Version control systems are widely used in computing education, yet students frequently engage with them only as submission mechanisms rather than as scaffolds for self-regulated learning. Drawing on nudge theory, this study investigates whether low-cost, non-coercive interventions can shift students toward more authentic version control practices. Using a quasi-experimental design with historical controls, four nudges were introduced in an introductory programming course of approximately 200 students: an expected workflow, clickable issue links, individual workflow feedback, and cohort positioning. Each nudge was designed to target a specific behavioral mechanism and a corresponding phase of self-regulation. Results show a substantial shift in behavior compared to five prior cohorts: students committed significantly more frequently, engaged nearly universally with issue tracking (98%), and closed issues predominantly via commit messages (96% closure rate). Survey responses indicate that students with limited prior experience reported significant gains in perceived proficiency and could identify which nudges were most influential. These findings show that carefully designed choice architecture can meaningfully support adoption of self-regulated version control practices at scale.