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:
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 voilĂ !
[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
---
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 voilĂ !
[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
