Espiocracy News

What's happening / TLDR: Developer diaries introduce details of Espiocracy - Cold War strategy game in which you play as an intelligence agency. You can catch up with the most important dev diary (The Vision) and find out more on Steam page.

---

Intelligence agencies in Espiocracy are closely intertwined with contacts & targets. To summarize previous DD#7 about the system one sentence, actors can be contacted to pursue semi-diplomatic actions and/or targeted to unlock more offensive operations. All players - humans and AIs - are actors too, embedded in the living world of multipolar interactions.

[h2]Contacts[/h2]

As the name of the game suggests, espionage-focused actors have much broader decision space than all the other entities. This is especially prominent in interactions between the intelligence agencies...



...which are elevated to the level worthy of a grand strategy, including alliances, puppet organizations, arch-enemies, and challenging negotiations. The latter case plays an especially important role in inter-agency interactions (watch out for the "early work in progress" screenshot!):



Here, players can tailor their offers and needs, achieve many shades of win-win situations, resolve conflicts, or even attempt to deceive each other. Visible on the screenshot aresnal of negotiable subjects is granularized: for instance, non-aggression deal can range from just a promise (which can be broken, especially between human players) all the way to passing an act which locks particular offensive actions behind game rules.

[h2]Targets[/h2]

While contacts with intelligence agencies have to be established and developed (and the trust can be dramatically lost), targeting is much simpler - all known agencies are targeted by default. This is natural state for the whole world, as everyone wants to know what all the other agencies are doing.

The process of targeting assists counterintelligence and leads, among others, to the salt of the espionage earth: capturing spies.



However, even the worst situations can be partially salvaged using contacts:



In addition to counterintelligence, targeting other agencies actually improves counter-counterintelligence:



For instance, in this country the knowledge about comings and goings of local intelligence services is lowering the risk associated with operations on the ground.

[h2]World[/h2]

In Espiocracy, you will play as the whole espiocratic apparatus of your country. For the USA it means controlling CIA and NSA and (part of) FBI, for the USSR it's both KGB and GRU, and so on. Every country has a single - to borrow the term from espionage jargon - intelligence community.

Differences between them are the backbone of replayability. They flow not only from self-explanatory differences between countries, but also from the structure of intelligence community:



They are not set in stone. Change of the structure is a historically-inspired mechanism of recovery, where - after a revolution, large change of political climate, or just too heavy burden of internal issues - player can start from (predominantly) carte blanche. Speaking of internal issues, does the game simulate competition between agencies, so common in the real world? The answer is: partially, to not divert attention from the grand level of strategy, but to still cover the case of 9/11 which severity has been attributed to the poor communication between FBI and CIA.

[h2]Internal Management[/h2]

Design philosophy of careful balance between macromanagement and micromanagement is reflected in the internal management of intelligence agencies. Player don't set up an exquisite order of battle - it can be more closely compared to a city builder, where the main resource is staff, and buildings are agencies with sections.

Let's preface this with a word about game's economy. It isn't the most exciting design in the history of games, so it suffices to cover it in a single paragraph (and is subject to further balancing and iterations). In every fiscal year, general budget is determined as a percentage of national budget, where percentage is determined by three equal stats of: minimized threat, acquired strategic intelligence, and relations with country's leader. Since it is a government entity and not a tycoon, player doesn't directly operate on that figure, and instead receives number of positions available to fill, along with some operational and black budget (more on the last two in later dev diaries).



General pool of available staff numbers can be distributed between agencies, defining for instance the weight put on human intelligence versus signals intelligence. Level below, sections standard for espionage agencies but not necessarily intuitive for laymen (such as analysis or planning sections) are automated and assumed. The building fun instead happens in the richness of optional task-oriented sections, taken straight out of the rich history of espionage:

• Direct Action (a.k.a. proffessional assassins, such as Mossad's kidon)
  
• Forgery & Disinformation
  
• Embassy Burglary
  
• Illegals
  
• Honeypots
  
• Poison Laboratory
  
• High-Altitude Reconnaissance
  
• Paramilitary Training
  
• Small Military Units
  
• and more
  

Ability to establish specific sections depends on local law - it's hard to imagine military unit in hands of CIA (well, at least before the era of drones), whereas East German Stasi expanded its Dzerzhinsky Regiment to the size of a division. That doesn't however mean that agencies in the liberal part of the world are toothless, as they can excel in other areas, such as cooperation with free market economy leading to technological feats such as U-2 airplane.



All agencies and sections are manned by operatives. At the end of the day, every command is carried out by them - not by abstract bureaucracy. This will be the topic of the next dev diary.

[h2]Final Remarks[/h2]
"Operatives" dev diary will be posted on October 29th.

If you're not already wishlisting Espiocracy, consider doing it:
https://store.steampowered.com/app/1670650/Espiocracy/

There is also a small community around Espiocracy:


---
"It is an instrument for subversion, manipulation and violence, for secret intervention in the affairs of other countries" - Allen Dulles

What's happening / TLDR: Developer diaries introduce details of Espiocracy - Cold War strategy game in which you play as an intelligence agency. You can catch up with the most important dev diary (The Vision) and find out more on Steam page.

---

Note: Mechanics described below were updated in 22nd dev diary "Contacts & Targets 2.0".

---

In a few comments, Espiocracy has been compared to the 80s game Balance of Power.

Transcript: World map with areas divided to peaceful, terrorist, under guerilla wars and under civil wars.

This classic strategy came out when the Cold War was still in full swing. However, it was criticized in a scientific publication for misrepresenting the history (more here). It was reasonable objection - the game simplified American-Soviet conflict to attacks and coercion, reducing constructive actions (such as negotiations) or treating them even as destructive (such as financial aid). In the real world, Cold War was not only about Cuban Crisis and coups, but also (mainly?) about the clash between two economic systems where all the other countries were tempted by economic miracles.

This critique could be reverberated when reviewing espionage systems in game designs. Power of destructive operations is rarely balanced with constructive actions, despite the latter constituting the majority of espionage work IRL.

Analysis of espionage systems shouldn't stop at the balance. Spying has been represented as a largely random endeavor, with no anticipation nor plans, limited (mana-based or time-based) preparation, almost non-existent counterintelligence, surprising lack of interaction, and worst of all - lack of real strategic decisions. Game designers shouldn't be (fiercely) blamed for that state, since espionage is typically an afterthought in games focused on other topics. But I wouldn't have that excuse in the game called Espiocracy!

[h2]TLDR[/h2]
Novel espionage system proposed by Espiocracy introduces long-term gameplay, large constructive possibilities, and series of connected strategic decisions. 1/3 part has been already described in the previous dev diary (Actors).

Transcript: Pie chart divided to three parts: actors, contacts and targets (as a one part), and the last part not described yet.

The second third, in short, is a collection of long-term connections: player can target or contact (or both) the actors, investing resources over longer periods of time.

[h2]Targets[/h2]

Let's start with targets, since they are closer to the popular understanding of espionage.

Targets represent surveillance, research, team following the actor, operatives recruiting people close to the actor. The word "target" frequents military dictionaries and can be immediately understood by invoking CIA actions after 9/11 where Osama Bin Laden became the absolute top target on their list.

Long-term targeting leads to the acquisition of knowledge (tactical intelligence) which in turn unlocks various operation types and improves their outcomes. Intuitively, long-term surveillance of the target enables successful attack. But it's not (only) a waiting game - during targeting, opportunities arise, events give the player ability to interact, there are more and less risky approaches.

To streamline the experience, not only actors are targeted but also countries. You can prioritize targeting USSR as a whole country over targeting Joseph Stalin, leading to long-term acquisition of country-wide sources that will outlive the Man of Steel.

Limited number of targets and importance of their ordering (more on that at the end) leads to a multitude of strategies: covering countries or covering specific threatening actors, targeting opposite intelligence agencies, turtling by targeting many actors inside own country, focusing on proxy wars, meddling in relations between superpowers, choosing between threats to ideology and to the country, or even being a gun for hire (targeting on behalf of another agency).

[h2]Contacts[/h2]

Contacts are the missing constructive side of espionage which - as far as I'm aware - hasn't been really represented in strategy games featuring spying. This fact on its own is surprising, given that many real-world intelligence agencies have formalized notion of intelligence contacts, and that any good spy book (whether it's le Carre or Mitrokhin) teaches you that spying revolves around contacts.

Contacts represent long-term relation between the player and actors: establishment of communication channel (non-trivial - contact attempt can be rejected), meetings, trust, exchange of information, and various direct interactions. They are implied to be covert, which means that you can contact both friends and foes. In fact, the latter was one of the main inspirations for the design: allegedly, British intelligence services contacted Islamic extremist organizations in the UK and struck a deal in which they promised them freedom of operation in exchange for not endangering British interests and citizens. In Espiocracy, you'll be able to do exactly that.

And many more things:

• support financially, technologically, by passing intelligence materials, by lending operatives
  
• protect in terms of physical and counterintelligence security
  
• smuggle people and weapons, arm organizations
  
• use contacts in operations to improve outcomes and lower risks
  
• escalate or deescalate conflicts
  
• threaten, make ultimatums, enforce rules
  
• influence or even control actions of the actor
  

Similarly to targets, long-term engagement leads to acquisition of the key parameter (trust) which unlocks more intimate actions. However, here this development is even more reliant on explicit decisions - there are certain barriers, which can be crossed only after the player decides to engage more heavily, back the actor in a specific conflict, or cross some boundary in relations. And, as the name of the parameter suggests, trust can be not only acquired but also lost.

Overall, contacts are a long-term game of multipolar diplomacy, where betting on the right horses can provide hefty returns. For instance, a political actor can be groomed - supported, protected, trusted - and reach high-ranking position or even become the leader of a country (maybe even own country ). You can also expect the classic dilemma of status quo, where it may be actually better to avoid elimination of a well-known enemy - contacted, targeted, predictable - because that could allow a new unknown enemy to enter the stage, requiring new expenses and operations.

To top it off, contacts are fully interactive on both receiving ends - there are opportunities and responsibilities, you can expect that some contacts will tip you off about upcoming events, attempt to exploit you, ask for help in times of troubles, or even propose participation in morally and legally doubtful endeavors. Actors can also attempt to establish contact with you on their own (this will be however fully configurable, on the spectrum from completely inaccessible to encouraging walk-ins in embassies).

[h2]The List[/h2]

All contacts and targets of an agency build a list. The order is critical - top target will receive most resources and most attention of the personnel - and serves as a handy way to abstract away micromanagement. Number of possible contacts and targets is determined by the number of operatives, with targets requiring more resources (as constant surveillance requires obviously more attention than rare one-to-one meetings).

The existence of such lists in every agency provides an obvious counterintelligence mechanic. The list can be approximated externally or directly acquired as intelligence material, and then used for direct counter-operations - such as reverting a known contact into double agent, or preparing an ambush in case a known target is attacked.

Contact & target system provides one more, even stronger case for counterintelligence. Since these actions are carried out by intelligence agencies, they can be contacted directly to sort out the matters. Even at the peak of the Cold War, KGB and CIA maintained communication channel. One can also think about more complex interaction between agencies - such as joint operations, training, sharing intelligence and technology, borrowing resources, signing armistices, or even purposefully deceiving the opposite side.

[h2]Final Remarks[/h2]
The topic of intelligence agencies will be further explored in the next dev diary, to be posted on October 15th.

If you're not already wishlisting Espiocracy, consider doing it:
https://store.steampowered.com/app/1670650/Espiocracy/

There is also a small community around Espiocracy:


---
"In a war of machines, the human element is, in the long run, more important than the machines themselves" - William Donovan

What's happening / TLDR: Developer diaries introduce details of Espiocracy - Cold War strategy game in which you play as an intelligence agency. You can catch up with the most important dev diary (The Vision) and find out more on Steam page.

---

Welcome back,

Captivating games, movies, books have one trait in common - they tell fascinating stories. After all, storytelling is what we've been doing for thousands of years, gathered around the fire, learning how to hunt, inventing creation myths, and we continue to do so in the era of a global village.

Strategy games - despite their chess-spreadsheet-like nature - also tell stories, although usually implicitly, through unexpected outcomes or conflicts between players. Direct character-based stories were traditionally reserved for RPGs and adjacent genres, until titles such as Crusader Kings and Rimworld - both important inspirations for me - showed how a strategy game can feature rich storytelling based on characters. Espiocracy will push this side of the genre a little bit further.

What if we tie everything to characters? What if the world and countries represent groups of characters rather than bags of stats? What if characters include also organizations and sectors? There is better word for this kind of entity, coming straight out of the espionage lingo: actors, from the ability to act.

Transcript: Actors are tied to type-specific actions, managing relations, following agendas, developing capabilities, interacting with the player, and most importantly - building stories.

Actors will keep the world alive, create narratives from many points of view, represent plots running autonomously in the complex world. It should also not escape your attention that this system is designed precisely for a true espionage-based strategy game. Support a leader hostile to the enemy? Check. Break into Boeing design bureau? Check. Recruit Marilyn Monroe? Check. Use Yuri Gagarin in propaganda campaign? Check. Fund George Orwell? Check. Kidnap Gerard Depardieu? Wait a moment!

[h2]Actor Types[/h2]

Transcript: Table follows pattern of type (example subtypes) - example actors. Leader (president, military) - Stalin, MacArthur. Author (writer, director) - Orwell, Tarkovsky. Inventor (scientist, engineer) - Crick, von Braun. Pioneer (astronaut) - Gagarin. Celebrity (model) - Monroe. Political party (mass, cadre) - CPSU, Democratic. Social movement (pro-view, anti-view) - separatist, Ban the Bomb. Influential company (industry) - Volkswagen. Top research institution (nuclear) - Kurchatov Institute. Influential media (newspaper, TV channel) - Pravda, CBS. Large mob (Italian, Japanese) - Cosa Nostra, Yakuza. Trade union (miner) - NUM. Terrorist (local) - Red Army Faction. Guerilla (exiles) - 26th of July Movement. Religious (Orthodox) - Moscow Patriarchate. Sector (media, industry) - French media, US industry.

Actors are both historical and generated. The latter option is much more involved than a simple procedural generation: population serves as the source (to the point where, for instance, a leader can hold views that were popular when they were growing up), actors create other actors, void after loss of an actor is filled by another contender. Proper balance between historical and generated actors can be a personal thing for the player, therefore it will be highly configurable and moddable.

[h2]Activity[/h2]

Main actions are intuitive and correspond to the actor (sub)type. Examples include:

Transcript: Leader (president) can, for instance, declare a war or sign a treaty. Author (writer) can write a book or give an interview. Political party can promote a candidate or support a movement. Social movement can protest or influence politicians.

There are also three universal groups of actions:

• Interacting with other actors (to the point of friends and enemies)
  
• Balancing internal growth and external actions (spending limited resources)
  
• Moving between countries (rare but sometimes significant, for instance former leader fleeing country after an invasion to establish government-in-exile)
  

Activity shapes not only the history, but also the fate of the actor. Some actions are more optimal in specific contexts, but actors - like in the real life - are not always rational. Instead, their actions are guided by competence, traits, and goals. It adds an interesting layer of complexity especially at the level of leaders, as you can probably imagine consequences of electing an incompetent leader...

[h2]Influence[/h2]

All actors represented in the game are actually influential actors - important or at least potentially important for the fate of the whole country.

Actor's influence is quantified to a single parameter, defined by:

• Recent actions and their results
  
• Current role in the legal system
  
• Size (in the case of organizations)
  
• Relations
  
• History
  

As with many other features of the game, influence is two-way street. On the one hand, it is meticulously acquired by actors over years. On the other hand, it unlocks actions, defines their reach, and is subject to dramatic changes. For example: a writer with low influence suddenly succeeds with a bestseller and hugely increases own influence, because now the country (or even the whole world) listens to the interviews and waits for the next book. And the player can interact with the author to push them into ridiculing Western or Eastern systems... (Yes, Orwell-Huxley vibes!)

Influence system neatly clarifies some complex mechanisms. Some leaders have no legal power (not enough influence) to declare war on their own, authors writing in lingua franca English have wider global reach (higher influence) than other authors, cartel parties can naturally emerge by accumulating influence and gatekeeping it from new parties, and so on.

[h2]Great Man Theory[/h2]

Let's address an elephant in the room. Is it "Great Man Theory The Game"?

The answer is straightforward: no.

Classic (Napoleonic) great man theory is out of the question, since there are incompetent leaders and those who are competent, can posses ill-fated views and negative traits.

Modern great man theory deserves more detailed rebuttal. Folks in discussions adjacent to Paradox games often equal the theory with apples and oranges. First approach, probably closer to the historical discourse, assumes that high-ranking individuals were largely products of their environments. I think this is a fair approach to history and I reflect that in the design: individual persons come from and are rooted in the population, population itself creates actors and is represented by actors such as social movements. In addition, fate of many actors lies in the hands of the common folk (by changing influence, reacting to actions, voting in elections, and so on) - which is also tied directly to views held by the population.

Now on to the oranges: sometimes discussion around great man theory quickly evolves into discussion about historical determinism. It's not hard to find voices equaling the theory with a view that Stalin, in the case of earlier death, would be replaced by an approximate copy of Stalin, because high-ranking individuals are deterministic slaves of history (shout-out to Tolstoy!). This approach is strongly rejected by the game on very simple grounds - deterministic history would be boring.

[h2]Final Remarks[/h2]

The next dev diary will explore the first method of interaction with actors - Contacts and Targets - on October 1st.

If you're not already wishlisting Espiocracy, consider doing it:
https://store.steampowered.com/app/1670650/Espiocracy/

There is also a small community around Espiocracy:


---
"Chess is not a game. Chess is well-defined form computation. Real games, real life consists of bluffing, of little tactics and deception, of asking yourself what is the other man going to think I mean to do" - John Von Neumann

What's happening / TLDR: Developer diaries introduce details of Espiocracy - Cold War strategy game in which you play as an intelligence agency. You can catch up with the most important dev diary (The Vision) and find out more on Steam page.

---

Howdy,

After ideologies (DD#3) and populations (DD#4), we will explore the third corner of political triangle in Espiocracy: political parties.

Transcript: Triangle of political parties, populations, and ideologies with views.

Here, political parties are living and breathing entities. Very much like the Cold War parties, they can be weaponized, serve as voice magnifier for the population, or, conversely, suppress the masses as an omnipresent organ of control.

To ensure tight integration with core gameplay, political parties are represented in the wider framework of non-state influential actors, alongside other organizations and individuals. To summarize this concept in one sentence: every country has a set of actors who shape the history and directly interact with the player. The next dev diary will be in full dedicated to various actors - meanwhile, we will take closer look at parties as a special case of an influential actor in the game.

[h2]Properties of Political Parties[/h2]

Transcript: Czechoslovak National Socialist Party. Cadre party representing liberal nationalism. Founded in 1897, known for WW2 resistance. Further described by example sections of: internal parameters, factions, recent activities, relationships, tactical intelligence, goals, future activities, past interactions.

Political parties are divided into four subtypes: mass, cadre, cadre-mass, and underground.

Particular subtypes differ in actions and growth dynamics. Mass party will focus on attracting millions of people, building large bureaucratic apparatus, and funding its activity with dues collected from members. Cadre party, instead, will cater to other influential actors, raise funds between wealthy individuals, and preserve hermetic staff composition, for better or worse.

As a whole organization, parties are associated with a single ideology, supplied by a set of additional views. However, they also have internal life in the form factions with ideologies and views of their own. In the case of CSNS, 91% of members subscribe to Zenkl's faction of liberal nationalism, which understandably dominates the party. At the same time, there is a small faction, led by Slechta, which prefers moderate socialism. Following real life events, Zenkl's faction can be purged out of the party, leading to the change of primary ideology, dropping "nationalist" from the name, and changing subtype. In addition to this example, factions are involved in a few more processes, such as choice of the candidate for elections or bloc parties absorbing smaller parties.

[h2]Activity of Political Parties[/h2]

Political parties have long-term goals, defined by previous and current situation. Objectives are fairly simple and range from survival to dominating global political life. These, along with possibilities (defined by members, funds, and so on), translate into actions. Non-comprehensive list of examples includes:

• Intensive campaigns (in addition to standard agitation)
  
• Pressing a policy (if present in legislature)
  
• Raising funds
  
• Modifying ideology
  
• Restructuring
  
• Interacting with other actors and the player in plethora of ways
  

Political parties will essentially play a game in their own decision space, balancing internal growth with external activity. At the same time, they do not exist in the void - parties develop cordial or hostile relations with other actors and the intelligence agency controlled by the player.

Without spoiling next dev diaries about the precise nature of these interactions, here is an example of an intelligence operation which can be recreated in the game: British Socialist Party received (allegedly!) financial support from CIA but with strings attached - the agency demanded suppression of the communist faction within the party.

In addition to direct interaction, there is also information-wise aspect of gameplay surrounding actors: some knowledge is hidden and has to be acquired (represented as lines crossed out in black). It can be particularly useful if you gain insight into planned actions and react before they even happen!

[h2]Position of Political Parties[/h2]

Transcript: Presidential-parliamentary democracy with two leaders: President Edvard Benes and Prime Minister Klement Gottwald. Legislature, named as Constituent National Assembly, features six parties and has coalition involving all of them. Next election is expected in two years, to the parliament, with communist party currently at the top of polls.

Fruits of the struggle for power are defined by local political system. The game features democracies and autocracies with many subtypes (such as crowned democracy or multiparty autocracy). Actual government is represented by two bodies: leader(s) and legislature. Their role and election, in addition to rules dictated by the system, depends also on the strength of the system itself and individual actors. There are also variants such as external control or de facto leader in the backseat instead of a president or a prime minister.

Position of political parties can be changed by policies. On the one hand, the reach and influence can be expanded as was the case in USSR. On the other hand, specific organizations can be outright banned, which results in either total withdrawal or transformation into an underground party. The latter status strips such a party of legal actions, but at the same time opens the gates of new illegal activities. Sometimes banning a party can - probably with the assistance of an intelligence agency - literally weaponize it, similarly to some WW2 resistance movements.

[h2]Election[/h2]

In democracies, depending on the system type, population votes for political parties, candidates proposed by political parties, jointly for both government bodies, or in a referendum regarding specific issue. Sheer popular support follows alignment between parties/issue and the population. However, it doesn't directly translate to ballot paper. Election results are skewed by:

• Voting rights (eg. women and indigenous populations barred from voting)
  
• Semi-legal suppression (eg. racial intimidation)
  
• Direct vote fraud (up to rigged or sham elections)
  
• Repressing opposition (eg. political arrests)
  

(Campaigns before elections, including propaganda operations executed by the player, do not modify election results directly - instead, they affect views in the population. This is very important, since one can promote a view among an ethnic group and do not influence elections, because this group cannot vote.)

[h2]Final remarks[/h2]

The next dev diary - "Influential actors" - will be posted on September 17th.

If you're not already wishlisting Espiocracy, consider doing it:
https://store.steampowered.com/app/1670650/Espiocracy/

There is also a small community around Espiocracy:


---
"It's got to look democratic, but we must have everything under our control" - Walter Ulbricht, First Secretary of Socialist Unity Party in East Germany (attributed)

What's happening / TLDR: Developer diaries introduce details of Espiocracy - Cold War strategy game in which you play as an intelligence agency. You can catch up with the most important dev diary (The Vision) or find out more on Steam page.

---

Hello there!

After introduction of Views & Ideologies in the previous dev diary, today we take a quick look at holders of these beliefs: populations.

Common folk forms the backbone of historical simulation in Espiocracy. Representation of populations is tailored to the Cold War processes, such as migrations, conflicts, and decolonization. Role of the masses in the game can be summarized in two words: political impact.

Transcript: Population of a country is described by geographic distribution of ethnic groups which hold views and have parameters. Populations make history in elections, movements, influential actors, and participation in conflicts. They are affected by propaganda campaigns, history before 1946, crises, conflicts, policies, migration.

[h2]Population Distribution[/h2]

Instead of provinces known from other grand strategy games, Espiocracy proposes area-based representation of world data. Currently, the design relies on population grids of cells 50 by 50 kilometers.

Transcript: Czechoslovakia is covered by 19 cells with different shades of blue, corresponding to population density.

Every cell - in addition to classic terrain modifiers, supplied by history and economy - contains number of people belonging to specific ethnic group. It allows fairly granular gameplay around internal conflicts: ethnic animosities within the same area, civil wars and local interaction with them, separatist campaigns with whole regions pressing for independence. At the same time, cells assist international conflicts, up to nuclear war and famous comparison of "dense and vulnerable USA" to "vast and hard to target USSR". (In case it's not clear: cells reside only in the population layer, borders won't be square-ish!)

Most populous places - capitals, aglomerations, industrial complexes - have special status of a population center. First and foremost, it defines them as locations of intelligence operations, providing different environments within the same country (for instance: West German Frankfurt in comparison to West Berlin). Moreover, they play important role in conflicts - their takeover in a civil war can be a decisive event, loss in the conventional war is also significant (to mention again West Berlin, the game gives Soviets important reasons to capture the zone), and you can be sure that mutually assured destruction will target these places. In addition, population centers also play role in migrations, both internal (urbanization process) and external (foreign immigration to New York or Paris instead of countryside, advancing internationalization of large cities).

[h2]Population Groups[/h2]

There are various possible ways to divide population - by occupation, wealth, religion. Espiocracy will divide populations by ethnicity (understood more widely than usual, that is including religion in certain regions).

Ethnic groups won't possess any innate parameters. They will be characterized by spatial and quantitative distribution, dictated by starting date of 1946 and ongoing simulation. Moreover, they will be compared on matrix of social proximity: any two given groups will have a single value, which attempts to summarize how close they are in terms of history, language, and culture. On the one hand, it is designed for espionage-focused gameplay (as in the old joke about an American spying in Russia). On the other hand, it will assist state-ordered discrimination, internal conflicts, assimilation, and decolonization struggles.

[h2]Activity[/h2]

Populations do not have any kind of unrest parameter. Instead, their discontent is represented organically by views. But how do they translate views into political impact, apart from elections if they happen to live on the democratic side of the world?

Activity of the population is distilled into active entities, called influential actors. An actor can be anything that has concrete goals, agenda, possible actions, and - as the name suggests - real influence. In the context of population, influential actors can be:

• campaigners
  
• movements
  
• trade unions
  
• terror groups
  
• guerilla groups
  
• political leaders
  

Any of them can directly emerge from population - especially in times of crises and conflicts. This is the most important part of the gameplay: influential actors are an absolute core of Espiocracy, the most central element, on which relies the simulation and with which the player constantly interacts - and there will be more than one whole dev diary dedicated to them.

Coming back to elections, political parties are also influential actors. Their support by the population is primarily materialized in elections, but autocracies also can be politically active - for instance, banned ideologies and political parties can still function in the underground. Details of parties as a special case of an influential actor are coming in two weeks.

[h2]Final remarks[/h2]

The next dev diary - "Political parties" - will be posted on September 3rd.

If you're not already wishlisting Espiocracy, consider doing it:
https://store.steampowered.com/app/1670650/Espiocracy/

There is also a small community around Espiocracy:


---
"The liberal reward of labour, as it is to the effect of increasing wealth, so it is the cause of increasing population" - Adam Smith in The Wealth of Nations