• 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.

Victoria 3 - Dev Diary #19 - Relations and Infamy

Thumbnail.jpg

Hello and welcome to another Victoria 3 dev diary! This one is going to be a little bit broad, as we want to go through the fundamental mechanics of Diplomacy before moving on to more specific topics. Today, the mechanics we’ll be going over are Relations, Infamy and Interests, so let’s get to them one at a time, shall we?

Starting out with Relations, this is a value on a scale between -100 and +100 that determines the overall diplomatic standing between two countries, similar to relations/opinion in games such as Europa Universalis and Stellaris. The key difference between Relations here and in those games is that in Victoria 3 relations are bilateral, meaning that while in Europa Universalis France can have a relations of -100 with Prussia while Prussia has a relations of +100 with France, in Victoria 3 these two countries will always have the same Relations score towards each other.

There’s a few reasons for this change, such as making it more clear exactly where two countries stand with each other, but the most important is that we want Relations to be a mechanic with significance and mechanical effects not just for AI countries but also for the player, and even in multiplayer. Your relation number will translate into a relations level, and the different relations levels are as follows (from highest to lowest): Warm (80-100), Amiable (50-79), Cordial (20-49), Neutral (-19 to 19), Poor (-20 to -49), Cold (-50 to -79), Hostile (-80 to -100).

Your relationship with the Great Powers will be especially important, as they are the ones with the global reach to potentially affect you no matter where your country is located
Country List.png

All of these have an impact on the AI’s decision-making in terms of which diplomatic proposals it will accept, which side it will want to join in diplomatic plays, and so on, but besides that there are also limitations on what actions you can take against another country based on your mutual Relations. For example, a relations level of Cordial or above acts as a non-aggression pact: It isn’t possible to start most Diplomatic Plays against a country with which you have that relation level without first acting to reduce said relations. On the flip side, signing and maintaining a Customs Union with a country requires you to be at or above Cordial relations, and there are other actions that cannot be taken unless relations are at other certain negative or positive thresholds.

So, how do you raise and lower relations? The primary way is through the Improve Relations and Damage Relations ongoing diplomatic actions (more on those next week), but there’s many other ways in which relations can be increased or decreased, including various events, Diplomatic Incidents (see the section on Infamy below) and the Expel Diplomats diplomatic action (which we’ll also go over in detail next week), which is a way in which one country can act to prevent another from cozying up to them relations-wise, though at the cost of gaining Infamy.

Here, France finds itself with few friends in Europe - the only other Great Power they have decent relations with is Austria, and it seems like it may not stay that way...
Diplomatic Relations Map Alt.png

That covers Relations, so let’s move on to Infamy. This is a system we have previously talked about a little under the name of Threat, implying that it works similarly to Aggressive Expansion in Europa Universalis, but is actually something we have since redesigned following tester feedback, as the very localized effects of Threat/Aggressive Expansion did not feel appropriate to the far more globalized Victorian era. The result is something that could be described as a hybrid between older Infamy (or ‘Badboy’ as those of you who have been around Paradox GSGs for a long time might recall) systems and the newer, more localized systems.

In Victoria 3, a country has an Infamy value that starts at 0 and can increase to… well, anything, as there’s no upper cap on it. As a country’s Infamy increases, other countries will become more wary, resulting in various diplomatic penalties for the infamous country.If Infamy exceeds the Pariah threshold (which is currently set to 100) the country becomes a potential target for a special Contain Threat diplomatic play where the Great Powers step in to ‘restore order’. Infamy decays slowly over time, and its rate of decay can be increased if the country has a large amount of unallocated Influence capacity, representing that capacity being put to use trying to salvage the country’s global reputation instead.

After making some aggressive moves against its neighbors, Bolivia’s infamy has increased to the point where they will start feeling some diplomatic effects - though it’s not yet too bad
Bolivia Infamy.png

So far this should probably sound very familiar to anyone who has played Victoria 2, but the key difference between Victoria 3 and its predecessor here is the Diplomatic Incident mechanic tied to Infamy. In the vast majority of cases, any action a country takes (for example demanding land in a Diplomatic Play or violating a neutral country’s sovereignty during war) that increases Infamy will also create a Diplomatic Incident localized at a particular Strategic Region (more on that below) on the map.

For example, starting a Diplomatic Play to demand a colony in West Africa will result in a Diplomatic Incident occurring there. Whenever a Diplomatic Incident happens, the country that caused it immediately suffers a penalty to their relations with all countries that have an Interest in the region, with the amount of Relations lost based on the amount of Infamy attached to the Incident in question.

Infamy in itself should be understood as a measure of how concerned the Great Powers are about a country, and as such, country Rank has an effect on how much Infamy a country gets when it commits a diplomatic transgression against another. Generally speaking, the lower the rank of the two countries involved, the less Infamy will be generated, as the Great Powers care a lot more about actions taken by and against other Great Powers than they do over two Minor Powers being engaged in a local squabble.

The Sikh Empire’s ambitions on India are not going to go unnoticed by countries with an Interest there
2021_10_07_3.png

Ultimately, what this means is that Infamy doesn’t just have a global effect, and where you’re accruing it matters. If you keep taking actions that destabilize a particular Strategic Region, you can expect to quickly become very unpopular with both the locals and any outside powers that have taken an Interest in it.

By now, I’ve said the word Interest a whole bunch of times, so it’s probably time to finally explain what they are. To do that though, I first have to explain the concept of Strategic Regions. A Strategic Region is a large predetermined geographic area consisting of a number of State Regions, with the 715 State Regions of the current internal build divided into a total of 49 Strategic Regions.

A look at the Strategic Regions of Europe - do note that as with all parts of the map, this may not be how it looks on release!
Strategic Regions.png

Interests is, put simply, a mechanic that determines whether or not a country has a stake in a particular Strategic Region and plays into numerous different mechanics such as Diplomatic Plays, Colonization and the aforementioned Diplomatic Incidents. A country can gain an Interest in a region in one of two ways: either automatically by having a geographical presence there (owning land or controlling subject nations in the region) or by using a Declared Interest.

A Declared Interest is a country quite simply saying that, regardless of their lack of a geographic presence, a Strategic Region is still of importance to them, perhaps because they plan to colonize it, or because they want to prevent a hated rival from expanding into it. A country can Declare an Interest in any region that is either adjacent to a region where they already have an Interest, or which they can reach through the support of their naval supply network (more on that later!). The number of Declared Interests that is available to a country depends on their Rank - a Great Power can choose to have its fingers in a great many pies, while an Insignificant Power is limited to acting only in regions where they already have land.

You might want to declare an Interest in Persia for numerous reasons, such as checking Russian or British aggression in the region… or as a precursor to seizing colonies there for yourself
Declare Interest.png

Interests do not provide any inherent benefit to a country besides the ability to throw their weight around in a Strategic Region, and can actually be a bit of a double-edged sword in that a country with Interests all over the world may get dragged into a lot of local conflicts. Ultimately, Interests are our attempt to simulate such historical occurrences as why certain parts of the world simply got a lot more attention from the Great Powers than others at particular points during the century that Victoria 3 covers, and to make nations act and care about things in a way that makes sense according to their national self-interest.

Right then, that’s all for today! Join me again next week as I continue to write lots of words about diplomatic things, this time on the topic of Diplomatic Actions!
 
  • 280Like
  • 95Love
  • 25
  • 11
  • 10
Reactions:
While I understand that the developers want to reflect modern borders as much as possible, I think that it doesn't make sense to include modern-day borders such as the "Churchill's sneeze" in Jordan as seen in the attached image. Therefore, it would be better to include more historically accurate borders, which, in this case, would lead to smoother borders in Jordan or Iraq.
 

Attachments

  • Diplomatic Relations Map Alt.png
    Diplomatic Relations Map Alt.png
    77,6 KB · Views: 0
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
Reading up on your post I wonder if it'd be a neat mechanic to only allow combat within the limited theater (and maybe adjacent areas to protect some gaming of the system?)

Like Crimean War means fighting in Crimea, not at Vladivostok.

That war did take place in the Baltic as well though. Russian naval base on Åland got smashed among other things.
 
  • 3
  • 1
Reactions:
Why is Südtirol in the Italian strategic region? It is geographically, politically and ethnically a part of the South German region. It does not make any sense, and I hope that it will change.
Because an Austria that keeps Sudtirol should have a strategic interest in Italy, while an Austria that does not and is confined to the other side of the Alps should not.
 
  • 7Like
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
That war did take place in the Baltic as well though. Russian naval base on Åland got smashed among other things.
A very good point - my understanding is significant Russian troops had to be kept near St Petersburg in case of invasion, which of course had an impact on what could be deployed to the Crimea.
 
Apologies for not having caught up with the thread before I ask:

One thing that never quite worked for me in Vicky or EU was how you could conquer and occupy the entire British Empire until the sun never rose on it, after wiping out its entire army and navy—in fact, you would keep a war going long after it was a foregone conclusion, because you got a benefit from it—and then you would be able to annex, if you were fast and lucky, Canada. If enough time had passed for Britain to promote some Canadian provinces to “states,” you would have to settle for only part of Canada.

The line about other countries getting to intervene diplomatically in a peace treaty, though, makes me hope this will make more sense in Vicky 3. Is the game now going to directly represent that, when other great powers feel that your demands threaten their interests, they force you to settle for less?
 
Last edited:
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Couple questions on Infamy:

Does infamy gained from conquest come at the start or end of the war?

Is there any way to change how much infamy you gain from an action? Would you gain less infamy from trying to "liberate" the homeland of your primary culture? Does declaring war before the peace timer runs out increase infamy? Does how far from your borders or capital an action is change how much infamy you get?
 
i would like to do a poll what do you think of the paadox maps? in particular europa universalis and victoria, don't you think they are inadequate? for a correct and realistic comparison? thanks
 
  • 4
Reactions:
i would like to do a poll what do you think of the paadox maps? in particular europa universalis and victoria, don't you think they are inadequate? for a correct and realistic comparison? thanks

the thing is prdx listens to a certain degree to their customers, potential cs.
i think the vic3 map can definitely be better, but i hope for the most they release the game in a finished state,
so regardless which nation i pick on which continent i get the feel it has not been copy paste kind of development.

Guessing the development costs and potential pricing vic3 should be be treated as their flagship release and sold for 46,99 retail online
41ish in discounted online channels.

if things go well after this major release prdx can cross the magic 50 barrier, hence 54,95 50ish discnt releaseetc.
 
  • 2Like
Reactions:
I meant maps as whole regions
that do not take into account individual cities and borders: either take the region or nothing! What if I want to take individual towns or provincial towns? . this would help a lot in the development of the game because this would create together with a good ai a history or alternate history, because the player has other advantages than the original story
 
Because an Austria that keeps Sudtirol should have a strategic interest in Italy, while an Austria that does not and is confined to the other side of the Alps should not.
Excuse me, but what? How does the control of a region, that has, historically, been always in the Austrian/German sphere, and in fact was always considered as such by others, transpose into a strategic interest in Italy? You seem to be missing the point completely. Whilst most of Austrian Italy was ethnically Italian, Südtirol never was. In fact, more than 90% of its population was Austrian. And you cannot say that geographically, it is more Italian than Austrian. So it remains a mystery to me, as to why it was integrated into the Italian strategic region, as there is no logical explanation to it. Unless they just got lazy and simply copied the modern political maps.
 
  • 1
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
And you cannot say that geographically, it is more Italian than Austrian.
Why not? The entire reason why Tyrol is strategically important is that it contains the Brenner Pass and serves as an important transit hub between Austria and Italy. Having North Tyrol be in South Germany and South Tyrol be in Italy seems like a pretty fair way to reflect that.
 
  • 2
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Excuse me, but what? How does the control of a region, that has, historically, been always in the Austrian/German sphere, and in fact was always considered as such by others, transpose into a strategic interest in Italy? You seem to be missing the point completely. Whilst most of Austrian Italy was ethnically Italian, Südtirol never was. In fact, more than 90% of its population was Austrian. And you cannot say that geographically, it is more Italian than Austrian. So it remains a mystery to me, as to why it was integrated into the Italian strategic region, as there is no logical explanation to it. Unless they just got lazy and simply copied the modern political maps.

The point isn't to create a map of what is Austria. That already exists as the political map at game start. It's to create conflict, which, if this post is anything to go by, is already working as intended. If the strategic interests just put each nation into its box, then what would even be the point.
 
  • 6
  • 1
Reactions:
Because an Austria that keeps Sudtirol should have a strategic interest in Italy, while an Austria that does not and is confined to the other side of the Alps should not.

Tbh with exact same credibility one could argue that Italy with Sudtirol should have strategic interest in South Germany (like Mussolini initially opposing Anschluss).

Excuse me, but what? How does the control of a region, that has, historically, been always in the Austrian/German sphere, and in fact was always considered as such by others, transpose into a strategic interest in Italy? You seem to be missing the point completely. Whilst most of Austrian Italy was ethnically Italian, Südtirol never was. In fact, more than 90% of its population was Austrian. And you cannot say that geographically, it is more Italian than Austrian. So it remains a mystery to me, as to why it was integrated into the Italian strategic region, as there is no logical explanation to it. Unless they just got lazy and simply copied the modern political maps.

It looks like another attempt to sort of encourage historical outcome. Like giving Annecy and Nice to South France region, giving Thrace to Anatolia, etc. I am not convinced this is a right tool to do that, though

The point isn't to create a map of what is Austria. That already exists as the political map at game start. It's to create conflict, which, if this post is anything to go by, is already working as intended. If the strategic interests just put each nation into its box, then what would even be the point.

I am getting this logic and still generally starting to think that the current system really needs free strategic interest in states that lie on your borders. Imagine Austria loose Galicia at some point. It would lead them to loose their strategic interest in Silesia as well under current composition
 
Last edited:
  • 2Like
Reactions:
Tbh with exact same credibility one could argue that Italy with Sudtirol should have strategic interest in South Germany (like Mussolini initially opposing Anschluss).



I am getting this logic and still generally starting to think that the current system really needs free strategic interest in states that lie on your borders. Imagine Austria loose Galicia at some point. It would lead them to loose their strategic interest in Silesia as well under current composition

I don't think they should get it for free. using some of your influence to declare a strategic interest is probably not too much of a cost. Especially if the cost is dynamic so closer areas are cheaper to play in. If Austria loses silesia they should have to make the choice of maintaining their interests there, or using that diplomatic influence someplace else.
 
  • 3
  • 1Like
Reactions:
I don't think they should get it for free. using some of your influence to declare a strategic interest is probably not too much of a cost. Especially if the cost is dynamic so closer areas are cheaper to play in. If Austria loses silesia they should have to make the choice of maintaining their interests there, or using that diplomatic influence someplace else.

Don't you think though, that if a possibility of having a free interest exist, it should primarily cover your own borders? This sounds like a very basic rule that should absolutely be adopted. In none of possible worlds I can think of, loosing Galicia could lead Austria to abandoning its interest in Silesian - Bohemian border.

Furthermore, as devs stated, declared interest can be double edged as it might drag you to conflicts you are not interested in. As Saxony, I would probably want to have interest in who holds Silesia - in the same time I would probably prefer to stay out of, say, polish - ukrainian dispute over Lwów. In fact, I don't see any decent rationale behind connecting these two.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Could you elaborate further on this portion please? How can we violate a neutral nation's sovereignty during war? That seems rather interesting.
Hello friend, looking at historical precedents my guess would be something similar to how the Romanian Principalities had their sovereignty violated during Russo-Turkish wars in the 1870s , or perhaps the Belgian neutrality that was not respected in 1914.