• 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.

Developer Corner: Reinventing Faction Dynamics - Part 1

Generals!

Continuing from where we left off last week, we have another briefing from command. Find a comfortable chair, settle in and read on!

Briefing: Reinventing Faction Dynamics (Part 1)
Written by: @Wrongwraith

Hey all,

Dev corners are back. What are they and how do they differ from the Dev Diaries we normally do? The key difference is probably the scope. Dev corners are usually shorter. Here we discuss things that are sometimes very early in development, whereas Dev Diaries are usually about describing and explaining the new features that come with an expansion. So less details, and also a lot less pretty screenshots. And above all, a lot more Work in Progress - the things we talk about here might not even make it into the game in the end - at least not in the shape they are presented.

But enough of that, on to what I was supposed to talk about. Today’s subject is Reinventing Faction Dynamics…

Not much has happened to factions since release, so we figured it was time to take a look at them. The main difference is that there are more of them as more countries can, and do, create factions now. But in general they are all very similar, and you don’t feel any difference playing as the Axis as opposed to the Allies, the Comintern, or the Chinese United Front - for example. The goal here is to change that. To make factions feel more unique, and immersive at the same time.

Before we continue I should reiterate that this is very early stages - so not much in terms of final UI is implemented, sometimes you can’t do things except by commands, and in general things are constantly changing - so don’t expect pretty pictures!

But look at it from the bright side - you get to see very early UX mock ups - and some beautiful “coder art:)


Core Concepts

Today I will try to run you through the core concepts of what we are doing with factions. Later on I will dive deeper into details, but for now, I’ll try to keep it relatively high level and give you the big picture of what we are working on for this feature.


dc_factiondynamics1_001.png

Early mockup of Faction Window Header - showing the Manifest, the Faction Icon, and the Faction Power Projection

Each faction has a manifest. The manifest is about what the faction wants to do. Conquer new land, Stop the spread of fascism - or similar longer term purposes.

Each manifest will have a percentage of fulfillment - that can go up or down during gameplay. If the fulfillment is high enough, some bonuses will unlock - depending on the type of manifest.


dc_factiondynamics1_002.png

In-game view of the Faction header with manifest for the Allies - this is as raw as a screenshot will get. Placeholder art, no tooltips, no graphics added, and no attention to placement or final elements. But it is there, and it is working, and as the Allies, we want to defend democracy


Faction Goals

In addition to the Manifest each faction will have shorter or longer term strategic goals. These can be things like conquest of specific territory or control, or instigation, of resources..

These goals, once completed, will give the faction members rewards that they can use to modify their faction in various ways - as well as more standard rewards like Army Experience.

Together with the Manifest, the Goals will give the faction a direction. A direction you need not follow if you don’t want to, but if you do you will be rewarded.


dc_factiondynamics1_003.png

Example Goal set up for the Axis. Again please note that the screenshot is an early prototype.


Rules

Each faction comes with a set of rules. These generally relate to a specific action type. Like for example who can join the faction or who in the faction can declare war.

Some examples:
A rule for joining can be based on the ideology of the joining country. For example, the rule might state that only non-fascist countries can join. (It won’t prevent a country from turning fascist later though). Another Joining rule can be based on Geography, saying that only countries from a specific region can join.

Other types or rules relate to things such as:
Peace Conferences - Giving you bonuses to certain types of actions
War Declaration - Who can declare war and what are the requirements
Call to war - Who can call to war, just the faction Leader, anyone, or Just Majors etc
Dismissal - When can you kick someone from the faction
Contribution - What are the minimum requirements for contribution to the faction
Leadership Challenge - What are the requirements for taking over leadership

There will probably be a few more, and some of these might not make it, but you get the general idea.

These rules can be changed during gameplay, if the Faction leader, or any other member country, has Faction Initiatives available to do so.


dc_factiondynamics1_004.png

UX mockup for changing your Rules (in this case the Join Faction Rules)

Speaking of Faction Initiatives - lets move on to:


Faction Initiatives and Goals Rewards

Initiatives are what you use to change things in your faction. These Initiatives are gained from completing Goals. Most goals will give one Initiative to the faction leader when completed. Some might give to other members as well. And if you have an Initiative to spare, you can change a rule. Or you can remove one. Or add one - it is basically up to you to decide what to spend your Initiative on, and how to modify your faction. But choose carefully, for initiatives will be few. (Which also means you won’t be spammed with decisions to make - which is something we want to avoid.)

Other ways to spend Initiatives
Apart from just changing the rule set for the faction, you can add specific upgrades to your faction to make it more unique.

Example of upgrades you will be able to do are:
Adding or improving Research Sharing
Adding or improving Military Doctrine Sharing
Adding a Faction Supreme Commander
Start up joint research sites


dc_factiondynamics1_005.png

UX mockup of the research part of the Factions screen.


Influence and contribution

The last thing I want to talk about today is Influence and its close relative; Contribution.

Each member Country has an Influence rating in the faction. This is basically an internal power level - how important a member are you within the faction?
Countries with high influence get more things from goal completions. Meaning they will also have a say in how the faction evolves - as some of these rewards can be Initiatives.

Additionally, in order to take over leadership of a faction you need to have a minimum level of influence.

You gain influence by War participation, Contributions, Industrial might, and from “Events”. Events can be various things depending on the faction and the content - but can include things such as executing daring Raids, or from focuses or decisions.

Of these, Contribution is probably the most interesting to talk about. Basically whenever a country delivers something to the faction, or to other faction members they gain “contribution score” - which is directly reflected in their influence rating. Whenever someone receives contributions, or “withdraws” from the faction pool, they lose contribution score - thus lowering their influence.

This means that Influence will build up and fluctuate over time.

Another use of influence is in peace conferences. When your faction is on the winning side, all member countries will pool some of their war score, and this will be given to the most influential countries in the faction. Similar to the game setting where the Faction Leader can get part of other members’ scores. But here it is not just the faction leader, so if you are an important part of your faction, you will get more say in the peace deal even if you are not the faction leader.

What are contributions then?

Generally they are things you can do to support your faction or your faction members - such as sending expeditionary forces, pooling manpower for use by the faction, producing industrial goods, Lend lease to faction members. Those kinds of things. Some of those we already have in the game, but the goal is to streamline them a bit. Others are new - but regardless of whether they are new or old, they will contribute to your contribution score - thus making you more (or less) important in the faction.


Some Final Words

Another thing we want to add when working with factions, is the ability to tell your fellow allies where you want them to focus their efforts. Similar to how you can create pings to multiplayer allies, you should be able to tell your AI allies that I want you to focus on this region. It shouldn’t mean that they abandon everything else, but rather just increase their attention here.

That was all for this time. I am looking forward to hearing your thoughts, and I’ll do my best to answer questions, but do bear with me, I won’t be able to answer everything - party from a time perspective, but also based on the fact that there are quite a few things that are as yet undecided, or at least relatively untested - so I might not know what the end result will be. If it doesn’t play out fine, or smooth - things will change. But I will do my best.

Additionally, I hope to be able to give you a few more details in a few weeks time - because as you can see if you look at the draft schedule presented earlier, I do have yet another slot for this.

And as I said, what you have seen here will most certainly differ from what will eventually make it into the game. It takes many iterations, and a lot of feedback to get a feature completed. But I hope you enjoyed this little peek into what I/we are doing at the moment.

/Wrongwraith
 
  • 111Like
  • 44Love
  • 9
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
This is an appropriate time for me to drop this again here.
Firstly:
- Please fix the Communist India focus tree, Why can it literally spam Iran with communism till Iran has a civil war? German can do the same thing and the civil war would start at 45%(yet when i played it, the civil war started when i had 30% support) It is not fun to play a country which is constantly blowing itself up.

Please make Austria(as A-H/Austrian Empire) have a decision to be able to core southern Poland(Historical Galicia and Bucovina), add this decision to Hungary as well, as why would a decision during an event, made by a another country, make u lose your cores?
-Same goes for Silesia(+ zaolzie) as Im pretty sure that as Hungary, even when you annex Puppeted Czech Kingdom with Silesia(which are its cores), you do not core it.
--------> You can also just fix this problem by adding these states from Germany and Poland to the decision - Reintergrate the Empire or seperate decisions.
- And also, add the Habsburg Spain/Mexico focuses Hungary has, to Austria's Focus tree as well. That would make Austria's focus tree perfect.
(And maybe, add the decision to restore the HRE without giving power to lichtenstein?) + Considering that now Spain can pick the Habsburg King, maybe add in a few secret focus trees to create a Habsburg faction/core and invade the benelux or a benelux puppet(Spanish Netherlands et.? or even to invade the Americas...)

!! By adding these few Hungarians focuses you can perhaps make a new Austrian Habsburg faction where you would have a strong Austria with Mexico, Poland, Belgium etc. as their puppet while the factions goal being to spead Monarchism etc.
This would tie in together to create a cohesive end-Game Habsburg Austria.

- Some descriptions of some focuses still refer to Otto von Habsburg as being a King/ruling a Kingdom eventhough Austria never was a Kingdom and was a Archduchy ruled by an Archduke.

- Maybe also finally add the ability to exchange land between puppets/allies? Idk how but would be a nice thing to have.
 
Last edited:
  • 2Like
Reactions:
No, not at the moment. Focusing on internal faction relations right now.
I was going to add that this is what immediately came to mind. Relations with other factions seems essential to really flesh this out. For example, so that China can have their United Front faction, while also being cooperative with the Allies (after all, China was, officially, one of the 5 major Allies in the War, which got them a permanent seat on the UN Security Council).

I'm not sure what would make the most sense, but some framework for a faction's attitude toward another faction. "Friendly, Co-Belligerent, Neutral, Antagonistic" something like that. It could also help with peace conferences by helping to define sphere of influence. For example, encouraging the Allies and Comintern to follow vaguely historical divisions of Europe.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
You guys are absolutely cooking with this one! The way these new faction mechanics feel almost makes me hope for some form of a League of Nations sub-faction thing!

But isn't a large numbers of them automatically then a member at the start of the game? And how do this work with Allies or Russia?
 
I'm excited to see these changes develop and thank you for sharing your thoughts so early in development.

Taking a step back though, this faction mechanic risks adding yet another menu for the player to juggle.

This mechanic needn't be bad in isolation, but now players need to check in on the manifest points, influence and contribution of faction members alongside babysitting the spy operations, choosing the next focus, choosing research techs, babysitting the decision menu, upgrading the MIOs, updating the build queue, buying doctrines, spirits and advisors, putting items on the market, juggling production queues, declining diplomatic offers, and babysitting the foreign trade for resources.

Adding new gameplay loops is very welcome, but it needs to be accompanied with at least two new QOL fixes for every one new mechanic so that the game doesn't become even more overwhelming.
 
  • 3
Reactions:
Well, here's some Wishlist for this new DLC, both for Qol and flavor
- a rework on island hopping, making it something more unique to the Pacific (as it wasn't like how hoi4 shows)
- addition to a new form of occupation for Japan and USA
- addition for the khalkhin gol conflict, as "testing" the soviets wasn't like that in real life, and instead was in the mongolian border
- an addition of Mengukuo and Mongolian focus trees
- Tannu tuva and Mongolia being puppets of the soviets, as it was in real life
- A new system of puppets for the Soviets
- a reworks on how uprisings/resistance works, so a 10 pop island doesn't have 50 resistance
- cheaper screenings and subs
- expanding on the sino-japanese war, as Japan never declared war, and was china that did in 1941, to support the american war effort
- making it harder for the player to invade china, while making sensible to Japan
- making the sino-japanese war more "realistic", as japan only focused on railroads, major port and some cities, not invading most interiors
- a focus tree for siam, as it's the only "player" of ww2 without a focus tree
and lastly, but for me the most important
- removing generic leaders which did not exist for nation who did have focus trees (i can recount Norway, Sweden and Brazil having it for both fascist and communists, why not just having the communist/fascist leader as the leader of the part, instead of being a guy who did not exist?)
 
Sounds like an interesting idea but i have to say devs should take first a look at the actual balance of the game. The best Tank in game is basicly a T-35 ( 34 heavy chassy biggest gun u can get + 3 times extra turret bad armor) which performed poorly in the reality. In the game its the best. Tank chassis in general offer no real benefit researching (very minor bonus for resetting your efficieny+ more ressource cost). Arti und anti tank guns are so bad theres no sence in producing them.

On planes cannons are complete trash (compared to machine guns) even though researched later and cost more.

Maybe its just me bit this killing the feeling of ww2 for me since its so far from reality.

Some adjusting of stats and design rules may alter this easy.

For example make guns available per chassi, in example heavy chassy 34 can only take heavy gun 1. In reality a t-28 could never fit a 120 mm cannon an IS-2 could. this would make chassys viable again since they bring a big benefit.

Arti should be set to 2 width and anti tank guns need to do more heavy damage or there should be heavy anti tank guns like in some mods to make the infantry viable again in killing tanks, not just beeing a rifle only damage sponge. In reality most tank kills were done by anti tank guns, which is kinda impossible in this game.

On planes just cannons need buffs, i mean later tech should be better then earlier right?

Maybe its just me but im kind of a history buff and this kinda kills the feeling, especialy in mp with this meme tanks and divisions.
 
  • 1
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Will it be possible to transfer the general along with the expeditionary force? It would be historical, let us recall the Romanian, Hungarian and Italian armies with their commanders on the eastern front in 1942.
 
As a modder I'd use the abandoned Diplomacy tab for that. Give us a tab with all pacts, alliances, factions etc that we can click through so that we'd see on the map those things in colors of the strongest members. I'm talking about things that some people already mentioned, f.e.:

- guarantee pacts like Balkan Pact, Little Entente and Saadabad Pact,
- factions,
- technology sharing partners,
- special project sharing partners,
- "factions" that imo should allow joining the Factions. F.e. Japanese Co-Prosperity Sphere and Axis
- London Naval Pact members,
- Monroe Doctrine,
- countires the player can send volunteers to,
- smalle factions that would accept merging into ours (presumably) larger faction,

Also will we get new diplomatic actions, special projects (I'm guessing yes, since I think we're getting elictricity later) and new spy agency upgrades?

If I'm right and we're getting electric power, will dams provide some?

Will starting national focuses of (most?) major countries get some effects other than ideology drift and create faction rule?

Can You tell if subjects' systems will be reworked?

And if there will be any more differenct subject types, like Protectorate (not just guaranteed, is a subject but with almost full diplomatic autonomy), Tributary (idk if not too late historically for that).
 
  • 4Like
  • 1Love
Reactions:
Please make sure Britain doesn't expel you from the faction. It is very annoying.
It makes sense though, the historical thing with the UK is that they were the ones defending Europe from a hegemony, whether that be France, Russia, Germany or the Ottomans
Keeping a warmongering state in your alliance really hurtens your reputation as the peacekeeper in Europe
However for historical AI off I do agree that they should work on that
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Please consider adding diplomacy between factions. Being able to sign non aggression pacts between factions (so Portugal doesn't drag the axis into war with Japan for example) and sign agreements such as military access between all members
 
  • 2Like
Reactions:
While I like the idea of faction members contributing towards a common goal and getting rewarded for it, I'm not sure I like the idea of how contribution score is distributed. It feels like another mechanic that buffs major countries and punishes minor ones.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Will this make dealing with Finland and Bulgaria more historically accurate? As in them being faction nominal members but not committed to all the wars (Finland) or any war (Bulgaria)?
 
Looks cool. Id like to maybe see some sort of time or influence bar needing to fill up before someone can join a faction? -to hold down the spread, especially in alt-history.

So, for example those less aligned, further away, not at war with a faction enemy, or less invested in diplomacy cant instantly join a war and escalate the regional war to a global one.

Through focus and prep you could still have instant join (like Finland plans to insta join NATO in the cold war).

IDK, im sure the devs have 101 ideas.
 
Will there be hard rules or heavily weighted rules regarding peace treaties? Ending up with countries split into isolated enclaves, countries only existing in states that wouldn't be self-sustainable/plausible (Czechoslovakia only existing in Southern Slovakia for instance), and Germany retaining Austria despite losing shouldn't be post-war outcomes. Not sure if you could maybe tie ideologies into it or factions into it?

Maybe a base rule where democratic countries seek to change regime and freeing only European countries (prefering Yugoslavia to Croatia and Serbia and prefering Czechoslovakia to Czech Republic and Slovakia). Communist countries seek to puppet neighbors, with the USSR opting to annex eastern Poland to push its borders westwards, and Fascist countries seeking to annex states that would grant them their "greater" status based on historical irredentism. Non Aligned would be puppetting and disarming mostly with taking resources/industry as compensation.

Additionally, maybe a hard rule that doesn't allow you to release a country if it will be missing less than half of its core states.
 
Some very good ideas here but appreciate it's early days for actual confirmed content. While you're working on this, would it be possible to kill two birds with one stone in terms of limiting wars/involvement?

I usually play minors and one of the frustrating things are when I join an alliance because I'm attacked by A which snowballs into B, C joining and I need to take out some random south american country with no navy. Would it be possible to set some faction rules that countries could make (white) peace on their own? (At the cost of maybe leaving the alliance). Also civil war could pull them out of the alliance? (See Russia in ww1). Frustating when you change government, a civil war kicks off, and you're at war with your former allies with 5 divisions.

The allies had something like this in ww2 in that no country could make peace on their own terms I believe.
 
Last edited: