• 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:
Imagine starting in Australia in 1337/1356.
Not that different from starting in Australia right now... And to be fair, less than 0.1% of games are started there (even in 1444) so i don't really think that should be taken into account much. Europa Universalis IV isn't really centered in Australia. In fact even most of the great European powers got their quite late.
 
Governing capacity

Would be cool to see a different take on it. Not just a number.
Its intresting how MEIO used communication distance, really felt like you had to invest in infrastructure, which was cool.

BUT, its missing something. How was Rome able to exist or any geographically expansive empire.
In Romes conecpt, did the terratories really only exist to feed Rome, or did they develop?
Same for Qing or Mongolia?

Whats the right balance of conquest and then the natural limitations of goverenance.

Maybe we can play with the idea of terratories and states, but with more granularity.
Maybe there are different concepts relating to beurocracies.
Maybe its basically an integrated vassal system (governors for Rome for like Gaul and Hispania, or different hordes for Mongolia) that you mostly control, but not fully control. - Idea: Hordes are militarilrly stronger, but their "sub-hordes" are harder to control.
Maybe there can be the concept of administrative unit or area (harping a bit on CK3 duchy/kingdom areas, but more streamlined).

Not sure what would be "fun", deffinetly needs to feel fun and a sense of progress with limitations that make sense.
Its super dumb to just keep conquering with no practical limits.
I think it is fun to conquer, then stabalize and expaning some sort of support so that the next expansion can be pulled off.

If you pull this off (not too complicated), I think you might get natural empire expansions that feels very realistic/historic.
Not just an ever expanding ottoman blob with a special decedance mechanic to stop it.

Maybe there is a balanic slider, stability vs innovation.
Small country can slide into innovative since they dont need the equivalent of governing capacity.
Big country can sacrifice innovative to get more of the equivalent of governing capacity.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Not that different from starting in Australia right now... And to be fair, less than 0.1% of games are started there (even in 1444) so i don't really think that should be taken into account much. Europa Universalis IV isn't really centered in Australia. In fact even most of the great European powers got their quite late.
The same thing applies to the Americas. The wait for Europeans to arrive would be extra 100 years. On the other hand, maybe there will be unplayable ''primitives'' like in Victoria 3 covering every populated colonial province and only settled Natives will be playable (at least from the beginning).
 
Tech linked to literacy? Could this hint to an elegant way of ensuring Europeans starting to more rapidly advance in tech roughly around the disemination of the printing press, with China having higher tech at the start?
 
  • 2
Reactions:
I don't know how difficult this would be to implement but this game should tell you how many sq km's your state/country has. Would love to compare the size of my state to historical states
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Very promising population mechanics.

I will shamelessly provide my feedback by linking to a previous post of my wishes because I still maintain them:


I do hope we see:
-Celebration dates (to promote cultures and religions)
-Natural immigration to high dev cities (unless you try proactively restrict it)
-Espionage being facilitated by pops of your culture in other countries.
-Religious syncretism (which implies having more subdivision levels among religions)

And I applaud that you are not shying away from the reality that was slavery.

You are cooking.
 
Ok so I have a bunch of questions.

If the start date is moved up, and I don't know if I believe it will be yet, will the end date also be moved up? Eu4 already starts to kind of break down in the 1700s with it's systems.

Mechanically, will effort to into the basic functions of the game to limit the effectiveness of stacking bonuses? I'd really like to see the fundamental rules of the game have checks so you can't hit absurd percentages on any modifier.

How much thought and effort will be put in to making sure that the game doesn't always get easier as it progresses? Most paradox games have a really pronounced inverse difficulty curve where the hardest part of the game is at the very start, but once you get over that the game quickly becomes more and more trivial.

Will colonization be slow to the point of leaving "uncolonized" regions at the end of the game? If so, will measures be taken against cheating the system by either stacking bonuses or using a bunch of smaller nations to do the work for you in parallel?

Speaking of smaller nations, will they have means of being more efficient/growing internally faster than bigger nations? If so will there be checks to make sure you can't turbo charge your big nation by 'farming' small nations; as an example on hoi 4 you should as the UK release all your land as puppets, let them all get even just 2 free factories from their focus tree and then annex them for dozens of factories. Or in eu4, small nations dump all their monarch points into dev which if then taken let's you generate way more dev than you could if you owned the land directly.

Will minorities persist into the late game? Or will you be able to achieve complete cultural/religious homogeneity in your starting locations? Even the Spanish never *completely* managed to achieve that after the reconquista.

Well there be the potential to deplete resources other than gold? It would be more interesting to see things like the depletion of the European beaver as a mechanical thing on map, or having to plan ahead with planting forests and managing old wood growth for building sailing ships.


How much effort will go into making tutorials later on in the development cycle? New players are a thing too and it's hard for me to hold my friend's hands while also trying to play efficiently.


Edit: oh and will any measure be taken to introduce mechanics a bit more gradually rather than more or less requiring a player to know what every single thing does right at the start of the game? I find this is probably the hardest part of explaining a game to someone, where they get bombarded with every single number right from the get go and I have to try and explain 2 dozen concepts and how they interlock all at once. Stellaris is basically the only paradox game I can think of that doesn't do that, and mechanics are introduced relatively gradually as you progress through the game. Or at least it was like that, I haven't played in quite a few years and things could have changed.
 
Last edited:
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 :)

I'm a quite experienced EU4 player, and only briefly checked out of curiosity how EU3 looked like (and bounced off the UI)

Thanks for putting a broader perspective on things. I never said the pop system will be bad, just simply I'm not super hyped about it, but I'll take it nonetheless :)
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
I hope the interface is not bland and dull as are V3 and CK3 ones. I hope it's up to the EU4 interface, which in style and immersion works pretty well.

On the other hand, is it possible to simulate autonomous territories inside a country/state in a way more natural than as now are in EU4?, i.e. the Crown of Aragon, which was ruled by one king, but it was composed of several kingdoms and lesser entities, each one with their own laws, rights...

And lastly, I just want to say I love I:R population system and all its possibilities, cannot wait to see how it works in here!
 
  • 1
  • 1Like
Reactions:
1356 start date pls

Pros

-Weak Yuan against Ming

-Golden horse starting to fracture

-Tenochtitlan founded (1328)

-Ottoman conquest of Balkans

-hundred years wars

-Granada still owns gibraltar and ceuta

-Pagan Lithuania

-Longer medieval experience



You can add more

Also, pls dont rush when making map, I mean make it completed (proper locations, tags, starting borders, sea tiles, wastelands etc)

No one wants to see one big placeholder manchu tag or other placeholder states until dlcs on that region( africa, americas…), I dont mean completed mechanics just completed provinces and tags for future work
French kings on the Hungary and polish throne, up to you to decide if it's in pros or cons !
 
  • 1
Reactions:
To help you guys a little bit, here is a map that me and my friend have prepared for you. Please DO NOT put Turks and Arabs, Azerbaijanis and Iranians, Hungarians and Romanians, Swedes and Finns, Bausqites and Spanish, Welsh and the English in the same group. <3
 

Attachments

  • MAP by EBSAS.png
    MAP by EBSAS.png
    161,2 KB · Views: 0
  • 4
Reactions:
Looks good but I think there should probably be a tribal pop type to represent nomadic people and tribal people. Obviously not a perfect solution but I think it would be a better fit than them being peasants. Basically I’d have it so that tribal pops produce full resources in a tribal nation but don’t in non tribal nations and probably vice versa.
Second this. In EU3 there was an interesting mechanic for hordes. Hordes were in a state of permanent war with every neighbor and couldn't be annex by normal means. Instead, a settled country could occupy their provinces and send colonist to settle nomadic province thus absorbing it. Although the system was quite simple it could be used as some sort of inspiration for managing your "settled" and "nomadic" pops and cultures.
 
  • 2
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
To help you guys a little bit, here is a map that me and my friend have prepared for you. Please DO NOT put Turks and Arabs, Azerbaijanis and Iranians, Hungarians and Romanians, Swedes and Finns, Bausqites and Spanish, Welsh and the English in the same group. <3
I don't think language should be the sole (or even primary) way of dividing up culture groups. I can't say much about your other examples but Finns in the eu4 period are a thousand times closer to swedes than hungarians culturally, even if they do share similar language roots with the latter. The english are closer to the welsh than they are to the pomeranians, even if they share a language family, etc. etc. I know paradox sometimes makes questionable decisions regarding culture groups but I prefer their approach to this one, no offense.

(also why is all of belgium considered latin, heresy)
 
  • 9
Reactions: