• 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 #3 - March 13th, 2024

Welcome to the third week of Tinto Talks, where we talk about our upcoming game, which has the codename “Project Caesar.” Today we are going to delve into something that some may view as controversial. If we go back to one of the pillars we mentioned in the first development diary, “Believable World,” it has 4 sub pillars, where two of them are important to bring forward to today.

Population
The simulation of the population will be what everything is based upon, economy, politics, and warfare.

Simulation, not Board Game.
Mechanics should feel like they fit together, so that you feel you play in a world, and not abstracted away to give the impression of being a board game.

So what does that mean for Project Caesar?
D4RGBO3N1xr8MhsfaTGT5DNNERZhnjijvnx4KgvFi0c2ZFBuMEvrfiht3yyayH6EloTJWJNKEh1VSCH_LsaJWUASqg1j0thITZivoIM3jtOzKM-IGlJFubDx6UZP-iMTRXmnCWAVsm5uKdmQD5F77i8


Every location that can be settled on the maps can have “pops,” or as we often refer to them in Project Caesar; People. Most of the locations have people already from the start of the game. Today we talk about how people are represented in our game, and hint at a few things they will impact in the game.

A single unit of people in a single location can be any size from one to a billion as long as they share the same three attributes, culture, religion, and social class. This unit of people we tend to refer to as a pop.
  • Culture, ie, if they are Catalan, Andalusi, Swedish, or something else.
  • Religion, ie, Catholic, Lutheran, Sunni etc. Nothing new.
  • Social Class. In Project Caesar we have 5 different social classes.
    • Nobles - These are the people at the top of the pyramid.
    • Clergy - These represent priests, monks, etc.
    • Burghers - These come from the towns and cities of a country.
    • Peasants - This is the bulk of the people.
    • Slaves - Only present in countries where it is legal.

TX1paNgsYnH4SO0ZWP2NOrbtNa8O20QO9w-Ps-VwjSN8uhMZca-pxt0P2kND5gOnejQfklB6AQpb_C3XH2cB9hF_6sd6GSxbsgygmOmvnUbPCfgWS_BvIq7fPQzBYgy0mYwAccRxR-vFvYfL5jptBMs



There are a few other statistics related to a Pop, where we first have their literacy, which impacts the technological advancement of the country they belong to, and it also impacts the Pop’s understanding of their position in life.

Another one is their current satisfaction, which if it becomes too low, will cause problems for someone. Satisfaction is currently affected by the country’s religious tolerance of their religion, their cultural view of the primary culture, the status of their culture, general instability in the country, <several things we can’t talk about just yet>, and of course specially scripted circumstances.

There are also indirect values and impacts from a Pop on the military, economical and political part of the game as well, which we will go into detail in future development diaries.

Populations can grow or decline over time, assimilate to other cultures, convert to religions, or even migrate.

Most importantly here though, while population is the foundation of the game, it is a system that is in the background, and you will only have indirect control over.

What about performance then?

One of the most important aspects of this has been to design this system and code it in a way that it scales nicely over time in the game, and also has no performance impact. Of course now that we talked about how detailed our map is with currently 27,518 unique locations on the map, and with many of them having pops, you may get worried.

14 years ago, we released a game called Victoria 2, that had 1/10th of the amount of locations, but we also had far more social classes (or pop-types) as we called them there. That game also had a deep political system where each pop cared about multiple issues, and much more that we don’t do here. All in a game that for all practical purposes was basically not multi-threaded in the gamelogic, and was still running fast enough at release.

Now we are building a game based on decades of experience, and so far the performance impact of having pops is not even noticeable.


Next week, we will talk about how governments work a bit, but here is a screenshot that some may like:

1710317019801.png
 
  • 432Love
  • 170Like
  • 17
  • 13
  • 11
Reactions:
I will probably not be read because i'm far in this comment but i hope too.

I think there is a massive incoherence with the pop class system they did show in this Talk.
Right now from what we see people are more than 90% peasant, meaning like peasant regroup all kind of worker and people mostly poor leading to the pop beeing almost only peasant.

But in fact it is wrong how things are presented here even if the game start in XIV or XV century. Why would you telle me ? Simply because in this version you are eitheir a peasant or a burgher, nothing between (you can be a slave too but rare i think). And so the worker class is not existing at all as an independent entity.
While historically Worker class existed even in the antiquity (we can say this is Freemens in Imperator Rome) and represent every worker mainly in cities. While peasant represent worker in farm and people under rules of serfdom.

And so what is the problem ?

I see 3 problems :

First it will create an important unbalance problem because merging the worker class and the peasant class into one thing will make big incoherence. For exemple you have a mission / decision that will improve your satisfaction of your peasant in your country by removing serfdom. Okay but that's mean worker not assimilated to this system will have the same happyness bonus than every peasant in rural zone that have been privated from their right to move for centuries.
This same logic and problem will apply to any bonuses and condition for missions (like at the opposite scenario : you have a mission that makes you artisan better performing then all your peasant will be better too even if no agriculture improvement happened).
So this will generate massive problem for modifiers and mission.

Secondly it makes the peasant class just too big overall, meaning that just keep them in check and probably no revolt will happen even if your nobles or burghers don't like you at all. so without a worker class, you cannot have unhappy artisan and worker inside cities but happy peasant (or the opposite scenario). Eitheir everyone is happy or everyone is unhappy with diffrent additional modifier depending of the culture and religion of course of the pop.

Lastly for historical reason like i said above, the worker class exisit from antiquity and don't have a specific representation for them is removing a ton of potential flavor.
Imagine Imperator rome without Freemen, this mean eitheir you are slave or citizen but nothing between. This would be a lot bad and leading to absurd situation.

I hope any dev can see this and correct before the launch. Else i wouldn't be surprised it would be added later in a castrophic situation post launch because everyone will ask why 97% of their pops are peasant only even in high developped state.
 
  • 6
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
I would prefer 1411 start date.

Right before the conquest of Ceuta and the beginning of the Age of Discovery.

But if it starts mid 14th century, it means it will also finish earlier and I'm OK with that. Late 14th century. Maybe 1370
More poke poke less pew pew in the game overall.
What about a compromise and 1410 stardate, so we can play one of the biggest late medieval battles ever (1410 Battle of Grunwald), which de facto resulted in the decline of the Teutonic Order and allowed Polish-Lithuanian Union to survive and later form the Polish-Luthuanian Commonwealth? ;)

"The battle shifted the balance of power in Central and Eastern Europe and marked the rise of the Polish–Lithuanian union as the dominant regional political and military force. The battle was one of the largest in medieval Europe.[9] The battle is viewed as one of the most important victories in the histories of Poland and Lithuania. It is also commemorated in Ukraine and Belarus."


I'm also very open to 1356 (Meiou and Taxes stardate) and 1399 (one of the EU3 stardates) :)
 
  • 2
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
I'm not overly enthusiastic about pops to be honest. I like that about EU4 that some of the concepts were simplified abstract, like development which did represent number of people somewhat (based on the numbers of homes in 3D map).

PDX games were supposed to fill the niches; CK about dynasties and individuals, Vic as trade and society sim, Eu about conquest and direct control. At least that's how I understand it.
 
  • 8
  • 4Like
  • 2
Reactions:
Great dev diary, EU series would really benefit from introdusing a detailed POP system (Although population mechanic had already been there in EU3 it was pertty much barebone). I have a question about cultures. How cemented cultures would be? I mean, in EU4 the list of cultures that exist in 1444 covers almost every possible culture you would or could have in your entire playthrough (almost 400 years) with some exceptions like colonial nations, Anglois culture that may appear, etc. I wonder if in EU5 cultures would be something more flexible. I mean, it would be nice to see a proper American/Mexican/Brazilian cultures that are not hardcoded to be available only to spawn in Britain/Spain/Portugal colonies respectively but appear as part of general mechanic (with maybe some extra flavor names depending on who is their parent culture).

Or it would be nice to see some cultures that initially was divided would unite into a single one under a unifier tag (Like, for 1444 the Novgorodian/Muscovite/Ryazanian divide is plausible as there is no Russia but a bunch of warring princedoms, but seeing this in 1700-s or even early 1800-s not as a unified Russian culture is kinda meh), or a two different cultures form different groups would eventually unite into something completely new (Like English under French influence can be transformed into Anglois culture). The latter would also may add more immersiveness by allowing you to create some interesting alt-history outcomes. For example, you are playing as Great Duchy of Lithuania. You have a Lithuanian and Byelorussian as your two main cultures in the country. If the player would manage to survive and stay independent for, let's say, early 18th century (numbers and conditions are arbitrary) a new unified Lithuanian-Byelorussian (Let's call it Litvin) culture would appear and your pops would start to convert into it. It would model the long coexistence between these cultures and their mutual influence on each other. I don't think that should be a general mechanic like in CKIII but there is, in my opinion, a room for such divergencies.
 
  • 2Like
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
@MrMcQue

Sorry, my previous post is a bit on the face...

What I really meant was that, had EUIV been for years starting in 1356, you would think that the events surrounding this date would be very important, and things later would be more fuzzy.
I have already played EU3 and have seen enough Bohemiablobs that i believe were caused, among other things, by the 1399 start date. I know about some of the things that happened between 1356 and 1444, and yet i don't see them as important as the events that shaped Europe for the centuries to come and are central to the era Europa Universalis has always orbited around.

And regarding any historical events happening after, say 1356, I'm very much in favor of them to happen... organically, based on the mechanics of the game, and not from a surimposed guideline, be it mission trees or DHE.

That wont work. It just wont.

Like i said, Victoria 3 tried that, early HoI4 was somewhat like that. Look how "great" Imperator v1.0 was. I'm not a huge fan of relying solely on scripting either, but suggesting that relying solely on mechanics in turn will make the game better, more immersive or that it even is a viable way to create these events is just not the case. Solely mechanical worlds are soulless and usually without any flavour.
Great for the Youtube/Twitch world conquest by 1445 meme crowd but bad for everybody else.

As per the example i talked about in my comment. I had the Trastamara dynasty die out more than enough times. But only one time out of many Spain runs has it led to a Habsburg sitting on the Castilian / Spanish throne. Something which had implications for centuries of European geo-politics. It is almost impossible to make this happen organically.

I'd gladly forgo any mention of the Hussites or the Black Death in game, if it in turn gives me a somewhat realistic chance, at least more than 30% or something, to witness these historical wars and events which made the era of the Renassaince and the Religious Conflicts into the interesting one it was.
 
  • 4
  • 3
  • 1Like
Reactions:
I'm not overly enthusiastic about pops to be honest. I like that about EU4 that some of the concepts were simplified abstract, like development which did represent number of people somewhat (based on the numbers of homes in 3D map).

PDX games were supposed to fill the niches; CK about dynasties and individuals, Vic as trade and society sim, Eu about conquest and direct control. At least that's how I understand it.
Well the game can still be about conquest and direct control as the main feature like previous EU games.
A bit more depth (and options like playing tall or focusing on trade/eco if you want) will not hurt the game. It's not like they are making Victoria Universalis; pop system is already a bit less complicated than V2 and V3 looking at the posted screenshots. It's still a EU game, just with more content and depth.

Look at progression between EU1, EU2, EU3 and EU4, Each new game had more depth and content, but also kept the core of the EU series very much alive.

And I'm not sure if you know (new player?) but EU3 already had (simple) population system :)

1024px-Province_interface_-_CoT_creation_icon_circled.jpg
 
  • 6Like
Reactions:
EU mixed with Victoria, Imperator and possibly CK?

Take all my money.
Also please join the CK development team so we can have minorities and better culture there too
 
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
I literally logged in to write this.

I believe this new pop system kinda replaces estates of EU4. What about special estates though? Will there be cossack, jannisary or qizilbash pops? How about tribes estate? I can do without eunuch pops or whatever but I think there should be another pop type called "tribesman" just like in the Imperator Rome. This pop type should be majority in some parts of the world. I absolutely love turning my tribesman into proper citizens and nobles in Imperator (majority of them end up as slave though :D). A similar gameplay for the first nation and horde tags would be awesome imho.

Also, I love the MEIOU & Taxes influence on "Not Eu4". Can't wait!
 
  • 2Like
Reactions:
I dont know how well simulated a game in that era can be if it doesnt include feudalism mechanics like CK does. The other issue of being over 100 years away from one of the main gameplay aspects that is colonization also confuses me. 1415 would have been a nice middle ground with an interesting scenario to go along with it. I'm just wondering what upsides starting before the 1390s (or even 1350 how some people are suggesting) could have that could possibly outweigh the negatives.
I think the issue is that it is then not an early modern game but a late medieval game. That could be fine, but if the purpose is to design a early modern game you want to focus on mechanics and assumptions designed for that period.

A game focused on nation states (as Project Ceasar seems to be) is not one well suited to the 1300s in which the concept of a state does not really exist. Instead the 1300s might be better modeled by a focus on dynasties and characters. But that is already very well done by CK3...
People say that "the concept of the state doesn't exist", what does that mean? If France and England in the HYW weren't states fighting a war with other, what were they? There were many territorial lords in France, but it makes sense to regard them as autonomous factions within a French political community. And besides, outside Europe the 1300s were not really so different from the 1400s. The Yuan weren't any less of a state than the Ming, and there are many polities in the early modern period, like the Timurids, that aren't simulated well because EU4 has trouble simulating ephemeral polities. Basically, I don't think the late medieval period can only be simulated with CK mechanics. States definitely existed at that time. I think what needs to be done in order to simulate medieval politics well is for the estates system to be greatly expanded upon.

And maybe also for the game to have the government type of a polity matter more, some polities should be a lot weaker and less persistent, it doesn't really make sense for a timurid warlord regime that emerged 2 years before the start date and vanished 3 months afterward to survive to the 1700s most games.
I didn't say Portugal was weak. I said if they design gameplay fully around population size, then smaller nations could become unfun to play. As the advantage of abstraction is that flexibility. Now I am not picking a side here. And I do believe population will serve mostly as a better way to represent "development" like it was in previous games, as a way to determine which lands are valuable and good to tax.
The issues raised by some commenters have some merit in my opinion. State revenues shouldn't be based on population, but instead on taxation of production and commerce, which don't necessarily go up along with population increases. It's possible for a country with tens of millions of pops to lose a war to a country with not so many, because population doesn't equate to state strength. So we should hope that the game systems represent this.
 
  • 8
  • 3Like
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
Please do not underestimate the political system

I'd love to have an early french revolution and proto-industrialisation centuries earlier if the player manages to do things right, that means abolishing serfdom, separation of church and state, implementing advanced republican systems, becoming a pariah to other nations if you do these things early as reaction, etc.

I love things like that. Coalitions? Yes please
 
  • 2
  • 2
  • 1Like
Reactions:
I'm also worried, though let's remember that EU3 also had population (back in 2007!), so who knows, maybe Johan and his team will find some clever way to avoid performance issues present in Victoria 3 in mid-late game).
Yes I remember, and also EUII, but it was just a number and not the pops system. I do love the pops as a concept because it's the best way to represent social classes and political groups, but all the games with pops tend to perform worse than those without.
I actually don't remember having huge problems with EUIII, but I do remember having them with HoI III.
Of course, I'm hopeful that for the time of the release, the pop system of EUV will be performant enough to not be slow as Vicky.
 
Please god dont let this game have a start date before 1400. If i wanna play middle ages i'll just boot up CK3.
"Please don't expand CK3 part 1453 if I wanna play renaissance I'd just boot up EU4 even if it makes us miss out on the war of the roses and dynastic politics played a huge role well into the 16th century"
"Please don't let us play past 1901 for the game is called 'Victoria' and when she dies the game should end even if the industrial revolution and political process and new frontline mechanics goes well into the 50's. If I wanna play WW2 I'd just boot up HOI4!"

I don't understand how people don't want Paradox games to overlap even if they do certain things better than others could according to the player's interest.
 
  • 5Like
  • 3
Reactions:
  • Social Class. In Project Caesar we have 5 different social classes.
    • Nobles - These are the people at the top of the pyramid.
    • Clergy - These represent priests, monks, etc.
    • Burghers - These come from the towns and cities of a country.
    • Peasants - This is the bulk of the people.
    • Slaves - Only present in countries where it is legal.

1) Will something like EU4’s estate system exist, separate from the population system?
2) Will the two interact meaningfully?

I appreciate any detail would be entirely premature.
 
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
I'm a EU 4 player, and trying to get into Vic 3, so the concept of pops is not a thing for me... yet.

A question for the experts in pops, why do you consider this to be a good addition for a war game like EU?
 
Hmmm ... I would think the CPU consumption resulting from pops is directly proportional to how noticeable they are.
Johan answered this elsewhere in the forums a few days ago. The more formal answer is that different algorithms have different scaling complexity as the quantity of data entities increases. "Must do X for each pop in the game, doesn't need to look at anything else but itself" plays a lot nicer for performance than "Each pop must talk to each other pop {for some group} to calculate something".
It'd be as if Paradox decided to move the start date of HoI 5 forward to 1925 or smth, before Hitlers rise to power, and WW2 was something that only happened in like 1 of 50 games.

"Oh great, i too am very excited to see what happened if Heinrich Brüning continued his coalition government for 15 years and literally did nothing but pay back Germany's debts, and as a highlight, entered into a tariff-union with Austria. This is the gameplay i'm here for!" (Ok, it would actually be interesting but not in the conetxt of what Hearts of Iron should be about.)
Curious timing, the HoI dev diary this week discusses whether the game sees itself as a historical WW2 simulator first and foremost. The answer was "we're a 20th century war simulator first, we happen to use that to cover WW2 but you don't have to". And indeed, there are non-mod ways to architect a very different global conflict than what historically happened. Just need to tell some 10 AIs which railroads to take to synergise and create a train wreck that's satisfying to play through.
 
  • 5
Reactions:
I'm a EU 4 player, and trying to get into Vic 3, so the concept of pops is not a thing for me... yet.

A question for the experts in pops, why do you consider this to be a good addition for a war game like EU?
Yes, because now you can also simulate real manpower numbers, attrition, diseases and losses during battles/wars will have real impact and 1 province OPM will no longer be able to conjure 15k troops out of nowhere (unless they are very rich and can afford mercenaries).

Also, lose too many people during war/crisis/civil war etc. and your economy will suffer.
Ukraine and Russia are experiencing this right now in real life.
 
  • 9Like
  • 1
Reactions:
I'm a EU 4 player, and trying to get into Vic 3, so the concept of pops is not a thing for me... yet.

A question for the experts in pops, why do you consider this to be a good addition for a war game like EU?
I can't answer for everyone here, but the entire point is to make it more than map painting by having something to work with outside of soldiers, making more money to hire soldiers and researching new guns to get better soldiers
 
  • 6Like
  • 5
Reactions:
Also, I know this might be covered in a later dev diary, but I'm wondering if there will be mechanics to represent how much of the land in each location is owned by each of the social classes? For this reason I also think it might make sense for lesser nobility and larger magnates to be distinct, since they can have different interests, and a society where large magnates own most of the land will have different political behaviour from one where most of the land is owned by smaller-scale aristocrats.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
What about a compromise and 1410 stardate, so we can play one of the biggest late medieval battles ever (1410 Battle of Grunwald), which de facto resulted in the decline of the Teutonic Order and allowed Polish-Lithuanian Union to survive and later form the Polish-Luthuanian Commonwealth? ;)

"The battle shifted the balance of power in Central and Eastern Europe and marked the rise of the Polish–Lithuanian union as the dominant regional political and military force. The battle was one of the largest in medieval Europe.[9] The battle is viewed as one of the most important victories in the histories of Poland and Lithuania. It is also commemorated in Ukraine and Belarus."


I'm also very open to 1356 (Meiou and Taxes stardate) and 1399 (one of the EU3 stardates) :)
1350 or nothing. Extra bookmarks for people who want 15th century
 
Starting the game at a significantly different date than 1444 is interesting if nothing else than for getting a vastly different starting setup than the last 10 years.
I hope it is not actually earlier than ~1350 though, because having to face the Black Death at the start of every game would be annoying, if not straight up depressing.

If it is such an early start without also having a significantly earlier end, I do think it would be good to have one more start date; one where colonization is expanding beyond just Portugal and Spain, and the Reformation is looming or already started. Because these things would be over 150 years out from a ~1350 start date.
The 2 start setup is something I appreciate in CK3; I like that I can start from the bottom, or start where I actually get to have the vital techs from the start for partition, revoking titles, and holding construction.

And it would just be neat to follow up the years of 1444 with start dates in the 1300's and the 1500's.
 
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1Like
Reactions: