• 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 #48- 29th of January 2025

Welcome to another Tinto Talks, The Happy Wednesday where we give out some information about our entirely top secret game Project Caesar, and get great feedback!

This week we will talk about how Unions and Regencies work in Project Caesar.

Unions
A union is a type of treaty that happens when two or more countries happen to have the same ruler, or when their rulers have a royal marriage. This functions like a defensive alliance in that they will come to each other's help automatically if they are attacked, but laws can be added to them to change how the union works.

In some previous GSGs we have done, a union was a type of subject, but here they start as a common pact in the form of an International Organization, where both partners (or more), at first all start at the same level.

A newly generated union only has the assured defense policy setup, and if you wish to keep the union stable and long-lasting you need to increase the Union Integration Level by getting more and more centralizing policies.

The Union Integration Level describes how centralized the Union is through laws and policies. Every member who is present when a centralizing policy is implemented gets its level increased. With the final centralization policy, all junior partners that have the same level as the union get unified by the Senior Partner. Members who join the Union later need to catch up on their progress to be integrated via the parliament.

muscowite_union.png

The Muscovite Union at the start of the game with the opinion, estates, stability, legitimacy and Integration Level of each member on display. At the top, you can see the Union-wide Integration Level which is basically a counter for all the centralizing policies implemented.


Union Parliament
In order to implement the laws for newcomers, you will have to use the Union Parliament which represents an assembly of the Union that calls in the ruling class estates of all members who have the already established laws not implemented yet.

Calling the parliament in the union works similar to how you call it at the country level. However, the parliament issue is fixed for it, differently to a regular country Parliament. To pass the Parliament Issue, you need to reach a minimum of 50% Parliament Support. And to get support for it, you have to bribe one of the three ruling estates of any of the countries in the Union. How much support they give depends on their Great Power Score compared to the total of all the member states that are called in the Parliament. In other words: in a union that has both France and Normandy in it, bribing France’s estates has a significantly higher impact on the result of the Parliament than bribing Normandy’s estates.

quadruple.png

Here we have the Parliament of the Hungarian Union with Croatia which already has 2 centralizing policies implemented and now has Serbia and Bosnia as newcomers in the Union, with an Integration Level for each of them of 0. The members are sorted by the potential Parliament Support.

There are three potential bribes available for each member, one per estate. Once selected, you have the choice of one of several Parliament Agendas for that estate:

agenda.png


Right now, the Bribe Effect is set to reduce the Legitimacy of your country and transfer gold to the target estate, and the cost scales with the Integration Levels the member state is behind compared to the whole IO and their Great Power Score compared to the Senior Partner. There are plans to diversify the bribes though, so each agenda has a more unique cost attached to it.

Once a member’s estate is bribed, the country vanishes from the list for that Parliament.

Union Laws
Let's dive into the different laws that a Union can have. Laws in the PU are separated into two categories: Centralizing Policies and Generic Policies. Starting with the latter, smaller category, every Personal Union has the Assured Defense policy when created, which gives the union its defensive character.

It is possible to replace it with its two alternatives if you wish to have your partners not be involved in your defensive wars. These options are however not very popular amongst the AI.

offense.png

The offensive counterpart has only one policy though which allows you to call union partners into offensive wars as if they were allies:


The final Generic Policy is the one about the Union Contribution. As you have noticed, the aforementioned policies mention that the Union needs a certain amount of Gold. With the Union Contribution policy, a treasury in the Union will be established where each member has to pay in.

union_contribution.png

The numbers of the actual payments are still subject to change.

The Gold in the Union Treasury is right now used to enact policies in the Union or to call in the Parliament.

Moving on to the Centralization Policies, the first and probably most important one is the policy of establishing a de facto Senior Partner of the Union.

The Senior Partner is the de facto leader of the Personal Union, so the Parliament is called by it, and it’s also the member that can propose Centralizing Policies. The AI member with the highest Great Power Score will try to enact this policy.

The remaining policies revolve around standardizing the Succession Law, the Government Reforms and Laws, the Estate Privileges, the Cultures and Languages of the members after the Senior Partner ones.

Finally, there is the Unification of Crowns policy which finalizes the centralization, and lets the Senior Partner annex every Junior Partner who has the same Integration Level as the Union itself.


Regencies

A Regency occurs while a government has no legitimate ruler, and is instead led by a regent. Usually, it is caused when the heir selection produces no valid heir, or when the heir is a mere child. In a Monarchy, the consort may become the regent, but otherwise, it is a character associated with the most powerful estate, or even the overlord. The Regency persists until a proper ruler is restored.

The type of regency you get depends on several different factors, but the game goes in the order listed below and picks the first valid one for a monarchy.

Nobles Regency
If the Nobles Estate has more than 33% of the Power, a character from the nobles estate will be assigned as the regent. This will make the nobles happier, but make other estates less happy.

Clergy Regency
If the Clergy Estate has more than 33% of the Power, a character from the clergy estate will be assigned as the regent. This will make the clergy happier, but make other estates less happy.

Burghers Regency
If the Burgher Estate has more than 33% of the Power, a character from the burghers estate will be assigned as the regent. This will make the burghers happier, but make other estates less happy.

Peasants Regency
If the Peasants Estate has more than 33% of the Power, a character from the peasants estate will be assigned as the regent. This will make the peasants happier, but make other estates less happy.

Overlord Regency
When a country is a subject and has no ruler, the overlord 's ruler may instead rule it as a regent. The subject will of course get a loyalty boost as long as the overlords ruler is controlling it.

Consort Regency
When the ruler of a Monarchy dies while the heir is still a child, the consort may rule the country instead as a regent. This makes the stability go up a bit during the regency.

Subject Regency
When a country is an overlord and has no ruler, a powerful subject's ruler may instead rule it as a regent. All subjects will be slightly less loyal though.

Interregnum
This regency happens when a country has no ruler, a temporary provisional administration will lead it until an official ruler gets appointed, which can be quick or take a long time.

Election Administration
When a Republic has no ruler, a temporary one is assigned to rule it as regent until an official election can be held.

We also have unique regencies like Judicial Conclave, Mamluk Succession, Papal Conclave, Fratricide Succession, which we will go into in more detail in the relevant Tinto Flavour Talks.

Extend Regency
If you feel that your heir is just too incompetent, and your current regent is really great, you can extend the regency by 5 more years for a mere cost of 20 legitimacy.

There is always the chance though that a regent has had enough, and attempts to seize power.

extend_regency.png


Next week we will talk a little bit about diseases…
 
  • 165Love
  • 120Like
  • 6
  • 3
Reactions:
Another doubt. Can a union be established between a regular country and other types of countries? For example, can a Medici rule both its bank and Florence in a union?
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
How do unions work with traditional appanages? In France the heir held Dauphine and in England the heir was the Prince of Wales. Would these titles then join a union until they were specifically granted to the heir, or would they be automatically granted to the heir and never join the union at all.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
I'm thinking that the bar for Burgher regencies should be raised a little, and the bar for Peasant Regencies should be raised a lot. Consort/Overlord/Subject Regencies seem to be more likely outcomes than either of those, but especially a Peasant regency...
 
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
How do unions work with traditional appanages? In France the heir held Dauphine and in England the heir was the Prince of Wales. Would these titles then join a union until they were specifically granted to the heir, or would they be automatically granted to the heir and never join the union at all.
I would imagine the system that exists to create a PU would also have a branching condition for if one of the titles is an appanage subject type and automatically merge instead.
 
Serbia should have been depicted with more accurate flag:

View attachment 1248854View attachment 1248855
View attachment 1248853
It's a bit of a point of pedantry (and as far as I can tell is how Paradox interprets it as well), but the white-on-red eagle is the "medieval Kingdom of Serbia" flag while the "red on yellow" eagle is the "Serbian Empire" flag.

Yes, even though the red-on-yellow flag is attested in 1339. It just feels nicer to have the establishment of empire also come with a flag change, y'know?
 
  • 1
  • 1Like
Reactions:
We don't have that, as we don't have an IO mapmode, as several may overlap, making it a visual mess. But you can see one in the Tinto Flavour of Novgorod.
PUs would not overlap on a map, as a country may belong only to 1 union. So a mapmode for unions alone would be possibe?
 
Last edited:
  • 2Like
  • 1
Reactions:
It's a bit of a point of pedantry (and as far as I can tell is how Paradox interprets it as well), but the white-on-red eagle is the "medieval Kingdom of Serbia" flag while the "red on yellow" eagle is the "Serbian Empire" flag.

Yes, even though the red-on-yellow flag is attested in 1339. It just feels nicer to have the establishment of empire also come with a flag change, y'know?
I think Serbian Empire having the same flag as Serbian Kingdom would be better for historical reasons, while Serbian Empire could change its flag if player takes over entire Byzantium, something like this:

1738179446753.png
 
  • 5Like
Reactions:
Very interesting! I didn't see much about whether estate satisfaction and power in junior partners (and crown power) affects the union parliament. I think there is some room here to have estate and union member power dynamics have more interplay here, considering for example how the nobility (and occasionally peasantry) of Sweden were a thorn in the side for the Kalmar Union. Or how the extensive privileges of Polish nobility was one of the points of attraction for Lithuanian nobles (besides the better economic and military/security prospects seen in the union). Some thoughts:

  • Estates in junior partners should have some sort of satisfaction penalty to represent discontent with foreign rulership. This would drive junior partners to either seek independence or make compromises to keep internal discontent low. Estate rebellions when in a union should generally lead to a bid for independence and a new ruler being elected/appointed by the estate.
    • Potentially, it could also be possible to directly make a bid for independence with the backing of a particular estate, if dissatisfied enough, at the cost of making that estate a fair bit more influential.
    • Potential contributors to dissatisfaction might be cultural opinion, religious view, linguistic differences, great power score difference, geographical proximity (all metrics measured between a particular junior partner and their senior partner). Crown power should also play a part, see the final point below.
      • Discrepancy between privileges could also play a part. If the senior partner estates are more privileged, junior partner estates are probably more less averse to a tighter union so they can share those privileges - and vice versa.
  • The cost of bribery could depend on an estate's power and satisfaction (ideally, not its overall satisfaction, only the modifier to its satisfaction from union circumstances only, as determined above). A happy estate is cheaper to bribe, a powerful estate is more expensive to bribe.
    • The latter point (powerful estate is more expensive to bribe) would probably require estate power to have some impact on bribes, otherwise you would just pick the least powerful estate most of the time. An example could be weighting parliament support based on bribed estate power (so bribing an estate with 25% power in France gives 25% of France's potential support. But that's problematic so long as you can only bribe one estate per country; you could potentially get a deadlock and lots of wasted resources. Say if you only bribe estates with <50% power in each country, then you might not have enough support to pass the issue. This would not be very intuitive to the player as it would not be obvious from supporting any individual estate whether you can still get enough support from the other estates.
      • Allowing bribery of all estates in each partner country would of course get around this issue.
  • Junior partner crown power should serve as the senior partner's influence against the national estates of the junior partner.
    • Crown power % share in junior partners could go towards supporting parliament issues without needing a bribe.
    • There could be policies directed at increasing/decreasing crown power in junior partners (with corresponding influences on estate satisfaction). So you can play a game of disenfranchising the national estates (at the cost of potential rebellion ad the costs that might entail) or allowing them their rights (at the cost of a longer and more costly [in terms of bribe costs] integration).
This is just a collection of ideas and would need some more care and thought to make into a cohesive proposal, but essentially, I find the system as presented in the DD as an interesting template, but think it can serve as the basis for having more interesting interplay and direct interaction with the national estates of the junior partners not just via a bribe button, but as actors you have to consider whether to suppress or work together with in order to centralise a union (or perhaps keep the union relatively decentralised with happy national estates in the junior partners).

Some of the above thoughts I suppose can apply to various subject relationships as well. Having to contend with not just your junior partners and subjects directly, but also the interests of their national estates, could make it a lot more interesting to manage such relationships.

As an aside, if the Union is in a defensive war, it would be interesting to be able for a senior partner to appropriate the Union treasury for the war chest (such as hiring mercenaries), perhaps at a relations/satisfaction penalty with union members and their estates. Though depending on how much cash the treasury builds up (I see a lot in one of the screenshots) that might not be very balanced. Other forms of appropriation (for infrastructure works or other projects) might also be interesting, say a road connecting territories of two union members. Perhaps policies could dictate what other things the treasury can be used for and how "selfish" the senior partner can be.
 
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Congratulations guys and girls. This is knocking it out of the park. I love what you are doing with the IO's it seems like a tremendous tool to build this kind of generic or specific gameplay features afkorting for great gameplay diversity. Except the name, that's still rubbish. I'm all for Associations it's short and feels a lot more fitting for the age. Perhaps association of countries
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
It's a bit of a point of pedantry (and as far as I can tell is how Paradox interprets it as well), but the white-on-red eagle is the "medieval Kingdom of Serbia" flag while the "red on yellow" eagle is the "Serbian Empire" flag.

Yes, even though the red-on-yellow flag is attested in 1339. It just feels nicer to have the establishment of empire also come with a flag change, y'know?
Also, I am unsure if Serbia will even get "Dusan's coronation" event, as they said that they plan to have only 2 empires in the start of the game (HRE and ERE). I am unsure if Serbia will get Empire rank at all.
 
Serious question: while the union mechanics are neat, wouldn't it be the default option to just outright conquest to avoid the slow process of integration?
 
  • 1
  • 1Like
Reactions:
What are the exact conditions of a union breaking. In EU4 it was:
1. negative opinion of the Junior Partner on monarch death
2. union break in the peace threaty
3. pretender rebels winning in the junior partner
4. independence war won by the junior partner
5. Junior partner changing their government, so i can't be under PU
(i think that's all, bu may have missed something)

How similar is this? As far as I understand the replies here, a country leaves the union if they somehow get a different ruler, what may happen in multiple ways. Is this more likely when relations within the union are bad?

Finally, can the integration progress be reverted? Can the union policies be undone?
 
  • 1
  • 1Like
Reactions:
It gets dissolved completely, and a newer PU would be a consideres a new, different one, that you are starting from scratch.

Even if the law is incompatible, the union partner doesn't automatically leave the union. However, if it is incompatible then there is an increased risk that the partner might just break apart naturally because their inheritance law prefers somebody else.
Interesting. I have some follow up questions though.

1. What happens if a country that's already in a PU gets a PU over a country that also already has a PU of its own? For example, Poland-Lithuania gets a PU on Hungary-Bohemia. Since as per what you said you can only be in one PU IO and since senior partner is decided by the parliament (so by the sound of it, only after the IO is formed), what decides which IO is used the the new joint PU? Something like great power ranking, diplomatic influence or prestige? Or do you get to choose which IO (and therefore which set of PU laws) to pick from during the parliament session when such a PU forms?

2. If incompatible inheritance laws don't automatically break the union, what happens to the partner that ends up with a ruler not matching their country's inheritance laws? Do they get a penalty to something like estate happiness?

3. If a country does break away from a PU not through outright war but, as you described it, naturally from things like law conflicts, can the senior partner try to restore it diplomatically after you build up relations back? Or is your only recourse at that point trying to enforce the union through war?

4. If a PU broke naturally due to inheritance law conflicts and you then re-enforce it through war, do you get to impose common inheritance law right away in the peace deal?

5. Does the PU system interact with things like laws/policies/age advances? For example, is there a law/policy/age advance that makes it so your PUs start at +5 integration level?

6. Are there any "dynastic deals" diplomatic interactions that increase the likelihood of a PU in certain situations? For example, where both countries agree that one of them will inherit both thrones in case the other one's ruler has no male heir (even if they may otherwise not meet general PU criteria)?
 
Last edited:
  • 2Like
Reactions:
There are similar IOs, like the Swiss Confederacy, but we want to make it a bit more standardized, so you can have proper Federations this way.
Federations? So could a colonial rebellion result in a federation of colonial nations? Say if Britain had 13 different colonies on the American east coast.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
I'd have to do the math, but I think that if no impossible, it'd probably be very, very unlikely.
But if it's mainly a money issue, then couldn't say a Castille squeezing Mexico and Peru of gold just max out that slider and blaze through reforms?
 
The default succession law would lead to union break up, so you have to establish the senior partner, and then pass the standardized succession law for the union to be stable upon ruler death, am I getting it right? Please make it so that getting the union to be stable is somewhat difficult or takes a long time. There were so many personal unions throughout the years but only a handful of them made it past the first common ruler.
 
Yes, partial integration is possible, as you can integrate the country or countries that are more centralized, and the rest will remain in the Union, at the same integration level they were previously. In this example, Castile would integrate Aragon, while Naples would stay as a separate, non-integrated member of the PU.

Can't this lead to exploits like waiting for a new member to join before integrating the others to avoid being sent back to level one in a new IO as the senior member?