• 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 #4 - March 20th, 2024

Welcome to the fourth iteration of Tinto Talks!

Today we’ll give you an overview of the different mechanics of the Government part of the game. There will be development diaries going into much more detail for these later on.

First of all, we have 5 different government types in the game, which determines a fair bit of what type of mechanics you get access to. As an example, a Republic does not have access to royal marriages, and a Steppe Horde has a different view on how war, peace and conquest works compared to other types of countries.

  • Monarchy, which uses Legitimacy
  • Republic, which uses Republican Tradition
  • Theocracy, which uses Devotion
  • Steppe Horde, which Horde Unity
  • Tribe, which uses Tribal Cohesion

ZLW8XrWYZLxnovNzgF_7TuPQWyWmoGGLwwD2R2susU8CbvdqziEL_Ulp-yKCubRFOexelDTDIdjssj852lmLobBEQVeYT6bSkHFEIZmWUs_H-38W79jBh1S5OiDDATUVu0nB6GXgi2ze2LmNyJ115OU

An illustration from our game..

These, together with country rank, government reform, and local flavor gives countries names like “Crown of Aragon,” “Kingdom of Sweden,” “Principality of Wales.” Not all countries are countries that are based on owning locations on a map though; more on that in later development diaries.

Each country also has a ruler, or they may be in a regency, if there are no possible adult heirs.

One of the most defining parts of the government of a country in Project Caesar is the Estates mechanic. This has been one of the core parts of the game, with a full connection between the population and the estates. Keeping the estates satisfied while keeping their powers low is an important part of the gameplay loop. In this game, the Estates are also active entities and will do things on their own if they get enough power.

qYgBGNEzv3H0jQc6eneo7kkUZgpdahDdiD2oZxQEQZsEziJaaYEGiEnn0-whjga7G0UAzf7YYhABAvScXHNozJux_FGQz5ujPQN8ey_63fuKTGJCI91U-b_fQ15sn3qbalZo_HQ4dyjmlZKWg_zOT1w

Two government reforms, one culture specific and one government specific.

As time passes, different government reforms and reform-slots will be available. They can also be based on tag, culture or religion.

uS3pA3GElx0t_YJa_9rdYdyTavbK_IEfSQP1AT3GA9nESw5PidjM0ca7CawBGS80IfNTF-gFGP7O5WDOKzR9Wt5Ffn9iPUkg7hzYRIdfnGp6EG-7ssCmrxh6kd1snKgU2LssP30gr5KJqlfgGJmfIjE

These are the two available possibilities in the Law 'Language of Pleading' for the country I tested.

Something that is different from a reform is what we call a Law. A Law can have several different policies you can pick from, and several laws have unique policies only available to certain tags, religions, cultures, government types or other factors.

There are some drawbacks to adding new reforms or policies though, as it takes a few years for it to have full effect, depending on your country's administrative efficiency. (Yes, it's a name for something else in another game, but it fits here.)

Regularly, if your government allows it, you can call in a Parliament. If you don’t do it often enough the estates will start to get irritated, but each parliament has issues that need to be resolved, and the estates will have agendas they want done for their support. Of course, you also have options to push through what you want from a parliament, if you are willing to accept the demands of the estate, like changing a particular law.

Another part of the government is the cabinet, which also grows in size as you become more advanced, allowing you to do more things. This is something that can be viewed as a hybrid between EU4 Advisors and the CK2 council actions.

Some of you may remember the domestic policies from EU2 and EU3. In Project Caesar we are bringing the idea back in the form of Societal Values. There are seven that we took from these games, one that was split in two, and we added four new ones, bringing the total to 13 different Societal Values. Societal Values are primarily affected by what other actions you do, like what policies you pick in a law, or what reforms you pick. As with so many other things in our game, this is not an instant action, but a gradual change over time.

ZEZWxSpKakO4WurGDUAAsx7sedtM4QfQOCQe32TQGOWyLFGbPv2JrSLjbi0NgOMzD855iLKD6JGOWancM-kU6hqp65oRF7P7ubsaNOY9_L5kdzqELF2f26rggfEojZBnW0giSvY1Xf3thtmlKDVEtqg

oh look, its eu3!

Next week, we will go into much more detail about estates and how they work.
 
  • 264Love
  • 167Like
  • 13
  • 10
  • 1Haha
Reactions:
I know Johan said something about no multiple start dates awhile back, but I'm not sure of the context. In any case, if the game spans 500 years of history, and it properly simulates the latter 200 to 300 years in a fun and realistic way, at least 2 start dates would be desirable. Personally, if the game starts in 1337, as primarily an eu4 player, I'd love a 1444 start date for familiarity and one in the late 1500s or early 1600s so you could actually play the later part of the timespan of this game with a realistic historical backdrop without needing too much railroading.

Now, if modding support for multiple start dates is included at launch, even if there is only one official start date, the eu4 community is large enough that a 1444 start date mod would be created sooner or later, but I still feel like a start date later in the timeline, maybe halfway through, if it is 500 years long, could help. I don't play CK3 so I don't know anything about the second start date in that game, but I feel like it's a solid idea.

While I know the later start dates in vanilla eu4 are pretty unpopular, the start dates and game mechanics in the Voltaire's Nightmare mod are so well thought-out that it's actually interesting to play from them, and having 2 or even 3 start dates would be far easier for the devs to maintain and update than the dozen or so that eu4 has, and yes, I'm aware that there's an ocean of difference in game development between volunteer modders and professional game developers. Either way, it's not a huge issue, just a concern based on no one really playing to the end of eu4 as it is.
 
  • 11Like
Reactions:
Willing to share any information regarding any administrative or military automation?

Managing or sieging all those locations manually one by one seems like a lot of work!
 
If Paradox really intends to introduce a new title between Europa Universalis and Victoria, and the new EU end date becomes an earlier date as a result, then from a historical perspective, 1721 would be one of the best choices, IMO. The Great Turkish War, the Great Northern War, the War of Spanish Succession, the War of the Quadruple Alliance, etc.; the conclusion of this series of conflicts marked an enormous watershed in European history.
 
  • 10
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
By far the most interesting thing here is the Cabinet:

I really hope that the occupants of Cabinet positions will be Imperator-style characters, not the fungible (cookie-cutter) advisers, missionaries, and diplomats of EU4. I want to have to decide whether Talleyrand is best used as my Foreign Minister or is better used as my Ambassador in Vienna; should I make Cardinal Richelieu my Chancellor (giving me powerful bonuses but risking him refusing to implement my policies) or should I leave him in a church job? I might hire Rousseau as my Domestic Minister as part of a strategy to reform France into a Republic, but the Nobles Estate won't like it in the short term. And so on. You are still playing as the spirit of a country, but you can tell much more interesting stories because stories are ultimately about people.
I absolutely hope this is the route they go. One of the best features of Imperator was disloyal generals and the various court factions that could emerge with disputes between the Great Families. Having Imperator-style characters that belong to an estate and can form cliques would be really cool, and man, I really hope they go with Imperator style portraits over CK3/Vicky 3 ones.
 
  • 5
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Can someone give me a rundown of how "missions" on Imperator run?
There's a short list of missions you can choose, focusing on particular area, like "matter of Greece" or "conquest of Gaul". They often give you CB for the area related to the mission. You finish the relatively short mission tree when you conquer the area and then you can pick another mission focusing on some other area. Sometimes missions are about improving your owned area economically, but they are lame.

Sliders are back? My hype is reaching levels previously thought to be impossible.

Imperator terrain map, please please please.
I beg for the glimpse of the terrain map in the next DD...

BTW, I'm so hyped right now that I hate the idea of waiting entire week for it.
 
  • 3Like
  • 1
Reactions:
On the question of the Estates:

Please make their influence and power be dynamic according to your country's situation. In Brazil's case for example, during the two first centuries of colonization, the power in the colony was heavily in the hands of the Pernambuco and Bahia planters to the northeast. From the discovery of gold in 1695 onwards, the political axis shifted to the Center-South, with Rio, Minas and São Paulo being the three key provinces, in a much more urban society (albeit still very rural) and thus, with a lot more power in the burghers' hands.

Would be great if the influence of the Estates increased or decreased in light of the developments of your country's history.
 
  • 13
  • 1
Reactions:
Looks a lot like I.R map, and I love it! Except for the weird shape of the coastal sea provinces.

Minor aesthetic suggestion, but please, consider reshaping them as previous games, polygonal, not curved, I suspect it's going to be distracting a lot when moving fleets between these specific sea provinces.
 
no. there will very likely be another type and style of mission trees.
Please let this mean Imperator Rome-style missions and not Vic 3-style "journal entries" as those are... ok but not good. with an imperator-style system, you can have multiple mission trees and unlock them as they become relevant for example: England and France colonizing North America they both could get a mission tree to knock the other out of the continent in a "7 years war"-like scenario.
 
  • 11Like
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
Please let this mean Imperator Rome-style missions and not Vic 3-style "journal entries" as those are... ok but not good. with an imperator-style system, you can have multiple mission trees and unlock them as they become relevant for example: England and France colonizing North America they both could get a mission tree to knock the other out of the continent in a "7 years war"-like scenario.
I really hope they continue to move away from Mission Trees in general, but Imperator has had the best implementation of them thus far, and is the game least bound to them, which is the major problem with Mission Trees in general. I miss the importance of decisions... it seems like every game after EUIV has moved away from using decisions, which, as a player, I found to be one of the most fun parts of CK2.
 
  • 3Like
Reactions:
IF this happens to be EU5, with an earlier start date, it will be strange seeing all the buff Ottoman threads that will happen.
Looks interesting so far, and I love all the provinces.
I can only imagine that Ottos will be supercharged to enable their rapid conquest even without EU4-style mission trees. Meanwhile the much vaunted "BIG BYZ" will implode under multiple mandatory disasters.
 
  • 2Haha
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Hello. I am from Manisa Province of Turkey.

I think Salihli or Sardis (the capital of the Ancient Lydian Kingdom) district in Manisa Province should be in the game. It is one of the most important and historical places of the region, together with Akhisar and the provincial center.

On the other hand, Demirci is a place that could not be found and occupied by the enemy during the Turkish War of Independence, so it is not that important. Additionally, Gördes and Kula are also quite unimportant places. Even today you cannot find a specialist doctor in these places.

I wish you patience and success for the new game.
 
  • 3
  • 2
Reactions:
In the language of pleading screenshot, we can see that the options either increase serfdom or free citizens. Can you elaborate on this mechanic and how it ties into literacy and other pop-based mechanics you have shared?
I assumed at first it would almost be like the HoI4 balance of power mechanic like in Italy, or like the Muslim piety mechanic in eu4... Maybe free citizens is one end of the spectrum and gives burgher influence + tech bonuses and serfdom is on the other and gives noble influence + goods produced

I think if done well this could be good in game, but it could also just lead to every country being played the same way because it turns out that serfdom is OP or whatever
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Oh, maybe countries without locations include rebels? I always felt that they should be interactive.
 
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Will we see period appropriate ideologies/practices such as cameralism (kameralismus) represented in some form? I mention cameralism, because it's one of the most fleshed out and multifaceted ideologies least representable through an individual policy, while also being rather period specific (unlike for instance mercantilism which was a much narrower policy or liberalism which has stuck around quite well.) but it was still immensely important especially in Sweden, Prussia/Germany and Austria in this time.
 
I really hope they continue to move away from Mission Trees in general, but Imperator has had the best implementation of them thus far, and is the game least bound to them, which is the major problem with Mission Trees in general. I miss the importance of decisions... it seems like every game after EUIV has moved away from using decisions, which, as a player, I found to be one of the most fun parts of CK2.
I want more of both. I feel like where EU4 is right now with their new mission trees interplaying with decisions and vice versa is a solid foundation and should be pushed further however the fusion of them which is what Vic 3 is trying with the journal entries should be avoided as it makes for an unfriendly user experience in most cases
 
  • 6
  • 2Like
Reactions:
Mission Trees could be replaced by Achievements
IMHO, the two flaws with EU4 mission trees were that (a) every mission completion was rewarded with a modifier, cash, or mana boost, leading to power creep and (b) the fact that mission trees were restricted to particular DLC made balancing more difficult; how do you make sure that Portugal still colonizes Brazil even if hasn't got that extra boost to colonization speed, etc?

I wonder whether whether the first flaw could be solved by replacing the more 'tangible' rewards of EU4 with Steam Achievements. This would give players a feeling of satisfaction on completing something. It also means that Tinto no longer has to have two sets of artwork, two sets of Content Designers, and twice as many bugs, for fundamentally the same purpose: suggesting goals to players and giving them a feeling of completion when they achieve the goal.

The second problem could be solved by having a clearer differentiation between Historical Achievements and Alt-History Achievements. Historical Achievements would be things like 'be the Western European kingdom with the largest number of colonies in North America in 1700'. The eligible English, French & Spanish AIs might periodically check whether it's set to achieve the goal, and increase or decrease some AI_Desire number for the appropriate actions/targets depending on its progress. Some Historical Achievements might even be DLC-locked for the player, but the AI would use always use them for its decision-making, so that the devs can check whether hands-off Historical games play out as intended.

In contrast, Alt-Historical Achievements would be the meme goals like 'Conquer the world as Ryukyu' or 'Control the Holy Roman Empire as Ulm', as well more plausible things like 'Expand France to its natural borders' and 'Keep Poland alive to the end of the game'. There would be no problem with making Alt-Hist Achievements DLC-locked, since they would necessarily be taking Project Caesar games off course. And in fact you should probably have to tick a box at game start to enable them. They also wouldn't be guaranteed to occur in such games, so human players wouldn't necessarily know whether Ulm was set on making a bid for greatness or not, and whether France was going to try to colonize North America or re-create Outremer.

If Achievements were used this way, restricting them to Ironman games would be unsustainable. But you could still have an Ironman version of the Achievements for those players who value that if Tinto wanted. You could literally just put an asterisk at the start of the name and give the icon a different border or a superimposed star. The Ironman version of each Achievement could even be created by a script (on a dev computer, not in the game) for maximum cost-effectiveness.

Mission Tree Rewards could be replaced by Characters
Separetely from the suggestion above, if Project Caesar had more fleshed-out characters (like Imperator), then you could also reward players by giving them an in-game character when you complete some Achievements. If you are the first to start the Reformation, then you get Luther (as a German tag), Calvin (as a French tag), etc., and the AI could be prompted to give them some job that increases literacy through the normal in-game mechanics. If you are the first to get the North American colonial Achievement above, you get de Moscoso or Montcalm or Penn. They shouldn't have superpowers, but their particular combination of traits might shape what you (and the AI) do next.


Yes, this is a big reason why a broadly Imperator-style character system would work so well in this time era. I know that Imperator doesn't allow inter-country marriages, but this would be a sensible expansion of that system, without going all the way to a CK3 system.

18th century warfare is really not my era, but I think the mass armies of the Napeoleonic era were a fairly major change, weren't they?

And they depended on the rise of nationalism and liberalism. It's the ideological justifications for warfare that are so very different from the 1330s, I think.
The numbers were higher, but the mechanics of warfare only started to change at this time, and with the industrialization of weapons.
Napoleonic era could be considered as the apotheosis of early modern era warfare. Sure, it can be considered a turning point in history, but we are speaking about the end of EU4 time period here. Not the mid 18th century.

City fortifications (of the “trace italienne” style) started to be demolished only in the late XIXth century. Not in 1650 or even 1750 the start of early industry.
 
  • 4Like
Reactions: