• 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 #55 - 19th of March 2025

Welcome to another Tinto Talks, the Happy Wednesday where we give you information about our rather secret game with the Codename Project Caesar, so that we can get feedback to improve the game before launch.

As we mentioned last week, we are spending four weeks going through how your feedback together with internal testing have shaped the game in this last year. Today it is time to talk about the changes that are related to the political part of the game.

Estate Power
The power of the estates is one of the most important aspects of the core game loops of Project Caesar, so much so that we had to rearrange what we show in the top bar in the UI. We added so you can easily see each estate's current power and satisfaction, without having to go into a special screen.

As part of the gameplay loop is about breaking the power of the estates and strengthening the central state as you shape a modern country, basing the core power of the estates to how many pops they had made a gameplay where urbanizing and developing your country would weaken the central government.

The main change is that the amount of pops of a certain estate impact their power, but also impact the crown power with the same base value, before any privileges or laws give more power to the estate. This makes the relative power distribution between the estates feel logical, but the weakening of the crown is due to the privileges granted. This further ties in with advances increasing crown power and the increase of absolutism in later ages.

nobles.png

It's just a cost of a few hundred of stability to remove all those privileges. And maybe not give that noble with insane stats command over the army.. And go more plutocratic? Then we can reduce their power below 30%.. But the +0.17 military tactics is good… tough choices..


As characters all have an estate they belong to, it’s now also added in that giving characters command of armies or navies, or a place in the cabinet increases the power of the estate they belong to. A total of 25% for armies, 25% from navies and 25% from cabinet positions can be added.

Connected to this, the direct family of the ruler is now always considered to be part of the crown estate, so if you want to strengthen the crown you may want to risk them commanding armies.


55_crown_estate.png

Having a crown prince in the cabinet helps a bit..


Parliament
When it comes to the parliament we keep adding new agendas and issues from feedback and internal testing, but some important changes that come from you guys include the following.

First of all, we added the Dutch-style parliament with only nobles and burghers, which you currently have access to if you have the Low Franconian culture.

We also made it so that if you keep giving out the unique privileges for the nobles in Poland, you will end up in a situation where you need 100% of the support to pass anything in the parliament.

We also added a building that was requested by the community, which is available through an advance in the Age of Discovery.

parliament.png

Could be useful…


Societal Values & Government Reforms
While we were happy with how societal values were indirectly influenced by laws & privileges, they had the problem that eventually anything with a drift towards one direction would eventually get to the extreme. Now one could change this by lowering the amount it would drift, but that would make for rather dull gameplay, and eventually you’d get to extremes anyway.

So what we did instead was to make a sort of soft-cap for how far a value could drift, at 100 times the current drift. So if you manage to stack up to +0.75 monthly towards Naval then you could get the values all the way to 75 Naval before it stopped there. If you’d drop to less than +0.75 naval, you’d still be at 75 naval though, as you’d not progress to the other side until you get all the way to at least +0.01 to land! This has the added benefit of you being able to shape your country how you want over a longer period of time, and even if you want to be a humanist country, you may not get further than a 65 on that slider, as you may not be willing to give up other aspects.

towards_capital.png

If we increase our trade income, we can push it even further..



While working on adding content this year, we added government reforms to every age, and while doing so, we decided to tie some of them to societal values. So now about half of the government reforms that are available to every country require that a specific societal value at least 50 to be selectable, and if you drop below that, you’d lose the reform. Some examples include that Religious Tolerance requires a country to be Humanist, while Bank Ledgers requires a country to have a Capital Economy.


Proximity and Control
The proximity and control gameplay loop is one of the most beloved by our playtesting, and it has been tweaked a fair bit during the last year, so as to make it feel more natural.

Proximity now traces along rivers, where it's even easier to propagate proximity and market access downstream.

proximity.png
And where in the world are we now?


The buildings that act as proximity sources besides the capital, like the Bailiff, have been made a bit more powerful, but also far more costly.

We also changed how roads are built, slowing them down by 50% as default, and rugged terrain like Mountains makes road-building far slower. I guess the rest of the team did not like my Nidaros-Oslo highway..

We also tweaked how Maritime Presence works, with adding a decay to the current value, so that unless you invest in naval infrastructure and/or a navy, your control propagation over coastal seazones is limited.

We improved the impact from some buildings, and navies now also increase maritime presence in every seazone in the “seazone” province they are currently in. There is also an objective you can assign to navies to patrol any area/province you want and it will move around increasing your maritime presence.


presence.png

A single galley does not provide much presence i guess…


Stay tuned, as next week we will talk about changes to Diplomacy and Military…
 
  • 156Love
  • 126Like
  • 6
  • 4
  • 3
  • 1Haha
Reactions:
View attachment 1268269
I'm not an expert on pirates or anything, but aren't pirates too "fantasy looking"? I thought that pirates for the most part looked like normal sailors and that the image most people have of them is due to medias like treasure island or pirates of the Caribbean
Here's a portrait of Blackbeard made 6 years after his death. It's possibly exaggerated but the most contemporary source we have.
1000001942.jpg
 
  • 5Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Proximity and Control
The proximity and control gameplay loop is one of the most beloved by our playtesting, and it has been tweaked a fair bit during the last year, so as to make it feel more natural.

Proximity now traces along rivers, where it's even easier to propagate proximity and market access downstream.

View attachment 1268115And where in the world are we now?
Does the game represent better proximity propagation over rivers that are more navigable? For example, take the Nile. Up to the cataracts, very navigable. Beyond the cataracts, less so. In the Sudan, virtually unnavigable.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
ep.png

This suggests that the penalty/benefit you get from an estate being above 25% power is a function of how much they are above it, divided by two. Meaning if an estate's power reached 100% (which I guess is impossible/quite hard to achieve), the maximum penalty/benefit would be 75/2, so -37.5% and +0.375 tactics. Which feel a bit... unnatural? 'We have absolute power, so the maximum the king can tax is decreased by 37.5%!'

I propose making it a sliding scale relative of how far/close they are above this threshold to maximum power (the portion between 25% and 100% power), so in this concrete case 59.24% estate power would give 34.24/75, so -45.65% penalty and +0.45 tactics instead.
 
  • 4
  • 3Like
  • 2
Reactions:
So the more trade income you have relative to tax base, considering the effects of capital economy, the less RGO output & more production efficiency and cheaper buildings you have
 
I'm happy to see that the crown control over the land is not just a given but subject to actively investing resources in increasing and maintaining it.
 
Has there been consideration towards a system of inter-estate relations? Like the burghers, nobility, clergy and commoners having opinions towards each other?
Throughout history, inter-estate relations have been a driving force in conflict, most notably being the French revolution where the burgers and commoners teamed up against the nobility and clergy and 'revoked' some of their privileges . Another, would be the reformation where particularly in the UK, the crown and nobility broke from the clergy and seized the Catholic church's assets to bolster their new Anglicanism. The American revolution, was comprised once again of the infamous burger-commoner team which initially sought just curtailing the nobility but eventually drove the colonies to revolt.
Obviously these are all examples from later in history but I'm sure it's abundantly clear relations between the estates were very important during this time period. In any given state, each corresponding estate would have it's own interests which often are in conflict with the other estates.
My proposal is this: as the crown is just one of the 5+ estates in a nation, the similar estates should have satisfaction with each other similarly to the crown. What would drive these satisfactions, is much more of a tug-of-war between the estates. The commoners would hate a strong nobility, but would be just fine with a weak one. The clergy would dislike a strong nobility or burghers, but are otherwise indifferent, so long as they're getting their tithes or jizya. The burghers and nobility, similarly to the real world, would be rivals. They would both vie for power over the commoners and crown and seek to out-do each other in advancing their own interests. The conflicts between estates could be simulated through events, like in EU4. If the peasantry became angry with the nobility, they may take up arms against them. If the burghers become too powerful, they would scheme to destroy the nobility and possibly the clergy as well to advance their interests. In a colonial nation, this would mean an alliance with the commoners and a revolution against the crown. If the nobility grows too powerful, like a leviathan it's tentacles would engulf the crown, peasantry and burghers in heavy taxation. It may even seek to abolish the crown and create a Sejm, like in Poland historically. Events would also play a big role in this, similarly to EU4

So what would the point of all this be? Why simulate the relations between the estates? I believe it would add a layer of complexity to internal management, and perhaps increase the difficulty of what seems to be an easy, yet tedious, process of centralization. Estates already act independently of the crown, is it not safe to say their agendas would almost certainly be in conflict with one another? As others have said, it seems like strategies may arise to outright chose one of the major estates over the rest. In the real world, this would not work because the estate being benefitted would at a certain point, regardless of satisfaction, put it's own interests beyond the crowns, and far above other estates. EU4 attempts at this, but it's age and engine limitations are apparent. Frankly, it would just be super cool and open the door for more historical representation through depicting the internal conflicts facing not just the crown, but the social classes themselves.
 
  • 3Like
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
So now about half of the government reforms that are available to every country require that a specific societal value at least 50 to be selectable, and if you drop below that, you’d lose the reform.

To me this juxtaposes yalls rework of societal "drifting".

Adding a soft cap along with requiring commitment to change these values sounds like an incredible system, but then having the reform attached to these values disappear when the "number isnt high enough" feels shallow. Maybe the reform can become less effective the more the societal value strays from the threshold? Or maybe making it more expensive to uphold the reform?

At the end of the day theres only so many variables that you can fit into the game without making it overbearingly granular, and its probably not as jarring as its made out to be when its coupled with the work already done on the system.
 
Last edited:
  • 6Like
  • 1
Reactions:
yes, immediately..

its a dramatic change though, you have to go from at least +0.50 to -0.01
This reply sounds weird.
I thought that as you get close to the max value you can reach given your social values, you would move slower to that value. A bit like how military tradition works in eu4 or culture acceptance works in ck3.
So, how do you move from a societal value of 50 to 40?
Maybe I'm the one not understanding the system well so please could you explain it again
Cause right now it sounds wild. Maybe i get a random event lowering my social values and I lose the advance
 
  • 6Like
Reactions:
View attachment 1268269
I'm not an expert on pirates or anything, but aren't pirates too "fantasy looking"? I thought that pirates for the most part looked like normal sailors and that the image most people have of them is due to medias like treasure island or pirates of the Carribean
I’ve noticed that some of the 2d art is indeed a little fantasy looking, particularly with outfits and armor. For example, the armor in the background court art in the Morocco flavor post looks to me to be largely ahistorical and made up. Some of the headgear of 3d models also look kinda dubious, which has me a little concerned, but hopefully these are things that are subject to change or eventually they’ll take more direct feedback on.
 
  • 2
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Would it not make sense to have societal values have a decay towards neutral that increases as the value gets more extreme? That would naturally create an equilibrium when balanced correctly, but one that is more responsive to changes than the one outlined here.
 
  • 2Like
  • 2
Reactions:
they give estate power yes
so does estate power work by
1. first getting the base estate power for the location
2. modifying this by location modifiers, e.g. the +20% clergy power if the location has a fortress church
3. adding the modified estate power for every location.
4. modifying this estate power by national modifiers.
 
no penalties?
The penalties are currently rather small compared to the benefits you get, so you're always incentivised to go fully in one direction.

I think this should be balanced out by introducing new, exponentially worse penalties as you reach the extremes of the societal values
 
  • 6Like
  • 2
Reactions:
We also made it so that if you keep giving out the unique privileges for the nobles in Poland, you will end up in a situation where you need 100% of the support to pass anything in the parliament.
Can't it be a special privilege that raises the requirement for parliament support to 100%
Religious Tolerance requires a country to be Humanist
Please separate the religious and cultural conversion into 2 separate societal values, I wanna do full assimilationist and zealot playthrough without choosing either to convert or assimilate
slowing them down by 50% as default, and rugged terrain like Mountains makes road-building far slower.
Also the cost is higher right?
 
Last edited:
more like railways in hoi4.

no armies involved
Can we have an option to click on a point of origin (A) and a destination (B), with the game suggesting the cheapest route between them? (Eg, like Shadow Empire)

Sometimes, I just want to connect two provinces without being forced to go through that awful mountain province just because it's in the way, without clicking around to see the costs to buld a road for each province. I would be a great qol imho

Perhaps adding other options, such as the route that will give the best control to point B and so on
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Its not getting any changes. Still no quantum computers on the market.
Asking again - can you put a toy example/simulation of the kinds of variables that you would have in a peace deal and expose that on github? I think if you allow members of the community to have a crack at it, you might be surprised by the outcomes :)
 
  • 4
  • 3Haha
  • 1Like
Reactions:
@Johan
What if you are an opm rural country and suddenly you conquer a very big prosperous city? How are your states affected? Do you get the burghers+privileges from the city? Will there be a lot of unrest because they just lost it?
 
  • 4Like
  • 1
Reactions: