• 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.
 
  • 341Like
  • 122Love
  • 21
  • 8
  • 6
Reactions:
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.
Ah. Decided to look thru random posts. Naturally ignoring all context and then puke something.
How very enlightened.

Politics? my oh my. lol. That must have been fun trying to figure out.
"Though based on your other posts, perhaps you consider Otto von Bismarck a commie."
I cannot even begin to guess what the hell you have been reading or interpreting with the worldinsight of some teenager.

well you are off to ignore. Can take just so much irrelevance.
 
  • 13
  • 1
Reactions:
How dynamic are such interest groups. For example, can I create a slavery interest group or the monarchists in the US?

How much can the player influence the perks of the interest groups?
 
  • 1
Reactions:
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.

sounds like one is talking about a two party system that very much has two parties with their more or less set agendas.

Meanwhile the non-anglo world has something else entirely, both various forms of multiparty to multi-interest groups forming more or less temporary alliances for an issue to achieve influence over a ruler.

A bit more than semantics.
 
  • 8
  • 2Like
Reactions:
At this point you are simplifying it to a matter of semantics.
Well, that's what this whole thing boils down to in our exchange. I do not disagree with you or @Renegade3231 in terms of mechanics proper (or their 'essence') since we all want a proper simulation and a believable alternative history occurring on its basis. I disagree about the form of those mechanics since I do not think that party mechanics should run parallel to IG mechanics as perfectly delineated systems rather than being integrated as part of a common system (which I personally identify with the IGs, while not excluding party politics as representing one of its integral components).

A cat matters only insofar as it catches mice, regardless of the color of its coat. I'd prefer them to not be named overtly (in terms of individual party nomenclature), but this doesn't represent a deal breaker for me in terms of looking forward to this game. I just fear that the nomenclature chosen will negatively impact my sense of immersion (not necessarily breaking it), same as with the questionable country names in HoI IV.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
If I understand the answer correctly that would be a bit strange. For instance in a unified Germany both Protestant and catholic clergy are legitimate power forces, but may differ significantly on ideology. Muslim and Hindu clergy in British Raj even more so.
Yeah, I was thinking about how the situation in Germany would be represented. I feel like if they have only one Devout Interest Group that is just for Protestants it would sidestep the fact that the Kulturkampf mobilized German Catholics and resulted in the formation of the Centre Party to represent their interests. It would make sense for there to be a German Catholic Interest Group in that case with different Ideologies than a German Protestant one. That would be, of course, if Germany forms. And it also matters who forms Germany, if it's Prussia the Protestants would have greater political strength but if it were to be formed by Austria and be more like Großdeutschland then the Catholics might have greater strength. This is a situation where representing the minority religious group in other ways outside of the Interest Group system would not be able to properly model the political strength they would have.
 
  • 9Like
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).
Except we don't already have it as part of the interest group system, because there's no indication of alliances between interest groups.

And it sounds like you're fine with political parties in literally everything but name? Which is kind of ridiculous since what you're saying is you want less flavor in the game, since "alliance" and not naming the coalitions of interest groups is way more bland and generic than calling them political parties and having actual names for them.
 
  • 3
Reactions:
How dynamic are such interest groups. For example, can I create a slavery interest group or the monarchists in the US?

How much can the player influence the perks of the interest groups?
It is definately moddable!
 
  • 23Like
  • 4
  • 2Love
  • 1
Reactions:
Can laws affect the power and attraction of IGs? So if you have Trade Unions banned (or just a single, State-controlled Trade Union) would they have less influence in your politics?
 
Parties having not really fitting names, kinda non-descriptive sounds pretty realistic to me, anyways.
The Liberal Democratic Party of Japan, Liberal Democratic Party of the United Kingdom, and Liberal Democratic Party of Russia agree with this.

Party names often come to apply to parties with widely disparate ideologies and platforms across countries over time because the parties don't necessarily stick with the ideology or platform they're founded with as interest groups in the party change beliefs or as which interest groups make up the party change, so it would be pretty realistic to have parties diverge like that in the game.
 
Last edited:
  • 5Like
Reactions:
Except we don't already have it as part of the interest group system, because there's no indication of alliances between interest groups.

And it sounds like you're fine with political parties in literally everything but name? Which is kind of ridiculous since what you're saying is you want less flavor in the game, since "alliance" and not naming the coalitions of interest groups is way more bland and generic than calling them political parties and having actual names for them.
Flavor is only worthwhile when it is good. In the case of political parties, it can be mediocre at best. That said, since political parties will most likely be included, I hope that they'll at least use universally applied exonyms reflecting party ideology and sociodemographics rather than opening the can of worms of handpicked historically appropriate political endonyms for all possible permutations in each individual country tag.
 
  • 4
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Can laws affect the power and attraction of IGs? So if you have Trade Unions banned (or just a single, State-controlled Trade Union) would they have less influence in your politics?
Yes, for example Religious Schools increases Devout pop attraction :)
 
  • 31Like
  • 10
  • 2Love
Reactions:
Well, that's what this whole thing boils down to in our exchange. I do not disagree with you or @Renegade3231 in terms of mechanics proper (or their 'essence') since we all want a proper simulation and a believable alternative history occurring on its basis. I disagree about the form of those mechanics since I do not think that party mechanics should run parallel to IG mechanics as perfectly delineated systems rather than being integrated as part of a common system (which I personally identify with the IGs, while not excluding party politics as representing one of its integral components).

A cat matters only insofar as it catches mice, regardless of the color of its coat. I'd prefer them to not be named overtly (in terms of individual party nomenclature), but this doesn't represent a deal breaker for me in terms of looking forward to this game. I just fear that the nomenclature chosen will negatively impact my sense of immersion (not necessarily breaking it), same as with the questionable country names in HoI IV.
I don't think anyone has said they should be perfectly delineated from each other or run in parallel. There's a whole recent thread speculating about how parties would be implemented and I don't think anyone discussing it said the systems should work completely separate from each other. They would obviously be intrinsically linked, that's the whole point of using Interest Groups as a basis upon which to represent parties. But saying we should just call them "alliances" or whatnot sidesteps the fact that these "alliances" in democratic nations took the form of political parties.

When it comes to names that's your preference of course not to have them. I think it makes it difficult to understand what these "alliances" would be if they are not parties and they don't have names. How would you even be able to identify them? "Oh yeah the alliance of Industrialists, Petite Bourgeoisie, and the Intelligentsia" or something like that. Or you could call that the "Liberal Party" and it would be easier to know what it's all about. And they wouldn't just be an alliance of Interest Groups because there would also be party mechanics linked to the Interest Groups as well.
 
  • 4
  • 1Like
Reactions:
There's no such thing as a good pie chart :cool:
(yes we have pie charts)
Ah good, that's the news I like to hear!

You've clearly never played Victoria 2 if you haven't seen a cool pie chart!
(Obviously joking ahaha, keep up the good work as always!)
 
  • 2Love
  • 1
Reactions:
The important thing in this DD is the color of Prussia

I do like the style of the map as well, especially as the countries have slightly variable colours (different brightnesses) that give it a almost ink painted look. Also, although this may be just a style choice or it still being WIP, it looks as though the UK start out with Hanover annexed. Could be a system of puppets taking on their overlords colour but it's difficult to tell from this screenshot.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Yes, for example Religious Schools increases Devout pop attraction :)
Also on this subject is it possible, with a sufficiently homogenous and pious population to get just as much benefit out of religious schools as out of publics schools or will public schools be more expensive but ultimately superior to religious schools in every instance (at least in terms of education provided)
 
I do like the style of the map as well, especially as the countries have slightly variable colours (different brightnesses) that give it a almost ink painted look. Also, although this may be just a style choice or it still being WIP, it looks as though the UK start out with Hanover annexed. Could be a system of puppets taking on their overlords colour but it's difficult to tell from this screenshot.
Vassals have the colour of their overlord in Vicky 3. On that same screenshot you can see Norway and Sweden, both of which are in a PU too, hence Norway having Swedens colour.
 
  • 6
  • 1
Reactions:
Parties having a main interest group like the communists with the trade unions, then others can join in like the intelligentsia, but potentially leave or be swapped out is interesting.


But I don’t really like the idea of the leader of an interest group having a large significance. I play a game like Victoria for as little to be random and arbitrary as possible, this is supposed to have the least amount of great man stuff of any paradox game. The landowners act the way they do for class and emergent reasons, not because of a guy who wrote a book they liked.
 
  • 5
  • 2
  • 1Haha
Reactions: