• 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:
I think it makes sense. The international shock of an Unrecognized power taking land (especially such a populous state) from the world's number one Great Power would be immense, especially since the Sikh Empire didn't have a nationalist claim on South Bengal- if it had become Recognized and tag-switched to India I think the situation would be far different.

To take an example of what a historical Containment War could look like, take a look at the Boxer Rebellion, which prompted the Eight-Nation Alliance to attack China, and in that case, the Qing didn't even conquer any territory, only allowed the Boxers to disrupt their interests in China.

Its not the same thing. France was actively supplying and aiding the local Indian princes resist the British in a major way and even engaging in direct combat. Best example is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tipu_Sultan and even in Punjab itself where the French actually led Sikh forces.

Slapping the Indians with infamy causes the OPPOSITE effect. In this case, other GPs will stop selling them guns and stuff and may even attack them. While in reality, other colonial powers and nearby Russia would have been more than happy to kick the EIC out and then get concessions from the locals in return.

Besides, this is colonial, non-core, non-primary culture province belonging to a puppet that was barely conquered a few decades ago.
 
Last edited:
  • 21
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Just noticed you can have rivals in this game (Bolivia seems to be rivaled with France in one screenshot). That is interesting!
 
  • 1
Reactions:
I definately like these mechanics, but I've got a few issues with the strategic region map.
1. Why is France 2 separate regions? If the entirety of Iberia can be 1and Scandinavia, Finland, St Petersburg, + the baltic states can be 1, the balkans can be 1.... why is France 2?
2. Are Scotland and Ireland really more closely aligned with Greenland & Iceland than with England? It seems to me that any country controlling/trading with Edinburgh & Dublin is going to be much more concerned with what's happening in York & London than in Reykjavik & Nuuk.

Three regions, not two.
And I can understand why Alsace-Lorraine would be inside the Rhine region, I don't see why there are more french territory inside the region than that.
As for why the rest of France is divided in two, I agree that it's strange especially with those borders.
 
The naming of the relations levels don't make a lot of sense and should be re-worked.

Why are "cold" and "warm" not opposites?
why is "poor" not worse than "cold"?
why isn't there a "fraternal" positive level to be the opposite of "hostile" negative?

In my opinion it would sound much better if was something like:
Fraternal > Amicable/Cordial > Warm > Neutral > Cool > Unfriendly/Poor > Hostile
 
  • 5Like
  • 5Love
  • 2
  • 2
Reactions:
oh, there are already testers ? big_eyes*

I suspect that they've had testers since day 1 (the idea that testers just black box test the game towards the end of project is not one that really applies anymore. You do tend to get more bodies but it's important to have QA working on the project from the get go IMO)
 
  • 4
Reactions:
2021_10_07_3.png



Sigh, there go any dreams of ever liberating India :_( I think colonial states should generate far far less infamy. 62 infamy is what you would probably get for taking London lol.

First, the numbers aren't final.

Second, in the bolivia example we could see they were losing 5 infamy a year. It would only take 12 years to burn all that infamy off, and probably less you you focus on increasing your excess influence even more.
 
  • 3
  • 2
Reactions:
If Ireland (Iceland, etc.) becomes independent, they shouldn't necessarily care what happens in England.
If England loses Ireland, they will still have an interest in the region through Scotland. If they lose Ireland and Scotland, it's hard to say that they would have a widely accepted geo-political interest in a southern-aligned rump state, but they would surely still be able to stake a declared interest.
So the regions look fine in broad terms.
I'm assuming that part of what Paradox is trying to do with regions is to distinguish actual-history cores and peripheries, to an extent. Like in Turkey, Ireland, etc.
 
  • 8
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Would it be possible to change things so that some areas can exist within multiple strategic regions? That way if you conquer a spot that straddles and controls 2 or more, more countries are directly affected. Like Copenhagen for north germany and the Baltic, st Petersburg for the Baltic and north russia, and Scotland for the north sea and england.
 
  • 12
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Is relations a model of the relationship between the Governments of a country, the State or of the population?

- So, will it shift with a change of government?
- Or, is it national feeling - would a load of german refugees to the USA make the US more friendly to a german nation?
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
I don't like this approach of relations between countries. I prefer the way Europa Universalis handles it. By the way, I was hoping that Infamy in Victoria 3 was going to be more like Aggressive Expansion of Europa Universalis IV, but it is more or less the same as it was in Victoria 2.
 
  • 15
  • 2Like
Reactions:
Second, in the bolivia example we could see they were losing 5 infamy a year. It would only take 12 years to burn all that infamy off, and probably less you you focus on increasing your excess influence even more.

62 infamy for liberating a colonial, non-core, non-primary culture province belonging to a puppet is a bit much IMO. Especially in this case when a local power is kicking out a colonizer. In fact, I think kicking out colonial powers should give no infamy other than pissing off said colonizer. Other GPs would actually help you in this case as they did historically. That is what happened during the American revolution and in India as well.
 
  • 10
  • 5
  • 2Like
Reactions:
1. I respectfully suggest you split Switzerland between different stragic regions (or create a separate Western Alps strategic region) rather than slotting them completely into Southern Germany. AFAIR IRL at some points France and Italy wanted to grab French or Italian speaking Swiss cantons, but their interest did not include any designs to meddle in Bavaria or Wuertemberg. If I understand this DD right at the moment if Italy wants to grab Ticino it will have to express strategic interest in South Germany Strategic Region which will cause it to be seen as potential adversary by Prussia and Bavaria. Whereas IRL Italian designs on Ticino were most probably of no consequence to Berlin or Muenich.

2. Same with "The Baltic" - please split Scandinavia from Baltic States (i.e. places where Estonia, Lithuania and Latvia are now).

3. Question: if as a country in one Strategic Region I form Customs Union with a country in another Strategic Region (Wuertemberg and Bayern) - does this mean that I automatically get strategic interest in that region?
You are absolutely correct, Switzerland french and italian cantons are in the geographical and cultural french and italian zones, the people disagreeing are clowns.
Ticino is located on the southern side of the alps and was part of the duchy of Milan until being conquered by the swiss.

I guess keeping Switzerland as a buffer zone between Italy, Germany and France was more important than the territorial gain per se.
 
  • 9
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
I hate the fact that all of Scandinavia is in The Baltics strategic region. Like couldn't you rename it into Scandinavia? Or The Baltics and Scandinavia. Idk, it just does not feel right...
Good diary anyway.
Actually it makes more sense because Scandinavia per say is not strategically interesting to nations during this time period. What is strategically interesting is the Baltics and access to it. Especially between Russia and Prussia/Germany and during the Crimean War UK/France. Sweden, Norway and Denmark had by this time basically faded into European backwater states that didn't offer a lot strategically which would continue until today.
 
  • 4Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Its not the same thing. France was actively supplying and aiding the local Indian princes resist the British in a major way and even engaging in direct combat. Best example is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tipu_Sultan and even in Punjab itself where the French actually led Sikh forces.

Slapping the Indians with infamy causes the OPPOSITE effect. In this case, other GPs will stop selling them guns and stuff and may even attack them. While in reality, other colonial powers and nearby Russia would have been more than happy to kick the EIC out and then get concessions from the locals in return.

Besides, this is colonial, non-core, non-primary culture province belonging to a puppet that was barely conquered a few decades ago.

I think you are getting too hung up on the numbers. They said they start with numbers too high rather than too low. Its WIP for a reason. There is little point in arguing over how big or small a number should be because it will most like change numerous times before launch. We also only know one of the numbers, but not any others. For all we know, its possible for the sikh empire to have -50 infamy decay, causing this to be a minor inconvenience at worst.
 
  • 7
Reactions:
62 infamy for liberating a colonial, non-core, non-primary culture province belonging to a puppet is a bit much IMO. Especially in this case when a local power is kicking out a colonizer. In fact, I think kicking out colonial powers should give no infamy other than pissing off said colonizer. Other GPs would actually help you in this case as they did historically. That is what happened during the American revolution and in India as well.
They're not liberating it though, it doesn't rightfully belong to them either
 
  • 13
  • 2
Reactions:
If Ireland (Iceland, etc.) becomes independent, they shouldn't necessarily care what happens in England.
If England loses Ireland, they will still have an interest in the region through Scotland. If they lose Ireland and Scotland, it's hard to say that they would have a widely accepted geo-political interest in a southern-aligned rump state, but they would surely still be able to stake a declared interest.
So the regions look fine in broad terms.
I'm assuming that part of what Paradox is trying to do with regions is to distinguish actual-history cores and peripheries, to an extent. Like in Turkey, Ireland, etc.
Exactly. If Ireland or Scotland become independent or another country conquers them or gains them as a subject, they're going to have more of a strategic interest in what's going on in the North Atlantic than what's going on in Kent.

It also just comes down to strategic regions being formed from state regions, so for other cases like Switzerland it all depends on what the state regions look like. Since "West Switzerland" is a state region, they have probably gone again with having two states in Switzerland, so which strategic regions Switzerland belongs to needs to be created with that as the consideration, not the French/German/Italian cultural divide.
 
  • 4
  • 1
Reactions: