Tinto Talks #40 - 4th of December 2024

[ibvfteh]

Hello everyone and welcome to another Tinto Talks, the Happy Wednesday when we talk more about our upcoming top secret game with the codename Project Caesar.

This week we will go into details about the government reforms and look into some specific ones that you may use or not.

Representing everything from ancient traditions to progressive amendments, Government Reforms outline the shape of governance in a country. Each one is unique, but they often give powerful trade-offs or open up unique play styles.

At the start of the game, countries are only allowed 2 government reforms, but in every Age there is at least one advance that unlocks another slot for reforms. Some specific reforms also add another slot, so they are essentially “free” for that country. On average in the final Age of the game, a country may have 7 or 8 reforms.

Common Government Reforms that are available to everyone are likely to have an Age requirement, spreading out their availability over the game.

Some reforms are major reforms, and a country may not have more than one major reform at the same time.

There will be a diverse selection of reforms in each age, with about 5 common new ones added each age, and another 2 per government type. The unique ones are far more plentiful, and diverse, with over 150 currently in the game.

In the User Interface, the government reforms exist in the Crown’s part of the Estates Screen, as the Crown does not really have any estate privileges…

View attachment 1226072France can have 3 reforms, but are the current ones actually beneficial?


Removing a Government Reform currently costs 20 stability, which is a bit cheap, but that may change. Some reforms can not be removed at will though, and are locked until specific circumstances allow them to be removed.

Adding a new reform does not have a cost, but it takes up to 2 years before the benefits are fully implemented.



Common Reforms
Here are some examples of early government reforms that many nations have access to from the start.

Religious Tolerance
For when your country is populated by people who practice different beliefs and confessions. Therefore, it would be prudent to govern in a tolerant manner with them, ensuring their support for the government.

View attachment 1226073
It will make your country a bit more communal though..

Diplomatic Traditions
From time immemorial our people have favored the word above the sword, giving us the ability to forge lasting relationships with our allies and friends and a reputation as honest and loyal.

View attachment 1226074
For certain types of countries, this is rather important..


Military Order
This is a major reform that catholic theocracies have access to. It is one of the types of reforms that truly defines a country.

The Military Orders were created in the Middle Ages as a militant body of the Catholic Church. Its members are both warriors and monks who take religious vows and are destined to defend and expand Christianity.

View attachment 1226075
Military Sponsorships are vitally important to a Holy Order!



Unique Government Reforms
So let's take a look at some of the more unique government reforms that we have in the game right now.

Family Sagas
This is a unique reform that anyone with the primary culture of Icelandic can get, which both Iceland and Greenland starts with.

Our ancient sagas passed orally through the generations tell of adventurous expeditions to a distant and wild land over the western sea. Perhaps one day we may follow in the footsteps of our old compatriots.

View attachment 1226076
If only they had the population to exploit it..

Three Departments
This is available to any country that has Chinese or Korean as their court language.

The Three Departments System originates from the ancient Chinese empires and is the primary administrative structure of the state. All departments focus on several aspects of the process of drafting, establishing and revisiting state policies.

View attachment 1226077
If you want laws changed, this is the reform to have..

Magna Carta
This is a unique reform that England starts with, and is also possible for any country with the English primary culture, or if their overlord has this reform.

The 'Great Charter' is a constitutional law that distributes power away from the monarch and towards the barons. First signed in 1215, it is also one of the earliest documents to enshrine the idea of civil liberties, such as the right to a fair trial, and protection against illegal imprisonment.

View attachment 1226078
It gives some power to the nobility, and shapes the country towards certain ideals.


Stay tuned, as next week we will look into all the different types of Parliaments, and how you interact with them...

maybe some reforms should have multiple levels?

I think tax collection can be levelled up by reforms. At first, only some taxes were paid to the crown but the rest to nobles but with more and more reforms, more of those taxes come to you even without high control.

 

[Sulphurologist]

Not to mention that it's not the same thing to send your fleets sailing across the huge and empty middle of the Atlantic Oceans, and sending it from Iceland to Greenland to modern Canada. While the northern seas definitely aren't exactly safe, what Iberians pulled off was a lot more impressive AND it was a big step in sailing other huge empty oceans.

Vinland and Columbus' Expeditions only share the destination, NOTHING else was the same. They should not be equalized.

Also, the reason for colonial settlements are often neglected in this discussion. Apart from the conquest of American empires like the Inca and Aztecs, etc.
Most colonial settlements were made as outposts to find a passage towards the orient.

Even Jamestown initially started out merely as an outpost to find a passage towards China. It's only when tobacco became popular as a product in the old world that there was incentive to expand upon colonisation for profit.

Returning to the Iceland discussion: which incentive would Iceland and Greenland have had to venture towards the new world?
Greenland I can imagine making an exodus towards the New World, because of crop failures due to the decline of the medieval warm period.
More realistically though is that anyone who left would return to Iceland and Norway. A declining settlement simply does not have the resources available to gamble everything on settling into unknown foreign land. Edit: might be a fun flavour route for a player, or a VERY rare occurrence for the AI, but that should be it imo.

 

[Muhu]

I think the various estates should have preferences for certain reforms and dislikes for others. Enacting a reform an estate doesn't like should give a large temporary malus to the satisfaction of the estate and a smaller permanent one as long as the reform is active. This would be more impactful than just a stability hit.

 

[Thrudgelmir2333]

Or it could have been a complete fluke that the iberians were so successful, pulling the metaphorical needle out of the haystack. Without being able to return history from 1337 on a few thousand times for a look at the distribution of events, it's a matter of subjective opinion.

The Iberians were successful because they combined technologies available in their context to make ships capable of supporting long-term colonial projects. They weren't just 'lucky'. They had the the backdrop of the Reconquista, the wars between themselves and their naval industries to encourage them to pursue ocean-going ventures and become uniquely prepared to explore and colonise the African and American coasts. The caravels and carracks didn't pop up just because the Portuguese 'stumbled' on to them, they were deliberate projects by a country that was readying itself for 'outremer' expansion.

This is to say, if any region in Western Europe was ready to be the first to have long-term, large-scale colonisation projects, it was Iberia, and Portugal in particular. Not Scandinavia.

 

[Duart77]

but this doesn't give colonial range? What's the issue?

Like would you be against Polynesians having the ability to explore just because they didn't exactly travel from Iberia to the Americas? The ability to explore even in EU4 in of itself means nothing without colonial range.

I agree with this - a load of nations had already sent exploration missions (Carthage, Ming, the aforementioned Polynesians and Norse, hell even Rome). Exploration in and of itself is nothing new; the colonization introduced by the Iberians is.

I think the ability to explore shouldn’t be a yes/no value, moreso being made available to you if you reach, say, 50 naval tradition or have a seafaring culture. Yes/no values don’t really represent the conditions that made sea exploration possible and restrict other perfectly seafaring nations from actually faring the sea.

 

[Hare'da Irijon]

I absolutely prefer "Crown" rather than "Government" for monarchies though - surely that can change depending on the country?

Well I assumed it's universal. But yes - it would be the best if it varied by government form - it could be for example "The Holy See" for the Papal State.

 

[Polesie Admiral]

all the different types of Parliaments

THERE ARE MORE THAN ONE TYPE OF PARLIAMENT?

 

[Praetorian44]

Having the ability to recruit explorers doesn't put Iceland at the same level as the Iberians, not even close. You need a good economic and population base to explore, let alone host a colonial empire. Iceland's basic situation is far more restrictive than whether or not they have this modifier.

But why even have it when this culture's major exploration exploits were hundreds of years in the past by the time that the game starts?

 

[Spiritoftwinings]

Some of these don't really seem like reforms to me, the way that the reforms specifically do in EU4. Like "Religious Tolerance" seems like something that should be called a "national focus". Could the naming of these be in some way more specific, to make it seem like it is a concrete reform rather than some general aspiration?

Great work, by the way. I am very excited for this game y'all are building

I have the same feeling, it's just a matter of naming, but a reform is different than a political stance. If there's a reform about religious tolerance, it should be named differently. For example "Acceptance of heretics in government positions", or something like that.

I think that, in general, there's a little overlap between different mechanics, like this and policies and laws, even in technology and innovation. My fear is that there will be three or four different mechanics that don't necessarily link clearly between them and that in the end will become a sum of modifiers and buttons that you'll click every 50 years, instead of being a clear way of administrating the country you're playing as.

 

[Duart77]

The Iberians were successful because they combined technologies available in their context to make ships capable of supporting long-term colonial projects. They weren't just 'lucky'. They had the the backdrop of the Reconquista, the wars between themselves and their naval industries to encourage them to pursue ocean-going ventures and become uniquely prepared to explore and colonise the African and American coasts. The caravels and carracks didn't pop up just because the Portuguese 'stumbled' on to them, they were deliberate projects by a country that was readying itself for 'outremer' expansion.

This is to say, if any region in Western Europe was ready to be the first to have long-term, large-scale colonisation projects, it was Iberia, and Portugal in particular. Not Scandinavia.

Yet a different set of circumstances allowed the norse to make long-range seafaring voyages too. The difference is that the Portuguese and Spanish did it on a much larger scale, but that doesn’t mean the norse shouldn’t explore and colonise. They should just get much, much fewer settlers.

 

[Sete]

My question would be how will Military Orders work for Portugal? They were quite influential trough the Middle Ages and then got under the Royal Family ownership.

Wy shouldn't it be? There is evidence that the Norse might have briefly settled Madeira too, it is directly comparable, they just didn't have the adequate technology 4-5 centuries prior.

They found rat dna with proves nothing. The widespread of trade routes can easily justify that one. But Vikings are so ingrained in pop culture this day and age people look for connections everywhere.

No evidence of settlements before the Portuguese.

Edit: you can disagree but it's factual. There is no evidence of human activity on the Madeira Archipelago previous to Portuguese colonization. Zero, nepia, nada.

 

[ArVass]

It already exists but as an Estate Privilege for the Nobility.

Interesting, thanks!

You may notice that our content categories are so flexible that we can hook historical content to a bunch of different ones(government reforms, laws & policies, estate privileges, advances, etc.). It is more a matter of preference regarding which category we think fits better.

Yes, which is very nice. For the icon, I propose a scroll with a golden seal on it, that would be cool

We'll talk more in-depth about all the unique content in January when we start the new 'Tinto Flavor' series.

Nice!

 

[Álvaro Núñez de Lara]

I really like the new art of the estate privileges as opposed to the previous one shown

 

[pheonicia]

The Iberians were successful because they combined technologies available in their context to make ships capable of supporting long-term colonial projects. They weren't just 'lucky'. They had the the backdrop of the Reconquista, the wars between themselves and their naval industries to encourage them to pursue ocean-going ventures and become uniquely prepared to explore and colonise the African and American coasts. The caravels and carracks didn't pop up just because the Portuguese 'stumbled' on to them, they were deliberate projects by a country that was readying itself for 'outremer' expansion.

This is to say, if any region in Western Europe was ready to be the first to have long-term, large-scale colonisation projects, it was Iberia, and Portugal in particular. Not Scandinavia.

And all of that was well over a hundred years after game start. The reconquista itself was not preordained by God as a destined occurrence, and there's no saying that iberian colonial success was likely, let alone probable.

 

[Zerodv]

The Iberians were successful because they combined technologies available in their context to make ships capable of supporting long-term colonial projects. They weren't just 'lucky'. They had the the backdrop of the Reconquista, the wars between themselves and their naval industries to encourage them to pursue ocean-going ventures and become uniquely prepared to explore and colonise the African and American coasts. The caravels and carracks didn't pop up just because the Portuguese 'stumbled' on to them, they were deliberate projects by a country that was readying itself for 'outremer' expansion.

This is to say, if any region in Western Europe was ready to be the first to have long-term, large-scale colonisation projects, it was Iberia, and Portugal in particular. Not Scandinavia.

I mean they were uniquely prepared by geography, there was so much participation of French and Flemish in early colonial ventures and the conquest of the Canaries too, it was spearheaded by the Iberians because the Iberians were the spearpoint, not because they were the whole spear.

Geography + institutions should be way Iberians would likely be the first to find and settle the islands and Central/South America, but Iceland is on the other side of Europe vertically speaking and they should be able to maybe explore their own corner of the Atlantic.

 

[Johan]

Agreed. This is 100% a meme policy. Going to end up with common Vinland exploits on day one.

For who?

Greenland will be lucky if they rediscover even Markland

 

[SlaveOfWant]

yeah sorry.. been a bit busy atm working on the game.

Is this also the reason you need to comment within an hour of a new post to get a response?

Good luck, and stay healthy.

edit: Can someone tell me if they’re downvoting me for being wrong about the issue or being rude to the devs? I have no idea what the issue is.

 

[Thrudgelmir2333]

Yet a different set of circumstances allowed the norse to make long-range seafaring voyages too. The difference is that the Portuguese and Spanish did it on a much larger scale, but that doesn’t mean the norse shouldn’t explore and colonise. They should just get much, much fewer settlers.

I agree. In fact, any country interested and fit for colonial projects should be allowed to do so.

But not given a leg-up. Especially to a country that failed at the very project being used to justify it, aka Vinland.

 

[Metz]

The UI seems to take the Imperator Rome approach of having information condensed in small circle charts. Any chance this could be replaced with just plain numbers or pie charts?

 

[Johan]

Maybe a better name would be "Governing Principles" and rename "Crown" to "Government"

legacy