• 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 #6 - Interest Groups

DD6 Thumb.png


Hello once again and welcome back to yet another Victoria 3 dev diary. Where previous dev diaries have been focusing on the economy, we’re now going to switch gears to another core pillar of the Victoria series - internal politics! More specifically, we’re going to be talking about Interest Groups, which form the nucleus of Victoria 3’s political gameplay.

What then, are Interest Groups? Fundamentally, an Interest Group is a collection of pops that espouse certain political views and want to change the country to be more in line with those views. Interest Groups are drawn from a number of different templates, but will vary in their exact views from country to country, based on factors such as the local religion, which social movements have appeared in the country or the personal views of their leader.

The Landowners is an Interest Group dominated by the Aristocracy and tends to be firmly in the conservative side of politics
dd6_1.png


As mentioned, Interest Groups are fundamentally made up of Pops - all individuals in all Pops are either members of an Interest Group or Politically Inactive, with the ratio in each based on factors such as Profession, Wealth, Literacy etc. Individuals inside Pops contribute Political Strength to their Interest Group of choice, with the amount they contribute again dependent on multiple factors, the main ones being their material Wealth and the status (and/or votes!) they are offered under the nation’s power structure.

For example, a single wealthy Aristocrat in an Oligarchy will provide hundreds or even thousands times the political strength of a poor laborer. The total Political Strength of all Pops in an Interest Group is what gives it its level of Clout - the amount of political weight it can assert on the country and the government. It’s important to note though that Pops are not unified in which Interest Groups they support - individuals within Pops are the ones who decide their Interest Group, and a single Pop can potentially have individuals supporting every Interest Group in the game (in different numbers).

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.

Individual members of a Pop can support different Interest Groups - or stay out of politics altogether!
dd6_2.png

As mentioned above, Interest Groups have a number of ideologies which determine their views on which laws the country should or should not enact. Different Interest Groups will have different ideologies (the Landowners are significantly more conservative than the Trade Unions, for example - shocking, I know!) but these are not entirely set in stone - they can change over the course of the game and will also vary based on the current leader of the Interest Group, who comes with his or her own personal ideology and view of the world. Additionally, some Interest Groups in certain countries have unique ideologies colored by their religion and culture, such as the Confucian Scholars Interest Group in Qing China who (unsurprisingly) espouse a Confucian ideology.

Interest Groups will generally favor laws that benefit them in some way
dd6_3.png

I mentioned previously that Interest Groups have a level of Clout based on the total Political Strength of their constituent Pops. Clout is calculated by comparing their Political Strength to that of the other Interest Groups in the country - if all the Interest Groups in Belgium put together have 100k Political Strength and the Landowners have 30k, they correspondingly get 30% of the Clout in Belgium. The Interest Group’s Clout will determine their classification - Powerful, Influential or Marginalized.

Interest Groups also have a level of Approval, which is based on factors such as how much they approve of the country’s laws, whether they are in government or in opposition, and how many of their individual members are Loyalists or Radicals (more on those in a later dev diary). There are numerous other factors that can affect Approval as well, such as how you react to certain events or decisions that you take.

Together, the classification and Approval of an Interest Group determines which Traits are active for an Interest Group at any given time, and how impactful they are. There are different traits, positive and negative, with positive traits being activated when an Interest Group is happy and negative ones when they are… not so happy. If an Interest Group is Powerful, the effects of any traits they have active (good or bad) are stronger, while an Interest Group that is Marginalized cannot activate traits at all, as they are too weak to exert an effect on the whole country.

Traits are, of course, not the only way that Interest Groups can affect a country, and it’s even possible for one (or several!) angry Interest Groups to start a civil war, potentially bringing in foreign countries to support them.

Keep the aristocracy happy, and they’ll be more willing to reinvest their ‘hard-earned’ money into the country
dd6_4.png

Now, something that’s been a hotly debated topic in the community in regards to Interest Groups is Political Parties and whether they will be a part of Victoria 3 so I want to briefly touch on this. What I can tell you for now is that we are currently looking into a solution where parties can form in certain countries as constellations of Interest Groups holding a shared political platform. This is something that’s by no means fully nailed down at this point though, so don’t take this as a 100% firm commitment to how they would function. What I can tell you for sure is that we will come back to this particular topic later!

That’s all for today, though we’ll certainly be coming back to the subject of Interest Groups and looking at the different types you will encounter in later dev diaries. With July and summer vacations coming up, we’re going to take a short break from Development Diaries, but we’ll be back on July 22nd as Mikael returns to continue talking about politics in Victoria 3, on the subject of Laws.
 
  • 342Like
  • 122Love
  • 21
  • 8
  • 6
Reactions:
Now, something that’s been a hotly debated topic in the community in regards to Interest Groups is Political Parties and whether they will be a part of Victoria 3 so I want to briefly touch on this. What I can tell you for now is that we are currently looking into a solution where parties can form in certain countries as constellations of Interest Groups holding a shared political platform. This is something that’s by no means fully nailed down at this point though, so don’t take this as a 100% firm commitment to how they would function. What I can tell you for sure is that we will come back to this particular topic later!

Thats fair. I’ll note that some have less than a 100% firm commitment to buying w/o parties.
 
I hope late game revolutionary communist parties are their own Revolutionary Interest Group and not only a radical Trade Union IG. That would better reflect the divisions inside the left in the beginning of 20th century
 
  • 2Like
Reactions:
Or the implication that education is anti-culture, anti-values, anti-community, anti-religion etc.
Where are you getting that impression from? I think the implication here is that the clergy wants to be in control of education, which is a pretty historical demand. It was a major element of the Kulturkampf in the German Empire.

Though based on your other posts, perhaps you consider Otto von Bismarck a commie.
 
  • 13
Reactions:
Aristocrats have wifes as well though, so womans sufferage should really not change the influence of the common folk or what am i missing?
The political influence and clout of aristocratic women frequently already existed even before they were granted the right to vote. The influence of commoner and poorer women did not. So poorer women are gaining per capita much more political influence and clout than aristocratic women are.
 
  • 5
Reactions:
This game is starting to look like a sociology/political science major's wet dream. Paradox should team up with people and universities working on simulated social sciences to work on research.
 
  • 5Like
Reactions:
So in the case of cultural nationalists / secessionists
How is culture going to be represented if there are no culture groups?

For example, will there be a British, Spanish, French, German, etc culture? Or will cultures be represented in a more local level like English and Scottish, Castilian and Catalan, Francien and Occitan, Saxon and Bavarian, etc?

What about things like Swiss or Belgian cultures? Will they have their own cultures or will they have French, German and Dutch cultures in their regions?
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Aristocrats have wifes as well though, so womans sufferage should really not change the influence of the common folk or what am i missing?
Aristocrats 100 Clout (90 from wealth, 10 from votes) -> Aristocrats 110 Clout (90 from wealth, 20 from votes)
Farmers 100 Clout (10 from wealth, 90 from votes) -> Farmers 190 Clout (10 from wealth, 180 from votes)
 
  • 6
  • 4
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Where are you getting that impression from? I think the implication here is that the clergy wants to be in control of education, which is a pretty historical demand. It was a major element of the Kulturkampf in the German Empire.

Though based on your other posts, perhaps you consider Otto von Bismarck a commie.
I have no idea what you are refering to regarding my comment on another post.

Even less so "the other something posts", read every last single one? Somehow i doubt it as it would take you more than a few hours.
 
  • 7
  • 1
Reactions:
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"
Yes exactly. The Soviet Union was known for poor education, and it was said at school to hate everyone. Maybe you should watch less Rambo and Red Dawn. :)
 
  • 14
  • 4Haha
  • 1
Reactions:
Aristocrats have wifes as well though, so womans sufferage should really not change the influence of the common folk or what am i missing?
Even under democratic systems Aristocrats gain most of their political strength from Wealth. So while women Aristocrats will gain as many votes as the same number of women Laborers (under universal suffrage at least) proportionally the resulting Clout of the Interest Groups they support will be quite different.
 
  • 37Like
  • 15
  • 2Love
  • 1
Reactions:
I have no idea what you are refering to regarding my comment on another post.

Even less so "the other something posts", read every last single one? Somehow i doubt it as it would take you more than a few hours.
I am referring to my general impression of your politics and view of history. I have not read every single one of your posts, no.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Outside of major events, yes. Leaders are randomly generated but this is strongly influenced by the Interest Group in question and the state of your country. You might end up with an Abolitionist as the country's religious leader, and this might be much more likely depending on what your state religion is, while you're not going to get an Anarchist Leader of the Armed Forces.
Welp, here's my worry that Victoria 3 is getting too 'Great Man'-ey again.
 
  • 11
  • 2
Reactions:
Yes exactly. The Soviet Union was known for poor education, and it was said at school to hate everyone. Maybe you should watch less Rambo and Red Dawn. :)
??
Rambo: a guy who got tired of bossy authority figures telling him he wasnt wanted as a veteran, and he ran into the forest to live there off the land. Authorities decided to hunt him down as .. gee.. he wasnt kneeling enough to authority figures?? That was a anarchist movie. So i kinda dont quite see what you are referring to.

The other, Red dawn, i have no idea what it is. Not the lithuanian soviet submarine pilot looking to flee to sweden with a submarine, but was bombed. The movie of that told some kind of fairytale like moves generally do. Watch less television, i turned off that some 25 years ago. Tv and movies contains nothing but inappropriate methaphors and false cultural models.
 
  • 3
Reactions:
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.
I’m not too worried about this. They were able to give unique names to Vic 2 nations. This wouldn’t be much diff. They could also give the player the ability to just rename the parties themselves.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
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).
At this point you are simplifying it to a matter of semantics. As if there are no mechanics that parties could add to the game like modeling legislative control, having bonuses and/maluses given by parties that are different than those given by IGs, ending up having things be parts of political platforms that are different than just IG ideologies, etc.

I would also like to point out that Wiz has stated adding parties would not replace the IG system. He said in the dev diary that they are thinking of adding parties as “constellations of Interest Groups holding a shared political platform.” It would work on top of rather than replace Interest Groups and it would only apply to certain countries where it makes sense to have them.

As to the naming part, yes that is a tricky thing to handle. Obviously all countries at the start with political parties would have these historical parties. After that point it’s not clear how to handle those that emerge in countries that started the game off without them. One could imagine them using historical names for those countries that ended up having parties emerge over the game’s time period, although that would make them deterministic in a way I know many people would rather they not be. They could try to randomize it a bit and add in historical names for certain kinds of parties in nations that ended up having them along with more generic names. They could have country specific generic names to give flavor to the parties. But acting like that’s all folks who want parties want to see is wrong.
 
  • 2Like
  • 2
Reactions:
Very nice DD. Very much confirmed my expectations.
As always - questions and more questions ;)
1. As I understand there will be a "Trade Unionists" influence groups - i.e. people who believe that chief political concern is the right of labour to organize.
But will there be trade-specific Trade Unions / Guilds separate from Influence Groups and Political Parties? They can be very interesting actors in domestic politics - especially if Player is able to influence them and their creation - such as Court Councillor Zubatov who tried to create loyal trade unions to steer proletariat away from political demands towards purely labour-relations demands (i.e. make them ask for higher wages / safer workplaces instead of asking for voting rights). Even if Trade Unions are not in release they will IMO make a great DLC part.

2. Are all Influence Groups present or pre-set at game start or in design? Can there be mutations and/or unifications / splits during the game? For example - if there is a Bourgeoisie Interest Group in USA at the beginning of game - can they split into 2 groups - International Traders who will support low import/export tariffs and Factory Owners who will support protection of domestic manufacturers? Or if you are playing one of Italian state - can a group that advocates Italian unification split into Monarchist Unification Group and Republican Unification Group (or maybe even a group supporting unification of Italy under the Holy See?). Or maybe some religious folks will merge with some militarists to create a new crusade movement?

3. If a country is a Monarchy will there be Imperial/Royal Family and Court Apparatus as separate Influence Groups?
 
  • 2Like
Reactions:
I’m not too worried about this. They were able to give unique names to Vic 2 nations. This wouldn’t be much diff. They could also give the player the ability to just rename the parties themselves.
Parties having not really fitting names, kinda non-descriptive sounds pretty realistic to me, anyways.
Even under democratic systems Aristocrats gain most of their political strength from Wealth. So while women Aristocrats will gain as many votes as the same number of women Laborers (under universal suffrage at least) proportionally the resulting Clout of the Interest Groups they support will be quite different.
Is this Wealth to Clout modifierable? That is, is there (or can modders add) laws to represent campaign finance laws that decrease Wealth's effect on Clout?
 
  • 2Like
Reactions: