Tinto Talks #31 - 2nd of October 2024

[Johan]

Welcome to another Tinto Talks, the Happy Wednesday where we spill the secrets of our upcoming game, with the codename Project Caesar.

Last week we talked about wars and wargoals, and today we are going to talk about how wars will end, as we discuss the peace system. If you have played other GSG games for Paradox, some of this may not be news to you though.


Peace Offers
To end a war you need to negotiate a peace with either the leader on the other side, or if you are the leader on your side, you can negotiate a separate peace with a single independent country on the other side.

One thing that is important to notice, is that if you declare war for a war goal to conquer a certain province, then you can not take any other land, UNLESS you take the wargoal.

To be able to take land, you also need to have control over the province capital.

A Peace Offer, will consist of a set of treaties that can have a total value of up to 100 Peace Cost. Of course the other side would have to agree, and they are very likely not to accept anything where the peace cost is higher than the current warscore.

Peace in our time?

Peace Treaties
A peace treaty can be the transfer of a location, province or area. It can also be to force another country to stop sending privateers, or transferring gold to you, or dismantling fortification in a location, humiliating them or any other of the dozens upon dozens of possible peace treaties of Project Caesar.

The cost of each treaty depends on many factors, whether it’s part of the wargoal or not, the population, the type of the treaty and so on.

Numbers are still being tweaked..


Aggressive Expansion
Aggressive Expansion is one of the drawbacks of strengthening your own country ahead of others. Taking territory is one of the easiest ways to increase it. While taking land impacts your own country a fair bit, it also impacts the opinions of other countries near the source of the aggressive expansion a fair bit. If you get your AE high enough, countries with a low enough opinion of you may join a coalition against you. A Coalition is an international organization oriented around severely reducing the power of a single country.

We can probably live with this AE though?


War Enthusiasm
When it comes to how willing a nation is to fight, much comes down to their War Enthusiasm. If this is high then the AI is unlikely to accept a peace that is not favorable to them. This is determined by the state of the country, with war exhaustion, control of capital and military strength are big factors. For the leader of a side in the war the overall military balance is a huge factor as well.

Bohemia really wants to continue this war…


War Participation
Most of the time you bring allies to help you out in a war, but they expect to be rewarded for the part they pull. The War Participation is how much a country has contributed to the progress of the war. This is primarily done through battles, blockades and sieges.

You may sometimes have to convince your allies to join an offensive war that you are starting, and thus you can promise them part of the spoils of the war. If the part that they gain from signing a peace is less than their participation they will get upset.



Stay tuned, as next week, we’ll talk about the conflicts in the world that do not involve declarations of war, and negotiations of peace.

 

[Johan]

Are you planning to reuse the current favor system from EU4 for calling in allies?

A similar system yes.

 

[Johan]

Since nothing here is new, I'll ask the most important question now:

Terrain map when?

When its ready

 

[Johan]

Sad to see there are no two way peace deals

Yeah, its not really something thats feasible to do, as the AI logic for it would be very very complex, and all our previous negotiate systems like that have been exploitable even when blindfolded.

 

[Johan]

I kind of feel like them being of the 'same religion' ought to be a negative factor for war cost and AE, not a positive one? Wasn't that one of the factors causing wars between christians to be really granular in border changes, and all? While territories of enemy religions were seen as fair game by your peers.

I'd argue peace cost could be lower, but AE higher.

 

[Johan]

What are the effects of AE on your own country? Less stability like in Imperator?

No,

- it moves some societal values over time.
- reduces your diplomatic reputation
- reduces your cultural influence
and makes your spies far worse.

 

[Johan]

I am once again reposting this image until you show us a towns and cities mapmode of the world so far

View attachment 1196558

Blue is town, green is city.

 

[Johan]

Two questions, one from last TT:

1. How long do you intend for a CB to last? Months? Years? Decades?

2. Do all locations amount to the same AE? Looks like they are all 0.71. So it doesn't depend on dev, pops, or whether it is part of HRE like in eu4?

1 - depends, currently its 5 years by default.

2 - AE functions are very "barebones" atm.

 

[Johan]

I think this is strange. I have no doubt that there are historical examples of wars that were declared for one goal, only for a peace deal to happen where something else is agreed upon. No doubt often done as a compromise, or when the goal changes.

yes, but it also removed a fair bit of griefing and exploits.

 

[Johan]

Will peace require for one of the 2 sides involved to need at least 10 warscore like in Imperator Rome? I hope not

To demand something?

 

[Johan]

Looks... about as frustrating as the EU4 system, frankly. Still a fixed 100-point cap, still the same AE effect as it always was with no level of nuance.

I'm disappointed.

It was the best system we have made for a GSG.

 

[Johan]

Can you do a bilateral peace deal?

no

 

[Johan]

If I want to conquer a province and won other provinces as well, I will get only that of war goal or even the extra "portion"?

yes, you can take the wargoal and other stuff.

 

[Johan]

Also, how come control influences twice the warscore cost of a location? Lack of control decreases it, control increases it, but they are the two sides of the same equation.

fun bug.

one was "increase and decrease" ... should only be at one place in formula.

 

[Johan]

Will we have a TT about coalitions specifically?

not in the plans yet, could be part of some else.

 

[Johan]

So why is there no bilateral peaces?

For games with peace-negotiations, about 20%+ of all AI development tend to goes to understanding situation of war and negotiate peace. Its a super complicated thing to work on, to make sure that

1) the AI is able to play the game and keep somewhat of a progress.
2) not frustrate the player and make him quit.

Making it support "treaties" going multiple ways for a peace would not just double the complexity, but instead of N, its a NxN problem at least.

 

[Johan]

Do I misremember something or wasn't there going to be something slightly new to AE and Coalition system? (I probably mix it up with something else)

just that coalitions use the new IO systems

 

[Johan]

You should really be able to sweeten the deal by paying the loser for the land you take to make a marginal difference towards accepting the deal. Or trade provinces that each side controls. A give and take.

it would increase the evaluation complexity

 

[Johan]

No wow.
It's literally the same as in EU4.

I especially dislike the 100 points WS limit. It's too game-y. What's stopping me from annexing as much land as I want after fully destroying the enemy? There's already a massive penalty for doing this in AE, lack of control, not integrated provinces etc etc. No reson to further arbitrarily restrict it.

Its there to make the AI function and be able to understand when its beaten.

 

[Johan]

I love the Eu4 favour and trust system too ... i hope we get something similar

these things exists in PC