Pops should react to your foreign policy

[luxfelix]

Bismarck wasn't keen on annexing Alsace-Lorraine either. He was pressured to do so by the Prussian military, it is easy to see how this could translate in game terms with the military interest group.

I recall there's a status on interest groups as essentially part of the government or as marginalized factions (with stages in between).

An integrated military interest group pushing for Alsace-Lorraine versus a marginalized military interest group pushing for the annexation would have differing levers to pull/effects on granting or denying their demands.

(What this would mean specifically, I don't know...)

 

[Hertzila]

If pops don't somehow get involved in the diplomatic side of things, I'll be very surprised. Internal politics vs external diplomacy seems like such a natural conflict to give the player to wrestle with. Why you might want to push Infamy beyond what is strategically smart because you want to appease your internal antagonists. Why you might want to push for things that might be extremely risky but would help you settle your internal factions, assuming the action itself doesn't screw you over. It's a natural fit for Vicky 3 and would at the very least be stellar patch material.

The scope of what pops / Interest Groups start agitating for could be partially restricted to the Interests their nations have, in regards to things like potential wars of opportunity to get more land. So pops wouldn't simply randomly decide to pressure you to grab Madagascar, but they could do it if the player had a Declared Interest on the region and Madagascar had a kerfluffle that your press ran with.

A Declared Interest wouldn't be your nation's shadow cabal of elites in ther shady gentlemen's club going "For our next place, we shall get involved in the affairs of *throws a dart at the world map* Madagascar." ...Well it might still be partially that, but afterwards, you start sending diplomats there, newspapers start reporting on the region's affairs and you generally start to get the people interested in the place as a way to make that Declared Interest a reality. It's why Declaring an Interest would be a double-edged sword, well, more than it's already stated to be. Your pops might start to actually take notice of things that happen in your areas of Interest and start pressuring you with their own ideas about what to do.

 

[The Goldfinch]

A Declared Interest wouldn't be your nation's shadow cabal of elites in ther shady gentlemen's club going "For our next place, we shall get involved in the affairs of *throws a dart at the world map* Madagascar." ...Well it might still be partially that, but afterwards, you start sending diplomats there, newspapers start reporting on the region's affairs and you generally start to get the people interested in the place as a way to make that Declared Interest a reality. It's why Declaring an Interest would be a double-edged sword, well, more than it's already stated to be. Your pops might start to actually take notice of things that happen in your areas of Interest and start pressuring you with their own ideas about what to do.

Indeed, thing with "interests" matches really well here (with some flaws of the current strategic regions composition). I would add, that other powers expanding in a region with your strategic interest could easily spark outrage of your population - triggering lots and lots of intetresting outcomes. Your pops/IGs might be pushing for war, they might increase support for army/navy and militarist interest group, they might turn against own government - I see a great potential here.

 

[luxfelix]

If pops don't somehow get involved in the diplomatic side of things, I'll be very surprised. Internal politics vs external diplomacy seems like such a natural conflict to give the player to wrestle with. Why you might want to push Infamy beyond what is strategically smart because you want to appease your internal antagonists. Why you might want to push for things that might be extremely risky but would help you settle your internal factions, assuming the action itself doesn't screw you over. It's a natural fit for Vicky 3 and would at the very least be stellar patch material.

The scope of what pops / Interest Groups start agitating for could be partially restricted to the Interests their nations have, in regards to things like potential wars of opportunity to get more land. So pops wouldn't simply randomly decide to pressure you to grab Madagascar, but they could do it if the player had a Declared Interest on the region and Madagascar had a kerfluffle that your press ran with.

A Declared Interest wouldn't be your nation's shadow cabal of elites in ther shady gentlemen's club going "For our next place, we shall get involved in the affairs of *throws a dart at the world map* Madagascar." ...Well it might still be partially that, but afterwards, you start sending diplomats there, newspapers start reporting on the region's affairs and you generally start to get the people interested in the place as a way to make that Declared Interest a reality. It's why Declaring an Interest would be a double-edged sword, well, more than it's already stated to be. Your pops might start to actually take notice of things that happen in your areas of Interest and start pressuring you with their own ideas about what to do.

I could even see a scenario where an industrialist interest group petitions the government to declare a strategic region of interest because it is rich in the raw material(s) that fuel their factories.

Perhaps an easy thing to brush off at game start, though harder to ignore as more of the economy industrializes over time...

 

[aantia]

Don't the IGs already heavily influence your war goals, in an organic and emergent way? If you do things that benefit them, (e.g. conquering a rubber-producing state would benefit the Industrialists), they'll be happier. Ill-advised wars which strain your economy and cost lives without tangible benefits will make the IGs unhappy.
Additionally, it seems fitting if there will be some sort of prestige stat that makes your population happier/unhappier, depending on your military successes, as in EU4.

 

[luxfelix]

Don't the IGs already heavily influence your war goals, in an organic and emergent way? If you do things that benefit them, (e.g. conquering a rubber-producing state would benefit the Industrialists), they'll be happier. Ill-advised wars which strain your economy and cost lives without tangible benefits will make the IGs unhappy.
Additionally, it seems fitting if there will be some sort of prestige stat that makes your population happier/unhappier, depending on your military successes, as in EU4.

Good point; I'd like a more proactive IG influence (not quite as proactive as other independent nations or vassals), though the reactive role is great too.

What I mean by proactive is in reference to an IG recognizing what they want and petitioning for it, whether it fits with what was already planned or not; reactive would refer to the following effects of acquiring resources, more jobs, and morale from winning a war, for example.

 

[Vernichtere]

Good point; I'd like a more proactive IG influence (not quite as proactive as other independent nations or vassals), though the reactive role is great too.

What I mean by proactive is in reference to an IG recognizing what they want and petitioning for it, whether it fits with what was already planned or not; reactive would refer to the following effects of acquiring resources, more jobs, and morale from winning a war, for example.

Influence groups can be given short-term and long-term reactions to foreign policy:

- Goals that an influence group sets.
- The desire to intervene in a particular war: we must save our fellow believers.
- Punishment for certain alliances. Why are we allying ourselves with the Turks or these communists?

For the AI: If, for example, abolitionists are involved in the government, the likelihood increases that the AI will demand that slavery be abolished.

 

[The Goldfinch]

Don't the IGs already heavily influence your war goals, in an organic and emergent way? If you do things that benefit them, (e.g. conquering a rubber-producing state would benefit the Industrialists), they'll be happier. Ill-advised wars which strain your economy and cost lives without tangible benefits will make the IGs unhappy.
Additionally, it seems fitting if there will be some sort of prestige stat that makes your population happier/unhappier, depending on your military successes, as in EU4.

This could work only to a very limitied extent. For example, you would still be unable to picture very important phenomenons, like catholic Pops pressuring Napoleon to keep garrison in Rome. Or German nationalists expecting you to declare war on Denmark.

As for costly wars: what you mentioned basically is implemented in eu4. My point is rather that in some wars Pops would be willing to make bigger sacrifices without complaining; while they would view other (irrelevant) wars as completely unnecessary and could be infuriated even by small losses.

 

[Willem IV]

I believe that pops should not really care about your foreign policy, as this can be addressed by propaganda, but more on their wealth level going down during war as a big factor

 

[luxfelix]

I believe that pops should not really care about your foreign policy, as this can be addressed by propaganda, but more on their wealth level going down during war as a big factor

With the exception of revanchism &/or literate pops?

Or maybe abolitionist pops?

 

[Willem IV]

With the exception of revanchism &/or literate pops?

Or maybe abolitionist pops?

The more wealth a pop has, the more likely they do care about other business. Poor strata were you busy with minding their own business. Rich strata are more literate and can care about it,

 

[The Goldfinch]

I believe that pops should not really care about your foreign policy, as this can be addressed by propaganda, but more on their wealth level going down during war as a big factor

Thats just not right, simply put. Population often enforced certain moves on government, XIX century is full of such cases. Do you think wealth was the factor that pushed French society to support war with Prussia?

And I am completely confused with this propaganda thing (which btw emerged in modern meaning as late as during ww1). Do you mean that peoples opinions should be nonexistent because propaganda can make them swallow everything? I see 0 logics here. Your pops can firmly oppose private schools, and other internal policies, but they should have no opinion whether to go to war with Russia? Because propaganda?

 

[luxfelix]

The more wealth a pop has, the more likely they do care about other business. Poor strata were you busy with minding their own business. Rich strata are more literate and can care about it,

Interesting; I imagine this might result in a tradeoff of sorts where improving the quality of life for your pops also leads to their increasing global consciousness.

 

[Nibbes]

After being insulted by Bismarck, Napoleon III hardly had a choice of how to react - overwhelming demand of society and parliament forced him to go to war.

British support for greek war of independence was largely a result of widespread sympathies for greek rebels in british society.

XIX century was an era when even small diplomatic failure made people take to the streets.

I suggest that in Vic3 your population should very strongly express their views on how well are you guiding their country to take its rightful place among other world powers.

If they feel insulted, they will be greatly upset if you just let the whole thing go, without proper punishment. If they consider bosphorus vital for your countries interest, they will expect you to prevent Russia from taking it. Obviously the more democratic your country is, the more you have to care for their views.

Your population should support a foreign policy that makes sense - this could be defined by a set of rules:

- cultural proximity: Austrian and Prussian pops won't let other powers touch their German brothers
- religion: Russian pops will greatly support wars in defence of orthodox nations
- strategic interests: pops of every country should sometimes support policies preventing other powers from taking control of very strategic areas, like bosphorus, Suez Canal, Malacca strait, etc.
- ideological support: revolutionary countries should be very strongly inclined to support fellow revolutionaries
- atrocities: generally pops of every great power should support punitive measures against countries committing atrocities against own peoples
- opportunities: population should expect you to take advantage of obvious opportunities: Japanese population should be expecting you to try to seize some far east russian lands during its civil war

To sum up, there should be direct connection between your foreign policies and your pops. They should get extremely angry if you pay with their sons' blood for some land they consider completely irrelevant. They should be happy and supportive if you achieve success in the field they consider important, boosting their national pride.

Game (via your pops) should support consistent foreign policy that makes sense; no to complete randomness. It should make you feel that every step in international politics has way deeper meaning than painting some more map and getting a bit more population.

Depends on culture. They US often had to exaggerate or use yellow journalism to get public to support expansionist wars. Like with Spanish American war sinking of ship, sinking of the lusitania and telegram to Mexico, and even killing of people at the Alamo. All examples of excuses or justifications for war.

For example, immigrant demographics can greatly shift view of some American nations not just US. A bunch of Irish Americans funded IRA or had direct ties with them. Some major leaders in Easter Uprising was even Irish American. Now anglo Americans or any other for that matter would careless about Ireland unless some German Americans use that as excuse to make US less cordial with British due to increased rivalries with Germany(ours would definitely support democratic or republic Germany way more so then Kaiser. Many are “48er” or ones like Amish and reformist from colonial era). Makes US wildcard.
Dixie pops would only care Americas and if threaten or insulted by anyone(doesn’t matter who really).
Italian Americans likely want to be friendly with Italy especially republic or regime more friendly to Sicilians and south Italians. Kingdom didn’t treat them well so many left with not so good feeling about government

 

[Vernichtere]

I believe that pops should not really care about your foreign policy, as this can be addressed by propaganda, but more on their wealth level going down during war as a big factor

That is solved a little differently. The population has a certain level of political awareness. Large parts of the population can be apolitical. Then you can do what you want. But if an influence group has radicalized pops behind them, they may well be interested in your adventures in the Congo.

 

[yurcick]

It's really a great shame that this thread hasn't got devs' attention (or at least hasn't got devs' response). I believe that without Napoleon being forced into Franco-Prussian war or Nicholas trying to placate the home populace with a "small victorious war", the game loses much in realism and makes minmaxing (by an omniscient player able to concede everything they're going to lose) way easier than it should be.

 

[Revolution 11]

It's really a great shame that this thread hasn't got devs' attention (or at least hasn't got devs' response). I believe that without Napoleon being forced into Franco-Prussian war or Nicholas trying to placate the home populace with a "small victorious war", the game loses much in realism and makes minmaxing (by an omniscient player able to concede everything they're going to lose) way easier than it should be.

Agreed, it is the missing link that would force internal demands for diplomatic plays. I wonder if the devs think the Journal system is an acceptable substitute for proper Pop/IG foreign policy demands.

 

[The Goldfinch]

It's really a great shame that this thread hasn't got devs' attention

Indeed I made another humble attempt to spread some fresh ideas:

Connecting foreign policy with internal situation

I generally consider this as an absolutely fundamental issue, one that can make Vic3 truly unique compared to other PDX games and all other grand strategy games in general. This matter has been discussed several times, for example here...

forum.paradoxplaza.com

 

[Nawolith]

How would the POPs had known it? They didn’t have Twitter back then.

Newspapers?