Victoria 3 - Dev Diary #6 - Interest Groups

[IndigoRage]

The thing with parties forming out of a coalition of interest groups is members of any given interest group could see different goals in relation to their interest. Not every industrialist or devoutly religious person sees the same means to their end. Also there are individuals loyal to their party regardless of its makeup. What about political machines in examples like the US where party loyalty is essentially a form of patronage? Could it be that when these parties form each has a new interest group called something like "loyalists" who will toe the party line no matter what?

 

[Manst]

There's no such thing as a good pie chart

Absolutely based take.

 

[Alpha2518]

And the effects of this can be simulated through the influence of electoral laws on clout and IG behavior. Political parties in practice only add fluff to the table and I fear that the naming of the various political parties will run the risk of being immersion breaking whether those names are handpicked in advanced or generated on the basis of ideological/IG parameters.

That's literally not the same and all you'd be doing is breaking down something like first past the post for the USA into something like proportional representation with extra steps

 

[lachek]

To try to address a couple of other questions all at once: Interest Groups only represents the "conventional" political forces in your country, those who could at least be marginally heard in the halls of power. While they can rebel against the government if they dislike where the country is going, not all rebellious forces in your country are represented by Interest Groups. So in the case of cultural nationalists / secessionists, minority religious groups, colonial subjects, and other Pops who are systemically disenfranchised in the country, there are other (usually more direct) ways in which they can influence you.

 

[Al-Khalidi]

I'm pretty certain in that situation you could do that, but if your Head of State belongs to the Landowners IG you would take a big hit to your government legitimacy.

That's exactly what I was hoping to learn about. I'm planning to modernize as Ottoman Empire and wondering whether it would cost me a civil war to favour intelligentsia and industrislists over aristocrats..Also whether it would be possible to use both intelligentsia and clergy: screen with attitudes of clergy towards schools seemto deny that, but I think should be possible under certain circumstances (jadidism, or islamic revival)

 

[BrokenSky]

Some Pops have no political strength at all, usually due to being disenfranchised under the nation’s laws (such as people of a religion or culture that is discriminated against, or women in countries that haven’t instituted women’s suffrage). These Pops are ‘outside the system’ so to speak, unable to demand reform through the regular political system of Interest Groups, and instead having to rely on other methods to put pressure on the government, but we won’t focus on those today.

I feel like women (or other disenfranchised pops) without the voting having no political influence is pretty misrepresentative of how things actually work IRL.

In real democracies, successfully changing a voter's mind is intrinsically worth more than being able to vote yourself (in that one is a net +2 votes to your side, while the other is +1) and this period was, I think, fairly notable for the extent to which nominally powerless people influenced politics via both large scale influencing of personal opinions and the influencing public opinion on a mass scale?
Unless I've misunderstood, and political influence is meant to represent something rather narrower than just the extent to which a group has influence in politics, I feel like non-voters should have greatly reduced, rather than non-existent political influence (to represent the ability of people to talk to one another and sway someone's beliefs over a relevant-temperature cup of beverage-of-choice) scaling up considerably under certain circumstances (to represent marches and major political movements with major media coverage, such as the one in the banner for the Dev diary, in which a number of non-voters influence politics).

That is, unless non-enfranchised people influencing the opinions of enfranchised people with whom they are in close proximity is a separate mechanic; one of those 'other methods' you mention, in which case never-mind.

 

[Somberg]

And the effects of this can be simulated through the influence of electoral laws on clout and IG behavior. Political parties in practice only add fluff to the table and I fear that the naming of the various political parties will run the risk of being immersion breaking whether those names are handpicked in advanced or generated on the basis of ideological/IG parameters.

If designed right parties could add a lot to the table in a mechanical sense and not just in terms of making the game more immersive and realistic when playing certain countries or liberalizing a more authoritarian state. They could give you benefits apart from those given by IGs alone and they make IG management in democracies both simpler (you don't have to choose all the IGs in the government) and more complicated (you have to be more responsive to those IGs because they might have expectations for their demands to be met).

 

[Alpha2518]

If designed right parties could add a lot to the table in a mechanical sense and not just in terms of making the game more immersive and realistic when playing certain countries or liberalizing a more authoritarian state. They could give you benefits apart from those given by IGs alone and they make IG management in democracies both simpler (you don't have to choose all the IGs in the government) and more complicated (you have to be more responsive to those IGs because they might have expectations for their demands to be met).

Indeed. In Mike Duncan's Revolutions podcast, didn't he mention the Czars trying to prevent the forming of certain political parties because of the conglomeration of certain IGs or am I not remembering this right?

 

[Hospodar]

That's literally not the same and all you'd be doing is breaking down something like first past the post for the USA into something like proportional representation with extra steps

As a matter of simulation and not of interpretation, I really don't see the difference between having a party system or simply having various electoral laws which would encourage either dominant, two party or multiparty systems. A state with FPTP (or whichever term for such an abstractization of electoral behavior the devs find most appropriate) will in turn influence IG behavior and whether they're open to collaborating with each other or not. Either in a hardcoded manner (particular electoral law -> set in stone number of IGs in governance) or as a modifier which causes IGs to be statistically inclined either in favor or against collaborating with other IGs as a united front.

I really don't see the concrete mechanics which parties bring to the table that couldn't be instead reflected in the IG system.

 

[mikhail321]

To try to address a couple of other questions all at once: Interest Groups only represents the "conventional" political forces in your country, those who could at least be marginally heard in the halls of power. While they can rebel against the government if they dislike where the country is going, not all rebellious forces in your country are represented by Interest Groups. So in the case of cultural nationalists / secessionists, minority religious groups, colonial subjects, and other Pops who are systemically disenfranchised in the country, there are other (usually more direct) ways in which they can influence you.

If I understand the answer correctly that would be a bit strange. For instance in a unified Germany both Protestant and catholic clergy are legitimate power forces, but may differ significantly on ideology. Muslim and Hindu clergy in British Raj even more so.

 

[wilcoxchar]

If designed right parties could add a lot to the table in a mechanical sense and not just in terms of making the game more immersive and realistic when playing certain countries or liberalizing a more authoritarian state. They could give you benefits apart from those given by IGs alone and they make IG management in democracies both simpler (you don't have to choose all the IGs in the government) and more complicated (you have to be more responsive to those IGs because they might have expectations for their demands to be met).

Exactly. As the United States you might want the industrialists in your government because they promote your attempt to industrialize, but if the industrialists have formed a political party with, perhaps, the devout and intelligentsia interest groups who have an abolitionist ideology, then you run the risk of putting an abolitionist government in power and angering the opposing party of the plantation owners and pushing them out of government which might cause them to rebel against you. And this kind of thing can't really be done through interest groups alone since you could just invite the industrialists into government without bringing the abolitionist interest groups in.

 

[Undead Martyr]

Can a new interest group emerge dynamically in a certain country based on culture?

Thinking mainly about immigration in the Americas. Should they join local interest groups ou form their own and brand new IGs?

Immigrants groups were a key factor in Gilded Age US political party machines, so this seems like something that should be represented somehow. Notably the Italian American community radicalized into anarchist/communist groups due to being poorly treated wage slaves and facing widespread anti Catholic bigotry, and German Americans were a key swing group in the Midwest, which strongly influenced McKinley's campaigns.

 

[lordkestrel]

Having it say Pol.Str. looks really weird when there is more than enough room there to have it say Political Strength, or whatever it's supposed to mean.

 

[Hospodar]

Exactly. As the United States you might want the industrialists in your government because they promote your attempt to industrialize, but if the industrialists have formed a political party with, perhaps, the devout and intelligentsia interest groups who have an abolitionist ideology, then you run the risk of putting an abolitionist government in power and angering the opposing party of the plantation owners and pushing them out of government which might cause them to rebel against you. And this kind of thing can't really be done through interest groups alone since you could just invite the industrialists into government without bringing the abolitionist interest groups in.

Change the word 'party' to that of 'alliance' and you can have all of that as part of the IG system. Only thing missing being subpar fluff in the form of party names which would most likely be either anachronistic (and possibly nonsensical given the diverging historical evolution of the world in a playthrough) or bland (when universally generated as to account for parties which had not historically existed in particular countries).

 

[Undead Martyr]

I'm really curious how the minorities fit into this system. Will different nationalities of the Habsburg monarchy just support IGs based on their profession, join Interest Groups of their own (Hungarian nationalists, Slavic nationalists?) or just be politically inactive? What about religious pops of non-state religions?

Historically, aside from the socialists pretty much all of Austrias political parties were duplicated along national lines (ie you'd have a Czech Liberal party and a German Liberal Party and they were often at loggerheads). The socialists IIRC did have a bit more cross national unity but even then you had national labor unions and such congressing together IIRC. Of course you also got intriguing things like Austro-Marxism out of this mess.

 

[Alfred Dreyfus]

I'm perfectly fine with a very simplified representation of political parties at launch.

A future expansion DLC based on political parties could focus in providing an expanded and complex political parties mechanic.

 

[Vernichtere]

Looks very good overall. And I have nothing to criticize. Of course I hope for the implementation of the parties and have to see the political system. But the interest groups are very good.

 

[ikki]

Yea, I don't think the Pious group is really accurate. I think it plays into the whole "Religious people are anti-science" stereotype to a worrying degree. Hopefully none of the other ideologies are like that!

Or the implication that education is anti-culture, anti-values, anti-community, anti-religion etc.

Well commie education is like that, seeking to divide everyone against everything else and rule over the burning trashdumb that remains of former countries when theyare done. So education makes you a communist hating your home and neighbours.. okiedokie.. well the modern western education is like that but that is a dying society about to collapse into madmax.


Otoh enabling all 3 educations simultaneously under state religion might grant a overall +2 (religion) +1 religious schools -1 -1 (public & private schools) IF it works like that, for a total +1 or a "like"

 

[Make Victoria 3]

More Dependents get to cast a vote, which makes the piece of the Political Strength pie made up of Votes even larger. This in turn tends to grant more political strength to the common folk.

Aristocrats have wifes as well though, so womans sufferage should really not change the influence of the common folk or what am i missing?

 

[Vernichtere]

Aristocrats have wifes as well though, so womans sufferage should really not change the influence of the common folk or what am i missing?

It is probably also simply given a stronger weighting to the common people. more voters are more difficult to manipulate.