• 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 #21 - Diplomatic Plays

16_9.jpg

It’s Thursday again and you know what that means - another Diplomacy dev diary! Today’s dev diary is one I’ve been looking forward to writing for some time, as it covers Diplomatic Plays, which we consider to be more or less the signature feature for Diplomacy in Victoria 3.

So what are Diplomatic Plays? Well, to answer that question, I’m going to reach all the way back to Dev Diary #0 and one of the four game design pillars, namely Diplomatic Eminence. That pillar reads as follows: War is a continuation of diplomacy, and everything that is achievable by war should also be achievable through diplomacy (even if that diplomacy sometimes comes at the point of a gun).

Well, diplomacy at the point of a gun is exactly what Diplomatic Plays are, as they allow you to try to achieve any objective normally achievable by war by diplomatically maneuvering to force the other side to give it to you without a fight. To fully explain what I mean by that, we’ll go over the mechanics of Diplomatic Plays in sequence - how they start, how they play out, and finally how they are resolved.

The way Diplomatic Plays start is the way you would normally start a war in another Paradox Grand Strategy Game - by demanding something from another country, for example that they cede a particular state to you. In fact, unlike other GSGs, Victoria 3 has no ‘declare war’ button to get what you demand - instead you start a Diplomatic Play, and wars are always preceded by Diplomatic Plays.

The fourteen opening moves currently available as Diplomatic Plays, each corresponding with a war goal. As usual, the number in green indicates the number of possible valid targets that exist for that Play.
DD21 1v2.png

Once a Diplomatic Play is started, there’s a number of things that happen immediately. First, the country that is being targeted is of course notified, along with any countries that are considered Potential Participants in the play. Who is considered a potential participant depends on the exact nature of the play, but usually it includes any country with an Interest in the Strategic Region where the Play is taking place as well as countries that have a strong diplomatic reason to get involved (such as allies or the overlord of the defender). At this point it’s important to note that only the Initiator (the country starting the play) and Target (the country targeted) are active participants, all others just have the potential to take part.

Next, the primary active participants on each side (the Initiator and the Target initially, though this can change if the overlord of either side steps into the play) are given a number of Maneuvers. This is a currency that primarily depends on Rank, with higher Rank countries having more maneuvers, and determines how many actions such as Swaying and adding Demands (more on these below) that said primary participant can take during the course of the play to try and gain the advantage over their enemy.

There are three distinct phases over which a Diplomatic Play plays, based on the level of Escalation, which is a value that increases each day after the play is started. The first of these is Opening Moves, during which participating countries take stock of the situation, set their initial stances (more on that below) and the Target has time to set their Main Demand (the Main Demand of the Initiator has already been set, as it depends on what type of Play was started). During the Opening Moves phase, it isn’t possible for other countries to fully commit to one side or another, with the sole exception of overlords of the primary participants. It also isn’t possible for either side to back down.

Cape Colony’s bid for independence and open British markets turned out to be a step too far. Britain demands nothing less than total annexation of the colonial upstarts, whose only hope now is either suffering partial annexation for its insolence, or having to get in real close with France and hope for the best.
DD21 2v1.png

Once Escalation reaches a certain point, the Opening Moves phase ends and the Diplomatic Maneuvering phase starts. If by this point the Target has not set their Main Demand, they are automatically given one (usually War Reparations). This is the ‘main’ phase of the Diplomatic Play, which occupies the majority of the escalation scale and during which most of the ‘action’ takes place.

During this phase, potential participants can now set any stance towards each side, from full support without requiring anything in return (something most AIs won’t be keen to do as they’re not big on having their troops die for charity, at least not in an offensive war), to leaning towards a particular side (which will signal to that side that they’re likely willing to be swayed), to simply being on the fence with no particular preference for either side. It’s also possible for countries that have not committed to one side or the other to simply Declare Neutrality and exit the play altogether, though this might have diplomatic consequences depending on the circumstances.

With only a fraction of the military strength of Great Qing, Kokand’s future independence looks highly questionable. But this Play still has the potential to become pretty complex if Kokand can convince the Sikh and Russian empires to support their case against Qing. Perhaps gaining another subject is not worth the risk of a protracted war that might well cost upwards of half a million lives.
DD21 3v1.png

The Diplomatic Maneuvering phase is also when the primary participants are expected to use up their available Maneuvers on adding Demands and Swaying potential participants to their side. It is also possible to spend your Maneuvers during the Opening Moves phase on adding Demands for yourself, burning through most of them early might leave you at a significant disadvantage late.

Demands are essentially Wargoals (and will turn into such if the Play escalates into war, but more on that later) and includes a wide variety of requests-under-duress such as ceding land, giving up claims or becoming a subject. Only the primary participants can add Demands, but in addition to demanding things on their own behalf they can also demand things on behalf of other countries backing them, if said country agrees that the Demand is something they want.

While this may make it sound like it’s a good idea to spend your maneuvers piling on as many Demands for yourself as possible, there’s a couple reasons not to. First, adding certain aggressive Demands (such as demanding land) always results in a Diplomatic Incident, which will immediately give you Infamy and may degrade relations with countries you need to support you in the Play. Second, being seen as greedy and unreasonable in your Demands will in itself make it harder to get countries to back you up, and may in fact make it so undecided participants side against you just to put a stop to your mad dreams of conquest. It’s worth noting though, that the Infamy from any Demands or Wargoals that end up not being pressed (for any reason) is partially or fully refunded, though their negative impact on relations remain.

Swaying, on the other hand, is the main way in which the primary participants get undecided participants over to their side, by making them a promise. This promise may be in the form of owing them an Obligation (more on this in a later dev diary) or promising them a Wargoal if the Play escalates into war. There’s a few more such types of promises planned for release (promising to become their Protectorate or giving them a piece of land or a subject of yours, for example) but these are not yet implemented. If the country agrees, they will be set as backing the Swaying side in the Diplomatic Play, and will fight on their side if war breaks out, just as if they voluntarily set their stance to backing that side.

Offering Prussia the Austrian states of West Galicia, Moravia, or Bohemia would be most appreciated, as they are populous border states. States which do not already border Prussian land are less attractive to them as they would be much harder to manage.
DD21 4v1.png

However, if you think the Play is over just because France threw their weight behind the Initiator and there isn’t anyone strong enough to oppose them, you’d be wrong! It’s possible for countries that have promised to back a side to betray that promise and go back to being undecided, or even switch sides entirely, perhaps because the other side made an even juicier offer. Doing this of course makes them lose out on anything that was promised to them and negatively impacts on relations with the betrayed side, but otherwise there is no limit to how many times a single country can switch sides in a Diplomatic Play (the AI will be rather reluctant to offer something to a country that has already forsaken them once unless they desperately need their support, though).

This also means that trying to ‘play it smart’ by burning through your maneuvers immediately to sway all the countries you think you need early in the Play can backfire, as the other side is then free to try and ‘bid over’ on your supporters while you’re unable to do anything. Furthermore, it can also make it risky to not be upfront about your own territorial demands - doing the swaying first and then saying ‘oh, and by the way, I want London’ might result in your side of the Play looking very empty all of a sudden as your former supporters scramble to distance themselves from you. Swaying and adding Demands during Diplomatic Maneuvering will also both pause Escalation for some time when carried out, to make it possible for the other side to react even if those actions are taken right at the end of the phase.

[Bolivia will remember this]
DD21 5v1.png

The final phase of the Diplomatic Play is Countdown to War, which is exactly what it says on the tin. During Countdown to War, both sides are locked down and it’s no longer possible for countries to declare or abandon support for either side, nor is it possible to add new Demands or do any Swaying. In fact, the only thing that is possible during this phase is Backing Down, and this is usually the phase when you will see one of the sides give in (though it is also possible to back down during Diplomatic Maneuvering).

Backing Down is, quite simply, one side deciding that the odds aren’t looking in their favor and deciding to concede the Main Demand of the other side to cut their losses. It’s important to note that only the Main Demand is ever conceded in this way, so any additional Demands that are either added or promised to supporters of the winning side are simply lost (with accrued Infamy fully refunded), along with of course all the Demands on the losing side. This means that there is actually in some cases a reason to want the Play to escalate into war (and hence, to not stack the odds in such a way that the other side sees no path to victory), as it is the only way in which you can simultaneously press multiple Demands/Wargoals, assuming you’re willing (or at least think you’re willing) to bear the heavy cost of the war. It’s possible to back down all the way up until the Escalation meter hits 100, at which point the Diplomatic Play is over and War breaks out.

Once all the cards are on the table you have to carefully weigh if this is really something you’re able to win, and what cost you’re willing to pay for the opportunity to try. Perhaps it’s better to cut your losses, gain a Truce, let the other side accrue some Infamy, score a Claim on the lost territory (if the Play was about land), and start making a plan to recover what you lost - and then some.
DD21 6v1.png

Whew, that was a lot of text, and I’m sure I’ve still missed some detail or another. As those of you who are familiar with Victoria 2 has noticed, Diplomatic Plays draws a lot of inspiration from the Crisis feature in Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness, a feature I’ve personally worked on and always thought was one of the most interesting things we’ve done in any expansion for a Paradox GSG. But with that said, our dev diaries on Diplomacy are drawing to a close (for now, we’ll certainly return to the subject later) as next week we’re going to talk about something you’ve been (rightfully) curious about since the announcement… War!
 
  • 316Love
  • 177Like
  • 14
  • 8
  • 8
Reactions:
Love this new system but few things are not quite clear in regarding to war score, especially considering this reply on no possibility of additional war demands after the Play is over
the Diplomatic Play sets the hard boundaries of the possibility space in the resulting war is a critical feature of the system
1. if AI promised me some province but I didn't bother to move any of my ships and troops in his aid will I be still getting the province or not?
2. is it possible for a war to end with white peace because neither side was able to take upper hand in the conflict?
3. is it still possible for one of the primary sides to force other side's war ally to sign a separate peace deal by winning a major battle against it or by taking its capital?

Once again I love this new flexible Diplomatic Play system but I'm not sure that making initial war goals "hard boundaries" makes sense since the final truce terms and who gets what are heavily related to who is "still standing", how terrible the situation is for the loosing side not to mention political situation like people demanding peace and so on.
 
Last edited:
Have you thought about dividing the cut down to size play into a naval and a land version? I might want to weaken a nation's global power projection by limiting their navy, but still want them strong enough on land to keep the balance of power in their home region.
IMO this wargoal should be even more detailed with added options of forcing the demolition of fortresses in particular states and establishing demilitarized zones.
 
  • 4Like
  • 3
Reactions:
This looks like a system with tons of potential, i hope it isnt harcoded, cause modders will create wonders with this
Honestly I can't wait for a Cold War mod, because this system sounds absolutely perfect for the mid-late 20th century
 
  • 10Like
Reactions:
No, the fact that the Diplomatic Play sets the hard boundaries of the possibility space in the resulting war is a critical feature of the system. The assumption is that every participant has already made all their possible claims ahead of time, to permit all the players to make a calculated decision on how critical this war is to them. I believe it's possible to add war goals via scripted effects though, so special events and the like could potentially introduce this where appropriate.
I would say that Great Wars should be an exception to this, since both sides of that war saw an escalation of their schemes (and an evolution as parties dropped in or out) as the war escalated and evolved.
 
  • 9
  • 1Like
Reactions:
No, the fact that the Diplomatic Play sets the hard boundaries of the possibility space in the resulting war is a critical feature of the system. The assumption is that every participant has already made all their possible claims ahead of time, to permit all the players to make a calculated decision on how critical this war is to them. I believe it's possible to add war goals via scripted effects though, so special events and the like could potentially introduce this where appropriate.
Please, please make it possible. If necessary - lock them behind the length of a war or casualties caused. I suspect that if WW1 ended in 1915 or 1916 the resulting peace agreement would have been much less strict.
 
  • 3Like
  • 2
Reactions:
Great stuff! Hope you find time to add more war goals in the future, like humiliate and ideological ones (restore monarchy, spread revolution, etc.). There are many examples of wars started over essentially prestige matters, without territorial claims. Crimean war comes to mind.
One question:
1. Will there be a cost for not choosing a side like in Vic2 crises?

A wish from my side would be for you to consider letting plays to continue even as the war is ongoing, with possibility to sway additional participants and add corresponding demands. Most major conflicts were laden with possibilities of new belligerents joining in, and in many cases they did (Crimean war, WW1). This creates an interesting interplay of military and diplomatic aspects, like the urge to win fast, limit hostilities to a certain region or avoid raiding sea routes (hope it’s a thing by the way).
Looking forward to the next DD!
 
Perhaps this is also deliberate to give everyone at least a little bit of time to mobilize :)
What I would also like to see is like a "Surprise Attack" sort of option, where you break the unwritten rules of diplomacy to invade the country with very little warning, at the cost of a huge infamy hit- though this is after the Vic time period, I am thinking of something like Germany-Poland in '39, where the Germans were escalating tensions with the Poles but still attacked with no warning- and this resulted in half the world joining the war against them.
 
I notice the Abolish Slavery play is grayed out. Is that because this is post-abolition in applicable countries, or is there something special you have to do to get that Play as an option?

EDIT: I assumed that the country looking at their possible Plays was Britain, but actually there is no reason to think that is the case. So maybe whoever it is just doesn’t have an Interest on any slave powers.
 
Last edited:
Wonderful to see that diplomacy and bargaining is finally getting more love! Can we hope for any translation of these mechanics to peaceful negotiations that have no risk of escalating to military conflict?
It would be cool that two friendly powers could negotiate to interchange some territories for example.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
This looks like it has the potential to be very fun. But it could also be a very miserable experience for smaller countries. Since this is the main way land can be gained, really there is no point for a small country to make a diplomatic play against a bigger country because you have nothing to offer. Even if you are a small country that decides to conquer an unallied territory of your same size, if everyone gangs up on you for being belligerent then it could make for a miserable experience. Can't wait to see it implemented, but I am a bit nervous about it. I'd rather declare war and kick everybody's ass.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
This sounds great! I love that there's no longer going to be any unprovoked wars, and that there is a way for a country to wiggle out of having to fight a war if necessary. This also opens up tons of options for modders.
 
  • 3
  • 2
Reactions:
Reverse-swaying (saying 'I will join you for X') currently isn't in but I'm hoping to have time to add it before release.

This whole things seems really interesting and promising. There has been a few mention to adding more things to the diplomatic plays, and in that regard, would it be possible to combine demands and offers? (using EU4 terms).


To give one example, as one of the arrangaments of this treaty: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-Dutch_Treaty_of_1824 the UK gave to the Netherlands all UK colonies in sumatra in exchange for the Netherlands giving the UK all dutch colonies in india. This kind of arragement, both as "trade" and as result of wars were extremly common in all of modern history including the period. Specially for imperialist nation and their colonies, but we can also see it in something like the UK-USA treaty of 1818 on the american-northern border, where the treaty meant that both sides gave each other territory in exchange of other territory.


Something like this wouldn't necessary have to be an equal deal. I can imagine Russia making a diplomatic play for a large part of manchuria, offering in exchange a small region of central asia. This would obviously *still* be a bad treaty for China, but may just be enough to make the deal less bad that China doesn't consider worth it to go to a risky war. For russia, this may mean making a small sacrifice, in exchange of getting a much better area, while avoiding a long, risky war against China and possible Japan (to put an Eg).

Of course, is possible that china does not backs down, and they go to war, in which case it may end up being a total Russian victory, with China end up not getting the central asian territory and losing the demanded area of manchuria.

Or something like that, i'm sure you guys can think the details better, point being, being able to both offer at the same time than demand, makes the whole diplomacy play more juicy and interesting, imo.
 
  • 3
Reactions:
Does that mean that diplomatically annexing your subject always leads to war, as annexing is nation ending?
Not if the subject is an AI country! It is possible for AI countries to actually act rationally in this situation and allow themselves to be annexed if it's obvious the loss of life will be too great.
If the target is a human player in MP though, backing down from a Play like that would mean Game Over, so they're liable to fight to the death just to spite you. But launching a Play that lopsided in MP is kinda bad form anyway ;)
 
  • 33
  • 27Like
  • 11Haha
  • 5
  • 1Love
Reactions:
This seems really cool.

I would like to know though, how long would a play take to resolve? The Franco-Prussian war, one of the iconic wars of the Victorian era, erupted over a period of 6 days. The Ems Telegram was dispatched on 13th July 1870, France mobilized it's army on 15th July, Prussia and its North German allies mobilized on 15th July and the Southern German states mobilized over next 2 days (by 17th July) and war was declared on 19th of July.
 
  • 2Like
Reactions:
You say that subjects can do plays of their own. Will dumb subject AI be able to drag me into plays without my input? Can AI Canada say "Oh, britain is powerful and is going to have my back, I'm going to start a play on the US!" without a player Britain having any input?
 
What will happen in cases of rebellions / independence uprisings?

How will this system deal with issue of diplomatic recognition?

What will happen in case of 2 separate diplomatic plays with same goals?
Suppose Venice is somehow independent in 1850 and then at the same time it becomes target of annexation ploys by both Austria-Hungary and by Savoy?
Or how will this system handle European intervention in China, where European powers wanted Chinese market open for all of them simultaneously or on a province-by-province basis?
 
  • 2Like
Reactions:
This seems really cool.

I would like to know though, how long would a play take to resolve? The Franco-Prussian war, one of the iconic wars of the Victorian era, erupted over a period of 6 days. The Ems Telegram was dispatched on 13th July 1870, France mobilized it's army on 15th July, Prussia and its North German allies mobilized on 15th July and the Southern German states mobilized over next 2 days (by 17th July) and war was declared on 19th of July.
Shouldn’t that play have started with Leopold being offered the throne of Spain?
 
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions: