• 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.

unmerged(75409)

Field Marshal
Apr 30, 2007
7.727
101
The influence system is at current very abstract, it's just numbers, and it's hard to see what the rationalization behind it is. It could definitely be made more accessible - for example, if the influence process consisted of political actions that a GP performs in the influenced country, instead of just being a game of dumping numbers into a country and crossing an arbitrary thresholds before another GP does, it would be more fun and also more accessible.

Instead of having to raise influence from 0 to 50 to get to "Cordial", you would need to build f.ex. a consulate, establish a religious mission, get the government to sign a trade concession, or establish a military mission that puts officers from your army close to their generals. To go from "cordial" to "friendly", you would need to get exclusive trade deals, get extraterritorial rights for your consulates, acquire legations in their cities, or install your missionaries permanently at their court. I.e. you would need to do those things that the Great Powers really did in history, to acquire "influence" in a far away country!

To finally sphere a country would be an act that requires you to have

Instead of performing abstract missions against other GPs that just change some numbers, you would be able to order underhand or direct actions against their establishments if you want to push them out of a counrty: Slander their missionaries, incite pogroms against their traders, play intrigues to get their emissaries removed from their court, push the government to revoke their trading concessions etc. Some of these actions could have a random aspect to them, or lead to consequences such as giving the offended GP an opportunity to retaliate, enact counter-actions ("ask the government to allow us to protect our embassies"). You could have a choice between "small" actions and "big" actions, where the "big" actions would be those that risk wars or similar stuff. Inciting riots against an enemy embassy could lead to massacres of the other GP's consuls, which would give them CBs against the country. (Or even against you!!)

There could be alternative approaches to establishing a SOI over a country: You could have a choice between
  • a commercial route (trade missions -> exclusive concessions -> trade monopoly),
  • a cultural-diplomatic route (religious mission/diplomatic mission -> permanent missionaries at their court -> Turning your mission into the official state church),
  • a military-diplomatic route (military mission -> officer exchange program -> Training their entire general staff)
or other routes. Each route would have different level1, level2 and level3 "establishments". Sphering a country could require you to reach the max level in any one category, or get a combination of level3 in one and level2 in another category.

Playing as Russia, wanting to expand your influence to Japan, you would f.ex. check the screen for Japan, and see that the USA already has a trade mission there. You deduct that they are focusing on the "commerce route", i.e. build and expand commerce establishments and eventually SOI Japan by monopolizing their trade.

Now you could either follow the same strategy. But the USA, being a liberal democracy, would have very good modifiers for anything related to commerce, and you're Russia which sucks at everything related to commerce. So you would go, hey, my commerce and industry suck, but I have the world's biggest military and I can get their general staff in my pocket faster than the Americans can monopolize their trade. And if they try to get their lvl2 establishment in the religious route, I will play my "Orthodox Far East Missionaries Card" and slander the US missionaries at reduced influence point cost. :)

Of course you would need some way to automate these actions, i.e. choose a general approach and then let an AI function handle the placement of those establishments. You would still need a red-to-green progress bar to quickly see which nation has the most influence in your target nation. You could set your AI agent to notify you when another GP reaches 90% on that progress bar, or when they perform hostile actions against you.

The fun thing in this idea is that the different GPs could be good at different approaches to spherization:
  • The UK and USA would be excellent at commercial approaches.
  • France and Italy would have bonuses on cultural or religious approaches.
  • Russia and Prussia would be good at military missions.
  • Constitutional countries could have extra options, they could send constitutional lawyers who help the locals write a constitution, and gain influence in the process. (I'm thinking of you, Japan!! Your copied your constitution from Prussia!!)
  • Moralist countries could have extra bonuses on religious establishments.
  • Atheist countries could not use cultural-religious options.

What do you think? Would this make the influence game more fun?

Could it create a connection between the influence game, and the other aspects? (War, peace, economy, trade)

Could it be balanced so as not to be micro hell, but still allow the player to choose and pursue strategies, and entertain him when something happens, rather than annoy him?

Finally can this be done in a mod or would it require an expansion?
 
This sounds like a really good idea!

It gives a reason for smaller countries to actually want to join the SOI of a Great Power so you can access trade benefits, military upgrades, or cultural (prestige?) benefits.

And the bonuses to certain Great Powers for their approaches gives each country a lot more flavor, and hopefully creates more tensions over colonial territories rather than random, unexplained wars over colonial territories!
 
The influence system is at current very abstract, it's just numbers, and it's hard to see what the rationalization behind it is. It could definitely be made more accessible - for example, if the influence process consisted of political actions that a GP performs in the influenced country, instead of just being a game of dumping numbers into a country and crossing an arbitrary thresholds before another GP does, it would be more fun and also more accessible.

Instead of having to raise influence from 0 to 50 to get to "Cordial", you would need to build f.ex. a consulate, establish a religious mission, get the government to sign a trade concession, or establish a military mission that puts officers from your army close to their generals. To go from "cordial" to "friendly", you would need to get exclusive trade deals, get extraterritorial rights for your consulates, acquire legations in their cities, or install your missionaries permanently at their court. I.e. you would need to do those things that the Great Powers really did in history, to acquire "influence" in a far away country!

To finally sphere a country would be an act that requires you to have

Instead of performing abstract missions against other GPs that just change some numbers, you would be able to order underhand or direct actions against their establishments if you want to push them out of a counrty: Slander their missionaries, incite pogroms against their traders, play intrigues to get their emissaries removed from their court, push the government to revoke their trading concessions etc. Some of these actions could have a random aspect to them, or lead to consequences such as giving the offended GP an opportunity to retaliate, enact counter-actions ("ask the government to allow us to protect our embassies"). You could have a choice between "small" actions and "big" actions, where the "big" actions would be those that risk wars or similar stuff. Inciting riots against an enemy embassy could lead to massacres of the other GP's consuls, which would give them CBs against the country. (Or even against you!!)

There could be alternative approaches to establishing a SOI over a country: You could have a choice between
  • a commercial route (trade missions -> exclusive concessions -> trade monopoly),
  • a cultural-diplomatic route (religious mission/diplomatic mission -> permanent missionaries at their court -> Turning your mission into the official state church),
  • a military-diplomatic route (military mission -> officer exchange program -> Training their entire general staff)
or other routes. Each route would have different level1, level2 and level3 "establishments". Sphering a country could require you to reach the max level in any one category, or get a combination of level3 in one and level2 in another category.

Playing as Russia, wanting to expand your influence to Japan, you would f.ex. check the screen for Japan, and see that the USA already has a trade mission there. You deduct that they are focusing on the "commerce route", i.e. build and expand commerce establishments and eventually SOI Japan by monopolizing their trade.

Now you could either follow the same strategy. But the USA, being a liberal democracy, would have very good modifiers for anything related to commerce, and you're Russia which sucks at everything related to commerce. So you would go, hey, my commerce and industry suck, but I have the world's biggest military and I can get their general staff in my pocket faster than the Americans can monopolize their trade. And if they try to get their lvl2 establishment in the religious route, I will play my "Orthodox Far East Missionaries Card" and slander the US missionaries at reduced influence point cost. :)

Of course you would need some way to automate these actions, i.e. choose a general approach and then let an AI function handle the placement of those establishments. You would still need a red-to-green progress bar to quickly see which nation has the most influence in your target nation. You could set your AI agent to notify you when another GP reaches 90% on that progress bar, or when they perform hostile actions against you.

The fun thing in this idea is that the different GPs could be good at different approaches to spherization:
  • The UK and USA would be excellent at commercial approaches.
  • France and Italy would have bonuses on cultural or religious approaches.
  • Russia and Prussia would be good at military missions.
  • Constitutional countries could have extra options, they could send constitutional lawyers who help the locals write a constitution, and gain influence in the process. (I'm thinking of you, Japan!! Your copied your constitution from Prussia!!)
  • Moralist countries could have extra bonuses on religious establishments.
  • Atheist countries could not use cultural-religious options.

What do you think? Would this make the influence game more fun?

Could it create a connection between the influence game, and the other aspects? (War, peace, economy, trade)

Could it be balanced so as not to be micro hell, but still allow the player to choose and pursue strategies, and entertain him when something happens, rather than annoy him?

Finally can this be done in a mod or would it require an expansion?

In principle, I'm not opposed to creating more flavor to the SOI system, but this looks like it would be extremely complicated. Remember, to form Germany there are many countries you have to influence and get in your SOI. The way it is today is already pretty challenging just to get the the numbers all lined up right.
 
In principle, I'm not opposed to creating more flavor to the SOI system, but this looks like it would be extremely complicated. Remember, to form Germany there are many countries you have to influence and get in your SOI. The way it is today is already pretty challenging just to get the the numbers all lined up right.

For a Human player I saw no challenge in this but it is a struggle for the AI
 
I like pretty much all of this but I am not so sure about giving bonuses to certain countries. Bonuses from government types and policies would be cool, but determinism based on historical events doesn't really make sense if those historical events are changed in the game's universe.

In principle, I'm not opposed to creating more flavor to the SOI system, but this looks like it would be extremely complicated. Remember, to form Germany there are many countries you have to influence and get in your SOI. The way it is today is already pretty challenging just to get the the numbers all lined up right.

This would replace the existing complexity, not add to it. Besides which, fiddling with a database is more confusing than recreating historical events.
 
I'm all for this idea!

This would be much more immersive than the current system.
One thing that I really like with this is the possibility of a war erupting from competing with other powers and doing things that they may not like.
 
This sounds like a really good idea!

It gives a reason for smaller countries to actually want to join the SOI of a Great Power so you can access trade benefits, military upgrades, or cultural (prestige?) benefits.

And the bonuses to certain Great Powers for their approaches gives each country a lot more flavor, and hopefully creates more tensions over colonial territories rather than random, unexplained wars over colonial territories!
Exactly! By relating influence levels to actual establishments that the GP builds in the country, you can model all sorts of beneficial, unequal or harmful relationships. Right now uncivs can get military missions and such, and profit from it, but it's totally unrelated to the influence game. Which honestly really doesn't make any sense. As a small country that has free trade and wants to grow, you would WANT to be influenced and get some of those establishments for the benefits they provide. Others you would maybe not want - f.ex. foreign advisors to your court who propagandize on behalf of your unwanted opposition parties, or your Christian minorities. Linking the influence process to tangible establishments would also give you a way to let a small country have (some) way to influence the process, too. If you REALLY don't want those MIL-raising catholic missionaries in your country, or those CON-raising French schools for your aristocrats, you could incite revolts against them, knowing of course that this brings a risk of pissing off the GP.

It shouldn't be a super complex aspect of the game - just a small addition that makes this influence game (which is pretty central to Vic2) less abstract and opens the door for a little more fun gameplay. The basic idea if influencing would remain the same - a GP would still chooses a priority, build its influence in the country, do something against other GPs' influence and add it the country its SOI when the requirement is completed. On the mini-influence-screen you'd still see a couple of flags next to a list of country names, and maybe a progress bar over each flag that advances (or regresses) as that GP builds or loses influence establishments in the country.

In principle, I'm not opposed to creating more flavor to the SOI system, but this looks like it would be extremely complicated. Remember, to form Germany there are many countries you have to influence and get in your SOI. The way it is today is already pretty challenging just to get the the numbers all lined up right.

Well for one thing, some measure of automation should be possible. Next to the priority button you could have a little checkbox where you can choose between "Defend agressively, then bring into SOI" or "Bring into SOI, and only then defend" for example.

For the German nations the influence game could be limited to the military route and a diplomatic route (since all German nations already share the same culture, a cultural route makes no sense) and you could have establishments with Germany-specific names, such as "Political Police treaty" (cordial level), "Zollverein" (cordial level), "Großdeutscher Verein" (Austrian friendly level), "Kleindeutscher Verein" (non-Austrian friendly level), "Secret Defence Treaty" (SOI level) etc. The basic mechanic would be the same as before... choose influence priority, watch what the Austrians are doing, counter act when they're close to a dangerous level.

For a Human player I saw no challenge in this but it is a struggle for the AI
Good point. The influence mini game should not be too complicated. Not more complicated than a card game of UNO :)

I'm all for this idea!

This would be much more immersive than the current system.
One thing that I really like with this is the possibility of a war erupting from competing with other powers and doing things that they may not like.

Yes, it would be fun seeing the "French-Annamese Missionary War" :D
Also as a small country it would mor more fun if you actually had some tangible effects from being influenced by a foreign GP. You could even choose between speeding things up, by explicitly asking Britain or France for an action ("Plz send advisors" -> they get 30 free influence points) or slowing things down by obstructing their efforts. Or play them off by first asking Britain, and then France for an action, and then watch them fight each other to a diplomatic stalemate :D

You could through random (or historic) events also get modifiers that can help oir challenge you in the influence game, as a small country:
- "King Chulalongkorn's diplomacy": double success chance when asking GPs for stuff
- "Corruption at the court": success chance in interaction with GP halved (ouch!)
- "Skilled traders": double profit from GP's trade establishments
etc
 
Last edited:
I like pretty much all of this but I am not so sure about giving bonuses to certain countries. Bonuses from government types and policies would be cool, but determinism based on historical events doesn't really make sense if those historical events are changed in the game's universe.
[...]

This. The establishments for german unification could be specific for german nations to german nations, but if, say, england goes for a german minor, it should be the normal route.

Bonuses should be tied to things in-game, not names. Say, ´free trade´rs are good in the commercial route, not ´the US and UK´. Stable governments would help SoI-ing, actually, as you can focus on and exploit one route for a longer time. If you went to ´friendly´ on the commercial one, you kind of dont want to have anything but ´free-trade´ before you get them into your SoI.
 
I think it's a very good idea developing SoI the way you've stated here.

In fact, I think that behind the changes that HRE and Papacy has experimented in EUIII evolution Paradox could give us more on this area. And it seems we're going to see more on related systems of 'empires' or influencing systems, like it's been announced in EUIII's 'Divine Wind' about China and Japan for 'internal' affairs, but nothing avoid us to use it on a 'external' feature like the sphere of influence.

Paradox can do great things with V2... "just" bringing here some achivements they're getting in other games (EUIII in particular). Hopefully we could see them in a not too far expansion.
 
I certainly like the idea of having more flavor to the influence game. It wouldn't have to be too complicated, either. The idea for the three different routes of influence lends itself readily to having bonuses from your scores-- i.e., cultural influence gets a bonus from prestige, military from your military score, and commercial from industrial, along with other bonuses from government types and such. It could be fundamentally the same mechanic as already exists, just with more flavor text and somewhat different bonuses from each path, along, perhaps, with bonuses to the country on the receiving end of the SOI.
 
This. The establishments for german unification could be specific for german nations to german nations, but if, say, england goes for a german minor, it should be the normal route.

Bonuses should be tied to things in-game, not names. Say, ´free trade´rs are good in the commercial route, not ´the US and UK´. Stable governments would help SoI-ing, actually, as you can focus on and exploit one route for a longer time. If you went to ´friendly´ on the commercial one, you kind of dont want to have anything but ´free-trade´ before you get them into your SoI.

Details, details... :D I think the exact details of when you gain or lose a modifier are something that you'd have to look at when you actually go and code this kind of system. It shouldn't be too abrupt, it would suck losing all your modifiers the day after an unexpected election result.

I think it's a very good idea developing SoI the way you've stated here.

In fact, I think that behind the changes that HRE and Papacy has experimented in EUIII evolution Paradox could give us more on this area. And it seems we're going to see more on related systems of 'empires' or influencing systems, like it's been announced in EUIII's 'Divine Wind' about China and Japan for 'internal' affairs, but nothing avoid us to use it on a 'external' feature like the sphere of influence.

Paradox can do great things with V2... "just" bringing here some achivements they're getting in other games (EUIII in particular). Hopefully we could see them in a not too far expansion.
Very good idea, but this would require re-making whole SoI system which Paradox won't do in a patch, definately.
Well here's hoping to a Vic2 expansion right after Divine Wind!! They said they are already hiring staff for a second expansions team... so maybe they'll even start working on it before EU3:DW is finished. :)

I certainly like the idea of having more flavor to the influence game. It wouldn't have to be too complicated, either. The idea for the three different routes of influence lends itself readily to having bonuses from your scores-- i.e., cultural influence gets a bonus from prestige, military from your military score, and commercial from industrial, along with other bonuses from government types and such. It could be fundamentally the same mechanic as already exists, just with more flavor text and somewhat different bonuses from each path, along, perhaps, with bonuses to the country on the receiving end of the SOI.

Yeah the scores could definitely play a big role! Flavor and interactivity are the two main things that the Influence / SOI system is lacking right now. It's a good (abstract) model but it doesn't lend itself very easily to immersion by the historical-minded player.
 
Details, details... :D I think the exact details of when you gain or lose a modifier are something that you'd have to look at when you actually go and code this kind of system. It shouldn't be too abrupt, it would suck losing all your modifiers the day after an unexpected election result.
[...]

It wouldnt be too bad, since those are progress-modifiers. Say you got to lvl1 and halfway to lvl2 on the commercial road and now loose your free-trade bonus, because of elections. You´d have to accomplish the rest without the bonus, then - not too bad, it´s not like you loose anything you already had.

If you had the modifiers this way for example:
- +50% progress-speed for the commercial route for free-traders
- +10% progress-speed for the commercial route for each industry rank above 9 (no.1 in IND would get +80%)...
and you loose the Free-trader bonus via election from one day to the next... that´s okay, i think.
 
It wouldnt be too bad, since those are progress-modifiers. Say you got to lvl1 and halfway to lvl2 on the commercial road and now loose your free-trade bonus, because of elections. You´d have to accomplish the rest without the bonus, then - not too bad, it´s not like you loose anything you already had.

If you had the modifiers this way for example:
- +50% progress-speed for the commercial route for free-traders
- +10% progress-speed for the commercial route for each industry rank above 9 (no.1 in IND would get +80%)...
and you loose the Free-trader bonus via election from one day to the next... that´s okay, i think.

Yeah that makes sense and sounds fun. Having politics, dipomacy and economics interact like this would be a really good thing.