• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.

Tinto Talks #29 - 18th of September 2024

Welcome everyone to another Tinto Talks, the Happy Wednesday where we inform you about how things will work in our super secret game with the codename Project Caesar.

In today's Tinto Talks we will delve into a few different and not entirely related topics, but they are important for what we need to talk about as they will be referenced a fair bit in future Tinto Talks.

Prosperity & Devastation
In Project Caesar this is a single value in a location ranging from -100% to +100%, where positive is prosperity and negative is devastation.

Prosperity represents how prosperous and resourceful a location is. A prosperous location increases development over time. Prosperity will slowly rise, unless different negative circumstances reduce it. If it goes negative it will cause devastation.

There is no direct way for the player to increase prosperity, but having a peaceful country will have it increase slowly over time.

prosperity.png

‘Market Fairs’ is a nice privilege to give.


Devastation represents how ravaged a location is. It includes burnt-down farms and abandoned villages, and the biggest sources of devastation are blockades and occupation.

It has a rather huge impact on a location over time, reducing how much food and raw materials it produces and the population over time.

If you have high devastation in any location in a province, the Age of Renaissance has an advance that enables a cabinet action, where you can focus on recovering devastation in a province, until it has recovered fully.

Ideally, you do not want any sort of war or conflict happening on your own lands.

devastation.png

Not ideal, let's end this war asap…

Development
One concept that has been in many of our previous GSGs is development. It has been used for various things, but in Project Caesar development represents how cultivated the land is, and how much it is used by the pops living there. The higher the development, the more people can live there, and the more it can be exploited.

As mentioned in earlier Tinto Talks, this is a value that the player mostly only has indirect control over, but you can have your cabinet working on improving development in an entire province at once.

Development helps a fair bit in improving the quality of a location, but all of these values here are still constantly being balanced.

development.png

The Woods probably has some other advantage…


Roads
We have had roads in many of our former games, and this game will also have roads. In Project Caesar this includes one of the most in-depth systems of roads we have ever made. A road is basically a connection between two land locations that reduces the proximity calculations from 40 down to 20. Most settled nations start with the capacity to build gravel roads, but there are three advances in later ages that will introduce new types of roads that can be built. Those roads will reduce proximity further, and increase movement speed for armies.

Now this may sound like it could be a lot of micromanagement if we had used the ways railroads were built in Victoria 2, or how roads were built in Imperator, but we have a few easier ways to build or upgrade road networks.

build_road.png

Here we have Kalmar selected and we are looking at building a road to Idre, which technically is in Norway at the start of the game. You can always build a road INTO the location of any country that has a positive opinion of you, so road networks can and will be connected for trade.
  • The green locations are locations you can afford to build a road from Kalmar to at the moment.
  • Striped locations are locations with a road network.
  • The white-outlined locations are the proposed path for the road between Kalmar and Idre.

Road building is one of the most important and fun parts of the control-growing gameplay loop.


Piracy & Privateers
To clarify here, a privateer is a pirate sponsored by a specific country. The ability to sponsor privateers has several different ways to unlock. First of all, every nation has access to an advance in the Age of Absolutism called Letter of Marque that reduces the cost for privateers while also making them sturdier. There are also unique advances in the Age of Discovery for some countries that allow them to hire privateers, while if you pick the Diplomatic Focus in the Age of Renaissance you have the possibility to recruit privateers that early.

Sponsoring a Privateer can be done in an area, and cost about 250 sailors per privateer, and 10 sailors each month they are active. A pirate/privateer in an area, depending on its current strength, can reduce the maritime presence of all non-friendly countries in all sea zones in that area. This hurts relations and will give them a way to get a casus belli on you though.


So how do you fight privateers? Well, you have a fleet of ships in any location in that sea area, and they will actively reduce the capacity of those pirates. Galleys are a bit better than heavy ships at hunting pirates, but light ships are by far the best at dealing with pirates, where a single light ship is about ten times as effective as a heavy ship at the start of the game.


privateers.png

You need sailors for your privateers, or they disappear..

There is a situation in the later half of the 16th century where piracy will start to grow in certain areas of the map. Pirates also have a chance to spawn from locations with pirate covens. These are buildings that peasants will build in coastal locations where control is very low.

privilege.png

This privilege when granted to the Burghers will help your privateers be more cost effective…




Stay tuned, as next week we will focus on Conquest, Integration and Casus Belli’s.
 

Attachments

  • development.png
    development.png
    387,2 KB · Views: 0
Last edited:
  • 144Love
  • 138Like
  • 7
  • 5
  • 4
Reactions:
It's not. Erase EU4 from your mind.
And from what we've seen development has literally zero direct effect on the production from a single building, so that comparison doesn't actually fit.
My mistake then. I haven’t actually caught up with most of the previous Tinto Talks before August.
I mean, Pavia already talked about how it's a starter algorithm and WIP. Absolutely give feedback, but "I don't understand, it doesn't make sense" probably just means they need some feedback and some tweaking, not an indication of mechanical function.
In my defense, I did give my reasoning for raising development in the Tarim Basin’s oasis cities and and the Nile south of Egypt. I’ll have to check what was going on east of Kiev in this time period.
 
In theory it could be added, but removing roads is rather time consuming in real life.
In real life, roads without any repairs/maintenance to them become less and less unsuable over time. That was true when roads where just wider paths between fields/forest, and it is true in modern times, when we use asphalt roads...

But i feel, implementing any type of decay to roads would make game even more complicated. Which might be interesting aspect, but in other type of game, maybe one focused on economy rather than politics & warfare...

Then, again I still think major rivers should have a chance for 'flood' or 'high tide' (given other conditions where meet- like severe winter few months earlier) and make itself noncrossable without permament bridges/ferries... such bridges could be destroyed by armies, to stop/slow down enemy armies...
 
Roads are "all" the connections.. so from Stockholm to Kalmar its about 9 "road" connections between locations.
So is it safe to assume, locations could be connect by a road, even if its not the shortest path... in some extreme examples, distance between 2 locations would be higher if going "strait line" than by moving arround...

one example could be: road that's going arround mountain province (passing 2-3 extra locations on the way) vs shortest path being strait through 1-2 mountain locations without roads...

Generaly my question simplifies to technical implementation of either of 2 options below:

So assuming that... each location is a node in graph and edges connecting nodes have a cost (which is affected by roads/building etc.)
Distance for control/trade mechanics between 2 nodes will be calculated as sum of all edges on the way and:
option1. path will be chosen as minimum number of nodes passed (shortest way always), if more then 1 option exists, 'cheapest one' is chosen
option2. path will be chosen to minimize the cost (cheapest path, which might include more nodes on the way, than option 1)

Which one would it be?
Option2 seems more natural approach, option1 might be cheaper in terms of CPU power used to calculate it :
changing cost between 2 locations in option2 might require a bunch of nodes to recalculate their distance to capitol/trade centers), while same change will require only to recalculate connections going between these 2 nodes... (although finding out which nodes are connected by this node, might be most costly than just simply recursive calculation of all nodes in same country + markets nearby -making cheaper connection to your market by building a road between some locations should be able to flip some of locations on the edge of market to switch where they are transporting their goods for trade, f.e building some roads between Kraków and Warszawa might make some locations from Riga and Lubeck Markets to switch and start sending trade towards Kraków instead...)
 
Last edited:
  • 2Like
Reactions:
So assuming that... each location is a node in graph and edges connecting nodes have a cost (which is affected by roads/building etc.)
Distance for control/trade mechanics between 2 nodes will be calculated as sum of all edges on the way and:
option1. path will be chosen as minimum number of nodes passed (shortest way always), if more then 1 option exists, 'cheapest one' is chosen
option2. path will be chosen to minimize the cost (cheapest path, which might include more nodes on the way, than option 1)
From gameplay perspective, option to choose between fastest arrival and least attrition would be nice. There could even be some automation in the path selection, while in peace choose least attrition, while in war choose fastest arrival. Of course the best alternative may not be either of the extremes, but the extremes are easier to calculate. Then again, creating algo for calculating the best option, between extremes, may be necessary to have a competitive AI.

In EU4 new world the pathfinder likes to take long detours to avoid uncolonized provinces, I often set path manually for a faster arrival. Don't like that I have to do that.
 
  • 2Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Muscow more developed than Cracow and Livonian order more developed than whole Poland??? Where did you get that info from
Cracow was the leading city in central European trade connecting West to East. Also in 1364 2nd university in central Europe was founded here. Also under reign of Casimir the Great city flourished. Cracow was way more developed than some city in the middle of taiga and part of Mongol Horde as well as Livonian forest full of pagans
 
From gameplay perspective, option to choose between fastest arrival and least attrition would be nice. There could even be some automation in the path selection, while in peace choose least attrition, while in war choose fastest arrival. Of course the best alternative may not be either of the extremes, but the extremes are easier to calculate. Then again, creating algo for calculating the best option, between extremes, may be necessary to have a competitive AI.

In EU4 new world the pathfinder likes to take long detours to avoid uncolonized provinces, I often set path manually for a faster arrival. Don't like that I have to do that.
I wasnt even talking about unit movement, but just about distance between locations for purposes of market/ control mechanics...
 
I wasnt even talking about unit movement, but just about distance between locations for purposes of market/ control mechanics...
Are there different formulas for calculating spread of control and unit movement? Or are they the same, terrain and roads have same impact on both (when on land)?

I'd think the total CPU cost for calculating control is much less than that for calculating unit movements, as the latter quite likely happens much more frequently. So, if they come up with good algorithms for unit movement, there should be no issues with calculating control spread.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Are there different formulas for calculating spread of control and unit movement? Or are they the same, terrain and roads have same impact on both (when on land)?

I'd think the total CPU cost for calculating control is much less than that for calculating unit movements, as the latter quite likely happens much more frequently. So, if they come up with good algorithms for unit movement, there should be no issues with calculating control spread.
I don't know, i'm not a member of development team, but every colonised location needs to have their distance to capitol/ nearest few markets (to check which one is the closest) as well as cost for moving to all direcly connected locations and that information will have to be stored to be used every tick(month? Day?), and updated whenever distance costs in some range ( idk, maybe 20-30 hops) changes... units might just use that information stored in every location ;)
 
  • 2Like
  • 1
Reactions:
It seems blockading is going to be a bit too powerful right now, will we be able to send out light ships to do blockade running? Because it seems completly contrary to how real maritime warfare works that one side just dominates the sea while the other just has to suffer a blockade.

Being able to punch up a bit more in the naval game is a red line, if we have the same eu4 crap where the greater naval power just domnates than I will not be getting project caesar. Not fixing the naval game is a dealbreaker. And at the moment you seem to be making it worse.
 
  • 1
  • 1Like
Reactions:
In theory it could be added, but removing roads is rather time consuming in real life.
Maybe roads could reuire a small upkeep and if you don't pay it they start ticking down to dissappearing?
you don't use your warfleet to privateer in PC
Can you use your warfleets to run blockades? Because at the moment there seems to be no reason to have a warfleet unelss you have the bigger one than anyone you plan on fighting. Which is how it is in EU4. Winner takes it all and the loser just keeps their boats in port to not lose them until the next war where they have more boats than the enemy.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
We have some of the old Roman roads that survived as routes throughout the Medieval period, such as the Via Egnatia, already scripted in the setup. But that the routes would still be similar doesn't mean that the roads are the same; in general terms, those that survived were replaced by the Medieval type of road, as the maintenance on the Roman style was in general terms not possible anymore.
Hey, I’ve been thinking—if players can restore the Roman Empire and its cultural heritage in the game, wouldn’t it be fascinating to also bring back their road construction methods? Having a unique invention in the tech tree that lets us restore and even upgrade these ancient techniques before asphalt roads came into play! I think it would add a really special touch, especially given how significant Roman roads were in history!

By the way, the first recorded use of asphalt for road construction happened in 1824 in Paris, France!
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Does Maximum RGO size (variable depending on developmnet) refer to only the basic product of the location, or is this an upper limit for other building levels, too?
 
Ideally, you do not want any sort of war or conflict happening on your own lands.
Does this also apply to other countries fighting in another country's lands for any reason? I think it should be so. For example, the Romanian Principalities were often ravaged by wars between the Russians and the Ottomans, which they did not always directly participate in.

Great dev diary btw!
 
And who would pay for roads connecting locations of 2 different realms? Both owners of given locations?
they'd both pay for the connections inside their realm.
 
Who would pay for that one road section between their realms connecting 1 location from each realm?
If they both pay for it they split it equally, if one pays for it they pay the entire thing.