• 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 #20 - Diplomatic Actions

16_9 (1).jpg

Hello and welcome to yet another Victoria 3 dev diary! Today we’ll be continuing to talk about Diplomacy, specifically on the topic of Diplomatic Actions, which are the means by which countries in Victoria 3 conduct diplomacy, build (or tear down) relations, and sign various kinds of agreements with each other.

Diplomatic Actions and how they work should be pretty familiar to anyone who’s played pretty much any other Paradox Grand Strategy game. In short, a Diplomatic Action is a type of interaction that is carried out by one country towards another, and which sometimes (but not always) requires the agreement of the other party.

As the exact requirements and effects of a Diplomatic Action are unique to each type of action, this Dev Diary will mostly just be going over which actions currently exist in the game, but before I get into that I want to briefly explain about the three distinct categories that all actions fall into and how they differ:
  • Instant Actions: These are actions that are carried out immediately upon use and/or acceptance (if acceptance is needed). They do not cost any Influence capacity as they do not require maintenance.
  • Ongoing Actions: These are unilateral actions that are carried out over time by one party towards the other, and can only be cancelled by the first party. They can have an Influence maintenance cost, in which case only the first party is the one to pay it.
  • Pacts: These are bilateral actions that are carried out over time as an agreement between two parties. If there is a maintenance cost, both parties have to pay it unless the agreement has a clear senior and junior partner (such as Subject relationships). Both parties can break the pact off, though in some cases it may require the agreement of the other party.
A look at some of the actions and pacts available between two independent countries
dd20 1v2.png

If you’re still a bit unclear on the difference between these three, don’t worry! It should hopefully become clearer once we start going into examples. So with no further ado, let’s talk about what actions there currently are available in the game. Please note that, as always, the game is still under active development so what’s in here may not exactly match what we have for release.

Instant Actions (not necessarily an exhaustive list):
  • Expel Diplomats: This is an action that immediately lowers Relations with the target country, stops any ongoing attempt by them to Improve Relations with you, and blocks further Improve Relations attempts for a period of 5 years. Using Expel Diplomats also gives the acting country some Infamy, and prevents them from using Expel Diplomats on the same country for 5 years.
  • Take on Debt: This is an action that allows one country to take on the debt of another in exchange for being owed an Obligation (more on this in later dev diaries).
  • Redeem Obligation: This is an action that forgives an Obligation owed to the acting country in exchange for a large boost in Relations.
  • Violate Sovereignty: This is an action that allows the acting country to violate the neutrality of another country through whom they need military access, creating a Diplomatic Incident and potentially bringing new countries into the conflict. We’ll go more into under what conditions you can use this and exactly how it works at a later time.

Russia’s unexpected attempt to build stronger relations with the Ottomans is not being received well at the Sublime Porte
dd20 2v2.png

Ongoing Actions (not necessarily an exhaustive list):
  • Improve Relations: This is an ongoing action that slowly raises relations up to a maximum value of 50 (out of 100). Costs Influence to maintain, with the cost increasing if the target has a high Rank
  • Damage Relations: This is an ongoing action that slowly lowers relations down to a minimum value of -50 (out of -100). Costs Influence to maintain, with the cost increasing if the target has a high Rank
  • Bankroll: This is an ongoing action where one country pays a part of its monetary income to another each week as direct subsidies to their state treasury.

The contest between Siam and Dai Nam for control of Cambodia led to a longstanding regional rivalry that sparked several wars in the early 19th century
dd20 3v2.png

Non-Subject Pacts (not necessarily an exhaustive list):
  • Alliance: This is a diplomatic pact that allows two countries to help each other when attacked in a Diplomatic Play, even if they do not have an Interest in the relevant area (more on this next week). Costs Influence to maintain, with the cost increasing if the other part has a high Rank.
  • Customs Union: This is a diplomatic pact where there is a senior and a junior partner, and makes the junior partner part of the senior partner’s national market instead of having their own market. Costs Influence to maintain for the senior partner only, with the cost increasing if the other part has a high Rank.
  • Trade Agreement: This is a diplomatic pact which gives both countries competitive advantages when establishing trade routes in the market of the other country. Costs Influence to maintain, with the cost increasing if the other part has a high Rank.

A trade agreement between Russia and Prussia would let the latter tap even more deeply into the former’s timber exports and improve Russia’s access to German-made tools
dd20 4v2.png


Subject Pacts (not necessarily an exhaustive list):
  • Protectorate: This is a type of non-colonial subject relationship where the subject is very autonomous, the only restriction placed on them being that they are not able to have a fully independent foreign policy. Can be turned into a Puppet by their overlord through a Diplomatic Play.
  • Puppet: This is a type of non-colonial subject relationship where the subject has no diplomatic autonomy, pays part of their income to their overlord and is part of the overlord’s national market. Can be annexed by their overlord through a Diplomatic Play.
  • Dominion: This is a type of colonial subject relationship where the subject has extensive diplomatic autonomy and can have their own subjects, though they’re still required to be part of their overlord’s market. Can be turned into a Territory by their overlord through a Diplomatic Play.
  • Territory: This is a type of colonial subject relationship where the subject has limited diplomatic autonomy, pays part of their income to their overlord and is part of the overlord’s national market. Can be annexed by their overlord through a Diplomatic Play.
  • Tributary: This is a special subject relationship only available to Unrecognized Powers where the subject has extensive diplomatic autonomy and can have their own subjects, though they’re required to pay part of their income to their overlord. Can be turned into a Vassal by their overlord through a Diplomatic Play.
  • Vassal: This is a special subject relationship only available to Unrecognized Powers where the subject has no diplomatic autonomy, pays part of their income to their overlord and is part of the overlord’s national market. Can be annexed by their overlord through a Diplomatic Play.
Afghanistan has no intention of becoming a Persian tributary peacefully, and Persia will have to resort to a threat of force if they intend to press the matter further
dd20 5v2.png

Before I leave off, I also just want to briefly mention that as with many of our systems, the Diplomatic Action system is built to be completely moddable, up to and including adding new forms of Subjects or entirely new Pacts with completely custom effects. We’re quite excited to see how you all take advantage of all this moddability once the game is finally out!

Well then, that’s it! This has of course been something of a brief overview, and we’ve left out a bunch of details regarding a number of the interactions that we’ll come back to later, but it should give you a good idea of the limits of diplomacy in Victoria 3… that is, unless you’re willing to get a bit more bold, in which case you should check back next week, as we talk about Diplomatic Plays and how they will let you shatter those limits!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • 224Like
  • 73Love
  • 15
  • 9
  • 5
Reactions:
I won't lie, I would have hoped for a rather more flexible, fleshed and granular diplomacy system (with promises, trade-offs, less abstract ways of increasing and decreasing relations personal unions, multiple overlords).

The current system is pretty good, don't mistake me - but it seems like the "typical paradox game" diplomacy. Not much here that isn't already seen somewhere else, except maybe for the complex hierarchy of subjects. The obligation system seems basically the "hooks" system from ck3.

I mean, it worked well in other games, so why change it, of course. But still, I hoped in some serious innovations...
 
  • 2
  • 1Like
Reactions:
I won't lie, I would have hoped for a rather more flexible, fleshed and granular diplomacy system (with promises, trade-offs, less abstract ways of increasing and decreasing relations personal unions, multiple overlords).

The current system is pretty good, don't mistake me - but it seems like the "typical paradox game" diplomacy. Not much here that isn't already seen somewhere else, except maybe for the complex hierarchy of subjects. The obligation system seems basically the "hooks" system from ck3.

I mean, it worked well in other games, so why change it, of course. But still, I hoped in some serious innovations...
You might want to wait until we see how Diplomatic Plays work before you settle on that conclusion. Reread that last paragraph of the Dev Diary.
 
  • 11Like
Reactions:
a union of states but republicans no dynastic union a union that goes from france to mazzinian italy if the republicans win of course
 
  • 8
Reactions:
a union of states but republicans no dynastic union a union that goes from france to mazzinian italy if the republicans win of course
And that’s a monarchy to you?

Regardless, I would say that that kind of thing is very unrealistic, and only could have existed in the fever dreams of early 19th century Romantics. Even if Italy were somehow unified in 1848, I don’t see why they would enter into a union with France.
 
  • 6
Reactions:
And that’s a monarchy to you?

Regardless, I would say that that kind of thing is very unrealistic, and only could have existed in the fever dreams of early 19th century Romantics. Even if Italy were somehow unified in 1848, I don’t see why they would enter into a union with France.
a victory of republic in 1848 and then a federation with france repubblican, i was thinking of a european republican diplomatic union in case of victory of the republic
 
  • 8
Reactions:
I hope there will be neutrality and non aggression pacts. As well as only defensive pact or only offensive pact, I don't want to join your offensive war but I'll accept to defend if you're being attacked.
 
  • 3Like
Reactions:
a victory of republic in 1848 and then a federation with france repubblican, i was thinking of a european republican diplomatic union in case of victory of the republic
In addition to being extremely unrealistic, that would also be broken from a gameplay perspective.


I hope there will be neutrality and non aggression pacts. As well as only defensive pact or only offensive pact, I don't want to join your offensive war but I'll accept to defend if you're being attacked.
The description of Alliances makes it clear they are defensive in nature. Your ally only gets pulled into the Diplomatic Play if you are attacked. Getting people to join hostile Diplomatic Plays that you launch will probably be covered next week.
 
  • 6
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Gonna need a flag mod on day one.
 
  • 8
Reactions:
Cheers for the DD Wizzington, and the extra info from you, Iachek and KaiserJohan :) It all sounds good, and a robust way of handling diplomatic actions. A couple of thoughts:
  • Five years feels a bit long for the Expel Diplomats cooldown - but that's just the vibe I got reading it, I may be off.
  • Is there going to be any way to have multilateral pacts? They may well have been others, but the ones I'm thinking of are the Washington* and London treaties on naval arms limitation. They were negotiated between a number of nations, and applied to all of them. It would be cool to have something like this in the game, but I appreciate making it work mechanically as well as on the UI side would be a fair bit of work.
* Actually a number of separate treaties.

It's also a nice transition into a naval pic for this DD - here's HMS Nelson (a photo ever-so-slightly after the Vicky timeframe, but it was commissioned in the 1920s), built under the provisions of the Washington Treaty (with limits on the size of the main calibre armament (max 16in) and overall tonnage (max 35,000 ton 'standard'). The restrictions of the treaty contributed to its unique design, which saved on weight be reducing the size of the armoured citadel by grouping the main armament forward.

1634856601427.png
 
  • 2Like
  • 2
Reactions:
a union of states but republicans no dynastic union a union that goes from france to mazzinian italy if the republicans win of course

Can't it be model by using either a protectorate or a puppet ?
You would have a republic holding control over another republic, for their own protection of course...

A personal union implies that the same leader rules directly over both nations and that seems a little odd for a democracy. In your example, I'm doubtful that the french population would have elected the italian prime minister as their leader or that the italian population would have voted for the french president.
A system where each republic has its own elected leader while one republic is the overlord of the other makes more sense.
 
  • 4Like
Reactions:
Can't it be model by using either a protectorate or a puppet ?
You would have a republic holding control over another republic, for their own protection of course...

A personal union implies that the same leader rules directly over both nations and that seems a little odd for a democracy. In your example, I'm doubtful that the french population would have elected the italian prime minister as their leader or that the italian population would have voted for the french president.
A system where each republic has its own elected leader while one republic is the overlord of the other makes m
a union federation?
 
  • 5
Reactions:
Personal Union is also a type of relatively autonomous "legacy" subject. Some PUs exist at start of game but you can't make new ones.
Pity, I was hoping that there could be a way in the early game for a possible union between Portugal and Brazil should either of the young monarchs die, them being siblings and all. Though the personal union should be very unstable because of the reluctance of both parties being united again as somewhat equals it could become a stepping stone for the reformation of the United Kingdom of Brazil, Portugal and Algarve, with primary culture being either Portuguese or Brazilian depending on who was the senior member and the other culture becoming an accepted culture.

Well, a man can dream... or learn to mod
 
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
Yea I was hoping for CK2 type of improve opinion and not EU4 or old Vic 2 improve opinion
Give arbitrary amount of money -> immediately receive lump sum opinion is a lot more "gamey" than what we've seen so far for Victoria 3.
 
  • 17
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Obligations... I never really liked those "favor" type diplomatic actions in other PDX games but who knows, maybe here it fits well. One thing tho, I for one think they should be non-mandatory. Sure, declining an obligation should bring a shaitteload of infamy, scaling up with the type of refusal, but to me there is great potential for the AI not being a good sport about this if it is mandatory. Like, as a minor nation you indebt yourself for an inconsequential naval access and soon the other nation looses its mind and declares holy war on Great Britain and drags you into it.

To me it feels like the type of thing most diplomats would say "oh nooooo, no no no forget it. Shame on me but count me out... whats that, oh I owe you? Yeah fudge that".
 
  • 2
  • 1Like
  • 1Haha
Reactions: