• 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 #56 - 26th of March 2025

Hello and Welcome to another Tinto Talks, the Happy Wednesday where we give out information about our super top secret game with the codename Project Caesar, so that you can give us feedback!

Today we will talk about some of the changes to the diplomacy and warfare mechanics we have done since we started doing these Tinto Talks.


Diplomatic Expenses
As you may have seen, in some previous Tinto Talks we added another expense to the economy to give more control to the player. The cost for this Diplomatic Expense is based on the tax base of your country, and the more you spend, the greater benefits your diplomatic corps gets.

56_diplospending.png

If you play France you may have this maximized, but may not if you play a smaller country without subjects unless you you want to be able to maintain an alliance with a bigger and stronger country.


Antagonism
In older GSGs we made, we had a concept called ‘Badboy’ which impacted how badly you had behaved and other countries would treat you more harshly according to it. This evolved into the Aggressive Expansion systems we used in Eu4 and Imperator which had a direct impact on opinions that also allowed Coalitions to be formed.

While these were useful systems, they all were a bit limited;as a global variable in your country it was too broad, and as merely opinion impacts, it was rather hidden and hard to get overviews.

In Project Caesar we developed a new system called “biases” which has static impacts and temporary values that change over time, like opinions work in most of our games. We had this for Opinions and Trust, and when we were not happy with AE and neither were you, we decided to scrap AE and instead make a new bias, which we call Antagonism.

Antagonism indicates how other countries are likely to view us. If they feel a lot of antagonism towards us, countries that consider us as relevant to their interests will be less inclined to engage in diplomacy and may act against our interests. Antagonism is caused by basic differences between countries' societal values, government types, religion, culture and language, and actions can cause an antagonism 'bomb' in a location that affects the countries near it to varying degrees depending on how much they care about that location and about the antagonistic country. Antagonism 'bomb' effects will generally dissipate with time. Antagonism also affects a country's opinion of you.

Of course, a country needs to have caused a certain amount of Antagonism against you before you can join a coalition. The overall effect of this is that you can get away with fewer antagonism ‘bomb’ effects against countries that have a baseline of antagonism for you before they start thinking about forming coalitions against you, and countries that are more similar to you will probably allow a bit more to slide.

56_antagonism.png

Ottomans will always have a base antagonism to Byzantium..

Independence Movements
Trying to become independent as a subject is usually a tough life. In some previous GSGs you could ask another country to support your independence and they could help you in a war. To make this better, we took inspiration from Crusader Kings where subjects usually band together to fight for independence. As we have the International Organization code, we made a new type of it, called Independence Movements. Any subject with a loyalty below 50% can start such a movement, and any subject can join it. Other countries can be invited as well, and the goal of the war is to get independence for all subjects!

56_indep.png

Probably need some more members for this..



Civil War Surrenders
Sometimes you are in a civil war and you know you are about to lose, and it's just a matter of time, so we added in an action to surrender in a Civil War when the other side is more than twice the size than the other.

And as some of you pointed out, losing a civil war as soon as possible to avoid it, may or may not be an exploit, so currently there are some penalties to jumping to the new country.

56_civil_war.png

At least Scotland will be free!


Naval Combat
During testing, we discovered that with all types of ships having the same frontage made it so that you wanted to stack almost purely the biggest ships and the rest were not useful. So instead they now have different frontages, so the categories have different roles.

Heavy Ships have a frontage of 2 and a combat speed of 0.5 & Galleys get 0.5 frontage, but their combat speed is 1. Light ships get higher initiative and combat speed, and have a frontage of 1.

New Objectives
When we talked about the military objectives, there was a request to add automated rebel suppression, and this was something we definitely added in. We have now also added a Hunt Navies that works like the Hunt Armies, and tries to engage and destroy enemy navies when spotted in the designated areas.

We are also looking into adding a few more objectives, like defending the coasts or focused sieges, and will tell you when more are implemented.

Logistics Improvements
While we were very happy with having a logistics system in the game, and where food mattered, it was a little bit limited in that you could only trace supply two locations away at most. So we introduced a concept called Logistics Distance, and now every single army traces a path to the closest valid supply source. The length that can be traced can be extended through advances in several of the later ages.

A valid supply source is a Supply Depot, a port or seazone with a navy carrying food that will distribute it to you, or a province-capital that is under control of a country giving you food access and actually has food.

Supply paths can only be traced through friendly controlled territory, but not through any location that belongs to the Zone of Control of a hostile fort.

We also made it so that armies can only carry a single month's supply of food with them, except for the auxiliary units, which can carry many months for several regiments each. This means that even if you can march deep into unprotected territory or have the ability to ignore the Zone of Control for forts, you need to get a supply path to the source you can get food from.

Of course, you can always see the path your armies trace supply from when you have selected an army, as a thin green arrow goes from the supply source to the army.

56_papermap_logistics.png

Here I walked past the Lithuanian armies (I used the remove fog of war cheat code, as they would have been hidden for me otherwise), and tracing supplies from Goriadz, and they will easily be able to cut my supplies by movingmy moving into Lipsk. This is the paper-map-mode where everything is icons on the map.



Monthly Attrition Losses
One thing that was requested by you guys was the ability to see how much attrition a unit has taken recently, so we added some history to it, so you can see how many died in the last year.

56_attrition.png

My army lacks food to continue the siege… a few more months at most..


Recruit Admiral/General
Another worry that was pointed out by the community was the potential lack of generals or admirals for your units. So we added two new actions where you can recruit either a general or an admiral for your country for gold. The price is based on the economy of your country, but the price is reduced by the military ability of the ruler.

The abilities of the new commander depends on the current army or navy tradition, which is also reduced a bit by recruiting a new commander.


56_general.png




Next week we’ll go through the mixed collection of all other major changes we have done..
 
Last edited:
  • 165Love
  • 160Like
  • 9
  • 9
Reactions:
Also, icon for antagonism should be changed.
As it is it clearly shows aggressive expansion, but since it switched to antagonism it would now be confusing for a person that doesn't know history of development of the game.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
How does the supply path trace through enemy controlled Lipsk in the image when the dev diary says that it can only trace through friendly controlled locations?

no hostiles
 
  • 26
  • 11Like
Reactions:
Love most of the changes! But I have two concerns:
-About penalties for swithcing sides in a civil war: Are they actually harsh enough? I would hope that the balance is such were fighting the civil war is always preferable over trying to go for the exploit, but at least in EU4 terms, -50 prestige, legitimacy and like -2 stab seems manageable and probably wouldn't have worked as an anti-exploit penalty.
-I undesrtand that cost scaling based on base tax is probably done for balance reasons, but not sure if I like it, seems like placing an unrealistic penalty in large wealthy countries, unless their generals are somehow better (since they have a larger pool of people) or their diplomatic bonuses scale better, not sure if I think it is justified to penalize big countries like that. Again focusing more from the perspective of realism over balance, but even from balance it seems strange to penalize the player for getting richer by making things more expensive. Hopefully the scaling is rather small and not a direct proportion to the relative base tax.
 
  • 3
Reactions:
I assume military expansion will still contribute to antagonism. Will the contribution of military expansion be weighted by religion/culture/distance still, or is military expansion component more global, since religion/culture are sorted out? For example, if Castile annexed Granada, does that contribute equal antagonism to both Aragon and Morocco, or would it be less antagonism added to Aragon?


Also, will antagonism have any contribution from other means of rapid expansion or even just conflicts of interest? Charles V inherited an empire that was a major threat to France despite not expanding militarily. Will the antagonism mechanic be a means of showing this resulting animosity, or will that type of situation be reliant on rivalry or other mechanics to capture?
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
It is truly a game changer!
I've been trying to get Stellaris to put some supply lines as they're going through a major version change. Good to see Project Caesar will have it ready at launch.
 
About antagonism, I would also suggest that being rivals with someone should increase mutual antagonism (for obvious reasons), great powers should also get a slight antagonism with all other great powers and all countries should gain a bit of antagonism with hegemons.
I also hope that actions such as embargos, coastal raiding or being at a defensive war aganist someone (specially if they loot your lands) cause a bit of antagonism as well.
 
  • 3Like
Reactions:
yeah, no good ideas yet.

Have you tought about option of rivalry not being something countries necessary had to have, but something that happens when two countries have conflicting interests for prolonged period of time, or fight several wars against each other etc, while at the same time being of similar rank, reputation etc?

Once the conditions are met, they become rivals automatically, without player input or ability to remove it. If those countries works towards reconciliation, avoid wars against each other for years, get royal marriages etc, that status could be changed.

That way, there could be countries not having a rival, but there could be countries having 3 or 4, like Ottoman being rivals with Habsburgs, Russia, and Persia at the same time.
 
  • 2Like
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
@Johan We know that armies require certain monthly goods to mantain beside money, manpower and food otherwise they don't work properly, you showed us that even when they are in enemy territory their equipment comes from the market to which the location they are standing on belongs to, so if I'm besieging a location inside a market owned by a country I'm at war with how does my army get military supplies? Since I assume you can't trade with them
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
I think it would be interesting if the antagonism between religions and cultures changed dynamically based on how they interacted with one anther in game. Similar to how different schools of Islam in EU4 could have their relationships changed based on how members of that particular school interacted with another.
 
  • 1
  • 1Like
Reactions:
It was mandatory. You get handicapped if you dont choose one. So yeah, its mandatory. Where isnt it mandatory? Vicky 3. there is no Magic number you need to declare in order to get rid of a malus. You can have 0 or 10.
You can chose to strategically to suffer handicap to your advantage. So it is not mandatory. I am not so sure how things work in VIC 3, but if I am not mistaken if you have more rivals you gain more authority ... no? Why is that not magic?
 
  • 4
  • 1
Reactions:
yeah, no good ideas yet.
Hopefully at least the "aragon being able to rival andorra" has been adressed :p?

Realistically rivals should presumable be based on countries of relatively similar power with competing interests in the same area. This should be based more on where they want expand than were they are located (for example if the Castile and Portugal AIs are interested in overseas expansion in different areas rather than desiring each other's lands they shouldn't really consider themselves rivals). For Ais this could somehow be based on what provinces the AI desires, not sure how you could translate it for a player.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
Can't the new Antagonism and rivalry mechanics be connected somehow if they already aren't? I always felt that rivalries where very gamey so maybe needing to have a certain amount of antagonism is needed before being able to mark that country as a rival.

You guys already showed that there is some base antagonism between some countries and maybe this way rivalries will feel a bit more natural (?)
 
  • 2Like
  • 1
Reactions:
yeah, no good ideas yet.
I think ideally revals shouldn't be just someone you pick from a list, but someone with who you have a confict of interest. Maybe if there was some way for countries or monarchs to stablish long term objectives, and then if those objectives overlap with other countries then it's when rivalries occur. But I understand this would be hard to implement, as it's not just about conquering something or not. Should take also into account if you want to control a certain market, expand your navy or expand your influence in a region with alliances. An option could be that instead of setting rivals, each country would set ever x years a listof objectives. So for example Spain during the start of the game can choose military onjectives like finish the reconquista, uniting iberia, going to Africa, or can try to control the market of iberia and expand its religion to Africa. The Austrians could have the historical objective of limiting France power with alliances. Maybe just growing and peace for some years, or removing nobles from power. So if you promise your people peace but get into war with everyone, the revolts will be bigger and worse. And if your objective was Iberia but you go against France, you get much more antagonism than normal. I understand that this would be hard to do well, as each country ideally should have unique historical objectives. And there should be some objectives limited to certain ages, religions, cultures etc. But if well done it would make rivalries appear more organically. France and Spain rivalry had lot to do with their clash over Italy, the same as Spain and England was Religion and maritime domination. Portugal wasn't as much seen as rival to castile cause they were focused on africa and asia exploration. Etc
 
  • 3Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Hello and Welcome to another Tinto Talks, the Happy Wednesday where we give out information about our super top secret game with the codename Project Caesar, so that you can give us feedback!

Today we will talk about some of the changes to the diplomacy and warfare mechanics we have done since we started doing these Tinto Talks.


Diplomatic Expenses
As you may have seen, in some previous Tinto Talks we added another expense to the economy to give more control to the player. The cost for this Diplomatic Expense is based on the tax base of your country, and the more you spend, the greater benefits your diplomatic corps gets.

View attachment 1271790
If you play France you may have this maximized, but may not if you play a smaller country without subjects unless you you want to be able to maintain an alliance with a bigger and stronger country.


Antagonism
In older GSGs we made, we had a concept called ‘Badboy’ which impacted how badly you had behaved and other countries would treat you more harshly according to it. This evolved into the Aggressive Expansion systems we used in Eu4 and Imperator which had a direct impact on opinions that also allowed Coalitions to be formed.

While these were useful systems, they all were a bit limited;as a global variable in your country it was too broad, and as merely opinion impacts, it was rather hidden and hard to get overviews.

In Project Caesar we developed a new system called “biases” which has static impacts and temporary values that change over time, like opinions work in most of our games. We had this for Opinions and Trust, and when we were not happy with AE and neither were you, we decided to scrap AE and instead make a new bias, which we call Antagonism.

Antagonism indicates how other countries are likely to view us. If they feel a lot of antagonism towards us, countries that consider us as relevant to their interests will be less inclined to engage in diplomacy and may act against our interests. Antagonism is caused by basic differences between countries' societal values, government types, religion, culture and language, and actions can cause an antagonism 'bomb' in a location that affects the countries near it to varying degrees depending on how much they care about that location and about the antagonistic country. Antagonism 'bomb' effects will generally dissipate with time. Antagonism also affects a country's opinion of you.

Of course, a country needs to have caused a certain amount of Antagonism against you before you can join a coalition. The overall effect of this is that you can get away with fewer antagonism ‘bomb’ effects against countries that have a baseline of antagonism for you before they start thinking about forming coalitions against you, and countries that are more similar to you will probably allow a bit more to slide.

View attachment 1271791
Ottomans will always have a base antagonism to Byzantium..

Independence Movements
Trying to become independent as a subject is usually a tough life. In some previous GSGs you could ask another country to support your independence and they could help you in a war. To make this better, we took inspiration from Crusader Kings where subjects usually band together to fight for independence. As we have the International Organization code, we made a new type of it, called Independence Movements. Any subject with a loyalty below 50% can start such a movement, and any subject can join it. Other countries can be invited as well, and the goal of the war is to get independence for all subjects!

View attachment 1271792
Probably need some more members for this..



Civil War Surrenders
Sometimes you are in a civil war and you know you are about to lose, and it's just a matter of time, so we added in an action to surrender in a Civil War when the other side is more than twice the size than the other.

And as some of you pointed out, losing a civil war as soon as possible to avoid it, may or may not be an exploit, so currently there are some penalties to jumping to the new country.

View attachment 1271793
At least Scotland will be free!


Naval Combat
During testing, we discovered that with all types of ships having the same frontage made it so that you wanted to stack almost purely the biggest ships and the rest were not useful. So instead they now have different frontages, so the categories have different roles.

Heavy Ships have a frontage of 2 and a combat speed of 0.5 & Galleys get 0.5 frontage, but their combat speed is 1. Light ships get higher initiative and combat speed, and have a frontage of 1.

New Objectives
When we talked about the military objectives, there was a request to add automated rebel suppression, and this was something we definitely added in. We have now also added a Hunt Navies that works like the Hunt Armies, and tries to engage and destroy enemy navies when spotted in the designated areas.

We are also looking into adding a few more objectives, like defending the coasts or focused sieges, and will tell you when more are implemented.

Logistics Improvements
While we were very happy with having a logistics system in the game, and where food mattered, it was a little bit limited in that you could only trace supply two locations away at most. So we introduced a concept called Logistics Distance, and now every single army traces a path to the closest valid supply source. The length that can be traced can be extended through advances in several of the later ages.

A valid supply source is a Supply Depot, a port or seazone with a navy carrying food that will distribute it to you, or a province-capital that is under control of a country giving you food access and actually has food.

Supply paths can only be traced through friendly controlled territory, but not through any location that belongs to the Zone of Control of a hostile fort.

We also made it so that armies can only carry a single month's supply of food with them, except for the auxiliary units, which can carry many months for several regiments each. This means that even if you can march deep into unprotected territory or have the ability to ignore the Zone of Control for forts, you need to get a supply path to the source you can get food from.

Of course, you can always see the path your armies trace supply from when you have selected an army, as a thin green arrow goes from the supply source to the army.

View attachment 1271794
Here I walked past the Lithuanian armies (I used the remove fog of war cheat code, as they would have been hidden for me otherwise), and tracing supplies from Goriadz, and they will easily be able to cut my supplies by movingmy moving into Lipsk. This is the paper-map-mode where everything is icons on the map.



Monthly Attrition Losses
One thing that was requested by you guys was the ability to see how much attrition a unit has taken recently, so we added some history to it, so you can see how many died in the last year.

View attachment 1271795
My army lacks food to continue the siege… a few more months at most..


Recruit Admiral/General
Another worry that was pointed out by the community was the potential lack of generals or admirals for your units. So we added two new actions where you can recruit either a general or an admiral for your country for gold. The price is based on the economy of your country, but the price is reduced by the military ability of the ruler.

The abilities of the new commander depends on the current army or navy tradition, which is also reduced a bit by recruiting a new commander.


View attachment 1271796



Next week we’ll go through the mixed collection of all other major changes we have done..
About antagonism

Does it mean that nations with different cultures and religions will be much more likely to join a coalition against you?

Also, as I understand, being a hegemon will antogonise everyone you see))) great mechanic!!
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Do the logistics of supply lines work the same for other goods (weapons, horses, gunpowder,...) army consumes as they do for food?

Negative anatgonism bomb? As in a positive change to diplomatic relations due to your actions?
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: