• 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 #26 - Peace Deals


16_9.jpg


Hello and welcome back to another Victoria 3 development diary! Last week we wrapped up our dev diaries on War, and now we’ll be bringing both Diplomacy and War to a close (for the being, that is) by talking about (appropriately enough) how to negotiate an end to one of your wars. We’re of course not done talking about warfare and will return to the topic at a later point, but for now, let’s talk peace.

So, let’s say you launched that diplomatic play to get the Dutch colony you’ve been eyeing for years thinking that you’d have it in the bag, all the way up until the French decided to back them up and you found yourself dragged into a bloody and costly conflict that you now want nothing more than to get out of. What do you do?

There’s actually two different ways of making peace in Victoria 3: Capitulating and Negotiating Peace. However, before we explain how these work, we first need to explain a crucial mechanic to all forms of peace-making: War Support.

War Support is a measure of the political will in your country to continue fighting in a particular war, and goes from -100 to +100. Each country will start a war with a high degree of War Support (currently always 100, though we’re considering having it start on different levels based on how politically unified your country is), which declines over time. The factors that govern how quickly War Support drops include:
  • Having your territory occupied by the enemy
  • Pops dying and being wounded in battle and from attrition
  • Internal turmoil in your country, for example because your economy is worsening due to the war
  • Whether the enemy controls their War Goals

Siam is in a bad way in this war, losing more than 11 War Support every single week. Unless they can turn things around quickly, capitulation isn’t far away. As with the previous war dev diaries, please note that any numbers/interfaces/tooltips shown are very much not final!
DD26_1.png

When their War Support hits -100, a country is forced to Capitulate. A country that Capitulates cedes all War Goals that are targeting them and gives up on all unpressed War Goals they were still holding. It’s also possible for most countries part of a war to choose to Capitulate at any time, even right after the war has broken out. This will immediately let them exit the war at the same cost outlined above, but may also incur a diplomatic penalty if the country capitulates early, especially if they had nothing to lose by doing so (as it would be seen as a cowardly betrayal of your allies). War Leaders are also able to Capitulate, and this doesn’t usually end the war, as they are only conceding War Goals targeting themselves and their subjects, and a new War Leader will be chosen to continue the fight on their side of the struggle. The only circumstance under which a Capitulation will end a War is if there are no War Goals left to fight over, which always results in an immediate end to hostilities.

However, it isn’t possible to simply attack a far-away country and force them to cede you distant lands simply by waiting for their War Support to tick down by itself. This is because any country that has a war goal targeting it which isn’t considered to be controlled by the enemy and still retains control of its own capital cannot have its War Support drop below 0. For example, let’s say that while playing as Brazil, you attack the Netherlands and demand they cede both Curacao and Guyana. You easily occupy Guyana but find that your navy is outmatched and you can’t land armies to take either Curacao or Amsterdam. As a result, you will be unable to force the Netherlands to Capitulate unless you actively choose to drop your War Goal on Curacao.

It’s possible to capitulate at any time during a war, even when it’s just started and War Support is at maximum - that it’s possible definitely doesn’t mean it’s a good idea, though!
DD26_2.png

So what then, of negotiated peace? This is quite a bit more complex than Capitulation, and can involve a whole host of countries that are part of the war. When making peace, countries involved in a war are split into three different categories:

War Leaders: This is the main participant on each side. War Leaders can propose peace deals and must ratify any proposed peace from the other War Leader in order for it to take effect.
Negotiators: This is any country that either holds a War Goal or has a War Goal targeting them and who are not one of the War Leaders. Negotiators must ratify any proposed peace deal from both the enemy and their own side in order for it to take effect.
Non-Negotiators: This is any country that doesn’t fall into the above two categories. They don’t play any active role in peace negotiations. Subjects whose Overlord is part of the war are also considered Non-Negotiators, as their Overlord negotiates on their behalf.

For a negotiated peace to happen, the War Leader on either side must first construct and propose a peace deal out of pressed War Goals. Unlike in many of our other Grand Strategy Games, peace deals in Victoria 3 isn’t necessarily just one side making demands - the War Leader can propose a mixed peace deal, in which War Goals are ceded from both sides. Once the War Leader is satisfied with the deal they’re proposing, they then send it out to both sides of the war for ratification.

This rebellion against Britain has turned into something of a brush war between the European Great Powers, with limited fighting in the colonies between Britain and its enemy France. War Support remains high, but if things take a bloodier turn both sides may find their populations quickly growing weary of the fighting.
DD26_3.png

That’s right - in order to have your proposed peace deal take effect, you need not just the enemy War Leader or even the enemy War Leader and Negotiators agree to it - all Negotiators on your own side must agree as well. This means that while you can try to cut a deal with your Dutch enemy to give you everything you want from them in exchange for selling out your ally Prussia, the likely answer to that from Prussia is going to be a firm and resounding ‘No’, at least so long as they aren’t truly desperate for a peace. However, if you’re willing to be fair about the whole thing and give up something of your own as well, they’re going to be more receptive to your proposals.

War Support plays a key role in determining what kind of peace deals the AI will agree to, with both their own and the enemy’s War Support factoring in: Even if their war support has dropped into the negative, the AI isn’t going to agree to a long list of demands from a country that is themselves a few weeks away from capitulating.

That’s all for today! Now that we’ve talked about Economy, Politics, Diplomacy and War, join us again next week as we cover a topic that touches on all of them - Technology!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • 259Like
  • 136Love
  • 14
  • 10
  • 6
Reactions:
They should probably start adding “Work in Progress” or “WIP” to these screenshots so people don’t think they’ve been finalized yet.
They really should

Using the Emperor's own banner to represent the shogunate is like solely using the Confederate Flag for USA in 1836 decades before there's even a Civil war, it's straight up plain ignorance and refusal to respect a nation's history

And the fact that Paradox did use the Emperor's Banner to represent Japan in EU4, hundreds of years before it even created gives me doubt that what we see is WIP, but rather what they chose to represent Shogunate Japan
 
  • 11
  • 1
Reactions:
How are you guys going to counter human players purposefully keeping a war going forever by not ratifying their ally's peace? Will there be penalty for refusing to sign a peace deal too many times?
My current thinking on this is:
1) If the player is occupying their war goals and is able to keep their war support high, eventually the enemy will capitulate and the war will end
2) If the player themselves is prevented from going below 0 war support because they have unassailable war goals and using this to keep the war going forever, the AI should be willing to drop those war goals
3) I'm considering adding it so that a war goal that a country is unable to occupy eventually gets automatically dropped

This would basically mean that it's impossible for wars to go on forever, eventually a resolution of some sort would be forced.
 
  • 67Like
  • 11
  • 2Love
  • 1
Reactions:
War Reparations is the way that money changes hands during peace deals currently, I do think the idea of being able to negotiate monetary settlements in addition to the current War Goals is interesting but nothing we're committing to at this point.
Numerous 19th century conflicts ended with territorial concessions in exchange for a bag of cash… It isn’t explicitly stated, but I’m guessing it would be possible to make a war end faster by offering, for example, Mexico a bunch of cash if they will cede California in a peace deal?
This could perhaps mitigate the hit to prestige/internal stability that the loser takes, if one exists. Although you obviously lost, your leaders can argue that it was a negotiated settlement, not a total defeat.
 
  • 6
Reactions:
Does it strike anyone else as odd that all combatants have suffered more dead than wounded? In pretty much every battle where I've seen reliable casualty reports, there are more wounded than dead. Are all casualties from attrition being treated as fatal? I don't think that makes sense; a soldier who slips in the mud and breaks his leg is an attritional casualty but not a fatality.
 
  • 10
  • 3Like
  • 1
Reactions:
The idea of ratification is a big advance on peace deals in other games. I remember suggesting something vaguely like this for HoI.

One thing that’s important to be able to do in the diplomacy system is be able to play rivals against each other, by bringing them in on your side in diplomatic plays. Thailand is a good historical example that kept its independence that way, by making concessions to both France and Britain. It seems like the system could be flexible enough for that, but the implementation is going to matter. There has to be some agency involved for the weaker countries to be able to propose deals to larger powers, for them to be playable.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
That is correct, though I would say that this would amount to a pretty extreme level of war mismanagement on your part.
Well, considering we can't direct our generals what to do, that would hardly be the player's fault :p
 
  • 13
  • 10
  • 2Haha
Reactions:
Does it strike anyone else as odd that all combatants have suffered more dead than wounded? In pretty much every battle where I've seen reliable casualty reports, there are more wounded than dead. Are all casualties from attrition being treated as fatal? I don't think that makes sense; a soldier who slips in the mud and breaks his leg is an attritional casualty but not a fatality.
As mentioned many times, all numbers are WIP.
 
  • 28
  • 21Like
  • 2Love
  • 2
Reactions:
Great DD.

Could you please outline a sequence of events / actions for a war of independence with outside interference - for example Phillipines try for early independence from Spain and try to bring in USA on their side, but UK does not want USA getting a new ally and wants to stop USA from interference.
 
Well, considering we can't direct our generals what to do, that would hardly be the player's fault :p
Uh, from the naval dev diary, you can direct your admirals to launch a naval invasion of the war goal island. You're still very much in control there.
 
  • 12
  • 5
Reactions:
This rebellion against Britain has turned into something of a brush war between the European Great Powers, with limited fighting in the colonies between Britain and its enemy France. War Support remains high, but if things take a bloodier turn both sides may find their populations quickly growing weary of the fighting.
This is probably most interesting part of this dev diary. How is it modeled by this system that:
1. War between GB and France remains "limited"?
2. Will " Populations quickly grow weary of the fighting" because the wargoal is a minor colonial issue?
This would be just awesome!
 
  • 6
  • 1Like
Reactions:
They really should

Using the Emperor's own banner to represent the shogunate is like solely using the Confederate Flag for USA in 1836 decades before there's even a Civil war, it's straight up plain ignorance and refusal to respect a nation's history

And the fact that Paradox did use the Emperor's Banner to represent Japan in EU4, hundreds of years before it even created gives me doubt that what we see is WIP, but rather what they chose to represent Shogunate Japan
Flags are constantly changing between different builds.
 
  • 5Like
  • 1
Reactions:
How would Great Wars and other similar large-scale wars function where the aims only escalated as the scope of the conflict widened and the casualties forced some "return of investment"? Considering this game would also cover the relatively ugly industrial warfare stage as well as some of the largest wars in human history which only escalated over time, it's rather bewildering to hear that adding CBs won't be a thing.
 
  • 5Like
Reactions:

Hello and welcome back to another Victoria 3 development diary! Last week we wrapped up our dev diaries on War, and now we’ll be bringing both Diplomacy and War to a close (for the being, that is) by talking about (appropriately enough) how to negotiate an end to one of your wars. We’re of course not done talking about warfare and will return to the topic at a later point, but for now, let’s talk peace.

So, let’s say you launched that diplomatic play to get the Dutch colony you’ve been eyeing for years thinking that you’d have it in the bag, all the way up until the French decided to back them up and you found yourself dragged into a bloody and costly conflict that you now want nothing more than to get out of. What do you do?

There’s actually two different ways of making peace in Victoria 3: Capitulating and Negotiating Peace. However, before we explain how these work, we first need to explain a crucial mechanic to all forms of peace-making: War Support.

War Support is a measure of the political will in your country to continue fighting in a particular war, and goes from -100 to +100. Each country will start a war with a high degree of War Support (currently always 100, though we’re considering having it start on different levels based on how politically unified your country is), which declines over time. The factors that govern how quickly War Support drops include:
  • Having your territory occupied by the enemy
  • Pops dying and being wounded in battle and from attrition
  • Internal turmoil in your country, for example because your economy is worsening due to the war
  • Whether the enemy controls their War Goals

Siam is in a bad way in this war, losing more than 11 War Support every single week. Unless they can turn things around quickly, capitulation isn’t far away. As with the previous war dev diaries, please note that any numbers/interfaces/tooltips shown are very much not final!
View attachment 781674

When their War Support hits -100, a country is forced to Capitulate. A country that Capitulates cedes all War Goals that are targeting them and gives up on all unpressed War Goals they were still holding. It’s also possible for most countries part of a war to choose to Capitulate at any time, even right after the war has broken out. This will immediately let them exit the war at the same cost outlined above, but may also incur a diplomatic penalty if the country capitulates early, especially if they had nothing to lose by doing so (as it would be seen as a cowardly betrayal of your allies). War Leaders are also able to Capitulate, and this doesn’t usually end the war, as they are only conceding War Goals targeting themselves and their subjects, and a new War Leader will be chosen to continue the fight on their side of the struggle. The only circumstance under which a Capitulation will end a War is if there are no War Goals left to fight over, which always results in an immediate end to hostilities.

However, it isn’t possible to simply attack a far-away country and force them to cede you distant lands simply by waiting for their War Support to tick down by itself. This is because any country that has a war goal targeting it which isn’t considered to be controlled by the enemy and still retains control of its own capital cannot have its War Support drop below 0. For example, let’s say that while playing as Brazil, you attack the Netherlands and demand they cede both Curacao and Guyana. You easily occupy Guyana but find that your navy is outmatched and you can’t land armies to take either Curacao or Amsterdam. As a result, you will be unable to force the Netherlands to Capitulate unless you actively choose to drop your War Goal on Curacao.

It’s possible to capitulate at any time during a war, even when it’s just started and War Support is at maximum - that it’s possible definitely doesn’t mean it’s a good idea, though!
.​

This rebellion against Britain has turned into something of a brush war between the European Great Powers, with limited fighting in the colonies between Britain and its enemy France. War Support remains high, but if things take a bloodier turn both sides may find their populations quickly growing weary of the fighting.
View attachment 781676
I am a bit confused - if the British crush Kanak secession, who are they paying war reparations to?
 
  • 1Haha
Reactions:
How would Great Wars and other similar large-scale wars function where the aims only escalated as the scope of the conflict widened and the casualties forced some "return of investment"? Considering this game would also cover the relatively ugly industrial warfare stage as well as some of the largest wars in human history which only escalated over time, it's rather bewildering to hear that adding CBs won't be a thing.
I think that would be okay if, under certain circumstances, we can make massive demands in diplomatic play.
 
  • 2Like
  • 1
Reactions:
I am a bit confused - if the British crush Kanak secession, who are they paying war reparations to?
Those war goals cannot actually be both pressed in the same peace. WIP interface.
 
  • 27Like
  • 17
  • 2
Reactions:
Uh, from the naval dev diary, you can direct your admirals to launch a naval invasion of the war goal island. You're still very much in control there.
Sure, you tell your admiral to support a naval invasion. You tell your general to attack. You have to hope the general finally decides to get into those boats and actually do said naval invasion. Because, right now, you can't actually tell your generals where to attack. If in said theoretical war, England decided to put half their armies defending London and the other half defending the island, I could see how the attacking forces were only capable of conquering EVERYTHING except British's capital and the war goal.
 
  • 9
  • 2
  • 1Like
Reactions:
My current thinking on this is:
1) If the player is occupying their war goals and is able to keep their war support high, eventually the enemy will capitulate and the war will end
2) If the player themselves is prevented from going below 0 war support because they have unassailable war goals and using this to keep the war going forever, the AI should be willing to drop those war goals
3) I'm considering adding it so that a war goal that a country is unable to occupy eventually gets automatically dropped

This would basically mean that it's impossible for wars to go on forever, eventually a resolution of some sort would be forced.
But what about the other way around?

Say that for example, Japan and the Dutch (both humans) are fighting for some Dutch island. Neither has a navy. Japan drops/is forced to drop their wargoal, but the Dutch still want war reparations. But it's not like they can attack Japan and get them. How do you auto-drop that wargoal? By the inability to occupy the capital? Or would Japan just be forced to pay reparations unless they can occupy anything?
 
  • 3
Reactions: