• 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:
How many societal values are in the game?
 
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.

I would say that 'national modifiers' would affect all locations and local modifiers would affect only the specific location.

So local estate power would be the value from pops adjusted by the sum of local and national modifiers. Total estate power would then just be the sum of all the local estate powers.
 
both ways, but downstream is better
I'm afraid I don't get whether 'downstream' means the capital is downstream or the town is downstream. If you're Egypt, for instance, do you want your capital down in the lower nile, or do you want it up in the Ethiopian highlands?

Capitals tend to be positioned downstream, so that would make more sense
 
  • 4Like
Reactions:
  • 70Like
  • 5Love
  • 2
Reactions:
  • 52Like
  • 38Haha
  • 14
Reactions:
no penalties?
Would you make penalties grow exponentialy ? That would make the "no penalties compared to a specialist" effect be more pronounced when you are close to 0.
But
I still think the 0% bonus of either societal value be at least at 25% of the other, so you don't go through the "you're good at nothing" phase even if you have been working on going the other way for decades (you're a naval power, you work to change to land power, you don't wait to have lost all naval specialisation before working on your land specialty). Though that would make you have 25% of both bonuses and maluses if you're in the middle, which might be too enticing... maybe exponential bonuses and penalties are a solution to that, or having the penalty of each SV cancel one bonus of the other SV when in the middle (aka 25% effect for everything).
 
  • 4Like
  • 1
Reactions:
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.
Wouldn't it be more simple and straightforward to have a decay towards the middle?
The effect is still the same, so if you have +0.75 to one side, you won't be able to go past 75 because the decay at that value is -0.75.
But if you get, say, +5 by event (going to 80), the decay will then be -0.8, so it'll drift back towards 75.
And if you get -5, (going to 70), the decay will now be -0.7, which will make you drift back to 75 as well.
This all would make it so these modifiers drag the resting point towards the desired value in a natural way, without some external "ceiling" modifier.
 
  • 5
  • 1Like
Reactions:
I feel like a more natural solution to the societal values would be to add some sort of decay towards zero, meaning the change gradually diminishes instead of abruptly ending. You could cap this decay to the amount gained to prevent everything from just decaying towards zero. For example if you had +0.75 the change would slow down as you got towards 75, but if youre rate dropped the decay would drop too
 
  • 5
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Hi Johan, would it be possible to spend one of the future dev diaries on the design intentions for Project Caesar? Things like, what the intended experience for players is, how much time they are intended to spend engaging with different mechanics, how the core gameplay loops work, things like that?

I think sometimes the dev diaries give a lot of details on all the numbers and variables in the simulation, and it would be cool to also know what the goals of the game designers are when you're putting the different mechanics together.
 
  • 3
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Regarding Diplomacy, I think you should expand the Threaten War option beyond what is there in EU4.
How I would like it to work (if possible) is as follows: A country takes an action (such as guaranteeing a country, embargoing your ally or you, changing a law, passing a reform, changing government type, annexing territory, persecuting a pop group, joining an international organization, or going to war with another country). Then, you (or the AI) uses the threaten war action. Pick which of the actions you want them to reverse (or even if they haven't done anything you want them to reverse, threaten war for something you want them to do, like changing their monarchic form of government into a republic). The player or AI compares militaries, economies, allies, war exhaustion and enthusiasm, and distance, and then chooses to comply or ignore it. If ignored, the country that threatened war gets a CB to declare on them.

Of course, ideally the AI should be able to use it on you or other AI nations.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
The addition of a soft cap in societal value is a nice move as it makes stacking modifier change the final value, instead of only affecting the dynamics towards that value.
However this means that after reaching the soft cap (let's say 70 traditional economy, so a total of -0.7 change), some decisions (choosing +0.1 capital economy for a total of -0.6 change) have no impact at all.
As you nicely explained, you would need to reach positive capital economy modifier for the slider to move again.
This feels both exploitable (I temporarily stack changes to get my slider as high as I can, and reverse them afterwards), and non-rewarding (I make decisions that have no impact).

Why not have a decay instead? (similar to military tradition in eu4 for instance).
This creates exactly the same kind of soft cap, while making all changes matter.
Also it allows temporarily motion of the slider (for example, event from church moves the slider by 20 towards religious), which eventually reaches equilibrium after some time, when people forgot about it.
Last point, because it is much harder to reach the extremum of the slider, you can make the associated bonus/malus much more impactful.

And as a side note, having an effect for being in the middle of the societal value would be great.
Humankind does it very nicely with the middle position giving a stability bonus (which somehow makes sense, goverments typically try to find some middle ground to keep everybody happy).
This creates a situation where going for an extreme is not always the objective of the player.
 
  • 4Like
  • 4
Reactions:
once again saying a humanist to religious slider is plain wrong : most of the most famous humanist works (and Reinassance as a whole) was financiated by the clergy and the papal states, yet I'd reckon that the papal states belong into "religious" and not humanist.

Can we please, please rename humanist with anything else?
 
  • 13
  • 4Like
Reactions: