• 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.

Dev Diary #41 - Revolutions

16_9.jpg

A glorious Thursday to you! Today we will finally get into details of what fate befalls the state that fails to deliver what its people demand - revolution!

Revolutions in Victoria 3 can be seen as a result of failure in the game’s economic and political core loops. When this happens it means you have failed to balance the material and ideological desires of the different segments of your population, resulting in one or several groups deciding to take matters in their own hands. The result is a tremendous upheaval which could go very wrong for you - but play your cards right, and there’s a chance you might bounce back from this crisis even stronger than before.

A design goal we have kept front and center is that outright armed uprisings should be rare but still feel threatening. There is a lot of foreshadowing and opportunity to course-correct or compensate if you want to avoid a revolution. Not all movements will actually be powerful or angry enough to pose a real threat to you, and if they aren’t, they won’t drag you into a pointless war with an obvious outcome but bide their time until they become relevant.

A revolution always starts with a Political Movement demanding some kind of change to the country’s Laws. The demand might be to enact something novel (perhaps Universal Suffrage or Workplace Safety), preserve something you’re about to change (maybe the Monarchy you’ve been trying to abolish), or restore something you used to have (Free Markets? Outlawed Dissent?). Any of these could end in a violent uprising if the movement is radical enough and you fail to meet its demands.

Political Movements have two major attributes to keep an eye on: their Support and their Radicalism. A movement’s Support affects how much help they would lend to enacting their desired change if you choose to go along with them, or how much resistance they put up in case of a movement to preserve a law you’re trying to change. It also determines how powerful a revolution they can muster, should it come down to that.

Meanwhile, Radicalism measures how likely they are to revolt if they don’t get their way. A movement with strong Support and high Radicalism is of course very dangerous. A movement with strong Support but low Radicalism can be a nuisance but is relatively harmless: they’ll work within the system, maybe raise a placard or two, but won’t take up arms. Finally, a movement with low Support but high Radicalism might not stand much of a chance to overthrow the government on their own, but the instability caused by their ideological fervor could be damaging to your country in the short-term and might even create geopolitical opportunities for your neighbors.

The movement to restore the Republic is not the most powerful one, but those who do support it care a great deal - and may even be willing to lay down their lives for it. It is supported by both the Armed Forces and the Intelligentsia - not the most likely of bedfellows typically, but united in this case for this particular cause.
DD41 01.png

A movement’s Radicalism originates from two sources: the number of Radicals among the Pops that support the movement, and the Clout of supporting Interest Groups with Approval low enough to be Angry. Since an Interest Group’s Approval originates both from the Laws of your country and also how Loyal vs Radical its supporters are, Radical Pops can potentially double their impact on a movement’s Radicalism. The major difference between these two factors is that when Pops act through their Interest Groups their impact is through Clout (the national share of their Political Strength) while direct Pop support makes a difference through sheer numbers. This means populist uprisings are possible even though the affected Pops don’t have any real representation in the halls of power, assuming they’re angry enough about their living conditions.

While a movement’s demands remain unmet, any Pops that belong to them will gradually gain Radicals. Once the Radicalism of a movement has exceeded a certain threshold it will begin organizing an armed uprising. You can monitor this progression in your outliner to see both how rapidly you’re moving along the road to revolution and how far you have already gone, both determined by Radicalism.

This means you can have a direct impact on revolutionary progression. Of course you can cave to the movement’s demands, which will placate them and eventually cause them to disband. But you can also address the problem by identifying the troublemakers and deal with them directly: either deradicalize them by improving their living conditions, or suppressing their contrarian ways by other means.

The ability to deal with insurgents by issuing Decrees to suppress Radicals can be a helpful tool in more authoritarian countries with concentrated populations, or where the insurgency is very localized. This is much more difficult in case of broadly supported populist movements in a large country.
DD41 02 v2.png

If you manage to get the movement’s Radicalism under control, you can make the revolution fizzle out on its own without giving an inch.

Another way of keeping revolutions in check is by establishing a Home Affairs Institution. By sinking Bureaucracy into Home Affairs you can more easily keep your troublesome elements in check, giving you more room to maneuver politically. As usual such an Institution can take several forms depending on what Law establishes it. A National Guard can require you to take more overt, proactive steps to keep law and order, while a Secret Police is able to operate more effectively in the background.

A minimal Home Affairs Institution under the Secret Police Law.
DD41 03.png

When radical movements are met with obstacles to their revolution for a long time, there’s an increasing chance that its revolutionary fervor burns out and the movement disbands.

But let’s say you don’t manage to placate or obstruct the political movement and the revolutionary progression boils over a required threshold. In this case an armed uprising will take a number of your states, proportional to the strength of the movement and localized roughly where its supporters are, to form a new revolutionary country. This country has the same technology as you but with some differences in laws, to reflect the ideological desires of the political movement’s leadership. Furthermore, the Interest Groups in this new country will become marginalized if they do not support the revolution, while the opposite is true in the loyalist part of the country.

Obviously, characters supporting revolutionary Interest Groups will join the revolution. This includes not only Interest Group leaders, but also those Generals and Admirals you may have carefully nurtured over many military campaigns and who may by now be in charge of most of your forces. Even if you win against them, they won’t be making it back to your country - alive, at least.

All other properties of this new country are dependent on the states they won over. If the revolution takes all your Barracks and Arms Industries, you might be in big trouble; if the revolutionary states consist mostly of Paper Mills and Art Academies, maybe you’re not so worried (until your Government Administrations start grinding to a halt and your aristocracy get mad about the lack of culture workers to patronize, that is). And of course, the loyalist part of the country retains all their hard-won diplomatic pacts and treaties, while the pretender has to start from scratch.

What follows is a Revolutionary [Diplomatic] Play where the stakes are very simple: the loyalist part of the country tries to crush the rebellion, while the revolutionary country tries to swarm the loyalists. Other countries with an Interest in the region can participate in this Play as usual. It is not uncommon for countries with good relations to the country before the revolution to support the loyalists in restoring order. It is also possible for a country whose government supports the ideals of the revolutionaries to back their side. As such, a revolution might not only result in you having to fight and kill your own people, but your nation might even become the ideological battleground of Great Powers.

A revolution in South Germany might prove a perfect opportunity for some old rivals to weaken each other and perhaps woo a potential Subject nation without having to take on any Infamy of their own.
DD41 04.png

If the prospect of winning against the revolutionaries doesn’t look good, like in all Diplomatic Plays you have the option of giving up. But rather than simply backing down and letting the revolutionaries have their way (which, to be frank, you could and should have done a long time ago if that was your intention), in Revolutionary Plays you only have an option to switch sides and take over the revolutionary part of the country in its fight against the loyalists. A daring player might decide to manufacture a powerful revolution on purpose in order to push some highly contentious laws through, though this strategy definitely straddles the line between brilliance and madness.

It’s important to note that there is no potential for a “white peace” in a revolution. Either side can capitulate, of course, but a peace cannot be signed without one party pressing their war goal and annexing the other side. By the end of the revolution, only one country will be left standing.

Needless to say, while all wars are expensive, civil wars are doubly so. A quick and decisive victory with minimal casualties is the best you can hope for - a long, drawn-out war amassing casualties and devastation on both sides might result in a country so broken it will take decades to rebuild. But once the war is over, the Interest Groups that lost the power struggle are defeated, for a time. Perhaps during this “golden age” you will have the opportunity to effect some much-needed political change and rise from the ashes?

Losing a revolutionary war means your country loses all its territory and Pops, in other words Game Over. This is something we’ve gone back and forth on during development, because while we do want you to be able to drastically transform your country through revolution, we don’t want to encourage you to just give up if things are looking bleak because resisting means a prolonged conflict leading to a more war-torn country in the end. So pick your side, but do it carefully! Should you end up losing after all, just like in any Game Over situation you can choose to continue playing as a different country, including the political faction that just took over yours. But to be clear, we still haven’t fully made our mind up on this and might well change our mind again! What do you think? Feel free to let us know in the comments!

Next week I’ll return with part two of civil wars: cultural secessions. Until then!
 
  • 217Like
  • 88Love
  • 16
  • 14
  • 5
Reactions:
Shouldn't there be an option for a revolution to also result in independence? There are many examples throughout history of the line being blurred where a nationalist or separatist movement also defined itself as revolutionary.
 
  • 3
Reactions:
Looks very good.
This sounds as if the American Civil War could be a revolution, unless it will be treated like an independence war
The American Civil War will probably use the generic mechanics but also have customized Journal entries to affect how the revolution turns out.

Edit: I suppose part 2 of civil wars next week could also have mechanics for the ACW.
 
Last edited:
  • 2
Reactions:
In the least not all revolutions will result in a bloody civil war - or any fighting for that matter thanks to the ability to simply give up before the actual 'war' in 'civil war' begins. Now this might just be my reading comprehension, but it seems like giving up at the diplomatic stage does not result in a game over. Either way at least the AI will probably just throw in the towel without fighting should the revolution be far too strong.
"But rather than simply backing down and letting the revolutionaries have their way (which, to be frank, you could and should have done a long time ago if that was your intention), in Revolutionary Plays you only have an option to switch sides and take over the revolutionary part of the country in its fight against the loyalists."

From this it seems pretty clear that giving up during the diplomatic stage means you'll switch tags and fight as the loyalists, but it'll still result in a war. Only way to avoid war is to give in before the diplo play breaks out by enacting or preventing it from breaking out in the first place.
 
Outside of Ironman there is zero point to giving a game over after losing a revolution. All you're doing is forcing me to reload a previous save and try again or pick the other side or another country.

In Ironman, do whatever because I don't play it.
 
  • 5
  • 1Like
  • 1Haha
  • 1
Reactions:
Now its: Lose -> click play another country -> click revolutionary gov -> click play

It used to be: Lose ->Play as revolutionary country.

It's the same thing but with unneeded extra steps.
 
  • 5
  • 4
  • 1Haha
Reactions:
Will the german revolution of 1848 have its own system, since in that special case the main goal was the establishment of a unified german state and it consisted of multiple smaller revolutions in different nations or will it be included in this system?
This would be the case of Italian revolutions of 1848, too...
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Now its: Lose -> click play another country -> click revolutionary gov -> click play

It used to be: Lose ->Play as revolutionary country.

It's the same thing but with unneeded extra steps.
Good! Give us the choice of which country to play in. What if I hate the revolution's guts and don't want to play them? More choices is good, right?

And you are complaining about a single mouse click.......:rolleyes:
 
  • 7
  • 2
Reactions:
This is incredible, one question though. Say I am playing as a subject kingdom in India and the sepoy rebellion happens in the East India Company, would I be able to join the rebellion? Or would I have to declare independence to do so? And if I do join said rebellion would our tags merge or stay separate? This is totally a unique scenario but I just kinda want to know.
 
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
Will there be things an unhappy movement can do when they lack power for a complete revolution? I mean like strikes, terror, sabotage, or assassinations.
Seconding this. Off the top of my head, three of the major powers in-game had hugely influential examples of such movements: the Fenians, the Narodniks and the pre-confederate bushwackers in Missouri and Kansas. I'm sure there were countless examples all over the map, and without some deeper representation of the slow-burn conflicts in the lead up to revolution, I can imagine it feeling like a too abrupt shift to conventional warfare, which is usually the final stage of a revolution.

The dev diary is good and clarifies some basic questions. But considering how much the game hinges on the depth of internal management and simulation, and how the devs have repeatedly said that warfare is being streamlined and simplified to allow for that more complex political and management gameplay, it's somewhat concerning to see revolutiom, maybe the best example of exciting high-stakes internal political and economic situations, lead directly to conventional warfare, the aspect of gameplay that we know is de-emphasized.

Reserving my judgement however because for all I know it works perfectly well and is fun.
 
  • 3Like
  • 1
Reactions:
"But rather than simply backing down and letting the revolutionaries have their way (which, to be frank, you could and should have done a long time ago if that was your intention), in Revolutionary Plays you only have an option to switch sides and take over the revolutionary part of the country in its fight against the loyalists."

From this it seems pretty clear that giving up during the diplomatic stage means you'll switch tags and fight as the loyalists, but it'll still result in a war. Only way to avoid war is to give in before the diplo play breaks out by enacting or preventing it from breaking out in the first place.
Personally I took this "If the prospect of winning against the revolutionaries doesn’t look good, like in all Diplomatic Plays you have the option of giving up." and that second sentence you quoted to mean your two options are "Throw in the towel, give up and let the revolutionaries win by default, join the revolutionaries or fight as the loyalists". Though that's just me, I mean you can't really expect an Englishman to have a sane comprehension of the English language can you? I mean look at this bloody monstrosity of a language.
 
  • 2Haha
  • 2
Reactions:
Will there be things an unhappy movement can do when they lack power for a complete revolution? I mean like strikes, terror, sabotage, or assassinations.
In the Canada AAR Daniel also had to deal with a potential general strike which sounds like a non-violent alternative for Trade Union revolution.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Do you hear the people sing?
Singing a song of angry men?
It is the music of a people
Who will not be slaves again! !
When the beating of your heart
Echoes the beating of the drums
There is a life about to start
When tomorrow comes!
Will you join in our crusade?
Who will be strong and stand with me?
Beyond the barricade
Is there a world you long to see?
Then join in the fight!
That will give you the right to be free!
Do you hear the people sing?
Singing a song of angry men?
It is the music of a people
Who will not be slaves again!
When the beating of your heart
Echoes the beating of the drums
There is a life about to start
When tomorrow comes!
Will you give all you can give
So that our banner may advance
Some will fall and some will live
Will you stand up and take your chance?
The blood of the martyrs
Will water the meadows of France
Do you hear the people sing?
Singing a song of angry men?
It is the music of a people
Who will not be slaves again!
 
  • 4Like
Reactions:
Something important that I hope is in is just how complicated revolutions become once they start. There’s counterrevolutions and parallel revolutions, groups whose interests align at the start of the revolution and become opposed later on. I hope that once one revolution triggers the time for other building revolutions is reduced in both countries!
 
  • 1Love
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Personally I took this "If the prospect of winning against the revolutionaries doesn’t look good, like in all Diplomatic Plays you have the option of giving up." and that second sentence you quoted to mean your two options are "Throw in the towel, give up and let the revolutionaries win by default, join the revolutionaries or fight as the loyalists". Though that's just me, I mean you can't really expect an Englishman to have a sane comprehension of the English language can you? I mean look at this bloody monstrosity of a language.
As an English major drop-out™, if I mark some key words in that second sentence I see little room for that interpretation.
Rather than -> Excludes backing down peacefully at this tage
Only -> Emphasizes no other options other than the following
Fight against the loyalists -> You need to use force against the loyalists, which means they haven't caved.

But rather than simply backing down and letting the revolutionaries have their way in Revolutionary Plays you only have an option to switch sides and take over the revolutionary part of the country in its fight against the loyalists.
 
  • 1
Reactions: