• 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 #33 - Decentralized Nations

16_9.jpg

Hello folks, I'm Ofaloaf, one of the content designers on Victoria 3, and I'm here today to talk about decentralized nations. What are they? Why are they there?

To start with, let's talk about what came before - let's take a quick look at what Victoria (well, Victoria: Revolutions) and Victoria II did when it came to regions outside of traditional imperial homelands.

Africa in Victoria: Revolutions
image1.png

Above is Africa as it was represented in Victoria: Revolutions. Most of the continent is open territory for any Great Power to colonize. There's people living there, but they don't do anything. Outside of a few limited cases, like Sokoto, they're represented by… nothing. They do not do anything on their own, and when added to a colonizing power, they just immediately become pawns in the imperial game and don't really care for independence or their own homeland.

Africa in Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
image2.jpg

The same is broadly true in Victoria II. Regions historically colonized by imperial powers, such as most of Africa and parts of the Americas, are represented as unclaimed swathes of land just waiting for an empire to come by and colonize them. The people who live there do not care who marches in, and will just be members of one empire or another forevermore after they are colonized. It's… a model that could use some improvement. It didn't do justice to the people who historically lived there, and, frankly, it made colonial gameplay kind of boring.

Africa as it currently stands in Victoria 3
image3.jpg

In Victoria 3, decentralized nations exist to address both the issues of gameplay and better representation of indigenous peoples. No matter where an empire tries to colonize, someone already lives there. They're organized, although they don't have the same level of international recognition and administrative organization as, say, Congress of Vienna attendees.

No formal declaration of war needs to be made in order to make an incursion into the territories of decentralized nations and start colonizing, although the deeper you colonize into a decentralized nation's lands, the more likely it is a diplomatic play will kick off where the decentralized nation starts a real war of resistance against you. Even if a colony is successfully established, the people living there aren't just pawns - they'll remember that they weren't always colonized subjects, and just like any other part of an empire they'll agitate for independence if conditions are right.


Mapping these nations has been a challenge. We essentially started with the Victoria II map as a base to build off of, which meant we had a lot of work to do just gathering information for peoples across the globe. Records of who lived where, and how many people lived there, have been difficult to obtain for some regions. Gameplay considerations have also driven some design choices - let's look at North America for an example of that process.

Behold the snippet of a beautiful draft image used when presenting the original proposal.
image4.png

This is part of one drafted proposal for the implementation of decentralized nations in North America. There's already some compromises in this version - peoples have been consolidated into some larger polities, and some state borders have been followed largely because having just one or two provinces on the other side of a state line can create regions too small to provide anything or anybody - 400 pops living in State X aren't able to provide enough men to contribute a single battalion to a native uprising, among other things. This design isn’t just for the decentralized nations - it is something we also do elsewhere in the world when trying to balance historical accuracy with gameplay, although we of course try to avoid steering too far away from actual history.

North America after the revised proposal was implemented.
image5.jpg

Even with these considerations, we still ended up pursuing a modified version of that proposal that did more to preserve the borders of larger imperial borders - we didn't want too many avenues for the United States to colonize its way into historical Canadian territories, or for Mexico to colonize its way into Minnesota. I do miss the Council of Three Fires and hope I can get it back in, but that depends on getting a design hammered out that works with the considerations and limitations we just went over above.


Other regions have had design considerations made in their implementation, too.

(from Wikipedia)
image6.png


I'm gonna be real with you, there was no way we were going to accurately and sufficiently map out all the peoples of New Guinea. That's one region where I think we've probably done the most consolidation, but I think it was necessary in order to provide anything like the combined strength needed in order to give the indigenous peoples of New Guinea a decent punch in case of a native uprising.

West Africa in Victoria 3.
image7.jpg

West Africa had many design decisions made since it was first mapped out for V3; as mentioned above, the original map built off of was Victoria 2's, so the first thing done was just getting some entity everywhere on the map. This early draft has been revised and revised and revised again, and probably will still be subject to further revisions. Countries that were first marked as decentralized have been centralized, such as the Ashanti Empire, and tag additions and renamings are a thing that's happened already and will happen again, as we continue to invest time in research and listen to feedback from our fans.

Decentralized nations give life to regions that have been treated as blank slates up 'til now. Mapping them out, getting them right, and balancing the challenges of precision and gameplay are a constant struggle, one which we are constantly tackling and working through. The result of all this, though, is a world that feels much more alive, one that I hope you'll be happily exploring at Victoria 3's release.

I'm terrible at transitions so let me just say that next week is @neondt's dev diary, and we're going to ship some monumental information there! And by that I mean it's on canals and monuments.
 
  • 257Like
  • 83Love
  • 21
  • 12
  • 3
Reactions:
Cheers for the DD Ofaloaf and it's sensational to see indigenous peoples getting much better representation - a huge step forward for the franchise :) As others have said, it would be great at some point to have playable options for these, while appreciating it's going to be a very tough gig.

Have to say I'm a bit excited about canals coming up next week as well ;)

For a decentralised nation maritime-themed pic, here are some bark boats from Tierra del Fuego :)

Log boats Tierra del Fuego small.jpg
 
  • 5Like
  • 2
Reactions:
RE: The actual topic of this dev diary.
As excited as I am about the attitude the developers clearly have to amending the "wrongs" of previous games in this series, part of me feels a bit disappointed that this dev diary pretty much only exists to say "hey, we're trying to do a better job with representation" without going into many of the mechanical implications that "representation" entails (or, for that matter, without doing the work to clearly explain what some of the terms used here are supposed to mean). How do all of these newly added African countries you've shown us actually play? How will we be able to interact with European colonial powers using them? How can players expand into neighboring regions to engage in some imperialism themselves? We've been teased with this new map, but we haven't actually gotten much new information that informed individuals wouldn't have already guessed at (we already knew new states were being added). The nature of "colonized powers", and the process of colonization as a whole, which this dev diary is clearly framed around, remain foggy, even though this is the second diary on the subject. I hope there will be a third one.

--


Are the rumors true that a centralized country can turn into decentralized one in certain situations?

Would the Ottomans (as the Dead Man of Europe when that fires) be one as suspected?
"Decentralized" is honestly not the most appropriate word for what the game-devs want to describe these regions as, and I think this is causing confusion. The devs aren't using "Decentralized" to literally refer to political decentralization or a lack of state-cohesion; pretty much, they're applying the term to regions where they feel justified in not adding playable "nations", whether because those regions lacked any framework for centralized political control (as in, this just wasn't a thing even sought after), in those regions where it existed, but not in ways we would recognize as in "state" forms (so, if an area is only inhabited by pastoralists who migrate, then simulating playing as them would be quite difficult), or in those areas were such control was split heavily, and the work to add them in full detail might be unjustified. Of course, the problem is that lots of the regions that are currently "decentralized" were in actuality quite centralized by the standards other states that are "centralized" set, but that's neither here nor there (and here we should remember roster of playable nations is in progress). If the Ottomans were to "decentralize", they'd likely split into a number of unrecognized states, all vying for power. You could colonize those, but those would be interacted with differently than "decentralized" states.
- There should exist a few decentralized nations in South America inside Amazon rainforest.
I think there are some already.
 
Last edited:
  • 5
  • 2Like
Reactions:
What if they put Seminoles as an event which causes devastation, unrest, or somthing in Florida, or start as rebels like Gotland in eu4.

maybe an event fires just mentioning them for fun or Maybe like the USA has to station troops there like a border war in hoi4. If you don’t put enough dudes they get released?

If the problem is manpower, maybe have an event about slaves fleeing to Seminole territory giving them extra manpower but giving the usa a war goal. Basically what happened.
 
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
I have to agree on that. This resembles some of those Imperator: Rome dev diaries.
Don't worry, next week we'll get to read about monuments. It totally won't be a barebone feature initially, where a large portion of the dev time has gone into making sure it is easy to add more monuments to the game in future DLCs. Just like mission trees totally weren't implemented in EU4 and Imperator to make it easy to make content for DLCs.

As for decentralised nations, I had hoped the dev diaries would shed some new light on how they actually work in the game. I struggle to see anything in this dev diary we didn't know already.
 
  • 8
  • 7
Reactions:
Do Decentralized Countries do anything other than resist colonization?
I am sorry dear, they do what with colonization? Privatize it, you say?

1644550191203.png



I think the consolidation choice is relatively good so the natives can put up a fight, are there ways to help the natives if let's say a rival tries to get a colony somewhere?
 
  • 1Love
Reactions:
This is a breath of fresh air compared with previous iterations of Victoria or EU for that matter. It is more than just a scramble for land were your only adversaries are other global powers. Coupled with the other mechanics in the game, such as diplo plays and devastation from war, pay-off is not going to be straight forward.
 
I like what you’re doing however sayig that uncivilised people “didn’t do anything and just waited for an empire to come colonise them” is unfair to Vic2 and 1. They had a different design approach.

In Vic2 you were able to colonise after you researched “colonial negotiations” and in the pop up of that research, design approach of Vic2 is clearly stated: “....And if the negotiations don’t work out we have the maxim gun and they don’t, what are they gonna do?” So uprisings of people were let’s say more subtly simulated. And they had much more technical limitations as well.
 
  • 4
  • 3
Reactions:
You know what, hot take: I do kinda want a mechanic for a nation to fall from centralized to decentralized (and I mean that, not just from recognized to unrecognized), maybe if only in a mod. Something that doesn't happen every game, maybe only 1-in-10.

I'm just imagining a nation getting so overcome by rebels, again and again, time after time, in a very short period of time, that the nation devolved into basically Warring States China, but so much worse than even that. Complete lack of any centralized rule, leaving it open for neighboring powers to come in to "re-establish authority" is said nation, essentially turning it into a set of protectorates.

"Decentralized" in game doesn't mean 1:1 what it means in a dictionary. It's not a "central authority can't enforce order on local authorities", it's more like formal bureaucracy doesn't even exist. Even those Chinese warlords just took over local government functions, so more like rebel states etc. The only modern example of a centralized state collapsing into a decentralized is Somalia and even that's probably not quite there. Hard to imagine anything short of a major nuclear exchange really doing this.
 
  • 2
  • 1Like
Reactions:
I'm not sure this idea will end up working well in the long run.

Yes, sure, pick a territory in 1836, and some people live there, bar a few extreme cases of tiny islands. But, how does this approach benefit the gameplay? We have hundreds of tiny countries, with different indigenous populations lumped together without much care for how much sense it makes, in terms of historical accuracy or cultural similarity. It just takes computing power to deal with those hundreds of nations.

On the other hand, if those nations don't do anything, ie. they're just names on the map - why have them at all?

The important part to do right was the POP count and distribution within the provinces, not to just to colour the provinces and give them names. Any and all events related to colonization and occupation should have been done through POPs mechanics.

We will see when the game comes out. Hopefully it adds to the gameplay without slowing the game down or making it more tedious.
 
  • 6
  • 1
Reactions:
Are there any genocide-related game mechanics? If yes, how will the native population react, are they just victims and can't do much about it? How will other nations react if you're about to this? Or is this too hot of a topic to implement it into a game like this?

EDIT: Also, how are genocides implemented/represented in the game? Like on the herero?
 
  • 4
  • 1
Reactions:
EDIT: Also, how are genocides implemented/represented in the game? Like on the herero?

The G word is not represented in Paradox games. Except Stellaris I guess.
 
  • 5
  • 2Like
  • 1Haha
  • 1
Reactions:
Not a meaningful amount, because they don't have an AI, an economy, internal politics, or real diplomacy. They exist for one thing, which is to potentially rise up when bits of them are colonized.
And how many successfully rose up once colonised in history?
 
  • 1
Reactions:
a bit off-topic question: the Spanish city of Ceuta still hasn't been added to map, is this intentional or will it make it into the map for the release?
Unfortunately it seems that the map of Spain has been directly ported from Vic2. Not only Ceuta is not portrayed, but it seem that “horrors” like the states of Vasconia-Aragón, whatever is called that thing including Galicia, Asturias and Cantabria and Murcia-Valencia are back. I wish Spain got the treatment of one in game State for each historic state/region, but I guess that Spain is not the only country with this problem. Still Ceuta should be in the game.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Goodness, there's a lot to reply to!

We know that if you click on another centralised nation in V3, you get an information panel showing the leader, government, population etc. Will it be the same for decentralised nations?
Yes! You can click on a decentralized nation and get further information on population statistics, government, and so forth.

Very nice DD and an extremely promising development.

As always - questions:
1. What about places that genuinly had zero or almost zero population before some developed country claimed them (its mostly small islands in Pacific, but they can be valuable basing points for navies)?

2. Can you "absorb" a non-centralized nation without colonizing, through diplomatic plays? For example if US completely surrounds Sioux Nation territory and includes them into their market - will there be an option for a peaceful annexation or maybe protectorate?

3. Likewise - will decentralized nations be able to start any diplomacy besides anti-colonial uprisings? It would be especially interesting if they could ask for protectorate/colony status from other nations - for example the same Sioux feel threatened by USA, but have better relationship with Canada - could they ask Canada to become their protectorate/colony?

4. Can a developed nation foment uprisings in colonial territories of another nation? Without this the "Great Game" would largely be impossible to simulate.

1. We ended up just associating those islands with the closest nearby inhabited islands, so several Polynesian realms are more widespread than is properly historical.

2. No, the Sioux will not willingly surrender autonomy no matter how many goods the United States send their way.

3. No, part of what makes a decentralized nation functionally different from a centralized one is the lack of an active foreign policy, or much of any organized and directed policies. The Nyamwezi of East Africa do not exchange ambassadors with Oman, and the Pawnee are not centralized enough for any protectorate to stick. If you go through the records of treaties arranged between the US and various native nations, many of them have notes like "Part of the tribe refused to be governed by this act and it had to be repealed later", because there isn't a central authority that can make these things stick.

4. Any pops in a country can be agitated through internal mechanics we've discussed in other DDs, like turmoil, standard of living, and the like. Generally speaking, though, we don't intend to have a system at release for directly influencing the pops of other countries, whether they live in a decentralized nation or a centralized state.

Will the Seminole be represented as a centralized country who start at war with the US, or will they be a decentralized country in the process of being colonized, with an active native revolt? There could be arguments either way, but I do think they ought to be represented in some way at least.

The Seminole is something I've personally angsted over and flip-flopped on repeatedly. At the moment, the Seminole are not in as a decentralized nation, but if a good design gets hashed out I hope we'll have a chance to implement the Seminole on the map prior to release.

Do decentralized nations ever become centralized if left alone or if they successfully drive off colonial powers? If they win against a colonizer do they just fall back into their decentralized ignorance or do they try to actively prepare for the next potential colonizer in some way, even if not through centralizing?

This might be a bit too much of a lift for it to be included at release but I’d love to eventually see something along these lines.
Decentralized nations will not be centralizing on their own at release.

Do decentralized nations get flags? Historical or generated?
Historical flags can be scripted, but I believe nearly all of them are generated at this point. It's hard to get something that works and fits the period- there's not even a modern-day flag for the Fang people, for example.

How will New Zealand be represented at game start? Will iwi be represented as numerous decentralised nations?
The iwi have been consolidated largely into the Ngai Tahu and Ngati Toa, those two being the two most prominent iwi at the end of the Musket Wars as I understand it. North Island, moreover, also has the United Tribes and some colonization by New South Wales- an image was shared on Twitter earlier this week of the setup, and I noticed a lot of people assumed the NSW bit was directly British-controlled because it's a British puppet and takes on its color because of that.
 
Last edited:
  • 17Like
  • 9
  • 1Love
Reactions:
Historical flags can be scripted, but I believe nearly all of them are generated at this point. It's hard to get something that works and fits the period- there's not even a modern-day flag for the Fang people, for example.

If needed, here is a modern flag for the Niisitapi, referencing the four main nations that make up the Confederacy:
blackfoot-flag-400x276.jpg
 
  • 1
Reactions:
The iwi have been consolidated largely into the Ngai Tahu and Ngati Toa, those two being the two most prominent iwi at the end of the Musket Wars as I understand it. North Island, moreover, also has the United Tribes and some colonization by New South Wales- an image was shared on Twitter earlier this week of the setup, and I noticed a lot of people assumed the NSW bit was directly British-controlled because it's a British puppet and takes on its color because of that.
Thanks very much for your response. Understand that NZ's a pretty minor part of the map, but the iwi names Ngāi Tahu and Ngāti Toa really do need a macron over the a; they're different letters, are pronounced differently, and significantly change the meaning of the word in Te Reo.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Lots of questions about decentralized nations becoming centralized I see, but I'm curious about the reverse: can a centralized nation become decentralized? How would you go about doing that, if so?
No, there's no way for a centralized nation to become decentralized.

This has been my biggest complaint about the EUIV colonial system, so good job fixing this before it became an issue. How exactly do the mechanics of colonizing work though? That wasn't explained well in the previous Dev Diary, and we learn now that there will be no regions of the world that start uncontrolled. If I am playing as the US, do I just select a state region that still has decentralized nations in control of part of it, then push a button to start the colony? Is a colony ever considered "finished" and stop taking up part of the colonial resources, or do all unincorporated states take up a permanent part of your colonial pool, unless they become incorporated?
Colonization is done on a state-by-state basis. It's started with a fairly straightforward process like you describe, but as colonization progresses, so does tension, so the more of a state region is colonized, the more likely it is that it'll blow up and decentralized nations will fight directly against the colonizer. Depending on the circumstances, this is either a speedbump or a serious challenge. If a country's at peace and doing just fine, a war against a single decentralized nation is no major hurdle, but I've seen games where the US continued to intrude into Native American territory even while at war with the British, resulting in a Sioux uprising succeeding, regaining the lands lost to the US in earlier colonization.

There's no real "colonial" pool- unincorporated provinces just eat up more bureaucracy, from the same bureaucratic pool that other things draw from for their own maintenance.

That's because there is no developer post outside of the op yet.
I was celebrating a friend's birthday after work yesterday. :p

What about great powers? Can we use this mechanic on decentralized great power provinces like Ottoman Algeria?
The Ottomans aren't decentralized, even if they fail the Sick Man of Europe content we've written. They're more liable to be subject to very direct forms of imperialism, but not colonization in the same way decentralized nations experience it.

Thanks very much for your response. Understand that NZ's a pretty minor part of the map, but the iwi names Ngāi Tahu and Ngāti Toa really do need a macron over the a; they're different letters, are pronounced differently, and significantly change the meaning of the word in Te Reo.
So noted! Not punching in a fix immediately right now just because of work priorities, but with the next opportunity to punch in some fixes I'll make sure this gets addressed then.
 
  • 24Like
  • 6
  • 3
  • 2Love
Reactions: