• 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 #6 - April 3rd, 2024

Welcome to the sixth Tinto Talks, where we talk about the design and features of our not yet announced game, with the codename ‘Project Caesar’.

Hey, before jumping into todays topic, I would like to show something very fresh out of the oven, based on your feedback last week. This is why we are doing these Tinto Talks, to make Project Caesar your game as much as ours...

1712136748556.png




Today we will delve into three concepts that are rather new to our games, but first, we’ll talk about locations a bit more.

Not every location on the map is the same, especially not in a game of such scope as Project Caesar. By default, every ownable land location is a rural settlement, but there are two “upgrades” to it that can be done. First, you can find a town in a location, which allows you to increase the population capacity of the location and allows for a completely different set of buildings than a rural settlement. Finally, you can grant city rights to a town, which allows for even further advantages. Now you may wonder, why don’t I make every location into cities? Besides the cost and the population requirement, there is also the drawback that each of them tend to reduce your food production, while also adding more nobles, clergy and lots of burghers to your country.

Stockholm, Dublin and Belgrade are examples of towns at the start of the game, while cities include places like Beijing, Alexandria and Paris.

EaMX4E1GNzy0P9fHqbFWuoyX3mTUo0i8He3V3QHENQ5s7GCgU534Pg30YtA5_9AeZZn1wTdCFUc1n5Pl88qbfm1YOW3BsFDQQkRjvlDWr2ydETNKCk9_3zNeRVQ8YQuznfJXxTdsIgZLE8GBuecztX0

Here you can see the control that Sweden currently has.

Control
Every location that you own has a control value, which is primarily determined by the proximity it has to the capital, or another source of authority in your country. There are only a few things that can increase it above the proximity impact, but many things that can decrease it further.

This is probably the most important value you have, as it determines how much value you can get out of a location, as it directly impacts how much you can tax the population in that location, and the amount of levies they will contribute when called. A lack of control, reduces the crown power you gain from its population, while also reduces the potential manpower and sailors you can get, and weakens the market attraction of your own markets, making them likelier to belong to foreign markets if they have too low control.


1712141069161.png


Proximity
So what is proximity? It is basically a distance to capital value, where traveling on the open sea is extremely costly. Proximity is costly over land, but along coastlines where you have a high maritime presence you can keep a high proximity much further. Tracing proximity along a major river reduces the proximity cost a fair bit, and if you build a road network that will further reduce the proximity costs.

There are buildings that you can build, like a Bailiff that will act as a smaller proximity source, but that has the slight drawback of adding more nobles to the location, and with a cost in food for them.

Maritime Presence
In every coastal location around your locations, or where you have special buildings, you have a maritime presence. This is slowly built up over time based on your ports and other buildings you have in adjacent locations. Placing a navy in the location helps improve it quicker, but blockades and pirates will decrease it quickly, making it absolutely vital to protect your coastlines in a war, or you’ll suffer the consequences for a long time.

As mentioned earlier, the maritime presence impacts the proximity calculations, but it also impacts the power of your merchants in the market the seazone is a part of.

LkfBoN7Vx3MIHx2sSqcN7jYlJFbRYR6EzczGu3xlsixWZ-jSIxbGI_cC2i64-13G3SrtT0wVZ8XeXZDI8pXnpPlUBw2ZGPmYVqwoVfXEsu1kkQf3TAia9shMDkEf6oE83ihwG2VtA_CCydlJeXuaULM


Stay tuned, next week we’ll be doing an overview of the economy system, which has quite a lot of new features, as well as features from older games.
 
  • 385Love
  • 212Like
  • 21
  • 9
  • 3
  • 1Haha
Reactions:
Does the player have to manually go around and click a button to upgrade locations to towns & cities? I'd imagine that would get pretty annoying for large empires. Maybe they could promote automatically when they meet the requirements.
 
  • 6Like
  • 1
Reactions:
On the one hand, I could see that. On the other hand, I think IRL 'Control' was often a bad thing for the people on the ground (not always- e.g French peasants praising the introduction of standardised weights and measures so the nobility couldn't play every trick in the book to squeeze more grain from their permitted volumes), such as making conscription easier and adding additional and often-punishing duties like 'make sure you can host our armies when they're in the area'. I think modelling it purely as Estate-related would miss out on that feel a little bit, although (as with the 'standardised weights' thing) there's definitely cases that sort of reforms would be explicitly Estate-related.
Control is the ability of the state (so you) to dispose of the “goods” (including manpower, taxation, etc…) of a location. It is not this ability that directly make your population unhappy but the things (privileges) they lose in order for you to achieve this outcome. And while of course the more you control the less the nobility have power (and so it will be angry with you for this) I find it more a “state level” problem (Estates) than a “local” one (Control over a specific location).
 
  • 2Like
Reactions:
im sure one can work wonders by spamming road levels and those local goverment building levels from bailiff to ... local governor-majors palace or something? Viceroy even, tho suspect such might be more limited. One in every location might be funny. Then you can atleast legitimately claim to be a emperor of a thousand viceroy nations.
 
1) What about hellenism? Will there a way for hellenic religion to come back to life?
2) And, since we mentioned pagan religions, will there be any pagan religions in Europe?
3) Will polytheistic religions have unique mechanics?
Not sure on 3 since we haven't seen how religion mechanics work in general. But in regards to Hellenism, Hellenism was sadly long dead in 1337; there probably shouldn't be anything for that outside of mods.

However for two yes. Lithuania is still pagan following their baltic gods and goddesses. They didn't convert officially to Christianity till 1387. I believe the Sami and the Finns still have followers of their faith but could be wrong. Depending on how you define Europe, then further east you go the more pagan people, such as the people in the Urals like the Mari. I also think that even though the lands are being christianized or Islamized, the people of the Caucauses still have a number that follow their ancestral pagan religions.
 
  • 5Like
  • 1
Reactions:
How will vassals in Project Ceaser differ from those in CK3?

Obviously there won't be any 3d portraits (I am guessing), but i.e in CK3 vassals get a flat negative opinion modifier of you for you having (abstract) higher crown authority, which well, has its sound reasoning but also has plenty of counter arguments.
And since in previous replies you've mentioned that having higher control is always good, how will control affect vassals (or the other way around)?

Will vassals have something like loyalty (-meter/value)? If so what defines it?

Will vassals (other than by giving a portion of their people as levies/manpower) be actively involved in my wars by i.e. sending their own units (unlike in CK3 where I have to marry off my children for them to do that which is neither completely historical or logical)?

In CK3 the so-called abstract "domain limit" exists (limiting the number of direct holdings one can hold at a time, exceeding this limit causes flat negative modifiers). I hope this won't exist in Project Ceaser and instead will be dealt with by the new proximity-control mechanic.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
I'm continuously intrigued by population throughout these dev diaries. Any chance we'll see a "people"-focused tinto talk in the near future? I'd love to see some of the various factors that can affect, increase, decrease, or migrate population - like wars, colonization, trade, estates, or especially disease - and the consequences of such things across your country and the world. Or, incentives that the player could provide for specific estates to concentrate in certain areas - like providing coastal, trade provinces with enough maritime infrastructure, buildings, laws, etc that it attracts more burghers over time, while sacrificing crown control but providing a lot of wealth and development. Another consequence of this of course would be taking larger swaths of population from your land-locked provinces, most likely increasing sailor counts but decreasing manpower counts, so it's a trade off kind of thing.

With things like that, different locations would develop higher populations more realistically and for good reason, and many different play styles would be feasible and fun. There's now a tangible reason as to why a certain town or city is a great spot for migration, and you can see that occur over time and through the timeline (which I hope is still in the game, with different map modes as well!) outside of just increasing development with a click of a button like in a completely unrelated game.

I mainly ask this because I am definitely a huge fan of population being introduced to the game, but my one hope is that population can affect a vast number of things, making it a very in-depth and fun system that has a place in all aspects of the game, which also has a lot of "interactivity" (rather than direct control or large influence by the player).
 
  • 5Like
Reactions:
Time to put those bureaucrats to work, I won't be losing my state control over to some lecherous nobles!

Man, this looks funs! I love domestic and administrative challenges in the game.
Each Dev Diary gets better!
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Johan, I know you said vassals will be a good way to extend control (especially in the early game) but are there any plans to utilize administrative divisions as a way to maintain control? Like states/provinces with governors appointed by the central government? Perhaps with control then measured from a provincial capital as opposed to the national capital?
 
Will control be affected by things like cultural and religious tolerance? I imagine it will also be affected by local autonomy laws, something like a province with high proximity allowing for lower autonomy, but a province with low proximity inherently demanding a higher one to maintain the same level of control.
 
with no bailiff or similar, you won't have control.
Isn't that a bit harsh with small locations like in this game?
For example you have an exclave right next to your capital; its maybe a few km in central Europe i would imaging.
You surely would have had control over that bc there were no real boarders for this kind of stuff.
I am sure a tax collector could go over there with no problems even if the road in-between is owned by another duke.

I get a harsh penalty from being not connected to the capital but 0 is strange for me.
So maybe the same system you have already for the normal proximity system but with a way harsher penalty over "provinces owned by another".

This would make more sense for me and would lead to a bit of a dynamic game play as you dont have to do that no matter what in some cases.
 
  • 2Like
Reactions:
I love this implementation of control system! I hope that:
  • reasonable number of balifs we can build in different locations won't be prohibitively expensive in any part of the game(but scalably expensive enough so that we don't put balifs in every possible location - corruption system also could be added if 2 location with balifs aree too close to each other). The cost of maintaining each balif can increase with total balifs build to relfect growing beurocracy, so that expanding by taking direct control of a location has the administrative (monetary) cost, but it shouldn't be too much and always have enticing return on investment after control gets to its maximum.
  • effectiveness of balifs will scale with how much authority crown has (something like in CK3 with it's tribal and feudal authority levels, but better)
  • this mechanic will serve as an immersive way of create administrative web of control as it was done in real life when conquering a country and taking cotrol yourself or building it in subjects and other countries as a means of applying steady pressure (as e.g. romans did when conquering Gaul by establishing garrisons in officially independent countries).
  • this mechanic won't serve as a limiting factor to expansion. Sure, if somebody has no money at all and conquers a country and has no money to invest into balifs to long-term get return on investment from taxes then that it's ok. But there shouldn't be magical limit to number of balifs or stupidly increase maintance (not to mention the cost of building itself) of balifs like "you have 5 balifs, it is 1 more balif than the unrealstic game wants you to have, so pay 10 times more for the building of the same size and benefits).
If you are worried about blobbing, here is my proposed list of "features" that avoided blobbing in real life and should be available as features in game from start date:
  • coalitions. Check Napoleon's rise to power and conquest. The moment kingdom gets too strong, coalition forms (virtual aggressive expansion like in other paradox titles doesn't exist aside from diplomatic opinion penalty, instead power comparison of France to all other countries is made and all countries feel threatened by the power of France so they make a coalition).
  • cultural coalitions e,g, when Rome fought Gaul, most gaulic tribes that weren't direct puppets of Rome would band together to fight
  • rebellions and keeping order. Conquered territory (either direct control, unhappy vassal and others) need to have military presence to suppress unrest and rebellions at all times
    • uncoordnated peasant rebelions - rise province/region wise that rise regardless of military presence
    • coordinated rebelions - big countrywide rebelions that use fact like conutry has weak military or is at awr (something like in CK3)
    • increased effort of keeping populace in check for non core cultures and nationalities
  • unstable internal politics - waging war when a civil war is upon the country only helps the rebels by the crown losing resources in the expansion war. As such, political stability is prerequisite to any expansion. What's more in more democratic systems parliament can impose very strong penalties for starting expansion war or in even more democratic systems just refuse war.
  • weak economy and as a result military
In the end to allow for permanent expansion, political stability, enough manpower and most of all abundance of money have to be present. If the player's country has more money and manpower than rest of europe (or has comparable amount but outplays the enemies) than he should be able to defeat the huge european coalition and if after the war country will have enough military and money, keep in check any rebels till either civil war due to political instability, unpopular/unlawfull change of power/succession, plague that weakens the economy or simply losing too much money before control on newly conquered lands gets to high enough value.
 
Last edited:
  • 3
  • 1
Reactions:
Very unhappy to see Dhimmi's added. Please just split the existing three estates into interest groups, as seen in VIC3, or by heretics, heathens and true faith, as seen in EU4.

Quote from the first dev diary:
"
Replayability

There should be many ways to play different starts and reasons to replay them. Different mechanics in different parts of the world create a unique experience depending on what you choose to play. With a deep and complex game, there should be so many choices and paths that the player should feel they can always come back to get a new story with the same start.
"

I think that the Dhimmi estate falls short of this criteria. Since Dhimmi's would be accessible to all/most of the Muslim countries, there would be no need to play all the Muslim countries. Another thing to consider is why didn't Aragon have this estate? Wouldn't it make sense, if Aragon conquered a large Muslim population, for them to also have the possibility of granting various rights to them? Therefore I would like to not see them in the game + it screams EU4. A crazy good, but kinda an expected thing to add would be modifiers for each religion and culture of how they interact with diverse populations. All in all, it would be a much better representation of religious protection and such things than a whole separate estate.

P.S. Very happy to see the historically accurate border gore in the Baltics.

Edit:
Thanks for all the disagreement. Yes, I know that it's not a replayability problem. I was wrong.
It's an unnecessary abstraction now that Project Caesar has a population mechanic - that's the updated criticism
 
Last edited:
  • 15
  • 2
  • 2
Reactions:
Might be touched on later, but I am wondering... Will terrain be dynamic or changeable? Chopping down forests or irrigating marshes to turn them into grassland, turning grassland into farmland etc.
 
  • 4Like
Reactions:
Very unhappy to see Dhimmi's added. Please just split the existing three estates into interest groups, as seen in VIC3, or by heretics, heathens and true faith, as seen in EU4.

Quote from the first dev diary:
"
Replayability

There should be many ways to play different starts and reasons to replay them. Different mechanics in different parts of the world create a unique experience depending on what you choose to play. With a deep and complex game, there should be so many choices and paths that the player should feel they can always come back to get a new story with the same start.
"

I think that the Dhimmi estate falls short of this criteria. Since Dhimmi's would be accessible to all/most of the Muslim countries, there would be no need to play all the Muslim countries. Another thing to consider is why didn't Aragon have this estate? Wouldn't it make sense, if Aragon conquered a large Muslim population, for them to also have the possibility of granting various rights to them? Therefore I would like to not see them in the game + it screams EU4. A crazy good, but kinda an expected thing to add would be modifiers for each religion and culture of how they interact with diverse populations. All in all, it would be a much better representation of religious protection and such things than a whole separate estate.

P.S. Very happy to see the historically accurate border gore in the Baltics.
I totally agree, it should fall under religion mechanics (like granting a particular status to an heretic religion, or all of them, and so on) rather than estates as they are clearly meant to represent population classes as a whole more than particular groups. The same way Cossacks should be present as part of some culture mechanic (if there will be one like in Imperator)
 
Last edited:
  • 8
  • 3Like
  • 1
Reactions:
I figured I wanna just quickly pop in for an unrelated thing: the UI. What is it with Paradox games this "generation" (CK3, Vic3, now this) looking so...mobile? I dunno how to describe the feel. It's really silly probably, but the fonts and the curves and the colors, it's really off-putting for me for some reason. I know it's not final for Eur...this Project Caesar and it's a long way from release, but still.

Very interesting work otherwise, and I'm excited for more, as is surely the rest of the playerbase!

So many people have the same opinion on modern Paradox titles. People criticize the design calling it mobile-like, without exactly knowing why it feels like this.
I thought about it for a while and I think I figured at least some of the reasons: The use of color gradients, and a lack of granularity.

The headers in the estates list for example:
The different colors (purple for the Crown, gold for Burghers, etc) are perfectly fine colors and serve their purpose well but they have this shiny, slick, modern digital gradient. This is something that designers like to apply these days in mobile apps and websites, but it is not immersive for a game set in this time period.

EU4 designs and backgrounds had solid colors, and were granular. They had a consistent feeling to it, like you were looking at a solid rock wall with text engraved on it, with the headers being made of fabric, with its folds and shadows. It was all very physical, and appropriately decorated with baroque style golden boxes surrounding them.

These new digital designs fail to be immersive, the time period's flavor is lost because they are following modern design trends. Designs in Project Caesar are smooth instead of granular, shiny instead of shadowy, with light effects that make you feel like you are using 21th century devices, not truly immersed in the events of the time period.
I think designers would be wise to try to emulate the textures of rock, wood, fabric and metals for the menus and text windows of this game.
 
Last edited:
  • 24
  • 2Like
  • 1
Reactions: