• 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 #50 - 12th February 2025

Hey everyone, and welcome back. Johan is busy today (allegedly) so instead I will walk you through this Tinto Talks on Formable Countries in our little project called Caesar. It’s a fairly tight feature so this should be nice and quick.



What are Formable Countries?

Basically, formable countries are new tags that you can switch to. Typically they represent historical unions and conquests, but some represent aspirations that never materialised.

Generally speaking, the vision behind Formables is to offer roleplaying and historical immersion, and support player fantasies, rather than modifier stacking. They will change your country name, national flag, and map color. So while you may unlock some content such as advances or other minor unique content, the tag change is often the goal in itself.

Screenshot 2025-02-12 113332.png
Screenshot 2025-02-12 112612.png

Spain gets some unique advances in the later ages, but not all do.

Rather than your country changing automatically every age, you achieve it by completing certain objectives. Usually, you'll need to control a certain percentage of a predefined set of locations, for example Scandinavia needs 75% of the locations in the Scandinavia region.

There’s typically additional requirements as well such as your Primary Culture belonging to a certain Culture Group. Forming Spain also requires you and all the independent countries in Iberia to be Christian, as it is thematically closely tied to the completion of the Reconquista. Iberian Muslims have the reverse rules for forming Al-Andalus.

Some are directly tied to actions in International Organizations, like the Holy Roman Empire or the Ilkhanate.

Formables also have a Tier that represents their natural order of precedence. You can only form countries that are the same or higher tier than you. For example, England (Tier 2) can form Great Britain (Tier 3) but Great Britain can’t form England. The AI will only form countries that are a higher tier.


Screenshot 2025-02-12 124554.png

Country formation is just a click away.


There are 3 settings to the relevant game rule.
  1. Only Historical Formable Countries
    1. Only countries that actually formed in the game’s time period will be allowed.
      1. Examples are Spain and Great Britain
  2. Allow Plausible Formable Countries(Default)
    1. Countries that could plausible have formed, or formed just after the time period will be allowed.
      1. Examples are Germany and Italy
  3. Allow Ahistorical Formable Countries
    1. Aspirational or fantasy countries can be formed. Examples include
      1. North Sea Empire (which is a Tier IV) if you control Britain and Scandinavia
      2. Europa (Tier V)



Screenshot 2025-02-12 121247.png

Some countries have different flags depending on the exact manner in which they are formed. For example this variant of the Union Jack with a dominant saltire when you start as Scotland.


1739361227786.png

And some formables come with little treats to sweeten the deal.


Screenshot 2025-02-12 123920.png

The Teutonic Order has a long way to go before they can become Prussia…


Screenshot 2025-02-12 124144.png

But it might be worth it…


Screenshot 2025-02-12 121702.png

Some exist to fulfil common player fantasies, but only appear if the player chooses in the Game Rules to have the less historical ones.



This is our current list of formable countries, let us know which ones you would like us add!

FormableTierNote
Europa5Ahistorical
Rome4Ahistorical
Hindustan4Plausible
Holy Roman Empire4Plausible
Byzantium4
Ilkhanate4
Iran4
Mongolia4
Mughals4
Rûm4
Russia4
United States4
Celtica3Ahistorical
Latin Empire3Ahistorical
North Sea3Ahistorical
Al-Andalus3Plausible
Arabia3Plausible
Canada3Plausible
Egypt3Plausible
Germany3Plausible
Italy3Plausible
Malaya3Plausible
Ruthenia3Plausible
Scandinavia3Plausible
Shan3Plausible
Banten3
Bengal3
Deccan3
Delhi3
Ethiopia3
Great Britain3
Gujurat3
Hausa3
Inca3
Kongo3
Manchu3
Maratha3
Mexico3
Poland-Lithuania3
Punjab3
Rajput3
Siam3
Sokoto3
Spain3
Timurids3
Two Sicilies3
Yamato3
Africa2Ahistorical
Carthage2Ahistorical
Hen Ogledd2Ahistorical
Aotearoa2Plausible
Greece2Plausible
Jerusalem2Plausible
Livonia2Plausible
Maya2Plausible
Albania2
Armenia2
Austria2
Ayutthaya2
Bahamis2
England2
Georgia2
Golden Horde2
Holstein2
Ireland2
Navarre2
Nepal2
Netherlands2
Poland2
Prussia2
Scotland2
Serbia2
Sweden2
Switzerland2
Tibet2
Wales2
Connacht1Plausible
Ulster1Plausible
Aïr1
Bavaria1
Beja1
Mazovia1
Mecklenburg1
Mossi1
Nassau1
Northumbria1
Pomerania1
Sardinia1
Saxony1
Silesia1


That's it for today's dev diary. Thanks for reading, and we'll see you next time, where we will talk about Subject Types, and an interesting part of the Castilian player fantasy…
 
Last edited:
  • 184Like
  • 83Love
  • 12
  • 8
  • 3
Reactions:
Ruthenia is covering Ukraine. I suspect that they just forgot to put Romania on the list.
Ruthenia is a region, Ukraine is a larger country... Ukraine includes Odessa region. Don-bass, Crimea which are not related to Ruthenia... Ruthenia is a region in current countries of Ukraine, Poland, Slovakia and Hungary
 
  • 3
Reactions:
Ruthenia is a region, Ukraine is a larger country... Ukraine includes Odessa region. Don-bass, Crimea which are not related to Ruthenia... Ruthenia is a region in current countries of Ukraine, Poland, Slovakia and Hungary
Then you may want to ask them to rename Ruthenia as Ukraine, because it is going to represent a bigger region than that.

Though considering the starting date of the game, it would be rather odd for Crimea, Odessa and Donbass to be required to form Ukraine/Ruthenia since they will be populated by Turkic peoples at the start (and some Greeks and Goths in Crimea's case). Much like Russia in Eu4 didn't require one to own land outside of Russian culture (and I'm pretty sure Ruthenia didn't require non Ruthenian land too), it shouldn't be required here. I also don't think forming Russia or Ukraine should grant claims on the steppe inherently.
 
  • 5
Reactions:
Loved the formable nations (pleasantly suprised about the ahistorical ones )! Already looking forward to Project Caesar.

As a suggesiton/request, I would ask you to please add this nation (as ahistorical, probably):

Sumeria/Babylonia (always loved sumerian culture and religion, but no paradox game has Sumeria as a nation...at least, I would ask you to add Babylonia, like in Imperator and Victoria II. It might not even add anything other than the tag name and map color, but it is already good enough for me)

Also, if possible, as some other comments suggested, Iberia (a union between Portugal and Castile, with Portugal in power, contrary to Spain, which has Castile in power).

Thank you for reading my comment, and hope you take it into consideration. Thank you for all your work! :)
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Then you may want to ask them to rename Ruthenia as Ukraine, because it is going to represent a bigger region than that.

Though considering the starting date of the game, it would be rather odd for Crimea, Odessa and Donbass to be required to form Ukraine/Ruthenia since they will be populated by Turkic peoples at the start (and some Greeks and Goths in Crimea's case). Much like Russia in Eu4 didn't require one to own land outside of Russian culture (and I'm pretty sure Ruthenia didn't require non Ruthenian land too), it shouldn't be required here. I also don't think forming Russia or Ukraine should grant claims on the steppe inherently.
For clarity from a Ukrainian, Ruthenia is this region in the game:
IMG_0819.jpeg


Ruthenia mainly represent some kind of mix of the Ruthenian Kingdom (Halicia-Volhynia) and parts of Kyivan Rus.

What must be definitely added as a Tier 2 possible tag is the Cossack Hetmanate, because it was a historical tag. Details here:
Please, add Hetmanate (Cossack Hetmanate) / Zaporizhia (tier 2) to formable historical tags, as it existed as a separate entity in the XVII – XVIII centuries for more than 100 years.
For some time it was independent, longer as a protectorate/vassal.

Cossacks were a crucial part of the regional history for more than 300 years and played an important role in the Polish, Ottoman, Muscovite and Crimean history.
It should have also a huge potential for unique flavour:
  • Zaporizhian Sich unique bulding
  • unique units (both land and naval)
  • republic stuff
  • hord-ish playstyle
  • provide good mercenaries to Europe
  • naval and land raids to the Steppe
  • liberation of slaves etc.
While Ruthenia could have more monarch-ish narrative and content.

For example, 1640s – 1650s Hetmanate under Bohdan Khmelnytskyi maps (all Ukraine-related cultures should be accepted, including Halychian, Volhynian, Polesian):

Historical maps:
Pays des Cosaques ou Ukraine
Vkraina quae et Terra Cossacorum
View attachment 1253647View attachment 1253653
The tag name Ukraine would be also viable with an option to rename.

Symbols:

As long as in the ~1660s – 1680s the Hetmanate was sometimes called The Ukrainian State in some Polish documents, it might be optionally called Ukraine. But the Hetmanate would be accurate.

So I would love to see the flavour separation:
Ruthenia = early monarchy, Kyivan Rus cosplay,
Hetmanate = later Cossack republic.
 
Last edited:
  • 6
  • 1Like
Reactions:
I disagree. Austria-Hungary was never a real aspiration, but rather a compromise. It's a step down for Austria and not enough for an autonomy-seeking Hungary. Austria-Hungary is already covered by the PU system explained a few TTs ago. If anything, it could be a possibility for a weakened (unified) Austria that owns the Carpathian Basin to revert to a PU with a strong reemerged Hungary as junior partner via event to somewhat portray what happened in the 1860s.

Sure, it was a compromise that did not really solve the issue and ultimately satisfied neither side. Nevertheless it was a state that actually existed und could plausibly have existed in the games time period.

Austria-Hungary also was more than a PU (which is one of the reasons the Hungarians were not satisfied), there were several joint institutions, most importantly the army and the navy.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Then you may want to ask them to rename Ruthenia as Ukraine, because it is going to represent a bigger region than that.

Though considering the starting date of the game, it would be rather odd for Crimea, Odessa and Donbass to be required to form Ukraine/Ruthenia since they will be populated by Turkic peoples at the start (and some Greeks and Goths in Crimea's case). Much like Russia in Eu4 didn't require one to own land outside of Russian culture (and I'm pretty sure Ruthenia didn't require non Ruthenian land too), it shouldn't be required here. I also don't think forming Russia or Ukraine should grant claims on the steppe inherently.
well Ruthenia never existed as a country it is actually a culture, and I am not saying that Crimea or Don-bass have to be required to form it. :) it was more a comment of what is the difference between Ruthenia and Ukraine...
 
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Two Sicilies and Italy being in the same Tier is a problem i'd imagine,since Two Sicilies would have formed Italy with no problem if it had the chance...
I'd say either raise Italy to tier 4 or lower TS to tier 2
 
  • 1
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
If Austria-Hungary will exist as a formable (tier 3 or 4), I think its full titled name should be either
- Austro-Hungarian Monarchy
- Monarchy of Austria-Hungary
- Dual Monarchy of Austria-Hungary

They used "Monarchy" as the official description of its title, not "Empire", which would be the default in the game normally.
 
I'm a bit iffy on the whole 'Celtica' thing tbh, it seems very out of place even among the other ahistorical formable tags, even Europa makes more sense to me, as a state which ruled all of Europe would likely be called Europe. I doubt something similar would apply to 'Celtica', or that the concept of a pan-Celtic state/identity existed within the time frame of the game.

I understand that a lot of people probably want a pan-Celtic formable, so I'm fine with it being included (even if it's something I wouldn't form ingame), but a more historically grounded alternative would go a long way for me personally. Specifically, a tier 3 pan-Gaelic formable (perhaps named Gaeldom?) would be ideal for me, as it would be based on a shared language and ancestry which were much more obvious to people of the time, as well as having some (admittedly limited) historical precedent in Edward Bruce, as well as Robert Bruce's letter to his Irish allies invoking the same common identity which simply wouldn't apply to a pan-Celtic project.

So I propose that Celtica remains as an ahistorical formable, and that a Gaelic formable is also implemented as a plausible tag, using Edward Bruce's campaign in Ireland and his coronation as High King as justification for this (I understand this may be pushing the definition of plausible, but compared to Celtica, it is).

As for the Brythonics, either give them their own pan-Brythonic formable, or give a Welsh GB its own flavour (different flag, special event, claims on Brittany). I'd lean towards the latter.

Basically, I think that Celtica should stay, but that an alternative that is more realistic and based on more obvious cultural links (specifically language) would be ideal for me personally.
 
  • 8Like
  • 2
Reactions:
If Austria-Hungary will exist as a formable (tier 3 or 4), I think its full titled name should be either
- Austro-Hungarian Monarchy
- Monarchy of Austria-Hungary
- Dual Monarchy of Austria-Hungary

They used "Monarchy" as the official description of its title, not "Empire", which would be the default in the game normally.
@Thales von Dasos what do you disagree on? This is objective truth here lol
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
I'm a bit iffy on the whole 'Celtica' thing tbh, it seems very out of place even among the other ahistorical formable tags, even Europa makes more sense to me, as a state which ruled all of Europe would likely be called Europe. I doubt something similar would apply to 'Celtica', or that the concept of a pan-Celtic state/identity existed within the time frame of the game.

I understand that a lot of people probably want a pan-Celtic formable, so I'm fine with it being included (even if it's something I wouldn't form ingame), but a more historically grounded alternative would go a long way for me personally. Specifically, a tier 3 pan-Gaelic formable (perhaps named Gaeldom?) would be ideal for me, as it would be based on a shared language and ancestry which were much more obvious to people of the time, as well as having some (admittedly limited) historical precedent in Edward Bruce, as well as Robert Bruce's letter to his Irish allies invoking the same common identity which simply wouldn't apply to a pan-Celtic project.

So I propose that Celtica remains as an ahistorical formable, and that a Gaelic formable is also implemented as a plausible tag, using Edward Bruce's campaign in Ireland and his coronation as High King as justification for this (I understand this may be pushing the definition of plausible, but compared to Celtica, it is).

As for the Brythonics, either give them their own pan-Brythonic formable, or give a Welsh GB its own flavour (different flag, special event, claims on Brittany). I'd lean towards the latter.

Basically, I think that Celtica should stay, but that an alternative that is more realistic and based on more obvious cultural links (specifically language) would be ideal for me personally.
Dál Riada for Gaels is what I suggested
 
  • 2
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
What are your thoughts on forming historical vassal countries? For example if a Scottish or English ruler owns or has vassilised the majority of non-player Irish states for enough years. they can be merged into a new (historical) Lordship of Ireland nation under semi-autonomous control of the player?
More decisions like this please. It encourages decentralized gameplay.
 
  • 3
  • 1Like
Reactions:
This is a great implementation in my opinion.

I'd like to see the Angevin Empire (Plausible, 4) as a formable. A pet peeve of mine in EU4 is having England plastered all over France or vice versa, and the union is definitely plausible with a different outcome of the hundred years war.

Maybe a nice purple colour combining England red and France Blue?

EDIT: It doesn't have to be called the Angevin Empire specifically, I'm talking about some kind of Western European Empire tag.
 
Last edited:
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
To enhance the historical identity of the Korean Peninsula, I propose adding two formable nations: Baekje and Korea (or Dai Han).

1. Baekje​

Although Baekje was destroyed during the Three Kingdoms period, it was later revived as Later Baekje during the Later Three Kingdoms period, once again establishing a powerful presence in the southern part of the Korean Peninsula. Additionally, Japan’s Ouchi Clan claimed to be the successors of Baekje, emphasizing their historical ties to the kingdom.

The formation conditions for Baekje could be as follows:

  • If Tamna (Jeju) conquers the southern regions of the Korean Peninsula (modern-day Gyeonggi, Chungcheong, and Jeolla areas).
  • If Japan’s Ouchi Clan occupies the same territory.
The national tier of Baekje should be either equal to or lower than Goryeo. It would be appropriate to categorize Baekje as Ahistorical.

2. Korea (Dai Han)​

The name Korea originates from Goryeo, but Goryeo did not unify the entire Korean Peninsula. Later, the Joseon Dynasty emerged and unified the peninsula, yet it would be more appropriate to retain the name Joseon for historical accuracy.

However, considering the historical precedent of the Empire of Korea (Dai Han) proclaimed in the late 19th century, a formable nation called Korea or Dai Han could be introduced. This nation would represent a higher-tier compared to Goryeo or Joseon and could be formed under the following conditions:
  • If it conquers Manchuria or parts of Japan.
  • If it undergoes specific reforms or modernization.
The appropriate classification for this nation would be Plausible.
Do you think it'd make sense for somewhere in the Japanese mission tree to have the option of releasing a puppet Baekje?
 
  • 2
Reactions:
Sure, it was a compromise that did not really solve the issue and ultimately satisfied neither side. Nevertheless it was a state that actually existed und could plausibly have existed in the games time period.

Austria-Hungary also was more than a PU (which is one of the reasons the Hungarians were not satisfied), there were several joint institutions, most importantly the army and the navy.
I know, it was a real union which is a bit different than a personal union, that's why I wrote "somewhat portray". It did exist, yes, but not in the game's timeframe and only because of very specific circumstances and I don't think it historically was something anybody really strived for (as opposed to e.g. a unified Germany). The way I see it, A-H should be a nerf for the Austrians, not an upgrade. But then who would click the "form nation" button if it makes your country worse? That's why, in my opinion, A-H should not be a formable but, if implemented, should happen through an event or maybe as a decision with a trade off (you as Austria lose control (in the PC sense) over Hungarian areas, but raise the satisfaction of your Hungarian pops + your name and flag change, something like that)
 
  • 4
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Then you may want to ask them to rename Ruthenia as Ukraine, because it is going to represent a bigger region than that.

Though considering the starting date of the game, it would be rather odd for Crimea, Odessa and Donbass to be required to form Ukraine/Ruthenia since they will be populated by Turkic peoples at the start (and some Greeks and Goths in Crimea's case). Much like Russia in Eu4 didn't require one to own land outside of Russian culture (and I'm pretty sure Ruthenia didn't require non Ruthenian land too), it shouldn't be required here. I also don't think forming Russia or Ukraine should grant claims on the steppe inherently.
To add to this, I would assume Ruthenia in PC to serve both as a sort of revival of the Kyivan Rus as well as a proto-Ukraine, same as in EU4