1. Espiocracy
  2. News

Espiocracy News

Christmas Special 🎄

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.

---

Today we return to the tradition of Christmas Eve with micro-AAR (after action reports) from casual Espiocracy gameplay. Welcome to the second installment!

We play as Argentinian SIDE, starting on March 6th 1946.



Unlike many countries at the start of the game, Argentina was not directly affected by WW2. Instead, the nation underwent an essentially bloodless coup which ended the reign of Ramon Castillo and paved the way to presidency of Juan Peron. (In this run, pre-game simulation already resolved the election which historically happened in June 1946).

Our starting position, however, suffers from other disadvantages. For instance, Argentina has only a few scientific and technological paradigms mastered. Out of useful new paradigms, SIDE suggests government subsidizing development of penicillin and rocket engines. For now, electronic dreams, not to mention participation in the nuclear race, are far beyond our reach.



We will tackle the problem head-on: by prioritizing electrification and industrialization in the state budget.



Intelligence-wise, we are in relatively remote place but thankfully we our operatives speak Spanish which makes expansion into many countries much easier.



Chile is our first direction of expansion, an almost obvious choice, given rocky history of relations between Chile and Argentina, active diplomatic disputes, and very long border which gives plenty of opportunities to covertly infiltrate the second country. In addition to expanding in Chile, we will slowly get a hold over domestic power centers, starting with local catholic church.



Let's check for a moment what happens on the other side of the world...



Civil wars spreading in Iran, China, and Indonesia!

On the home front, we conduct more operations against domestic actors. Here, we will recruit a family member of an Argentinian writer in exchange for employing said person at an influential organization.



In the meanwhile, civil wars spread to Mongolia.



And mainland China is overrun by communist forces in 1947, rather early.



A few months (and domestic operations) later, we may be ready for more offensive operations on Chilean ground. The first, pretty tame venture is discovered by local DINA just three days after the launch:



A series of other failed operations and increased external pressure on our counterintelligence apparatus lowered trust of local government in our capabilities - which is directly translated into available funds - from initial 47% to 40%.

However, Peron consolidates his power and establishes de facto dictatorship which cynically increases the need, bringing funding almost to the starting level.



While we carry out further operations and Spanish-themed expansion (such as a station in Lima), our neighbor undergoes a coup.



This event contributes to tensions in the region and Chile becomes our diplomatic adversary. New tools, "border build-up" and "invasion", become available.



In Peru, Belaunde becomes the president. The name rings some bells... as it turns out, in earlier days of Lima station, we acquired an opportunity to subvert him!



Although we don't have practical ability (or motivation) to execute such operation, we can sell it for pretty high price on the black market:

Disabled because I was too excited and sold it before taking the screenshot

We could launder illicit funds but it's more efficient to just steer them into another wallet, here through establishing cooperation with a Peruvian political leader.



Slow and reasonable expansion in our part of the world brings first results: solid increase of State Power Index.



Electronic and nuclear future is a tad closer.

---

Dev Diary #49 - International Organizations 🌐

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.

---

Good design of any product, counterintuitively, sometimes shouldn't be about the end result and instead should focus on the process of making it.

The Empire State Building was built in less than a year and one of the main principles behind its design was... schedule for trucks with concrete. It may be compared with the World Trade Center towers which, despite superior technology, took a decade and went far over budget to complete. While architects of the first building organized the site around trucks arriving every minute (!), the director of the second project prioritized the end result and "continually fought against compromising his architectural vision in the face of various practicalities" (more).

Game development resembles a construction site. In this context, there are mechanics that may be good for the game - and desired by the players - but which will also encourage poor or lazy code, slow down progress, or even contribute to development hell.

Having observed the development of a few mods trying to make a game out of the Cold War and modern times, I can risk a hypothesis that one of such areas is a detailed international organization, especially the United Nations. It's a graveyard of good intentions. There are endless structures, actions, details, ripple effects, and edge cases that may be really fun to read about. You could make entire games about a large room in New York or Brussels. And the players! There is always a subset of people very passionate (and vocal) about these organizations. Even in the case of this diary, folks started speculating on "what new mechanics will be revealed".

The answer is: none. Espiocracy, deliberately, uses already existing mechanics to capture the soul of international organizations. Funky details may be slowly added in the form of accumulated content (or mechanically after the release) but I intentionally avoid any deeper implementations for the sake of good design.

[h2]Control and Member States[/h2]



The game features the most influential organizations in the framework of actors.

Primary gameplay around them is focused on control. Standard actors by default have full control over their actions. For instance, many players begin with full control over their actor agencies...



...which then can be chipped away by other entities, as shown in the previous diary, and in the following example of a Soviet player controlling a Polish player:



In contrast, international organizations usually have minimal control over their actions - with exceptions such as ICJ launching investigations - and the rest is distributed between member states.



These are usually not equal. Different levels of control approximate diplomatic prowess, participation in the Security Council, or the role of the USA in NATO and the USSR in the Warsaw Pact (or observer members with nil control). As with any other actors, control gates access to proposing and ordering actions. Proposed action, depending on its details, may be further proceeded through debating-voting mechanics borrowed from governments of Espiocracy.

Types of actions depend on the subtype of the organization. Examples include:

  • Statehood-Defining (eg. UN): legitimize invasion, propose border changes, establish trust territory, call for elections
  • Legal (eg. ICJ): settle a dispute, set up an international criminal tribunal
  • Military (eg. NATO): invade, conduct exercises, share nuclear weapons
  • Regional (eg. EU): integrate economies, fund less developed countries, agree on military action
  • Common Interest (eg. BRICS): promote common views, coordinate responses

[h2]Global, Dynamic, Spyable[/h2]

In addition to evolved control mechanics, influence takes here slightly different angle:



Global influence of international organizations stems mainly from legal prerogatives and the participation of member states. Typically for actors, internal life of the organization reflects and influences the external world. United Nations - or any other organization - may evolve during a campaign into a much more influential or much more toothless entity through natural actions such as taking in powerful members or catastrophically failing in a mission (eg. the IRL death of Secretary-General in Congo in 1961).

Naturally, the dynamic nature lends itself also to the set of international organizations. All of them may be dissolved, new ones may be established through a single decision or from a series of summits, organizations may create subsidiary organizations (eg. the UN creating ICC in reaction to events analogous to war crimes of the 1990s), members may join, leave, be expelled, and so on.

Finally, let's take a brief look at more unusual espionage beats associated with international organizations:

  • A HQ with diplomats from many countries is naturally a hotbed for espionage
  • Membership gives access to good covers for operatives, allowing them to infiltrate HQ and target other members
  • For the host country, it creates interesting gameplay of both the easiest access to many useful targets and of harsh reality of dealing with a nest of spies in the homeland

[h2]Final Remarks[/h2]

This was a brief diary, unlike the AAR coming on December 24th - stay tuned!

---

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:



---
"Protocol, alcohol, and Geritol" - Adlai Stevenson, US ambassador to the UN, about diplomacy (1967)

Dev Diary #48 - Actions 🔨

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.

---

One of the earliest diaries used a metaphor of "symphony of history played by an orchestra of ___ where you modify the ensemble in the middle of performance (by assassinating the violinist and blackmailing the pianist)". Back then, the gap was filled by "views". Although they still play important & unique roles, two years later more appropriate word is "actors". These significant individuals and organizations, from political lingo: those who can act, shape history directly via actions. Today we'll look into these actions.



[h2]Basic Example[/h2]

Let's start with the simplest example: an artist creating an art piece. Such action has just a beginning, an end, and a result. In a naive simulation, writers are intrinsically motivated by fame and beliefs to write books. In the game, player agency is injected straight into this motivational vein. As an intelligence agency, you can covertly nudge actors towards actions.



Naturally, it's a battlefield between players who compete over a limited number of actors and limited ability to influence their actions, the latter measured by level of control. This intuitive 0-100 parameter can house surprising complexities (such as a politician simultaneously influenced by multiple players or a satellite intelligence agency - yes, it applies also to players! - infiltrated and manipulated by a superpower player) but at the most basic level, it's just a result of successful espionage combinations.

A domestic artist with low influence in a country destroyed by WW2 can be relatively easily snatched up with one or two operations.



Here, two agents close to the actor are enough to bring the level of control to the desired 40+.



As the actor is a film director, creating an art piece means shooting a movie:



Details of the action also depend on the level of control. Influencing the name requires higher control than ours, and so does nudging the actor to avoid the view held by the author. However, it's enough to drop the pro-communist tone. In addition to the cost of bribes and others (0.2M), we will also covertly enhance the reach of the movie. It's also worth noting that the entire process is carried out in the field by agents who run into the risk of being discovered by the actor (and abroad also by local counterintelligence services) with each intervention.

After the action is finished, its result further lives in the world. With enough luck and quality, it can spread in the region...



...influencing people...



...and intersecting many mechanics, as always in Espiocracy. The movie can be now censored in particular countries, the change in the prevalence of views may influence particular actors and their actions, fame gained by the author may subtract our level of control, and so on. In this playthrough, the story ended in a very human way, an ending which will happen sooner or later to all of us:



[h2]More Complex Actions[/h2]

Espiocracy features nearly 100 actions. Many of them explore the nooks and crannies of the world and various mechanics. They may:

  • remain covert in certain phases (eg. during fleeing from the country) or as a whole (eg. a meeting known only to involved parties)
  • require a minimal level of influence (eg. enough to gather people for a protest)
  • use resources (eg. financial support)
  • depend on external processes (eg. a reaction to ongoing civil war)
  • have very different temporal (eg. immediate public critique) and spatial (eg. diplomatic tour across many countries) features
  • and more...

In particular, actors forming the government can use state apparatus via governmental actions. They are also available to the player who - as an intelligence community - is usually a part of the government. For instance, the Soviet player can see these:



(Note the protest and protest-related decisions.)

Similar actions, depending mostly on the required influence, are available to members of the Soviet government. In further complexity (that's why we started with simple movies), governmental decisions usually have two thresholds of influence. A higher threshold allows an actor to directly order an action to be executed, which - in dance with influence mechanics - organically simulates differences between political systems and the power of people inside. A lower threshold allows an actor to propose an action which is then considered by governmental bodies.

This is the case here, where an actor - probably Beria - proposes a crackdown on protests.



(Crossed lines were not added artificially, they are used in the game to cover hidden information. This action is nominally covert. However, as member of the government we know about the process and can reasonably suspect who's behind it.)

A proposal is subject to a vote in the politburo (in which the Soviet player has one vote) which legitimizes it as a state-level action instead of an actor-level action:



That doesn't mean that an actor is now completely separated from the proposed action. When it backfires and sparks a new guerrilla group...



...it can also haunt the actor originally responsible for the mishap:



[h2]International Chess[/h2]

In a slightly more complex world of international relations (IR), the game runs into a classic conundrum of many methods multiplying many targets. A standard set of four simple international actions (subject to change)...



...expands into at least 4 actions x 200 countries = 800 possible actions for every actor participating in IR, de facto much more because established relations allow more specific actions. Imagine meaningful UI and efficient AI for that! This conundrum has been solved by giving IR meaningful frameworks.

An example of such a framework is an international issue, here represented by the "Iran Crisis" from the perspective of the Soviet player who can - as do other actors in the government - propose escalating or settling the matter:



Issues can touch territorial disputes, military presence, peace negotiations, unification, and many other facets of diplomacy (including multiple facets within the same issue). Multiple rounds of negotiations still function as actor actions, which means that they can be voted on by the government, their details can be adjusted, and they operate within the entire espionage gameplay, including... manipulating foreign decision-makers into precise international decisions.



This dev diary hints at IR in the context of actions. In the future, the topic will receive separate deep DD.

[h2]Reactions[/h2]

Returning to Iran, we can also observe meta-complexity of actions:



After Pahlavi began liberalization, other influential actors in the country reacted with critique. This is possible because an action itself also exists in the game world (as "a thought") and therefore can be the subject of other actions. Reaction can also spark further reactions - such as Pahlavi imprisoning critics - and in that way building reactive world from natural chains of actions.

(What's happening in the north-western Iran? USSR still occupies the area in early 1946 and shields the civil war waged by the Azerbaijani guerrilla. Black ink represents a region controlled by separatists with a granularity of the game's ~5x5km grid. Arrows show recent battles and gains for either side, depending on the direction of the arrow. Obviously work in progress.)

[h2]Moddability[/h2]

The system of actions in its all complexity is also fully moddable. Actions can be modified, replaced, added, and actors are robust enough to make use of any of them. The level of code flexibility is set with a few interesting total conversion mods in mind - one of them is a potential UFO / X-Files / conspiracy theory mod. For such a mod, we can add a new action using XML:



And then either use hooks to existing actions (perhaps ambush actions could suffice here) or write new ones in C# Harmony patches. Et voilà!



[h2]Final Remarks[/h2]

As always, screenshots show work in progress and contain countless incorrect details (yes, Russians shouldn't really "meets members of Kyrgyzs" on the 9th screenshot but they did in this playthrough...).

See you on December 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:



---
"Every cause produces more than one effect" - Herbert Spencer

Dev Diary #47 - Espionage Gameplay 🕵️

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.

---

Best ideas can be conveyed in one sentence. For Espiocracy, it's roughly: play as an intelligence agency in the golden era of espionage. Such ideas, however, can pave the road to hell. There are usually multiple reasons why an exciting approach has not been implemented yet - and why it stays that way until someone stubborn (and stupid) enough executes it.

Anticipating these issues, development was preceded by a critical analysis of espionage systems in other games. Conclusions not only pointed to the long list of avoidable sins but also suggested a few significant chicken-or-egg conundrums that need direct solutions:

  • Player persona undermines political leaders or political processes or both (DD#1)
  • Intelligence missions are either inconsequential or cause disruptions too frustrating for a strategy game
  • Combination of many possible targets and methods creates decision space difficult to logically use or even represent in the interface
  • Espionage happens in small rooms, dark alleys, bugged devices - places distant by principle - and featuring that in a strategy game leads to abstractions of abstractions of distant abstractions

Core gameplay has been designed from zero to solve these fundamental problems. However, it still took countless iterations over two years to arrive at a solid implementation. It is mature enough to finally receive the big-picture view in the 47th (!) developer diary. Buckle up!

Following the formula of recent diaries, we'll explore the topic from the perspective of two different countries and times (although this time it will be much more static and text-based, as always due to construction site of a game).

[h2]West Germany and East Germany, 1960s[/h2]

There's no better place to start than a conflict between East German Stasi and West German BND. Both players come from opposite ideologies and blocs, competing over the highest stakes possible - statehood, cold war going hot, even a risk of becoming a nuclear wasteland.

This is right where the espionage angle shines. Playing as the BND, there's no single "Damage East Germany" button. There are dozens of them in the form of usable materials (intelligence assets, essentially).

Every one of them can be weaponized. This is where espionage becomes instantly palpable instead of abstract: we can mobilize East German dissidents for a propaganda campaign, publicize secrets to break promising careers of East German generals, or exploit risky opportunities to get critical insight into nuclear posture across the border. More than just dropping abstraction, this system prefers unique discrete resources over continuous numbers (such as tactical intelligence; previously seen in some dev diaries, now completely phased out from the game), helping both with intuitive immersion and with establishing more manageable decision space for players.

Over time, these assets matured like wine into five categories:

  • Controlled Actors (nationally significant individuals and organizations). As always in Espiocracy, a lot revolves around actors. They are by design an ideal target for intelligence operations and perhaps the most critical backbone of an interesting espionage system. Here, the battle is more precisely fought over control, a limited 0-100 parameter that can be chopped off by any number of entities (including non-player ones, eg. a political leader controlling a political party).
  • Agents. Disposable people who can be used in operations and other actions, usually associated with professions, backgrounds, or indirectly with some actors.
  • Strategic Materials. Documents and other materials that can influence entire populations and nations.
  • Secrets. Accounts of controversial actions or traits of an actor, which can be used to blackmail, control, or eliminate.
  • Opportunities. Ability to pursue an operation, use any other asset, exploit vulnerability, and so on.

Naturally, players never acquire an abstract agent or an unknown opportunity. Assets in these categories are extensively derived from the high stakes of the Cold War. Here are sample tools that you can use as an intelligence agency to wage a war of ideologies:

  • Controlled Actors: political leaders, political parties, authors, celebrities, top media
  • Agents: journalists, dissidents, defectors, undercover funders
  • Strategic Materials: books, movies, speeches, conspiracy theories
  • Secrets: actions or traits in conflict with professed ideology
  • Opportunities: breaking stories potentially promoting an ideology (such as the Moon landing) or subverting an ideology (such as launching an invasion)

Every tool has specific modes of maintenance and use, and many of them can interact with each other, some even to the point of operational combinations where through an opportunity you acquire a secret which is then used to control an actor who then provides a steady supply of agents who later...

Returning to the BND, we can try striking the heart of the East German apparatus by revealing that the party has many members with Nazi past. Potentially, it may lead to tensions inside the Warsaw Pact, political purges, and temporary paralysis in the government. On the espionage level, it will likely open many opportunities amid the chaos and disgruntlement.

From the perspective of Stasi, this would not come like a bolt from the blue. Intelligence agencies usually know secrets of domestic actors (especially Stasi) and in the scope of counterintelligence, players are also usually aware whether the knowledge about such secrets is wider or more narrow. Stasi likely knows or suspects that BND can use this secret. East German players therefore can engage BND in operational games to rob them of the secret - for instance, destroy the evidence or defuse it through diplomatic backchannels. And when the time of use comes, it can be still met with countermeasures (eg. censorship) and even counterattacks (obviously, accusing West German parties of the same sin).

Moreover, these assets are also a battleground between intelligence agencies. The secret from the East German communist party may be falsely manufactured by the Stasi, served to precisely surveilled assets, and an attempt to use it may burn West German opportunities, agents, or even controlled actors.

[h2]United Kingdom, 1950s[/h2]

Tense situation between the two Germanies resembles Carl Sagan's quote about the nuclear arms race ("two sworn enemies standing waist deep in gasoline, one with three matches, the other with five") but it's not the case for many other playable countries. When there's no mortal enemy at the gates, espionage gameplay can become more expansive and geographical.

Fading empire of the United Kingdom is a good example of such an angle. Instead of collecting secrets and exploits, British player in Espiocracy is usually more concerned with another set of core espionage mechanics: networks. Players build networks as a foundation for all the other activities. Their nodes (and connections in some cases) are primarily used to handle assets and conduct operations.

There are three main types of networks:

  1. Espionage. Usually intelligence stations (DD#44 although already slightly different; in one sentence, these are foreign outposts, often located in embassies, which safely host operatives on the foreign ground).
  2. Smuggling. Routes to covertly infiltrate and exfiltrate people or move objects (usually strategic materials, from weapons to uranium ore), usually with the use of geography such as mountains or green borders.
  3. Propaganda. Entities influencing particular countries (not necessarily the host, for instance a Russian language radio in allied Portugal).

Once the financial market becomes globalized (usually in the 70s-80s), players can weave a fourth - financial - network to move and launder money. Potentially, later a fifth network may appear (internet/hacking, currently in early tests).

British player can, inter alia, pursue more aggressive domestic nuclear program by establishing smuggling routes from Congo and then acquiring and moving uranium ore (a strategic material). Geographically, this also may coincide with reinforcing propaganda network in Africa to limit decolonization. More intelligence stations may not be needed at the moment but some fundamental presence - larger than IRL history where MI5 staff in Kenya counted just a few officers - will be important to limit the influence of French SDECE and some of the anti-colonial players.

Networks, in principle, are one more step at making espionage more palpable. As the previous example of East vs West Germany shows, they aren't necessarily very important for medium-sized players (although there's some limited role in two Germanies, especially of smuggling routes, that was omitted for clarity). Instead, interestingly, this part of core gameplay serves both the largest global players (like the UK) and the smallest ones - like Andorra, which becomes an important node for some networks and therefore its minuscule intelligence section of local police can still tap into fascinating opportunities and other intelligence assets (not to mention later gameplay and becoming tax heaven!).

[h2]Behind The Scenes[/h2]

► If you're following this dev diaries for a long time (or worse: if you're reading them all in one shot), all the espionage mechanics in this dev diary compared to bits and bites in previous dev diaries may be rather confusing. Sorry for that! It's a low price for transparent development in the open. We made a long way from initial naive ideas such as "contacts and targets" to current comprehensive combinations of dissidents and smugglers.
► Many core improvements were driven by an unusual approach to AI, as described in 39th dev diary. Most notably, chess-like implementations, terminology, and lessons helped to shape intelligence tools by looking at some parts of player agency as pieces, movements, threats, captures, sacrifices, and so on.
► The list of sins in espionage mechanics, mentioned in the introduction, is quite long. Among the most important ones that this game attempts to avoid are: focusing on the most boring parts of the intelligence world (eg. bureaucracy, knowledge tax, corruption), prioritizing non-interactive background sections of espionage (such as signals intelligence), lack of meta-espionage balance (severely too much or not enough spy-vs-spy), lack of differences between countries and intelligence agencies (despite vast IRL gap between, say, KGB and intelligence section of Canadian police forces).
► In a few more significant core changes that didn't make it yet into this dev diary: awkward and outdated "top operatives" evolved into mechanically aligned "top sections"; abstract-ish parameters such as local intelligence evolved into meaningfully composed parameters of parameters (local intelligence now consists of familiarity with language, topography, and so on); control over actors slowly solidifies as a rich mechanic that even influences players directly, eg. Soviet player partially controls actors of satellite intelligence communities.

---

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 Intelligence Services of East and West have given Europe over fifty years of peace - the longest the Continent has ever known. They did so by keeping their leaders from being surprised" - Markus Wolf, chief of East German HVA

Hooded Horse Strategy Publisher Sale

Hi everyone! Espiocracy and other games published by Hooded Horse are all featured at the Hooded Horse Publisher Sale. Come check it out!

Hooded Horse Strategy Publisher Sale

[previewyoutube][/previewyoutube]