• 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 #114 - The Great Game

16_9.png

Hello. This is Victoria, and today I will be covering much of the Great Game-themed narrative content which is coming in Sphere of Influence. This will be the first dev diary covering narrative content, with the second covering minor nations in the Great Game and other related content.

The Great Game

Throughout the nineteenth century, Russia and Britain competed with one another for influence in Asia. This period of rivalry was known colloquially as the Great Game, beginning in the Caucasus and Central Asia, and expanding over time to include struggles for influence in areas as far away as Korea and China.

The new Great Game objective diverges from the more sandbox-oriented objectives by serving as a guided tour of this period in history. Whilst much of the content involved in the Great Game is available to owners of Sphere of Influence during every playthrough, the Great Game objective contains objective subgoals designed to guide the player through this content and represent the progress of the Great Game as a whole.

To ensure the best experience, the Great Game objective is only available for the six historical participants specified below—Russia, Britain, Persia, Kabul, Herat, and Kandahar.

DD114_01.png

Upon launching the Great Game, the first thing one will see is a list of objective subgoals, along with the subgoal which represents the core of the Great Game. The Great Game objective mixes country-specific and generic objectives—whilst both Britain and Russia have the objective of securing influence over Persia or creating an Afghan protectorate, they also have country-specific objectives which will be covered later in the diary.

DD114_02.png

The Great Game core subgoal is where the progress of each nation in the Great Game is tracked. Completing each subgoal will benefit the nation that completes it, pushing the bar to the right or the left. The bar will also drift in one direction or another each year, according to differences in national prestige and market GDP.

As can be seen here, there are three currently unopened questions in the Great Game—the fate of the Caucasian states, and the struggle for influence over Afghanistan and Persia. These are victories to be had. Both Britain and Russia have made advances before the game’s start, with Britain benefiting from their successful expedition through the Hindu Kush and into Bukhara in 1831, and Russia benefiting from enforcing the Treaty of Turkmenchay in 1828. In the Great Game, Victories represent conflicts within which both powers vie against one another, and advances represent more technical, military, or diplomatic achievements.

DD114_03.png

When the journal entry concludes, the position of the bar will determine whether the Great Game has a victor, or whether neither power was able to gain supremacy. The power that wins the Great Game will receive a prestige and Power Bloc cohesion bonus, and the nation which is defeated will be humiliated in the eyes of the world.


DD114_04.png

DD114_05.png

Of course, the Great Game does not always have a winner. Contrary to the views of the imperial administrators vying over the territories of Central Asia, the people which reside there have agendas of their own. If, whilst playing as a Central Asian or Persian power, one pushes both Britain and Russia out of the region, the Great Game will be forced to a close with both Great Powers being humbled.

Generic Content


Whilst both Britain and Russia have their unique national priorities, the core of the Great Game lies in the battle for leverage over Central Asia. Both Great Powers have generic subgoals for acquiring influence in this region.

Afghanistan

In Afghanistan, for example, one may establish a protectorate over all the nations in the region—but the process does not stop there. The power which successfully establishes a protectorate over Afghanistan must keep it for ten years, without any Afghan states slipping out of their grasp.

DD114_06.png

At the game’s start, Afghanistan’s borders are quite different from what they were at the end of the period. This is owed to the Anglo-Russian Agreement of 1895, in which Russia and Britain jointly decided upon the borders of the Afghan state. Once Afghanistan unifies, a journal entry modelling this will appear for both Britain and Russia, along with an objective subgoal for those playing the Great Game.

DD114_07.png

The Pamir Delimitation journal entry represents the negotiations between Britain and Russia to determine the borders of Afghanistan. Depending on the borders of Afghanistan at the beginning of the process, the journal entry will present a variety of different proposals, permitting the Great Powers to grant or claim a varying amount of land.

Pictured: Britain has decided that Afghanistan’s southeastern border should be drawn along the Indus River, whilst Russia has decided upon giving it some territory in the North.
DD114_08.png

Once both Great Powers have agreed to a treaty, it is presented to Afghanistan, which has the option to accept or refuse. If Afghanistan refuses, the Great Powers will need to do another round of negotiation, this time with additional coercive measures available to them.


DD114_09.png

DD114_10.png

DD114_11.png

If Afghanistan continues to refuse or the Great Powers fail to come to a deal, negotiations will break down, and overlapping claims will almost guarantee future wars in the region.

Pictured: Some of the shapes that a post-Pamir Delimitation Afghanistan may take. Some of these may prove more viable than others.
DD114_12.png


Persia

The requirements for successfully completing the subgoal to secure influence over Persia is similar to Afghanistan, with the caveat that the territorial integrity of Persia must be maintained, at least to some extent. The fluid borders and expansionist ambitions of Persia, which will be shown in more detail next week, mean that Persia may take many shapes over the course of a game.

DD114_13.png

Himalayan Exploration

Throughout the late nineteenth centuries, European explorers constantly attempted to penetrate through the Himalayan Mountains, to chart the Tibetan Plateau and determine the best routes for a military expedition into the interior of China. Sphere of Influence adds a new expedition into the Himalayas, with ramifications for the Great Game if successfully completed.

DD114_14.png

Whilst your explorers survey the roof of the world, they may come across many things, from mountains higher than any seen before, or fascinating wildlife.

DD114_15.png

In addition to the risk of losing life or limb to both frostbite and the wildlife’s claws, any European expeditions trespassing into this region will run the risk of causing diplomatic incidents with China. It is best to tread cautiously, lest the expedition be sent back humiliated—or not come back at all.

DD114_16.png

Country-Specific Content

In the Great Game objective, the majority of objectives are country-specific. In many cases, these objectives are linked to journal entries that are available for a country in any playthrough, with the objectives serving as a way to point out specific journal entries and grant the player points in the Great Game for completing them.

The Caucasian War

For example, in Russia, the “Secure the Persian Border” objective is tied to a new journal entry that is available for Russia at the game’s start.

DD114_17.png

The Caucasian War is a conflict that has been raging for some time at the beginning of the game, beginning with the Russian attempt to annex Circassia in the mid-eighteenth century. In 1836, the Caucasian Imamate and Circassia continue to resist Russian domination of the region, making much of the region effectively ungovernable. Russian control of the South Caucasus is exerted primarily through the Georgian Military Highway—a route constantly threatened by the unrest in the North Caucasus. If Russia loses control of the North Caucasus, it is certain to lead to the loss of the South as well.

DD114_18.png

Whilst the Caucasian War journal entry is active, events will intermittently fire, covering various situations related to the war. The options in these events often increase devastation in the region, which will make things more difficult for the Imamate and Circassia, at the cost of spilling out into Russian-controlled regions as well.

DD114_19.png

DD114_20.png

DD114_21.png


Once Russia has either successfully researched certain technologies or reached the end of its starting truce, the war may be escalated into a full-scale conflict, which permits the use of ordinary diplomatic plays against these nations.

DD114_22.png

Upon escalating the war, the Russian armed forces in the Caucasus will present the historical Milyutin memorandum to the government. Accepting this memorandum will please the command of the armed forces, but lead to the historical outcome of the Caucasian War—the devastation of the region, depopulation, and the forceful expulsion of much of the Circassian population to the Ottoman Empire.

DD114_23.png

Circassia and the Caucasian Imamate also have content related to the conflict, which will be shown off in the next dev diary.

The rest of the Caucasian War requires the Sphere of Influence DLC, but the content pertaining to the Milyutin memorandum and brutal depopulation of the Caucasus does not. Whilst this is a gruesome event in history, it is also not something which can in good conscience be overlooked.

Kazakhstan

As of 1836, the Kazakh steppes have been under the Russian Empire for several decades. The power of the Khan has recently been abolished, and the Kazakh zhuzes placed under the command of various Russian-appointed agha-sultans. However, this system of administration is beginning to fray. Early in the game, Russia will receive an event notifying them of the rise of Kenesary Kasymuli, a Kazakh aristocrat who has come to spearhead Kazakh resistance against Russian rule.

DD114_24.png

When this event occurs, a new unresolved victory appears in the Great Game central subgoal, and a new subgoal, along with its corresponding Journal Entry, appears.

DD114_25.png

DD114_26.png

The Pacification of the Steppes journal entry is completed by slowly and peacefully annexing the Kazakh protectorates, and fails if the Kazakh protectorates’ liberty desire rises too high, or if ten years pass without successfully achieving this goal.

DD114_27.png

Whilst the journal entry is active, events pertaining to Kenesary’s rebels will fire, possibly interfering with the liberty desire of Russia’s Kazakh subjects.

DD114_28.png

In addition to firing events for Russia, Kenesary will also fire events for the Kazakh zhuzes and the Central Asian khanates, giving them a chance to side with Kenesary when he eventually launches his final play for control of Kazakhstan.

DD114_29.png

If Russian rule is sufficiently disrupted, and Liberty Desire reaches too high a value, Kenesary will seize control of the Uly Zhuz and launch his independence war against Russia, along with the allies that he’s collected along the way.

DD114_30.png

DD114_31.png

If Russia can successfully crush the revolt, they will gain progress in the Great Game—but it has far more to lose than to gain. Whilst Britain is not necessarily aiding Kenesary, his victory will represent a coup for Britain, as Russia now has much more work to do to reach Afghanistan.

DD114_32.png

If Russia succeeds, it will have an opportunity to menace the other Central Asian Khanates, and, upon researching Civilising Mission, unlock a new journal entry—the Conquest of Turkestan.

DD114_33.png

DD114_34.png


Other Russian Subgoals

Throughout the course of a game, Russia will periodically unlock additional subgoals which will advance its position in the Great Game. These subgoals represent various historical aims of Russia, and are exclusive to the Great Game objective.

The Codify the Chinese Border subgoal represents the Russian Empire’s desire for the various territorial concessions in Central Asia and Outer Manchuria signed away by the Qing Empire in the mid-nineteenth century. The acquisition of Outer Manchuria was instrumental to the ability for the Russian Empire to project power into the Pacific Ocean, a situation which eventually led to British concerns over the integrity of their Pacific colonies and their later alliance with Japan.

To complete this subgoal, Russia must both acquire these territories from China, and force China to abandon claims on the territory. If a non-player China has been weakened by the Opium Wars and other calamities, the options to sign the Treaty of Aigun, Beijing Treaty, and Chuguchak Protocol provided by the Ruler of the East Journal Entry are a perfect way to see this goal through whilst minimising both the risk of war and the negative implications of a revanchist China on the border.

DD114_35.png

The Acquire Manchurian Concessions subgoal also relates to the relations between China and Russia, and is triggered by the Russian acquisition and incorporation of a state in Outer Manchuria. This subgoal encourages Russia to acquire a treaty port in Manchuria, and construct the historical Chinese Eastern Railway, which served as the furthest Eastern branch of the trans-Siberian railway until the opening of the Amur River Line in 1916.

DD114_36.png

With the Russian acquisition of Outer Manchuria also comes ambitions to secure a protectorate over Korea. Korea was considered to present a risk in the hands of a foreign power as a staging point for the decapitation of Russia’s Far Eastern naval assets. Historically, the Russian Empire contended diplomatically with Japan for influence in Korea following the first Sino-Japanese war, a period which would meet its climax with a Japanese-sponsored coup killing the Queen of Korea and forcing the King to flee to the Russian embassy.

This period of heightened tensions between the modernising Empire of Japan and Russia would cool for a brief period with the establishment of several agreements that would establish a balance of power in Korea. These agreements would come to an end following the end of the Russo-Japanese war, and the later Japanese conquest of Korea. The Secure a Korean Protectorate subgoal represents an alternate route—the ambition of both Nicholas II and factions within his government to establish full Russian control of Korea.

DD114_37.png

British Subgoals

In the 1830s, British citizens and ships played a role in assisting Circassia against Russia. Whilst Britain was historically unwilling to escalate its involvement in Circassia beyond occasional shipments of weapons or volunteers dispatched by private citizens, it considered exerting influence into the Black Sea to be in its national interest.

The Disrupt the Russian Caucasus subgoal represents the various initiatives amongst British civil and political society to assist Circassia, and react to what they saw as the threat of Russia taking control of the Ottoman Empire if it could consolidate its territories in the Caucasus.

DD114_38.png

The Expand British India subgoal represents the desire to expand the territories controlled by the East India Company into Burma and modern-day Pakistan. A strong East India Company, or British Raj, may serve as a valuable counterweight to Russian influence in the region, and a centre from which Britain may project power into the remainder of Asia.

DD114_39.png

The Contest the Russian Pamirs subgoal represents an abortive attempt in 1902 by Britain to seize control of the Pamir Mountains and establish an independent buffer state through a deeply unsubtle method—a direct military incursion with cooperation from Afghanistan.

Whilst this proposition was historically rejected by the British government before materialising, the acquisition of Tajikistan by Russia will present Britain the opportunity to launch the proposed invasion. If Britain can manage to seize Tajikistan or establish a new Tajik state in its power bloc, it will gain a decisive advantage in the Great Game.

DD114_40.png

The final unique subgoal for Britain is to counter Russian Pacific Influence. This represents the historical Anglo-Japanese Alliance of 1902, which was formed in reaction to the strengthening of the Russian presence in its Far Eastern territories. This subgoal is triggered by Russia developing naval bases in Outer Manchuria, heralding an incoming threat to the British fleet in the Pacific.

DD114_41.png

Next week, I will cover the content for minor nations involved with the Great Game, as well as how sandbox mode works with the new content. And that is all. Thank you for reading.
 
  • 123Like
  • 59Love
  • 25
  • 17
  • 6
Reactions:
On my part, extremely worrying the amount of railroading this has.

Instead of improving the game mechanics to allow for these situations to happen naturally, we just had a completely railroaded eventchain/ JE chain, thats not even available on sandbox/MP.

The Great Game, at the end of the day, is a conflict of interests between two GP's over a region where its more important to get protectorates/vassals than direct control. The only special about it its the name.

There is perfect plausability that there could have been a Great Game between USA and UK over south america, UK and France over indonesia, France and Spain over the berber coast...

Sadly, the game does not represent this.

Instead, it forces the player into actions that by how the game is made, the player would not be taking usually.

There exists no limited warfare/supply chains/guerrilla warfare, so the player is forcefully limited on the caucasus only.

There exists no advantage to having protectorates over direct control , so the player instead is forced to protectorate persia.

There exists no mechanics for negotiating with other GP's so the player instead gets some scripted buttons for it.

There exists no mechanics for conflict of interests, so the game instead has the countries railroaded, without posibility of adapting to the actual game, a rising ottomans will not interfere in the great game, a isolationist Russia or UK will still be interested on it.
 
  • 12Like
  • 9
  • 5
  • 1Love
Reactions:
By the way you write, either you work with coding or at least you mod. Great, but that's precisely why I said that this system only appeals to a certian segment of the players, who find fine and efficient this way of presenting info. But my point is not about efficiency, especially if you leave behind people confused (I've had plenty of discussions with people showing off their arrogance when it comes to talking about logical language being superior, so I'm well covered here).

I used to mod Imperator and thank to the gods we had something called custom_tooltip where we could "narrate" the requirements as opposed to give a barrage of checkboxes like here. Either this does not exist in V3 or devs are extremely lazy.
PDX games themselves rely much on logical language, expecially when players want to figure out how decisions/events/localisations work within some complicated trigger.

It makes me kinda mad: when I edit wiki, I spend a lot of time to translate logical language to human language; when I edit localisation, those countless custom_tooltip (countless because they just keep calling other strings, which also call some other strings else). It usually leads to a lot of bugs, especially on non-english localisations.

I'm wondering if it's possible to make some tooltip for custom_tooltip, showing the logical language behind it, so that I do not need to open Visual Studio to check out what those triggers naturally are while enjoying my game.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
Do I understand it correctly that stuff "exclusive to the Great Game objective" will NEVER happen unless the player plays as one of the nations with the Great Game objective? This does not sound nice as it includes a lot of stuff related to nations outside of the Great Game. Eg. if I play as Japan (thus no Great Game objective) then Russia will NEVER ever interact with China?
 
  • 3Like
  • 2
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
This sounds interesting, but it is really undermined by the fact that the big reward for "winning" the great game is some prestige and power bloc cohesion.

It makes sense, but it is underwhelming considering how useless prestige is, especially when you are already a great power. There is little benefit to outranking other great powers nor is there any difference to by how much your prestige exceeds theirs. This is, to say the least, the exact opposite of how great power prestige and competition played out in reality. Prestige should matter more the more powerful you are, but in the game it matters less and less.

I had hoped that SoI would begin to address this by making prestige both the primary currency and asset at stake in international relations and the push and pull of great powers competing over influence in lesser powers. Instead the power bloc system, while having some neat features, is once again another tacked on additional mechanic that only partly integrates with existing mechanics and makes them feel purposeless. That feels disappointing.
 
  • 4
  • 3
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Love the idea but does this stop us (as either Russia/GB or anybody else) from just puppeting Persia day 1 without interference? Right now that is a viable strategy as no else usually gets involved.

Quick edit for clarification: I would love it if it was not that simple.
While i agree with that, not being able to just puppet Persia form day one may be a good thing, but it doesn't stop Russia, or anyone, from getting Borneo, California, Bolivia or any other good piece of land from day one.

I have been playing Paradox games for 14 years now. Many, many players have made the same propositions over the years, and still, these "mechanics to represent complex patterns" are yet to appear in any paradox games...
Those "bandaids" are the bread and butter for historical immersion in paradox games and I largely prefer that over a bland sandbox game because players foresee mechanics we have never seen in a game before... But maybe I simply lost my youthful naivity & hope ;)
You know, you're basically saying "PDX made no progression in 14 years"? But i see this kind of things on this forum. Like saying "maybe PDX should start making game mechanics and emulations with their engine limitation in mind so the game don't lag by just normal playthrough" or "maybe PDX should make game mechanics in a way so AI can use them without crutches" is met with "you don't know anything, this is impossible".
 
  • 2Like
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
Journal entries are simply not very intuitive, even unnoticeable and therefore illegible. Mechanics such as the Mission Tree (EU4) and National Focus (HoI4) are presented in a clear way, which allows us to see what the next stages may be after completing the current one. In addition, they are simply more interesting and increase immersion by allowing for the creation of both historical and alternative branches.
Yes! This is my main problem with the JEs. They are hard to read/care.
 
  • 3Like
  • 3
  • 1Love
  • 1
Reactions:
Do I understand it correctly that stuff "exclusive to the Great Game objective" will NEVER happen unless the player plays as one of the nations with the Great Game objective? This does not sound nice as it includes a lot of stuff related to nations outside of the Great Game. Eg. if I play as Japan (thus no Great Game objective) then Russia will NEVER ever interact with China?
1714120380810.png
 
  • 14
  • 3Like
Reactions:
Im not a fan of such journal entries. I would would rather have universal mechanics which would allow such things to happen organically.

For example it could be an universal feature to be able to have a conference between great powers which have interest in the region to establish borders between them over the heads of minor nations. And whole diplomatic play should be expanded to allow for some negotiations and compromise.
Very much this.
The great game mechanic happened all the time during the victorian age.
The great powers came together and set up their spheres of influence.

See the creation of Albania or one of those multiple crisis germany had in morroco.

We do need to have some sort of mechanic where the great powers come together and draw up the borders of a certain region.
"Yes Austria you will get Mexico as part of your sphere, Germany will get Costa Rica and the US will be bribed with the ownership over Cuba"
- Lord Firmansstone during the 1884 Paris Conference over Central America -

What? The Mexicans, Cubans, Costa RIcans and Spanish haven't been consulted and object to the result of this conference?
Well tough luck, the Great Powers have agreed, better acquiese to this. Otherwise Article 15 of the Treaty kicks in, granting the Great Power the right to police the nations in their respective sphere.
 
  • 5Like
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
I'm wondering if it's possible to make some tooltip for custom_tooltip, showing the logical language behind it, so that I do not need to open Visual Studio to check out what those triggers naturally are while enjoying my game.
That would definitely be a good thing, the best of both worlds.
 
  • 3Like
Reactions:
This makes me wonder: are there any notifications for Great Game milestones, so that I am more or less up to date with Great Game developments even if I play an uninvolved (to use CK3 terminology) country? Or will I have to check the map and diplo screens regularly to see who is winning?
 
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Im not a fan of such journal entries. I would would rather have universal mechanics which would allow such things to happen organically.
In the sense of abstraction/simulation of history, both JEs and general mechanics are featured contents - they just show themselves in different ways.
 
  • 3
  • 1
Reactions:
Hello! I can answer that!

I can give you a broader overview of what is coming up, but not a direct schedule as it allows us to move around dairies if needed.

So in no particular order, we will be covering: Art (2d and 3d), Modding, Cultures, Map Changes, UX/UI changes and improvements, some changes in 1.7 (this one is a bit broad, but can include say something that doesn't fit nicely into the other diaries) and some more about power blocs.
Cheers @PDX_Pelly :) appreciate the answer and it all sounds good - looking forward to reading all of them :)
 
  • 1
  • 1Like
Reactions:
  • 1
Reactions:
I want more alt-histories pls. A more failed Qing, more land grabbing by GB and Russia, or if Japan failed to industralize a JE on influence over Japan would be nice. Also don't forget Canada! There's sort of tension between them there too, with both racing for the northwestern territory and stuff. Anyway, would love for the JE to be extended to cover more than historica outcomes, like a complete British/Russian victory, possible disslusion of EoC by Russia, popping up nationalistic states and influencing them in Sinkang, and other stuff.
AAANNNND why only Britain/Russia? If France grows powerful enough(historically they had influence in levant, not that far(?)) they should be able to challange them both(?) and turn the game a three-way game.
Just playing historically seems suspicously rail-roady, so...
Anyway, that's some kool stuff. One question: would the great game still happen if I started as someone else and tagged to GB/Russia?
 
  • 3Like
Reactions:
I want more alt-histories pls. A more failed Qing, more land grabbing by GB and Russia, or if Japan failed to industralize a JE on influence over Japan would be nice. Also don't forget Canada! There's sort of tension between them there too, with both racing for the northwestern territory and stuff. Anyway, would love for the JE to be extended to cover more than historica outcomes, like a complete British/Russian victory, possible disslusion of EoC by Russia, popping up nationalistic states and influencing them in Sinkang, and other stuff.
AAANNNND why only Britain/Russia? If France grows powerful enough(historically they had influence in levant, not that far(?)) they should be able to challange them both(?) and turn the game a three-way game.
Just playing historically seems suspicously rail-roady, so...
Anyway, that's some kool stuff. One question: would the great game still happen if I started as someone else and tagged to GB/Russia?
I feel like that as content designers you cannot program infinite journal entries so you have to focus on some (historical) cases. The rest is done with (sometimes barebones) game mechanics. France should already be able to do some things just with the power block mechanic on their own.
 
  • 3
  • 1
Reactions:
A more failed Qing, more land grabbing by GB and Russia
These could even not be alt-historical but historical, or should i say historical and historically reasonable. If Yettishar could be a part of the Great Game, we could see more details about Russian and British influence in Sinkiang.

Considering that vassals and puppets are part of this version, I’m wondering if it’s possible to treat Mongolia and Sinkiang as two colonial puppets of Qing - a civil war within Sinkiang that allows Yettishar comes into being, and Qing’s reconquest and direct control over there.

…or should we wait for a east Asian featured dlc?
 
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
For my part I'd like to say I'm glad this isn't generic content that can happen everywhere. We've seen what that looks like in these games and it generally just ends up being bland and unable to represent the actual historical conflicts that occurred. I'd much rather have neatly tailored content representing the historical great game, which has its roots in events before the game start date, than a generic "great game-esque" system that can happen everywhere and happens at weird times and feels bland.

And that's the choice that I feel like we have because we've never seen a well-executed generic version of something like this that happens at times that make sense, feels well-developed, and enhances the game experience, all while being able to adequately represent the most important instances of what it's trying to simulate. I'd rather have more of this and the Brazil journal entries than generic content that happens everywhere and gets boring. Especially if this model means Russia gets improved with this DLC, because I've avoided playing as them so far
 
  • 9
  • 4
  • 1Like
Reactions: