• 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 #14 - Political Movements

header14.png

It’s Thursday again and that means we’re going to continue talking about politics in games! Specifically, we’ll be talking about Political Movements in Victoria 3. I touched a little bit on this feature back in Dev Diary #6 by saying that there are ways for politically disenfranchised Pops to push for reform, though that isn’t the entirety of the role that Political Movements fill in the game.

What then are Political Movements? Put simply, a Political Movement is a way for your Pops to make a direct demand of the government, either because they desire change or because they don’t desire the change you are currently pushing through. A Political Movement is always aimed at one particular law, and can take three different forms:

Movement to Preserve: This is a political movement that can form when there is sufficient opposition to the passing of a particular law. For example, if Great Britain starts replacing the Monarchy with a Republic, it’s very likely that this will result in a Movement to Preserve the Monarchy.
Movement to Enact: This is a political movement that can form when there is a popular demand for the enactment of a particular law. For example, if you have a politically active and literate but very poor underclass of laborers, these laborers might form a movement to create a minimum wage.
Movement to Restore: This is a political movement that works exactly like a Movement to Enact, but aims specifically to bring back a law that was previously in effect in the country - for example a Movement to restore the Monarchy in a Britain that successfully transitioned into a Republic. The main difference between a Movement to Restore and a Movement to Enact is that the former will tend to get some extra support from being able to harken back to the ‘golden era’ of the past instead of having to champion new ideas.

Political Movements have a singular goal and will exist only so long as this goal remains unfulfilled. Their impact on the country in pushing for said goal is determined by their Support score. A Political Movement can have support from both Interest Groups (which represents a part of the political establishment backing the movement) and individual Pops (which represents individuals championing the movement in the streets).

Political Movements are not always progressive - while the Industrialists and Intelligentsia want to expand the franchise in Prussia, a coalition of more conservative Interest Groups are simultaneously pushing for more censorship
2021_08_19_2.png

Interest Groups will provide Support for the Movement based on their Clout, while Pops provide Support based on raw numbers (compared to population as a whole), meaning that a single discriminated Laborer backing a Movement provides just as much Support as a fully enfranchised Aristocrat when taking action outside their Interest Group.

In other words, while Political Strength still plays an important role in Political Movements (in the form of Interest Groups throwing their Clout behind movements championing laws they like), it is entirely possible for a Political Movement to form with no Interest Group backing at all - even if nobody is willing to champion workers’ rights in the halls of power, enough angry workers in the streets may just be enough to affect change anyway.

Which Interest Groups will or will not back a Political Movement depends on whether they would approve of a change to the new law (in case of Enact/Restore) or disapprove of the current change in progress (in case of Preserve). Interest Groups that have high approval or which are part of the Government will not support Political Movements, though Government IGs may put pressure on you in other ways if they’re not pleased with your actions.

Pops are more complex, as they can back a Political Movement either because it aligns with their political movement (ie their preferred Interest Group is in favor of the movement) or because they have something to gain directly from it (for example a discriminated Pop backing a movement that would give them more rights).

This Political Movement to abolish the regressive Poll Tax is currently only backed by the Trade Unions and Pops sympathetic to them.
2021_08_19_1.png

The Support score of a Political Movement has two direct effects on legislation: Firstly, it affects the chance of successfully passing a law (making it easier to pass the law the movement wants in the case of a Movement to Enact/Restore, and more difficult to replace in the case of a Movement to Preserve). Having a Movement to Enact/Restore also allows a country to attempt to pass the law the movement wants, even if said law has no backing among the Interest Groups in government.

But what then, if you don’t intend to bow to the wishes of a movement in your country? This is where the Radicalism of a Political Movement comes in. Radicalism is based on the number of Radical pops and Clout of Angry Interest Groups supporting the Movement. A movement with low Radicalism is one that is intent on getting its wishes heard through peaceful means, while a movement with high Radicalism is willing to use more extreme methods, up to and including sparking a Revolution (though that particular topic is something we’ll cover in a later dev diary).

Replacing the Monarchy with a Republic is *not* a popular idea in Sweden in 1836 - the opposition is both strong and highly radicalized - a civil war is all but guaranteed unless the government reverses course.
2021_08_19_5.png

It is by no means a sure thing that every peaceful movement will become radical, and movements may very well fizzle out without accomplishing their goal, but ignoring the wishes of a significant part of your population and/or political establishment does come with some associated risks.

When talking about Political Movement Radicalism, I mentioned Radical Pops, and since they play an important role in creating and radicalizing Political Movements I thought I’d take a little time to explain how Radical Pops and their Loyalist counterparts function in Victoria 3. The first thing that should be understood about Radicals and Loyalists is that just like with Interest Group membership, Radicals and Loyalists are not whole Pops but rather individuals within Pops.

Starting a game as France by hiking the taxes up as high as possible and slashing government/military salaries is a sure-fire way to watch the number of Radicals quickly climb
2021_08_19_3.png

Radicals are individuals who have become disillusioned with the government and political apparatus of the country and want to seek change through any means necessary, while Loyalists are ‘patriots’ who are generally willing to put their political views and goals aside for the sake of the nation. There is a large variety of ways that Pops can become Radicals or Loyalists, here’s a few of the more common reasons listed below:
  • Pops that experience an increase in material living standards will become more loyal
  • Pops that experience a decrease in material living standards will become more radical
  • Pops whose Standard of Living is below the minimum they expect to have will radicalize over time, particularly if it’s so low that they’re actually starving
  • Pops that are literate but discriminated against tend to radicalize over time
  • Pops from Political Movements whose demands are ignored may radicalize over time
  • Pops from Political Movements that have their demands fulfilled become more loyal
Radicals and Loyalists generally function in directly opposite ways. For example, Radicals are more likely to create and join Political Movements (as well as contributing to radicalizing said movements) while Loyalists will never join Political Movements. Loyalists make the Interest Groups they are part of happier, while Radicals make them less happy and so on. This means that one way to prevent political activism and curtail movements that oppose your agenda is to increase the Standard of Living of your Pops. Just because you at some point during the game created prosperity (and as a result a bunch of Loyalists) doesn’t mean everyone will just be onboard with your programme forever, though.

Pops will remain Radical or Loyalist until they either die or have a status change as a result of becoming more radical/loyal (for example, a Loyalist Pop might stop being Loyalist if their material standard of living suddenly takes a nosedive), but they do, in fact, die. As generations die off and are replaced by new ones, less and less people will remember all the great things you did for the country 30 years ago and will start wondering instead what you’ve done for them lately.

With that said, that’s a wrap for this dev diary. Next week we’ll continue talking about Politics on a topic that very much relates to Political Movements by being one of the most monumental political questions of the 19th century: Slavery.
 
  • 187Like
  • 95Love
  • 10
  • 8
  • 3
Reactions:
Can pops or interest groups support more than one movement at the same time? If not, are there mechanics that take in account the total amount of people of people in movements or will a diversity of similar movements always weaken them?

For instance, lets say there are movements for both minimum age and workplace security. Will the bonus to passing a law quickly only be based on the relevant movement or will the game system recognize the other movement as well?
 
  • 16
Reactions:
One suggestion: think about renaming the "Radical" label. As described, the Radical-Loyalist mechanic makes sense. However, because the term "Radical" was used historically by many liberal-ish political parties, it may lead to confusion about what the label is meant to indicate. Maybe "Politically Activated" or "Dissatisfied" would be a less historically loaded -- and therefore clearer -- label.
"Dissident" maybe?
 
  • 14Like
Reactions:
Victoria II already had a pretty good system for handling this, but this seems like an improvement on it, less likely to lead to endless whack-a-mole revolts.
 
  • 9
  • 1Like
Reactions:
It’s Thursday again and that means we’re going to continue talking about politics in games! Specifically, we’ll be talking about Political Movements in Victoria 3. I touched a little bit on this feature back in Dev Diary #6 by saying that there are ways for politically disenfranchised Pops to push for reform, though that isn’t the entirety of the role that Political Movements fill in the game.

What then are Political Movements? Put simply, a Political Movement is a way for your Pops to make a direct demand of the government, either because they desire change or because they don’t desire the change you are currently pushing through. A Political Movement is always aimed at one particular law, and can take three different forms:

Movement to Preserve: This is a political movement that can form when there is sufficient opposition to the passing of a particular law. For example, if Great Britain starts replacing the Monarchy with a Republic, it’s very likely that this will result in a Movement to Preserve the Monarchy.
Movement to Enact: This is a political movement that can form when there is a popular demand for the enactment of a particular law. For example, if you have a politically active and literate but very poor underclass of laborers, these laborers might form a movement to create a minimum wage.
Movement to Restore: This is a political movement that works exactly like a Movement to Enact, but aims specifically to bring back a law that was previously in effect in the country - for example a Movement to restore the Monarchy in a Britain that successfully transitioned into a Republic. The main difference between a Movement to Restore and a Movement to Enact is that the former will tend to get some extra support from being able to harken back to the ‘golden era’ of the past instead of having to champion new ideas.

Political Movements have a singular goal and will exist only so long as this goal remains unfulfilled. Their impact on the country in pushing for said goal is determined by their Support score. A Political Movement can have support from both Interest Groups (which represents a part of the political establishment backing the movement) and individual Pops (which represents individuals championing the movement in the streets).

Political Movements are not always progressive - while the Industrialists and Intelligentsia want to expand the franchise in Prussia, a coalition of more conservative Interest Groups are simultaneously pushing for more censorship
View attachment 754430
Interest Groups will provide Support for the Movement based on their Clout, while Pops provide Support based on raw numbers (compared to population as a whole), meaning that a single discriminated Laborer backing a Movement provides just as much Support as a fully enfranchised Aristocrat when taking action outside their Interest Group.

In other words, while Political Strength still plays an important role in Political Movements (in the form of Interest Groups throwing their Clout behind movements championing laws they like), it is entirely possible for a Political Movement to form with no Interest Group backing at all - even if nobody is willing to champion workers’ rights in the halls of power, enough angry workers in the streets may just be enough to affect change anyway.

Which Interest Groups will or will not back a Political Movement depends on whether they would approve of a change to the new law (in case of Enact/Restore) or disapprove of the current change in progress (in case of Preserve). Interest Groups that have high approval or which are part of the Government will not support Political Movements, though Government IGs may put pressure on you in other ways if they’re not pleased with your actions.

Pops are more complex, as they can back a Political Movement either because it aligns with their political movement (ie their preferred Interest Group is in favor of the movement) or because they have something to gain directly from it (for example a discriminated Pop backing a movement that would give them more rights).

This Political Movement to abolish the regressive Poll Tax is currently only backed by the Trade Unions and Pops sympathetic to them.
View attachment 754431
The Support score of a Political Movement has two direct effects on legislation: Firstly, it affects the chance of successfully passing a law (making it easier to pass the law the movement wants in the case of a Movement to Enact/Restore, and more difficult to replace in the case of a Movement to Preserve). Having a Movement to Enact/Restore also allows a country to attempt to pass the law the movement wants, even if said law has no backing among the Interest Groups in government.

But what then, if you don’t intend to bow to the wishes of a movement in your country? This is where the Radicalism of a Political Movement comes in. Radicalism is based on the number of Radical pops and Clout of Angry Interest Groups supporting the Movement. A movement with low Radicalism is one that is intent on getting its wishes heard through peaceful means, while a movement with high Radicalism is willing to use more extreme methods, up to and including sparking a Revolution (though that particular topic is something we’ll cover in a later dev diary).

Replacing the Monarchy with a Republic is *not* a popular idea in Sweden in 1836 - the opposition is both strong and highly radicalized - a civil war is all but guaranteed unless the government reverses course.
View attachment 754432
It is by no means a sure thing that every peaceful movement will become radical, and movements may very well fizzle out without accomplishing their goal, but ignoring the wishes of a significant part of your population and/or political establishment does come with some associated risks.

When talking about Political Movement Radicalism, I mentioned Radical Pops, and since they play an important role in creating and radicalizing Political Movements I thought I’d take a little time to explain how Radical Pops and their Loyalist counterparts function in Victoria 3. The first thing that should be understood about Radicals and Loyalists is that just like with Interest Group membership, Radicals and Loyalists are not whole Pops but rather individuals within Pops.

Starting a game as France by hiking the taxes up as high as possible and slashing government/military salaries is a sure-fire way to watch the number of Radicals quickly climb
View attachment 754433
Radicals are individuals who have become disillusioned with the government and political apparatus of the country and want to seek change through any means necessary, while Loyalists are ‘patriots’ who are generally willing to put their political views and goals aside for the sake of the nation. There is a large variety of ways that Pops can become Radicals or Loyalists, here’s a few of the more common reasons listed below:
  • Pops that experience an increase in material living standards will become more loyal
  • Pops that experience a decrease in material living standards will become more radical
  • Pops whose Standard of Living is below the minimum they expect to have will radicalize over time, particularly if it’s so low that they’re actually starving
  • Pops that are literate but discriminated against tend to radicalize over time
  • Pops from Political Movements whose demands are ignored may radicalize over time
  • Pops from Political Movements that have their demands fulfilled become more loyal
Radicals and Loyalists generally function in directly opposite ways. For example, Radicals are more likely to create and join Political Movements (as well as contributing to radicalizing said movements) while Loyalists will never join Political Movements. Loyalists make the Interest Groups they are part of happier, while Radicals make them less happy and so on. This means that one way to prevent political activism and curtail movements that oppose your agenda is to increase the Standard of Living of your Pops. Just because you at some point during the game created prosperity (and as a result a bunch of Loyalists) doesn’t mean everyone will just be onboard with your programme forever, though.

Pops will remain Radical or Loyalist until they either die or have a status change as a result of becoming more radical/loyal (for example, a Loyalist Pop might stop being Loyalist if their material standard of living suddenly takes a nosedive), but they do, in fact, die. As generations die off and are replaced by new ones, less and less people will remember all the great things you did for the country 30 years ago and will start wondering instead what you’ve done for them lately.

With that said, that’s a wrap for this dev diary. Next week we’ll continue talking about Politics on a topic that very much relates to Political Movements by being one of the most monumental political questions of the 19th century: Slavery.
Hm, so ability to enact reform the movement wants is always granted? Does it mean that if the small groups of socialists wants healthcare, I can theoretically try to enact it even if I'm absolute monarchy? Or intelectuals pushing for public schools.
Also, what if movements contradict each other? Lets say we have intelectuals pushing for public schools and devouts for religious. How this would impact ability to introduce one of those reforms? (Lets say we have private schools)
 
  • 3Like
Reactions:
If we run out of techs to advance the economy (assuming we're otherwise in a socialist utopia) and standard of living, will all pops inevitably slide towards radicalism?
We'll talk more about technology in another Dev Diary, but our general approach to techs is that they should unlock things, not impose automatic, instant change across your whole country as soon as you get access to them. Most technological change comes with some sort of cost, or at least impact. For example, a more efficient Production Method might come with a new input goods cost or a decreased workforce who need new employment. So I'll hedge this response by first saying that our aim is that even if you can plow through the tech tree early, you should still have to struggle to implement all those novelties by game end.

With that caveat in mind though: sure, rapid progress means you have to fight even harder to sustain that progress. Any decline in living conditions is unacceptable, after all.
 
Last edited:
  • 46Like
  • 19
  • 14Love
  • 8
Reactions:
Hm, so ability to enact reform the movement wants is always granted? Does it mean that if the small groups of socialists wants healthcare, I can theoretically try to enact it even if I'm absolute monarchy? Or intelectuals pushing for public schools.
Also, what if movements contradict each other? Lets say we have intelectuals pushing for public schools and devouts for religious. How this would impact ability to introduce one of those reforms? (Lets say we have private schools)
Based on earlier dev diaries, I believe the issue of trying to enact universal healthcare as an absolute monarchy with a powerful aristocracy is that the opposition of the influential interest groups would outweigh the desire of the disenfranchised working class socialists, which could get painful.
 
We'll talk more about technology in another Dev Diary, but our general approach to techs is that they should unlock things, not impose automatic, instant change across your whole country as soon as you get access to them. Most technological change comes with some sort of cost, or at least impact. For example, a more efficient Production Method might come with a new input goods cost or a decreased workforce who need new employment. So I'll hedge this response by first saying that our aim is that even if you aim to plow through the tech tree early, you should still have to struggle to implement all those novelties by game end.

With that caveat in mind though: sure, rapid progress means you have to fight even harder to sustain that progress. Any decline in living conditions is unacceptable, after all.
A modern day mod could do a very good job modeling the needs of an oil dependent society against the backdrop of the rising demands of a changing climate. Lots of room for political instability and war in a situation like that.
 
  • 12Like
Reactions:
Do political movements have any kind of internal "momentum" for support? I understand that the number of different pops and the happiness of interest groups will wax and wane, and number of radicals and loyalists will shift. But sometimes an idea seems to take hold and support grows quickly and sort of burns out. Particularly for people demonstrating in the streets, could they get tired of it?

Can having strong movements trigger other events?
 
  • 2Like
  • 1
Reactions:
With that caveat in mind though: sure, rapid progress means you have to fight even harder to sustain that progress. Any decline in living conditions is unacceptable, after all.
That's a really good emergent anti-snowball effect actually.
 
  • 6Like
  • 4
Reactions:
Based on earlier dev diaries, I believe the issue of trying to enact universal healthcare as an absolute monarchy with a powerful aristocracy is that the opposition of the influential interest groups would outweigh the desire of the disenfranchised working class socialists, which could get painful.
Yes, that for sure, but I mean will such situation make appeasing less popular movement impossible? Or you can listen to them and risk unrest?
 
This look pretty good but my question is how do differing groups play off each other? If you have two different groups who's interests are polar opposites, such as aristocrats wanting to roll back democratic reforms vs workers wanting to implement more, are you doomed to have to fight rebels or deal with permanent turmoil if you support one side over another?
 
  • 3
Reactions:
No further word on this yet. It's still on the table, but we have a big pile of things on that table. ;)
I hope it stays there :) political parties isn't something universal for that era, I would say that more often than not it was rather unrealistic (especially in case of non european non democratic countries)
 
  • 24
  • 10
Reactions:
Hm, so ability to enact reform the movement wants is always granted? Does it mean that if the small groups of socialists wants healthcare, I can theoretically try to enact it even if I'm absolute monarchy? Or intelectuals pushing for public schools.
Also, what if movements contradict each other? Lets say we have intelectuals pushing for public schools and devouts for religious. How this would impact ability to introduce one of those reforms? (Lets say we have private schools)
I imagine you can try, but it will be hard if the movement is not big enough. Reminding that changing laws is not instant and there is a whole "EU4-siege-like mechanic" that might stall your law change so much it is virtually impossible.

As for the second question, I imagine you can introduce either whichever you prefer. I do wonder if the opposing movement will have an impact in the success chance of the law though.
 
Hm, so ability to enact reform the movement wants is always granted? Does it mean that if the small groups of socialists wants healthcare, I can theoretically try to enact it even if I'm absolute monarchy? Or intelectuals pushing for public schools.
Yes, because even if the people in charge might fundamentally disagree, if the rabble on the street is demanding it perhaps the topic becomes more relevant to them. But there's sure to be a lot of dissent during the process of enacting such a Law, it might take a long time and require a lot of concessions.
Also, what if movements contradict each other? Lets say we have intelectuals pushing for public schools and devouts for religious. How this would impact ability to introduce one of those reforms? (Lets say we have private schools)
Both would impact their respective Law but not the other one. What's more common is that you start to enact one Law that's demanded by a certain Popular Movement, and once you start that process another Movement forms to Preserve the old Law. In this case the movement to enact the new Law would increase its chance of passing while the movement to preserve the old one would try to cause it to stall, so the final impact would depend on the relative Support values of the two groups.
 
  • 42Like
  • 12
  • 6Love
  • 2
Reactions:
What about separatist or pro-autonomy movements? They wont be "Political movements"?

Also, can you please explain why Spain won't be the 8th power like in Vic2, and why it has such a low GDP and literacy? In 1836 Spain had more or less 1/2 the GDP of USA. But in the game USA has a GDP of 29M and Spain of only 7M. It seems very unbalanced and unrealistic. And 15% literacy also seems exagerated, it should have a similar literacy to Italy more or less.
(https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...e-8th-great-power-after-the-ottomans.1488850/)
 
  • 5Like
  • 1
Reactions:
No further word on this yet. It's still on the table, but we have a big pile of things on that table. ;)
Would you mind pointing us to that table and then turning your back for a few minutes?
 
  • 19Haha
Reactions: