• 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:
"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."

Finally no more AI div abominations in middle Africa I believe.
This. Definitely this. Now the question is can the AI be given some weights so that it “understands” that Africa (besides Egypt/Suez) isnt as important as Europe, Far East, and then act accordingly?
 
I love the conceptual idea behind this so much. The gap between the development that’s happening here and that of GoE is the size of the Pacific Ocean.

I hope it is well executed, fully modable, not gamey, and doesn’t conflict with existing focuses while adding to new ones. I also hope generated factions feel as good as the existing ones

Bravo, please follow through and give this idea the time it needs to be implemented properly.
 
  • 3Like
Reactions:
Well, let's not make the Allies and Soviets BFFs just yet. They worked together out of necessity, but there was nothing they liked about each other. If Stalin went on a similar path in the late 30's, annexing the Baltics, demanding chunks of Romania and invaded Poland after that, I feel the Allies would have responded too.
 
  • 2Like
  • 1
Reactions:
But anyways, It is possible to change rules in a faction, so that is one option of handling that. Also the rule itself only stops you from joining via diplomatic action. It doesn't stop you from being added via an event or a focus effect, neither does it mean fascist countries will be thrown out.
Is there an expectation that we'll be able to simulate something such as NATO's Article 2 obligations, in the event a country does suffer a coup or other realignment, where by the fact that they are non-Democratic, they are forcibly ejected from the faction for no longer upholding their ideals? There's a lot of focus tree events that have countries proactively leaving alliances as part of their realignment alternative paths. But is there any plan to codify it so that it is the faction itself that is ensuring ideological purity if it so desires, and it's not a case of a constituent nation basically saying "I'm taking my stuff and going home" if that makes any sense? Or maybe, someone like the Axis encouraging an almost automatic declaring of war on former members as a faction rule if they find themselves drifting ideologically for those cases where the shift may not have been as part of a focus tree that puts the defecting country on a war-footing with their former allies?
 
One thing I'd like to see represented in factions ( although I'd say its unlikely and a little hard to envision ) is a way of coordinating whole operations when you are a war leader, say having your subjects land all at the same time in a region, or have multiple offensives or orders prepared with your allies before the war even starts ( Like Barbarossa) or have situations where a faction rivalry splits command where one country wants to do X and the other one wants to do Y ( USA UK situation regarding the invasion of Italy, for example ).
I'd like to also be able to tell my allies that I don't need them at the front and would rather they defend their coast with their army instead, or tell them I need more railways and hubs to be buit, or that I want them to improve their resource deposits. Kind of a "diplomatic" strategic planner that doesn't give the player full control over the AI but allows you to push it around a little, like countries actually did back then, thinking mainly of Germany.
 
Last edited:
  • 1Like
Reactions:
It would be nice to be able to influence when a faction member is planning to declare war to delay or prevent it. I have been surprised a few times by computer allies declaring war at the worst time.
 
We are looking at potentially merging factions. But mainly for the smaller ones dissolving and joining the bigger ones - not merging the main factions such as the Allies and Comintern. That is a too central thing in how HoI4 works.
Alongside faction merging, what about faction splitting? People will often join forces for a common cause, but once that cause is achieve, their differences become highlighted. The Stresa Front, for instance, could easily split due to ideological differences after Germany is defeated. So does the Chinese United Front after Japan is defeated, or any Anti-Soviet pact after the USSR is defeated. Sometimes it might make sense to disband the faction altogether, other times they split into two or more factions, and every once in a while the faction may be kept alive and just set new goals for itself. Factions changing dynamically as the world changes and nations switch their ideologies and goals could be very interesting.
 
  • 2Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Ok
 
It might be worth making the joining rules cost points per government type included rather than government type excluded

The mock-up looks like it's designed so that trying to have everyone is easier than making a more cohesive faction with only one ideology. It would probably make more sense to do it the inverse, where every new ideology is harder
 
One thing that I hope is addressed by this change is the merging of a lot of the smaller new factions which are created through alt history focuses and are all kind of redundant to each other.

For example: the UK, Spain, and France all have a tree to create an independent Communist faction which is opposed to the Soviet Union. These trees are kind of boring though because you either either end up forming a faction of one and have to fight a world conquest or if you set the trees for those countries to go down those paths, they eventually create their own redundant independent communist faction which has no point of existing when you already formed the independent communist faction. Another example is Italy, France, Turkey, and I think also Spain and France all have a tree to create some version of the Latin Alliance, which are all redundant because all of the members all can create their own version of the alliance and half the tree ends up being just going after each other rather than the big factionss.

Adding onto this, the Devs should look at the country paths. Since which factions form is directly linked to those paths.

I’m hoping this system is a fix to all that mess. Setting two countries on the same Alt history paths should make them unite into a real faction, not just result in them becoming pointless rivals. Make it possible for players to form large compelling alternate history alliances which replace or rival the alliances from our own timelines. This would make going down those smaller alt history paths more fun, since instead of every game becoming a World Conquest you’re fighting a real world war with real goals.
 
  • 3Like
Reactions:
How does political tension within factions work?

For example, the United State's anti-colonialism clashed with France's desire to reclaim it colonies in Indochina, but the United States was initially opposed to this and wanted France to give Indochina independence by developing the VNQDD. OR Maybe tension between Bulgaria and Italy over the division of Greece?
And the often-forgotted one is on the Dutch East Indies, when the Americans are backing Hubertus van Mook's proposal backed by Queen Wilhelmina to make the Dutch East Indies as a Commonwealth, clashing with the Government-in-Exile led by Gerbrandy who is backed by the British.
 
  • 1
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Let's also not forget the entire "Do we want to include De Gaulle in the post-war discussions or not?" saga.

And for the Axis, maybe give Hitler some options to chastise Mussolini for being incompetent.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Hey, improved faction research/special project sharing is a great idea! Along those lines, I think a system where you can consume captured equipment to boost that equipment's specific research would be a good way to simulate reverse engineering.
 
i reminded i did a extensive suggestion post about that on tha past.

Important to remind.

I have been playing a lot of "faction of puppets" lately, that means me the "leader" and everyone else is my puppet(or collabs governments) is almost like Japan historical faction, i write about that in the sugestion post also.

to inspired you guys, here my "happy family" portrait.
1749858150367.png

1749858180413.png

1749858213669.png
 
  • 1Like
  • 1Love
Reactions:
For example: the UK, Spain, and France all have a tree to create an independent Communist faction which is opposed to the Soviet Union. These trees are kind of boring though because you either either end up forming a faction of one and have to fight a world conquest or if you set the trees for those countries to go down those paths, they eventually create their own redundant independent communist faction which has no point of existing when you already formed the independent communist faction. Another example is Italy, France, Turkey, and I think also Spain and France all have a tree to create some version of the Latin Alliance, which are all redundant because all of the members all can create their own version of the alliance and half the tree ends up being just going after each other rather than the big factionss.


The above point is a very good one, but without a complete rework of trees (which I suspect will be out of scope for the early release) I worry the whole thing will be a mess other than the historical trees/war. One solution would be to ensure that members can swap factions relatively easily (but not frequently). So in your latin scenario, faction members of the commitern could join it if invited. Would also be interesting if they were at war as they could potentially white peace and leave the commiterm. But I'm very sceptical with any updates for HOI now after the last couple of DLCs. Most have been pretty good ideas but poorly executed and then instead of looking forward to the next DLC, they're continually patching the last broken one.
 
I have wanted something like this for years. I know I posted about it but will have to go back and try to find it.

I would hope this enables a more sane and organized Theater/Front control rather than the every country running around doing their own thing random crapshoot that the game has currently. What I mean for example is that in the invasion of the USSR, Germany would be the leader and director of Axis forces.

It would be nice if this allowed countries to be in a Faction but not be a full participant/full
belligerent. Because there are many countries like Turkey for example that joined a Faction (Allies) at some point but they did not participate in the war offensively. Currently when the AI joins a Faction it's just a full participant and will join foreign invasions which has led to a lot of unhistorical behavior. Bulgaria is another example, they joined the Axis and opened their territory for the invasion of Greece but they did not participate in offensive operations. They also never declared war on the USSR.

Also how would this system handle Germany-Japan who were in the Axis in real life but in the current game they are two separate Factions.

Something I would say about Research Sharing is that it was very hard for the Axis to do due to being physically separated by enemy/neutral countries and the huge physical distance between them. The secret Submarine technology sharing missions (Yanagi missions) that had to travel across the whole world and were often intercepted by the Allies weren't very effective as far as I know.
 
  • 3Like
Reactions:
i would hope this enables a more sane and organized Theater/Front control

I would wish me this also for volunteers. The "german" AI is doing the same shit as years ago. Now I memory why I stopped playing South Africa. Pockets are the natural trap for the AI. It's just as if the Italian volunteers were standing in Spain on the Galician-Portuguese border or the German volunteers were rotting in Shangxi in the desert sand.

1749928853230.png



When the ai fear the real frontline more as colonel klink the eastfront.

1749928947715.png
 
Last edited:
  • 1Like
Reactions: