• 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
 
  • 110Like
  • 41Love
  • 9
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
This is interesting. My fear is you will focus on new stuff like this and not take care of the technical debt that has piled up over the last 9 years. To Wit:

1. the air war in both land and navy still lacks plausibility the way you have simulated it. Too many land aircraft and too few naval carrier aircraft.

2. Unrealistic Division TOEs for modern warfare and yes WWII is still considered modern warfare. Perhaps instead of giving bonuses for particular support units, you should give negatives for lacking them. For example, if the division does not have a logistics unit, it travels at half or a quarter of the standard speed if it had the logistics unit representing lack of food, fuel and footware. All modern divisions, independent brigades have logistics, signal, ordinance(maintenance) which are optional in HOI IV. They should be required. If not present then penalties should be applied.

3. Naval Light cruisers are still OP. You can build your entire navy using the light cruiser as your base hull and sink every other hull in the game. Increase the naval air capacity to counter this. Carriers should be so far away that ships of the line cannot get near them to sink them. My last game I lost a carrier to a battleship. Carriers worst nightmares are submarines and other carriers, not battleships.

4. Carrier screens should surround the carriers not be in front of them. Carrier screens have two purposes, find, fix and destroy submarines and find, fix and destroy aircraft.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
This is interesting. My fear is you will focus on new stuff like this and not take care of the technical debt that has piled up over the last 9 years. To Wit:

1. the air war in both land and navy still lacks plausibility the way you have simulated it. Too many land aircraft and too few naval carrier aircraft.

2. Unrealistic Division TOEs for modern warfare and yes WWII is still considered modern warfare. Perhaps instead of giving bonuses for particular support units, you should give negatives for lacking them. For example, if the division does not have a logistics unit, it travels at half or a quarter of the standard speed if it had the logistics unit representing lack of food, fuel and footware. All modern divisions, independent brigades have logistics, signal, ordinance(maintenance) which are optional in HOI IV. They should be required. If not present then penalties should be applied.

3. Naval Light cruisers are still OP. You can build your entire navy using the light cruiser as your base hull and sink every other hull in the game. Increase the naval air capacity to counter this. Carriers should be so far away that ships of the line cannot get near them to sink them. My last game I lost a carrier to a battleship. Carriers worst nightmares are submarines and other carriers, not battleships.

4. Carrier screens should surround the carriers not be in front of them. Carrier screens have two purposes, find, fix and destroy submarines and find, fix and destroy aircraft.
I too want new content on one hand. But you are right in a sense, that i wish the team just focused on bringing all the stuff that was added over the years together into a new, cohesive baseline.

There is some tech-debt that needs to be adressed, but also some narrative-debt about how the nations, new mechanics and new focus trees work together. It all feels as if the devs try to form a giant snowball from all the snow in the field by rolling it around, but there is constantly more snow snowing than they can possibly put onto the current snowball.

I know this is probably one of the dumbest comparisons you have read, but i couldn't think of anything better haha.
 
  • 2Like
Reactions:
I really love all progress in HoI IV, especially when it's already older like the factions are! But I have some concerns about exceptions... For example, if you play as fascist Italy but decide to go and guarantee Austria. you will go down a Focus Tree within the Allies and even get some War goals on Greece, Bulgaria and Romania. But the UK really doesn't like that for some reason and it just loves to kick you out for going to war with countries, that they gave to me (Focus Tree wise). I'm afraid that with the new rules of the faction, it wouldn't be possible anymore to go to war with Greece and such if you're within the Allies, even tho that does contradicts the Focuses : ( But whatever you do, keep doing it, every progress is good progress and we all love an even better HoI IV ;)
Ofcourse UK should kickmyou out if you are naughty and attact countries!
 
  • 1
Reactions:
I too want new content on one hand. But you are right in a sense, that i wish the team just focused on bringing all the stuff that was added over the years together into a new, cohesive baseline.

There is some tech-debt that needs to be adressed, but also some narrative-debt about how the nations, new mechanics and new focus trees work together. It all feels as if the devs try to form a giant snowball from all the snow in the field by rolling it around, but there is constantly more snow snowing than they can possibly put onto the current snowball.

I know this is probably one of the dumbest comparisons you have read, but i couldn't think of anything better haha.
I agree, There are a lot of threads hanging loose from the tapestry to be warped back into the weave.
 
I was interested in "Adding a Faction Supreme Commander", how will this work?
Will we designate certain generals to be in command and will they give us bonuses to attack, defense, logistics and planning? Or will it be a flat bonus like "5 damage"?

The most obvious would be ability to draw attack lines to faction member armies… not the bonuses…
Or have a map target and starting daybto start an attact where AI tryed to get to that map target…
 
Last edited:
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Reserved for developer replies~

Wrongwraith replies;

I don't have a direct answeer as to exactly we will deal with this or similar cases, as we are pretty early in development, and we haven't decided on everything yet at this stage. (it's usually a pretty iterative process. What I wrote above might be very different from what actually appears in game at some point in the future...)

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.

But there are definately other cases in existing content, esp alt history that will need to be looked at as well - so it is a very valid point.

No, not at the moment. Focusing on internal faction relations right now.


The rules can be scripted, so yes more requirements can be added.

Most rules will be available to all (but you can only do a limited amount of changes to your rule system during a playthrough).
But there will be some that are locked. And some that you can't remove unless you fulfill certain criteria. (Again with the caveat that this might all change)

There will be rules relating to more areas, yes (there are a few listed in the post). They are pretty scriptable. There are limitations to what you can do, but also, I know that modders can be pretty creative...........

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.

I really can't - mainly because there isnt much in the way of UI for it yet. :)

But basically it means that you will have a base of influence based on your industry (although that may of course be growing over time - but think of it as a "base value"). Onto that you will add other things - for example points gained from fighting (or for supplying contributions to other faction members). So when the US joins, their "base value will be pretty high, but they will not (yet) have much in the form of gain through war or other contributions. But they will most likely be able to play catch up with both of those things when they enter.

At least some projects should be, yes
Why can you do things like this but not implement an automatic trading system or a setting to automatically ground planes based on weather?
 
The absolute only thing Im hopeful might come from this update is allowing people to share experimental research, So that even small nations can recieve the buffs of special projects if in a faction with a major nation, I always hated how limited you are as a minor nation in special research, espicially expensive ones like atom bombs, But in real life the same was real except the US and the USSR provided tons of experimental expensive research to allies.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Welcome to the forums! :)
The absolute only thing Im hopeful might come from this update is allowing people to share experimental research, So that even small nations can recieve the buffs of special projects if in a faction with a major nation, I always hated how limited you are as a minor nation in special research, espicially expensive ones like atom bombs, But in real life the same was real except the US and the USSR provided tons of experimental expensive research to allies.
Sorry...but to me that neither represents reality (nuclear knowledge is a perfect example of what countries didn't just give to every ally...alone for the reason that you are never sure how long an alliance lasts) nor it would be good for gameplay: The special projects are expensive for a reason. I don't see how it would be good to give every minor an easy access to them - minors with unique content tend to come out strong enough. And finally: A part of the immersion and fun around special projects is that not everyone has them. Whats the point of them, if you fight out a WW3 and everyone has these gadgets?
 
  • 2
Reactions:
Welcome to the forums! :)

Sorry...but to me that neither represents reality (nuclear knowledge is a perfect example of what countries didn't just give to every ally...alone for the reason that you are never sure how long an alliance lasts) nor it would be good for gameplay: The special projects are expensive for a reason. I don't see how it would be good to give every minor an easy access to them - minors with unique content tend to come out strong enough. And finally: A part of the immersion and fun around special projects is that not everyone has them. Whats the point of them, if you fight out a WW3 and everyone has these gadgets?
While that is true, there was still a lot of cooperation to get the Manhattan Project done. Scientists like Bohr and Fuchs (whatever we do with him :p ) were flown over by the UK. Uranium was provided by Belgium. Some of the project sites were in Canada. I do hope these elements will be represented in the new mechanics.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
While that is true, there was still a lot of cooperation to get the Manhattan Project done. Scientists like Bohr and Fuchs (whatever we do with him :p ) were flown over by the UK. Uranium was provided by Belgium. Some of the project sites were in Canada. I do hope these elements will be represented in the new mechanics.
I have no objections against better representing such support...and ok, I concede that this could mean even that in such cases a transfer of certain secret project results would be ok. But please no automatic inclusion in general tech sharing...
 
We wanted basic mechanics such as earlier peace or surrender, and the possibility of status quo at certain % of surrender and casus belli territory capture. Instead we get some more complex mechanics. Is this some kind of... disgrace?
 
  • 2Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Ok, it's nice to see PDX Gold taking mechanics from other PDX franchises.

But what exactly is expanding faction mechanics supposed to solve?

If anything, it will make allies even more powerful than they already are (because US & UK/France are in the same faction) while the Axis (split between two factions) become even less powerful.

Not only that, it seems that currently there is no decision to demonstrate how old European colonial powers (like UK & France) had vastly different interests than the USA.

It also seems that the devs are expecting to stick to the current discrete 4-dimensional politics system of Democrat/Fascist/Communist/Non-Aligned, which has long been extremely outdated.
 
This faction system allows bigger control to facti
Ok, it's nice to see PDX Gold taking mechanics from other PDX franchises.

But what exactly is expanding faction mechanics supposed to solve?

If anything, it will make allies even more powerful than they already are (because US & UK/France are in the same faction) while the Axis (split between two factions) become even less powerful.

Not only that, it seems that currently there is no decision to demonstrate how old European colonial powers (like UK & France) had vastly different interests than the USA.

It also seems that the devs are expecting to stick to the current discrete 4-dimensional politics system of Democrat/Fascist/Communist/Non-Aligned, which has long been extremely outdated.
this system allows greater control ower the factions. It allows also factions of different levels. It allows temporary factions, it allows country tombelong several factions. So it gives granuality to factions. This can be powerfull tool to modders when they make and modify old mods. This almost surely kill all old mods untill they are upgraded… depending on if this has two separete lines or not. Aka is this purely for dlc and vanilla players stay with old 4 faction system, or does this become the system that replace the old one completely. I can see both options to be possible.
 
it allows country tombelong several factions.
Where are you getting this? NOTHING that the Devs have said in this thread says that a country can be in multiple factions at the same time.
 
  • 1
Reactions: