• 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 wonder if we will get trade route similar to HOI4 supply system. Control the trade route and you can block the trade for your enemies or even charge a tax on goods
 
Last edited:
To whom should I write if I want to offer my service in the history of East Slavs/Former Rus territories? I once suggested myself in the CK3 field but as the starting date for Project Ceaser moved a lot earlier I decided to write again. 1337 is 3 years before the practical collapse of Galicia-Volhynia (well to be honest in 1349) in 1489, the first mention of cossacks and the Khmelnytskyi Rebellion in 1648 that created Hetmanate lasting 1648-1764
Overall Ukraine and Belarus are very interesting in this starting date but as you have said that you want to make better pacing I can offer a lot of stuff even later. Probably as a DLC but even now at the earlier state of game, I can offer something like correcting provinces maybe?

Would be very glad to receive your response.
 
  • 5
Reactions:
I think the minutia should not be in the players control. The general parts, of "The state needs an alliance with Spain, so the royal family will marry into Spain's" should be up to the player, but how that is ultimately done should be up to the royal family, (i.e. the game. you could come up with a non-rng system if you wanted). You are not playing as the royal family, you are playing as the state.

No matter what, RNG will come into it. You cant control heir's or deaths, can you? You might have a fantastic plan to get the throne of Spain but if some crucial piece in that plan gets dysentery its over. Or if your epic plan gets foiled by them just not having a male heir, thats still up to RNG. You can't avoid it, and I don't think you should have exact control anyway.
This seems to me like a good compromize. We do not necessarily need to control every single marriage and bloodline in a state focused game.

It’s important thought even if we don’t have control over it, that the game keeps track of who married who. Ie, if you go claim Castile as France, is it gonna be for yourself (PU), for your heir ( potential future PU), for your consort, for your brother (only a dynastic relation, no PU)

However, EU4 was way over simplistic to the point that you could not even know whether you had a second heir in case the first one died, and succession wars were completely f***** up as
1) any rival of the overlord, or the minor, could be involved in the succession war, with or without having a marriage… and the factor for country B or C to be the main contender was totally hidden
2) AI would always declare war, even if they had absolutely no change of winning (i.e. bohemia contesting PU over brandenburg against France,brandenburg and all its allies… even worse if the succession involved crossing the HRE border and thus the emperor and his allies )
3) historically, it was not all support for country B and none for contender C.
The Spanish succession war for example saw Castile / Leon Cortes support Bourbon France while Aragon Cortes supported the Habsburg claim. It was both a (foreign) succession war and an internal war at the same time (and much more balanced)

One option to balance that would be to give contesting countries a Claim Throne CB instead of straight declaring for war, allowing
1) several countries with a dynastic claim to go press their claim
2) the AI to not just stupidly declaring a war it has absolutely no chance of winning, losing more territory on the way. Instead waiting for the right moment
 
  • 4Like
  • 2
Reactions:
This seems to me like a good compromize. We do not necessarily need to control every single marriage and bloodline in a state focused game.

It’s important thought even if we don’t have control over it, that the game keeps track of who married who. Ie, if you go claim Castile as France, is it gonna be for yourself (PU), for your heir ( potential future PU), for your consort, for your brother (only a dynastic relation, no PU)

However, EU4 was way over simplistic to the point that you could not even know whether you had a second heir in case the first one died, and succession wars were completely f***** up as
1) any rival of the overlord, or the minor, could be involved in the succession war, with or without having a marriage… and the factor for country B or C to be the main contender was totally hidden
2) AI would always declare war, even if they had absolutely no change of winning (i.e. bohemia contesting PU over brandenburg against France,brandenburg and all its allies… even worse if the succession involved crossing the HRE border and thus the emperor and his allies )
3) historically, it was not all support for country B and none for contender C.
The Spanish succession war for example saw Castile / Leon Cortes support Bourbon France while Aragon Cortes supported the Habsburg claim. It was both a (foreign) succession war and an internal war at the same time (and much more balanced)

One option to balance that would be to give contesting countries a Claim Throne CB instead of straight declaring for war, allowing
1) several countries with a dynastic claim to go press their claim
2) the AI to not just stupidly declaring a war it has absolutely no chance of winning, losing more territory on the way. Instead waiting for the right moment
Wait a moment! Only i remember the IA NEVER declare war because they are too coward?
 
  • 2Haha
Reactions:
all our menus are in side bars. Except the ledger and some unit reorganisation windows (just like eu4)

ironically, we used to use much more full screen in older games like hoi2, hoi3 and v2
Minor Question, but when it comes down to Government mechanics, one of the primary things you see in modern Paradox games is characters, real 3d characters you can see. Ck3 and Vic 3 are great examples of this. Are we going to have 3d characters, or are we going to have the normal nameplates? Or are we going to have something similar to Ck2? The Rulers, Generals and Admirals are important bits and pieces of previous titles!
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Will subjects be depicted on the map in the Victoria 3 fashion (same color as the overlord), the CK3 fashion (part of your realm until you break down the vassals in the political map), or the EU4/HoI4 fashion (look like independent countries but are actually vassals)?

In other words, with the map scale, will the HRE look like a Christmas tree due to all the different colors, or will it be a solid color like in CK3 until you zoom in?
I hope it will stay like it is in EUIV. Maybe it could be added to the settings, if you want your subjects coloured in your colour.
 
This is brilliant! I truly can't wait to see what will be done with this system.

I hope it brings a bunch of stuff from the other titles to this game, from Imperator's army and map, to CK's representation of late-medaeval monarchies, to possibly representing federations and stuff. Either way, this game should have a ton of potential. I wonder if we'll be able to create our own states (like merging provinces for regional parliaments) or creating countries like in EU4. Caesar is looking great.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
How does the HRE work before the signing of the golden bull of 1356, I believe I read that the start date was officially confirmed to be April 1 1337.
 
I wonder if we will get trade route similar to HOI4 supply system. Control the trade route and you can block the trade for your enemies or even charge a tax on goods
I think it would have sense as the Ottomans who blocked the silk way and the trade between Europe and Asia were the main reason for traders to explore new ways to India

And now in EUIV it looks like this big green territory makes absolutely zero problems for European trade

Why then should the European sailors look for new some other ways, make expeditions and take risks

I hope such mechanics will exist
 
  • 3
  • 2
  • 1Like
Reactions:
I know that no one cares about this except for me but I am from a small Central Anatolian town in Turkey, Niğde. In every single Paradox game so far there hasn't been Niğde. It was a part of Tyana, Karaman, Kayseri, Konya but never Niğde. This is the first time I have seen Niğde and I am absurdly happy. Niğde world capital let's gooooooooooooooo
With all your story it's a bit fun that in Russian language a word "nigde" literally means "nowhere" :)

Yes, the map is so sophisticated, detailed and it's really wonderful
 
  • 2Haha
Reactions:
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.)

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.

An aspect that would also be good if there were more benefits/costs to certain cabinet members/laws/reforms/ideas and more inter connection. Eg Picking someone who is an administrative advisor like a "Master of Mint" give you additional bonuses if you have finished Economic ideas. Or if you have a "Commandant" and picked up Offensive ideas then you also get 5% damage to moral in addition to 5% discipline? But if you keep the Commandant you also have 5% debuff to manpower modifier, while if you get a "Master Recruiter" type army advisor in your cabinet with 10% manpower you get a 2.5% debuff to discipline

More interaction with reforms and ministers would be good too.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Regarding the sliders, would it be possible to get a better understanding of how the ends would play against each other? For example Prussia, it is famous for the drilling and quality of its troops, so that suggests it would be on the quality slide of the slider. However, it also had a far more massive army relative to its population than other European states, which suggests that it would not be neglecting the quantity side too. Obviously Prussia being on both sides of a Quantity-Quality slider makes no sense, so how might that be represented in game?
 
  • 2Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Regarding the sliders, would it be possible to get a better understanding of how the ends would play against each other? For example Prussia, it is famous for the drilling and quality of its troops, so that suggests it would be on the quality slide of the slider. However, it also had a far more massive army relative to its population than other European states, which suggests that it would not be neglecting the quantity side too. Obviously Prussia being on both sides of a Quantity-Quality slider makes no sense, so how might that be represented in game?

Quantity could be achieved by efficient extraction of resources, in this case manpower. A Prussia for instance might have a bonus where it has a higher baseline to access it's manpower from. This could be in the shape of pure manpower, cheaper upkeep/recruitment costs, etc.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Is Project Caesar gonna have modelled characters like Vic3, and plenty of art like CK3? I really liked the throne room illustration in the diary.

It seems like the epoch the game is gonna go through will touch lots of awesome cultures and moments. Seeing them fleshed-out, even if not as detailed as CK3, and the many arts of the time, would be great!

Cuz I find Vic3 way a good compromise between characters having some 'character' and not being the focus of the game. Personally I'm pro-CK3 approach, but professionally I find the game not fitting that formula (it is a different game too after all ).


Either way, I'm eager to see more art and aesthetic of this game. Also, the MUSIC! These are always such a joy and immersion for me in Paradox games.
Agreed. It was already debatable not to have any friction of monarchs in EUIV, only a name (for a period which, surely was about rising nation states, but also under the hand of absolute monarchs).

Now it becomes even more interesting as the start date was pushed back more than a century

Plus, immersion speaking, I would love to see my Ming emperor clothed in, my French monarch with its Manteau d’Hermine (Siberian and Russian fur which was one of the main economic drives of colonization of the period)…
 
  • 1Love
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Please don't. Wars with claims like in ck3 would be awful and not fitting for the period.
I indeed don’t think that “claim kingdom” would be working for EUV timeframe.
However it’s worth noting :
- Many EU4 CBs are non realistic and useless. (humiliation, rival CB for example, which don’t allow anything).
I believe all CBs should be casus for wars which allow any peace proposal, only with a discount to said argument (after all, that’s the diplomatic reason you publicly communicated to foreign countries).

CB are just excuses for warfare. Most of the 17/18th century warfare was about trade conflict, which in EUIV only allows for war reparations trade steering. In reality, it was a time of exchange or seizing of territories at the end of the war.

Even more recent wars, such as the 1870 Franco Prussian war, would technically be a “diplomatic insult CB”. Yet Prussia annexed Alsace-Lorraine.

Overall, I think non useful CBs should simply be removed, since no country ever fought a war just to gain “honor” and nothing else (it was simply too costly).

It could be made harder to fabricate CBs, to balance that, but any CB should grant a possibility to annex any/all occupied territory, with only a discount on what you can take.

I also hope though, that we will get a system similar to VIC3/HOI4, where allies can put their own participation score in the negotiation, not just get whatever the war leader wants to give them.
When one country entered a (offensive) war, it did not just do it because “it had favors toward its ally”. It did it because, either it had territorial claims on the enemy too, or because it needed to maintain the balance of warfare in Europe (ie. France helping Prussia against Austria since it also allowed them to be at war against England).
We need Allies or foreign countries to be able to intervene more in wars than they currently can, only when called in at the beginning
 
  • 3
  • 1Like
Reactions:
I indeed don’t think that “claim kingdom” would be working for EUV timeframe.
However it’s worth noting :
- Many EU4 CBs are non realistic and useless. (humiliation, rival CB for example, which don’t allow anything).
I believe all CBs should be casus for wars which allow any peace proposal, only with a discount to said argument (after all, that’s the diplomatic reason you publicly communicated to foreign countries).

CB are just excuses for warfare. Most of the 17/18th century warfare was about trade conflict, which in EUIV only allows for war reparations trade steering. In reality, it was a time of exchange or seizing of territories at the end of the war.

Even more recent wars, such as the 1870 Franco Prussian war, would technically be a “diplomatic insult CB”. Yet Prussia annexed Alsace-Lorraine.

Overall, I think non useful CBs should simply be removed, since no country ever fought a war just to gain “honor” and nothing else (it was simply too costly).

It could be made harder to fabricate CBs, to balance that, but any CB should grant a possibility to annex any/all occupied territory, with only a discount on what you can take.

I also hope though, that we will get a system similar to VIC3/HOI4, where allies can put their own participation score in the negotiation, not just get whatever the war leader wants to give them.
When one country entered a (offensive) war, it did not just do it because “it had favors toward its ally”. It did it because, either it had territorial claims on the enemy too, or because it needed to maintain the balance of warfare in Europe (ie. France helping Prussia against Austria since it also allowed them to be at war against England).
We need Allies or foreign countries to be able to intervene more in wars than they currently can, only when called in at the beginning
Another thing are: enter in the middle of war, and switch side (savoy house was FAMOUS for this thing)
 
  • 2Like
Reactions:
Another thing are: enter in the middle of war, and switch side (savoy house was FAMOUS for this thing)
Yes.

And I hope we will get bidirectional peace treaties, like exchanging territories AND/OR conditioning territory to some treaty.

I.e, even the 1763 treaty of Paris saw France make some gains. They ceded most lands in Canada and some islands in the Caribbean, at the same time they gained St Pierre & Miquelon

And although they lost Canada, they got granted religious freedom to French colonists (which, if Britain had broken it, would have both increased unrest / revolt and given a CB to France).

Or in Utrecht 1713,
- France won the Spanish throne
- BUT had to renounce any future union (so the new Spanish king had to renounce any claim in France)
- AND Milan was ceded to Savoy, Burgundy / Low Countries and Naples to Austria, Gibraltar and Minorca to Britain.
- AND recognize Portuguese Brazil in the Amazon river basin
So, it was no uni directional gain, but a trade of “I give you this back, but I want that in return”. This city is worth 10 points, which I would trade for 10 points of my personal objectives


Since Project Ceasar takes a new approach with laws, etc, I believe they should take this into account as well. If not for release, at least for future DLC
 
  • 2Like
Reactions:
Yes.

And I hope we will get bidirectional peace treaties, like exchanging territories AND/OR conditioning territory to some treaty.

I.e, even the 1763 treaty of Paris saw France make some gains. They ceded most lands in Canada and some islands in the Caribbean, at the same time they gained St Pierre & Miquelon

And although they lost Canada, they got granted religious freedom to French colonists (which, if Britain had broken it, would have both increased unrest / revolt and given a CB to France).

Or in Utrecht 1713,
- France won the Spanish throne
- BUT had to renounce any future union (so the new Spanish king had to renounce any claim in France)
- AND Milan was ceded to Savoy, Burgundy / Low Countries and Naples to Austria, Gibraltar and Minorca to Britain.
- AND recognize Portuguese Brazil in the Amazon river basin
So, it was no uni directional gain, but a trade of “I give you this back, but I want that in return”. This city is worth 10 points, which I would trade for 10 points of my personal objectives


Since Project Ceasar takes a new approach with laws, etc, I believe they should take this into account as well. If not for release, at least for future DLC
If i remember, the devs in EUIV ever said "we not do these mixed peace, because was abusable by players"