PDA

Archiv verlassen und diese Seite im Standarddesign anzeigen : Dev Diary 14 - POPs and issues part 1



Bane
03.03.10, 15:40
We have already talked a bit about this, so for those of you who have followed the developer diaries fairly religiously I am going to repeat myself a bit. However, part of the plan here is to get everything into a single place.

Each ideology, each party issue and each reform is potential issue for a POP. Each of these has a base factor that determines how strongly the POP feels about this issue by default. Then we have various additional modifiers that will raise or lower the POPs opinion on an issue. These modifiers are divided into three types; country, state and POP. So, although Capitalists have a bias towards liberalism, how strong that bias is depends on the country, the state these capitalists live in and how they feeling personally about things. We are aiming to make countries more unique from each other and also set up trends of regions that should be the same, but somehow not end up being that way.

So how do we do it? First off, just to confirm what has already been said, the issue scripts are in plain text files in the POP files. This not only makes for easy modding, but from my point of view easy editing for testing and balancing purposes. These scripts work like the event modifiers you see in games like EU3, Rome and Hearts of Iron 3. These are multipliers on the base chance of something happening. If our multiplier is greater than 1, then it increases the weight that the POP has towards this issue or ideology, while a factor of less than 1 decreases the weight towards this issue and ideology. The POP adds up all its factors and then uses this to work out what percentage should be assigned to each issue. Then each day the POP slowly moves towards this preferred percentage.

Now so far so good, this has been covered in all sorts of previous developer diaries in various places, but now onto the new stuff. Party issues and Ideologies always have a weight factor no matter what (although it may be very small), but reforms have a zero factor block at the top of the script. Thus, although POPs will always feel some sort of affinity towards an ideology, POPs do not always demand reform. There are several ways to do this, but one is to give POPs 100% of their luxury needs. A POP will see no reason to rock the boat if the current system is giving them what they want.

Ideology and reform selection have two direct effects on POP militancy. The more conservative a POP is the more his militancy will receive a base reduction. Conservatism is supposed to reflect a happiness with the status quo, it is logical to us that if you are happy the POP’s militancy should drop. Reform demand on the other hand increases POP militancy. After all, you are angry about the way things are and want them changed. You may be willing to be patient for now, but sooner or later, if the government ignores you, you will get really angry.

This militancy effect creates two cool things. Firstly, giving your POPs reforms does not guarantee that they will become happier. Instead the most effective way to keep your POPs happy is to give them specific reform they ask for, so although it may not have made sense to give people a shorter working day in Victoria, it can do in Victoria 2. Secondly, it makes a dictatorship a much more viable form of government in Victoria 2. If you can keep your POPs away from asking for reform and instead keep them conservative they are not going to get angry and revolt. All you need to do is keep your economy going and your state will be stable.

Now our new love in with authoritarianism… Although we are less unforgiving than the original Victoria, is not total. Giving all your POPs 100% of their luxury needs will ensure that your state remains stable. However, it also pushes up POP consciousness (CON). The higher the CON is the more a POP will ask for a particular reform if he wants one. This in turn will make the swing towards the demands for reform that much stronger should your economy ever take a turn for the worst. The underlying notion is that an authoritarian state should be viable, but it will also be more brittle than a more liberal state.
Quelle (http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/showthread.php?t=463932)
Screenshot (http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=22193&d=1267614473)