• 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've thought for years that something like 'tribal cohesion' would be great to both represent the decentralized nature of tribes, but also inject a fun mechanic into them. I also hope that they approach stuff like estates and pop classes differently too- in my mind tribes should be a sort of double edged sword to play where they have less concerns to deal with in terms of nation management, but likewise lack access to the strong bonuses they might give. I wonder if migratory tribes like in the America's will make a return. I hope they do in some form- I like that they had distinct mechanics, especially the ability to form federations diplomatically (giving them a diplomatic alternative to conquest). Though I do think a lot of those mechanics could have used another pass.

I just hope that the gold filigree look EUIV's UI makes a return and we don't get a minimalistic one here- the UI is probably a placeholder one.

Question- will having a parliament be separate than say having a diet? I think there should be a difference between the two- maybe for medieval kingdoms it's more about convening the court. But while I like the idea of expanding Diets from EUIV, I feel Parliaments while maybe related to that mechanic should be distinct.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Start date 1356 confirmed ?
Ottoman still not unified, we can see the beyliks borders in Anatolia

Has to be before 1354, or the Ottomans would own Gallipoli.
 
Firstly, I think we can be sure about the starting date of game and it is 24th May 1337, because:

IMG_1074.jpeg
We can see ottomans has the city of Izmit at the start date of game. And they did not capture yet from the byzantines the rest of upper Izmıt peninsula in the road of constantinople.

This can be only a specific time period in 1337.

I will show on reliable Turkish map video which is approved by my history professor.


IMG_1088.jpeg
IMG_1089.jpeg
IMG_1090.jpeg

We can easily see The Project Caesar's map specificly dated to May 1337. Right after the conquest of Izmıt.

And in the previous Tinto Talk we have seen the map of Delhi Sultanate. I want show you maps for near this date.

IMG_1082.jpeg
We seen this map and i think this map pasts in May 1337 too. Because basically History of india is a big mess and there are few resources about it you can easily found. And these highlighted countries in green possibly Can Delhi Sultanate's subject at this date.

And this map matches the that time period too.

IMG_1083.jpeg




And I think what makes this theory certain is that the start date of The Hundered Years War.

IMG_1091.jpeg

Look how it perfectly fits on ottoman conquest of Izmıt.


Because of These things I think game will start on May 24, 1337.


Thank you for reading.
 
Last edited:
  • 10Like
  • 8
  • 2Love
  • 2
Reactions:
just noticed caspian sea has tiles? does it mean we will be able to have navies there?

The real question is, will the Great Lakes be able to have navies? I still remember back in EU1 or 2 when pirates began showing up in the Great Lakes with no way of clearing them out. That was patched out fairly quickly!
 
  • 4
  • 3Haha
  • 2Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Something I'm wondering is: Will "Project Caesar" have mechanisms (specifically for the AI) for the simulation of the creation of historical states and polities that don't exist at game start? It's starting to become clear that this game will have an earlier start date than EU4, a game that Caesar likely shares NO relation to ;). And don't get me wrong, I love that. My favorite part of that other unrelated game is the 1400's-1500's early game where nobody's blobbed that much yet. My inner Byzantaboo is already jumping for joy.

BUT. One of the issues with EU4 is that some countries that were really relevant during the game's time span don't start off on the map, and the AI is pretty much incapable of forming them. I'm 3,400 hours into that game and I could probably count on one hand the number of times I've seen AI Prussia not only exist, but actually become kinda strong. Same thing for the Netherlands. They sometimes pop out of another country as OTL, but they almost always lose a bunch of land in their independence war and then fall into obscurity. The Mughals, the Qing, even Persia can be kind of a rare sight. Russia only even forms about 40% of the time, usually getting gobbled up by Kazan and the PLC. France only rarely becomes strong, usually never even retaking English Normandy and Gascony.

So with this apparent earlier start date, will there be internal mechanisms for ensuring that things such as the Rise of the Ottomans and the creation of states previously mentioned still happen in most games?

Sidenote: Might I suggest a toggleable game rule akin to HoI4's "Historical AI" that directs the AI to act more historically for those who want it? I'm kind of tired of seeing Spanish Canada and Portuguese Mexico.
 
Last edited:
  • 7
  • 2Like
Reactions:
Hello. Will there be a tribal estate in the game? I ask because there are no tribal pops so not sure what they would be tied to.

I hope tribal pops are not captured by ‘peasants’
 
  • 1
Reactions:
So...

24 May 1337. The beginning of the 100 Years War and it also aligns with Ottoman conquests in this period. Could this be the date?

Yup. Makes total sense. If we're going for an important date in this time range, this would be by far the most likely to have been chosen.

The fun part is that you know that Johan has been sitting back enjoying teasing us on this and watching us scurry about doing the research. And the best part is that we're enjoying being teased - because what fun would it be if he had just told us outright? We're all loving the thrill of the chase!
 
  • 4Like
Reactions:
1337 is interesting in Asia as well. Japan has just entered its Northern and Southern court period, and the beginning of the Ashikaga Shogunate. In India, the Vijayanagara empire was founded just year before. Finally, in the middle-east the dying Ilkhanate is about to shatter to a hundred pieces.

Looks like from the maps that the Ilkhanate has already gone, which makes sense as almost immediately after Abu Sa'id's death in 1335, the Chobanids and Jalayirids were backing different puppets for the throne. 1337 might be a bit to early to have it completely gone (and maybe Togha Timur as an independent candidate for the throne will represent the an "Ilkhanate" confined to Khurasan), but for gameplay reasons, it would make sense to show it already fractured. Most of the states like the Muzzafarids, Kartids, and Injuids were already established as Ilikhanate vassals, and merely just threw off that vassalage in the chaos after 1335.
 
I'd like to share something I think is important for the future of the game, so even though I know my comment is a bit long, I'd really like you to read it in full.

(I used a translator, I'm sorry if the translation isn't of good quality)

I think we should change the way the war of conquest works, and I'm not talking about the units, I'm talking about the way the war unfolds. I think you should be able to declare war on one or more claims, and that you can, by winning a few key battles, besieging the enemy capital and if the claims are really important, occupy the claimed territories, be able to take what is claimed.

On the other hand, occupying territories should be much more costly and difficult to maintain, but if you occupy territories you haven't claimed, you should naturally annex them at the end of a war, unless you give them back in exchange for something else in the peace treaty.

Speaking of peace treaties, I think they would represent the times much better if we could make offers as well as demands. This has often happened in history, for example, I ask for a territory and in exchange I offer commercial advantages. This would limit the need for long and costly wars.

I also believe that humiliation should not be imposed as part of a peace treaty. Humiliation should be done automatically when we win any war quickly and far less expensively than the opponent, and only if the opponent is our rival or has insulted us recently.

Another system that I think could greatly enhance immersion is a more dynamic claim system. We should be able to claim any border area, but at first the claim is very weak, and nobody takes it seriously, but by investing time and effort we could make it more and more legitimate and we could ask or force other countries to recognize our claim.

I think a similar system would be interesting for legitimizing a territory (by territory I mean a set of locations that have been taken in a recent war). Legitimizing a territory, especially if the claim is weak or non-existent, would be a difficult process, requiringi mportant countries to recognize our right to these territories.

Thanks for reading, I really hope I've given you some good ideas.
Humiliate is not as abstract a concept as you are making it out to be. A peace treaty could include the demand that the opposing King kiss the hands of your King, or something of the like. In 1848, The Austrian Emperor Franz Joseph had to kiss the hands of the Russian Czar to get foreign troops to help him put down rebellious Hungarians. This is an example of how concessions to your allies could be part of a call to arms or peace treaty as well.
 
  • 9Like
  • 1
Reactions:
One thing I just have to say is that I'm floored by the granularity in the map for this game. I'm staring at the Greek isles trying to figure out which ones are in which provinces, and which are full provinces on their own. I never would have thought that I'd see a game map with Lesbos split into two provinces, let alone one that spans the globe! The map alone is giving me serious hype for this game!
 
  • 2Like
Reactions:
Please consider conscientiously decoupling government reforms and laws from tags. Anything tied to tags is “tag magic”. Specific tags should never be magical.

PAP is the exception that proves the rule.

Can you please speak to how (in your view) “horde unity” and “tribal cohesion” being abstract numbers fluctuating over time reconciles with your stated design goal of not having abstractions?

(I don’t mind that they’re obviously abstractions, but I would really appreciate an elucidation of what you’re deciding what to abstract, when, how you’re conscientiously deciding to abstract those things, and why).
 
  • 8
  • 3
Reactions:
How will royal marriages work for monarchies? Is it simply a diplomatic modifier like in EU4, or will Project Caesar have actual characters in the royal family, so a royal marriage would actually be pairing up a prince and a princess from the two countries agreeing to it?
I think this is the single weirdest request I see regularly for EU5.

Why would anyone want this to be a feature?

A) It would just make finding royal marriages harder therefore diplomacy more obnoxious.

B) It wouldn’t even be historical. “Royalty” extends much further than the king’s kids, political marriages extended further than royalty, and all that aside waiting for duke A to get to fifteen so you can marry him off to duchess B to get +25 relations sounds like the worst part of Crusader Kings wedged into a game where it doesn’t make any sense.

Can people please stop asking for what would inevitably be the most-hated feature of whatever game it was put into? You’re just going to complain when the feature is dead on arrival and get it patched out three weeks after release.
 
  • 14
  • 5
  • 2Like
Reactions:
Are we getting another administrative layer? states->provinces->cities?
 
I think mission trees (and Hoi4 focus tree) is the best feature PDX has made. You need country-specific trees for the flavor and to encourage players to try new countries. Some hard-core fans might advocate for dynamic mission trees and more sandbox-y experiment, but majority of players DO NOT want that. The dynamic trees of Imperator just weren't very engaging - players love historical content and unique content.
 
  • 14
  • 12
  • 1Like
Reactions:
I think mission trees (and Hoi4 focus tree) is the best feature PDX has made. You need country-specific trees for the flavor and to encourage players to try new countries. Some hard-core fans might advocate for dynamic mission trees and more sandbox-y experiment, but majority of players DO NOT want that. The dynamic trees of Imperator just weren't very engaging - players love historical content and unique content.
Happily, Johan has suggested he does not agree.
 
Last edited:
  • 9
  • 6
Reactions:
I love the cover pic. Such a mapmode is equal to two mapmodes in EUIV.