North German culture; if they lived in Bavaria they would be assimilating into the South German culture; and if they lived in Bohemia they would not assimilate at all, since Bohemia is a not only a South German but also a Czech Homeland. If this Pop instead lived in Transylvania (with both Hungarian and Romanian primary cultures and Homelands), they would be assimilating into whichever of those cultures is more dominant in the part of Transylvania where they live.

The rate of assimilation is the same as for religion, 0.2% per month. As mentioned, the Promote National Values decree can be used to double this rate on a per-state basis. In addition, a Public School System will provide an increased assimilation rate of +12.5% per investment level, representing perhaps a less overt approach to indoctrination than their religious counterparts. With maximum effort, this means you can assimilate half of a minority population in about 18 years.

northgermanprotestantassimilation.png

I’ll end on a small design note. While our primary motivation while developing these mechanics was to provide a logical and believable simulation, a nice side effect of the asymmetry between conversion and assimilation is that there’s no way to benefit from both without an asymmetry in your laws as well. An inclusive, accepting, discrimination-free society won’t also become religiously homogeneous over time, nor will an oppressive, xenophobic country be able to assimilate their cultural minorities just by waiting them out while throwing resources at integrating them. Culture-wise, Pops need to be either accepted or harshly dealt with, now or in the future. Being accepting of all faiths today means there will be problems if you backtrack in the future. There is no one-size-fits-all strategy for dealing with heterogeneous populations.

There are of course a few good examples of countries that already start out with asymmetrical Citizenship and Church and State laws. The Ottoman Empire, home to a lot of cultural and religious minorities, has fairly lenient Citizenship Laws but zero separation of Church and State. As a result they will initially have a lot of both assimilation and conversion, and increasing the rate of those further might be one way for them to try to minimize Turmoil due to discrimination long-term. Meanwhile, the United States has total separation of Church and State (zero religious conversion, but no religious discrimination either) but Racial Segregation laws that cause considerable population segments to be discriminated against, particularly Indigenous- and African-American. Since none of these populations will ever be assimilating unless the Citizenship policy changes, this problem will not just go away on its own. Either the United States changes course legally, or they will have to continue dealing with trouble caused by the oppression of these minorities for the following century.

That’s all for this week! Like I hinted above, next week Martin will get into how Unifications work in Victoria 3, which I for one am very excited about!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • 175Like
  • 50Love
  • 22
  • 20
  • 16
Reactions:
I agree with you here that the game seems headed toward representing only the kinds of discrimination that the government could affect. Nevertheless, sometime down the road the game could start to simulate discrimination that arises spontaneously between groups of POPs. For exmaple, a society that is relatively tolerant of minorities might start acting more harshly toward immigrants if the begin to grow rapidly in numbers. That's just one possibility.
It would indeed be very cool to have a flexible system for discrimination that can change relations between cultures over time, similar to how in ck3 you can now promote cultural acceptance or diminish it.
 
I think it's a bit of a missed opportunity to not include the Loyalist mechanic in assimilation, after thinking about it. Loyalism can actually model pop attitudes towards the state (and thus the primary culture(s) of that state), which is a more natural metric for whether a pop would be inclined to assimilate. It would also allow for situations where discriminated pops assimilate, but would make that rarer by virtue of discriminated pops being less likely to be Loyalists. I think this would both be a more intuitive and flexible system since assimilation can vary depending on the situation in the country (if minorities are radicalized, logically, they do not assimilate).
I think this is a really good DD but I do have one suggestion which relates to what others have been saying about the seemingly ahistorical possibility of a largely Christianised Ashkenazi population in Eastern Europe, a largely islamised Greek or Armenian population in the Ottoman Empire or a largely Christian North African Maghrebi population by the game’s end.
I think perhaps instead the mechanics should reflect how religious distinctiveness often reinforced the cultural distinctiveness of the ethnicities that tended to adhere to them, and that religion and culture tended to be interlinked rather than separate. This could be done by having that instead of only whether a culture is accepted deciding whether its pops will assimilate, a combined measure of the religious and cultural discrimination that pop faces would decide it’s openness to assimilation.
This solution would seem, in my view, to encourage more historical results- for example the Ashkenazim of Eastern Europe would indeed in cases convert to Christianity but now as these pops became religiously accepted it would now be possible for them to be culturally assimilated as well. This would would also open an alternative game-style for cultural assimilation (of believers) by a culturally and religiously intolerant state while still reflecting the added difficulty of such policies by making it still impossible to assimilate those who are both religiously and culturally discriminated. The latter fact would mean that the culturally Ashkenazi population itself would always be predisposed to the Jewish faith as only Christian Ashkenazi would encounter any cultural assimilation. This example could also be used in the Ottoman Empire, where instead of -as the current game mechanics suggest-there be an encouragement towards large numbers of Muslim Greeks and recently assimilated Orthodox Turks, discriminated orthodox Greeks would be highly resistant to cultural assimilation while Muslim Greeks (presumably in this game facing little religious or cultural discrimination in the empire) would be in a process of assimilation into Muslim Turks.
Fully agreed on both counts.

Loyalists should convert/assimilate at a higher rate and generally be the first ones to go, regular pop members should change at the current or lower rate, and Radicals not at all. Combine that with preventing cultural assimilation if a Pop is already discriminated against for their religion, and not converting if they'd still be discriminated against for their culture, and you could get plenty of cases where very specific Pops are actually extremely difficult to convert the harder the nation tries, and mostly succeeds in angering and driving them away instead.
 
Last edited:
  • 3
  • 2Like
Reactions:
It seems to me that the conversion and assimilation mechanics offer a solid foundation, but need considerable refinement to reflect the era's realities regarding shifts in the cultural and religious composition of societies.
 
  • 2Like
  • 1
Reactions:
i'm not sure to understand , but if you annex, say , rhineland as France using the left bank CB , those germans would not assimilate? same if you conquer maghreb, local pops would stay the same?
 
Ethnostate: only Pops of primary cultures are accepted
National Supremacy: Pops whose cultures share both heritage and another trait are accepted
Shouldn't these two descriptions be swapped? As far as I know, ethnostates are supposed to "racially" or ethnically homogenous, where the "ethno" part refers to ethnicity; I understand "race" to represented here by ethnicity. If "nation" in this sense is meant to represent a peoples and not the nation-state, perhaps it would be better to change it to "Cultural Supremacy".

Also, I would just like to echo that it doesn't make sense for a culture to be accepted before they integrate; this only makes sense for ethnicities or in this case heritages. If a culture is accepted, what incentive do the people have to change? They get no advantages, since they are already able to fully participate in society. On the other hand, if they are discriminated against, they have more incentive to change their behaviour, in order to be accepted and thus be allowed to participate in society; the other option of course being outright revolt and forcing the government to recognise you as equal.
 
  • 2Like
Reactions:
Also a question about Shinto in Japan, what religious group are they, if Japan goes for Freedom of Conscience. Is there any other religion in their group, or are they grouped with Buddhism? Or will State-Shinto not be a thing, and Japan will always stay Buddhist as their state religion?
The Japan AAR goes into some detail on that. The AAR thread should be on the first or second page and I've collected all the discord posts into the thread.
 
I'm a bit worried about the hard lock on converting pops who are in their homelands. How will this system deal with multicultural regions like Schleswig-Holstein?

Historically, the Schleswigian populations of Germans, Danes and Frisians waxed and waned throughout the 1800's with the spread of different nationalisms influencing who they identified with, as well as with the laws of the countries governing them. The hard-lock system makes sense in "status quo" situations where there were no attempts from above to assimilate cultures in the region, like during absolutist Danish rule before the two Schleswig wars, or after the 1920 Schleswig plebiscites. In the middle period however, there were several attempts to enforce the use of respectively Danish and German as the administrative and educational languages in the region in order to force assimilation (For example the German Köller Policy from 1898-1903 which attempted to repress Danish national sentiments).

Ideally the system would be able to model both peaceful coexistence and attempts to "correct" the inhabitants of multicultural homelands - with the attempts to keep the beleagured culture alive affecting the results as well.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
Surprised there's literally no way at all ever to assimilate folks in homelands, at least linguistically. France managed to just fine in this period, using education. Welsh was rapidly disappearing during this time period as well.

Edit: In fact the argument that folks need to be accepted in order to assimilate doesn't make a great deal of sense when it comes to language- what you speak is as deliberate a choice as which religious rites you practice, ultimately.

The issue of language is an interesting point, as in the case of France, Spain and Britain their governments were able to break the back of the regional languages but it didn't put an end to nationalism; Irish was almost completely replaced by English in Ireland during the 19th century, but it's not like the Irish stopped being Catholic or being oppressed by Great Britain.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
This leads us to cultural assimilation. The conditions for assimilation are a little more complex than conversion, and in some ways operate by the reverse logic. In order to start assimilating, a Pop must already be culturally accepted. After all, if they can’t get citizenship, can’t vote, can’t participate in politics, can’t get paid a fair wage on the basis of who they are, there simply is no way for them to assimilate - by which we mean, integrate themselves into a primary culture such that they are both accepted as such by others and genuinely consider themselves part of that culture. Renouncing one’s religious beliefs and practices can be a very practical and concrete choice, but adopting and being adopted by a different culture is not a utilitarian decision.
Hm. That doesn't really fit much of European experience. A lot of people just assimilated into majority culture because it was beneficial to adopt its language and customs. Especially migrants from countryside (and it was often the case that countryside had different ethnicity and culture than new industrial cities, which were hubs of assimilation) to growing cities.

It happened to persecuted cultures too. A lot of Poles migrated into Ruhr and most of them assimilated, for example.

It even happened in the 'homeland' territories, although to lesser extent (not due to some idea of homeland, more because it's less bad to be a part of majority group that is discriminated against, so there is less incentive to adopt other customs/language - if you can get by by using your mother tongue).


Cultural assimilation is also a rational decision (even if not conscious) based on incentives. Sometimes the incentives are negative (discriminated against), and sometimes positive if something about the culture is attractive itself (and don't forget that cultures change internally all the time too).

Unless the "culturally accepted" stuff is just a very low bar - if the non accepted cultures are so discriminated against that this is racial discrimination and it's virtually impossible to change your ways, but then it's a misnomer... and a weird design of cultural acceptance laws, because it should be separate case (Poles in Russian empire were certainly not accepted culturally, but there was not excluding them from changing culture/nationality, this is different from Jim Crow USA)
 
  • 5
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
I think that the base system for assimilation is solid for a general mechanic, not perfect, but solid, I am happy with what I read.
I have certain that in future post-release patches assimilation mechanics will be expanded, rebalanced and revised, mainly because while this system is solid it can't really simulate some specific cases that happened around the world.

I would like to ask for a specific mechanic for pops of African heritage in the new world: If slavery is legal and if pops of African heritage are discriminated, they should assimilate in african cultures from the new world, for example, if the Atlantic Trade remains for a significative portion of the game places like Caribbean Islands would become full of dozens of African cultures while would be more immersive if these pops assimilated in the Afro-Caribbean culture for example.
 
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
The Japan AAR goes into some detail on that. The AAR thread should be on the first or second page and I've collected all the discord posts into the thread.
Which begs the question what exactly the point of switching the state religion was. The AAR says it makes the monks like the monarchy but they started a civil war and ended up marginalized anyway.
 
Last edited:
  • 1Like
Reactions:
For me it would kinda make sense if you could choose specific religions and cultures, that are not descriminated against. E.g. The Ottomans accepting all variations of Islam and Orthodoxy, but not other religions. Or Germany making an exception for Danish, but not the other Scandinavians. Or maybe the other way around. Germany accepting all variations of Christianity but not Orthodoxy.
 
  • 5
Reactions:
I also support this idea. Here is even a proposal, how the current laws can be relatively quickly modified to fit into 3-tier discrimination system
Another idea is that during long or costly wars a culture representing an enemy nation may move from accepted to tolerated status, see for example the historical anti-German sentiment in the US and Britain during WW1.
 
  • 2Like
Reactions:
I think it would be very good to have dev replies in here, hopefully we do soon. People are raising very good questions that make me think this system may be too simplified and have silly outcomes
 
  • 5
Reactions:
So it seems to correctly model it one need to make animism very susceptible to conversion, while Islam (and probably Judaism for that matter) should be very resistant. I don’t see any other way, than applying arbitrary modifiers.

I’m not sure that said modifiers would be arbitrary. There are legitimate reasons why religions such as the Abrahamic faiths are more resistant to people converting away from them (different reasons for each) and why animist faiths are less resistant.

Even without getting into the weeds, the lack of an institutional structure to support/enforce adherence and discourage/punish apostasy alone will make a huge difference.

This does get into an interesting point: the growth of religions other than the state religion. For example, it looks like the US will be represented (incorrectly) as having a Protestant state religion, but its laws are such that that is irrelevant. However, especially within such religiously free countries, missionaries of all sorts are bound to be active. Granted, when you lump all of protestantism under one label, most of that gets swept under the rug, but if the Mormons get represented, they’ll need to be able to proselytize.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
Great developer diary. Thanks for your hard work.
 
Unlike what some people are saying I think cultures needing to be accepted before assimilating is perfectly reasonable, generally that's the only way assimilation works and generally an accepted culture WILL assimilate. As soon as Irish and Italians in the US were no longer seen as foreigners or scheming papists they became white americans.

I do however absolutely think forced assimilation needs to be modeled. Poland and native americans have been mentioned, but in the context of euro-american immigrants there's also the fact that German was the most spoken second language in the US until WW1, during and after which is was heavily suppressed and German-Americans heavily pressured to fully assimilate.

Based on the current mechanics I don't think it should be too hard to have another Authority decree that increases assimilation rate, maybe at the cost of increasing the discontent of scaled according to their wealth/SoL? (i.e. poorer pops will have a harder time assimilating based on lack of access to education, depending on multigenerational immigrant communities, simply being unable to get better jobs or "proper" goods that make them acceptable to the accepted culture) Seems like a way to do this without adding new systems or completely reworking the existing system.

As far as general discrimination within the populace apart from state mandates, I think this could be fairly easily modeled by linking unemployment of accepted culture pops to their support for IG's that support more restrictive immigration laws.

That said I do think the game would have a major blind spot if these issues go totally unaddressed, I'm only trying to suggest workable solutions that could be implemented because I'm sure that whenever a suggestion takes the form of reworking or adding entire core gameplay systems it's just not viable at this stage in development.
 
  • 2Like
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
How do discrimination laws work if you manage to gain more than one primary culture?

Is the trait-check based on the original primary culture only, or will the other primary culture's traits be counted as well?
All primary culture's traits are counted in the case of multiple primary cultures.

Also, I hope Promote National Values will make sure that pops convert to the official religion rather than any accepted religion: it makes little sense for the Protestant, Freedom of Conscience UK givernment to actively advocate conversion to Catholicism, for example.
It doesn't in the current build, but we plan to make that the correct behavior under that Decree, yeah.
 
  • 21Like
  • 4
  • 2
Reactions:
Will there be any downsides to being completely open and non-discriminatory towards religions and ethnicities?
As the DD says discriminated pops get less wage and have no political power. So an egalitarian nation loses a cheap workforce that doesn't play a role in regular politics. If that's a benefit depends on your goals (it empowers the elite, and keeps workers away from trade union), but it will surely make your industry have an easier time to produce cheaper goods than the foreign competition if you don't have to pay competetive wages.
 
  • 1
Reactions: