• 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 # 7 -10th of April

Welcome to the seventh edition of Tinto Talks, where we talk about really super secret stuff, that is hidden behind the code name of ‘Project Caesar’.

Today we’ll look into what makes up the economy in Project Caesar. Obviously, we’ll go into much more detail on some of these aspects in later Tinto Talks. Right now though, we’ll go through the incomes and expenses of a country in the game.

Every month you have running incomes and expenses that need to be balanced, and if your balance is positive, your gold is increased and you can use that gold to invest in other things.

And with balancing incomes and expenses, of course there are sliders. Having some buttons for just a few possible options for taxes or expenses, like in Imperator, is not really fitting for a GSG with deep economical gameplay.

PPVyAPKRbkGNi9xIYE5C6NOVXDxOaKswGQxu3b9gcCc5b8PaXSO_4sODLXCE9t-2sCfSwMaYbao8Y8IpjpMcZ-3Li3cjmXxnCuQHY888ARMvCKmuZeZi9YONLLwVmt6lqVB8kIxvg2TKYmGp4hQuBro


Incomes

If we start with income, you have trade-related incomes, which is a system we will delve deep into in early May, as well as diplomatically related income. You also gain gold from provinces (not locations) that sell surplus food they can not store in their local market. Neither of these you directly control with any slider though.

The bulk of most countries' income will come from taxes though, and taxes in Project Caesar are really different than before. First of all, every estate has a possible tax base, a concept we will delve into much more detail next week. This you can attempt tax from them, but every estate has a maximum tax you can take from them, which depends on your laws and their privileges, and how much power they have in your country. The higher the tax you take from them, the lower their satisfaction equilibrium becomes. Some examples of tax affecting things include the Catholic religion which limits the taxes on Clergy, and also the ‘Auxilium et Consilium’ estate privilege for the nobles, which reduces the tax they pay.

Finally, for something that has existed in some older of our games, we have minting. Now what is that you may ask? Minting is the possibility to get more money by printing more coins. It just has the slight drawback of increasing your inflation the more you do it.

mcArWw0iiueMRbtuRVgr3tLJUkvlZI-4vzXpCOFRgy7tlJ95fi9Ul9F_NgppYsABpYjJhR5M4JOoFIVmdhU5hoPFnmSFkPQRswUoYAr4dDXFYK9zZmS9jr1q8YQmfKv1XoSmTwnR0t27uOq3NINFcDE

Here we have the possibility to tax the commoners a fair bit more…


Expenses
We all do love gaining gold, but sadly we also have to spend it, and while we can reduce some of the spending, we can not completely avoid all of it.

First of all, we have the Cost of the Court. This is something that is directly correlated to the economic base of your country, and if you spend less gold than expected, your legitimacy, or equivalent applicable government power, will decrease over time, and the more you spend, the more legitimacy can increase. There are advances, laws, and other things that impact how much you need to spend here.

Then we have the cost for your standing army and navy, where spending less reduces their fighting capability. This is nothing new to our GSG games, so I am not sure why I need to mention this here.

Fort Maintenance is another common economic expense from our games, which is here as well. If you don’t pay, garrisons don’t tend to stick around.

Culture, this is an entirely new concept, which will become available in the Age of Renaissance, where you can invest money to get [TO BE TALKED ABOUT LATER], while also impacting your prestige.

You can also decide how much you wish to spend on your colonial charters, which is a new system we will talk about later this year.

Finally, the last thing you can impact with a slider is your investment in stability. The cost for how much your investments are needed depends on the size of your country, with different laws and societal values impacting it as well. Stability in itself ranges from +100 to -100, and will decay towards 0 on its own. There are two other ways to impact your stability gain, besides investing gold as mentioned here. One of them relates to the cabinet system, but another is a more long-term impact from how your country is built up, as it is based upon how many clergy pops you have of your state religion compared to the total population.

There are other expenses as you can see below, but one important thing to mention is that provinces that lack food will try to buy it from the local market.
2yQQjfeKu7xLnxbIQDUCpaLaDWxRaVY8r0ZloXbKvnsq3_jT82Ld10Zz_HlNw6AsPb2SLX3Gs2uZoac7oPPXpuJtQlw2FlhL0y5RZOf7vI7sKd2t7PcMBeg-sQi9H_BCSAU2EAlNEn6wP6ybQI4mmYE

Maybe maybe we should cut down on our fleet, and maybe we don’t need ALL those forts. Our standing army of 200 brave footmen is enough!

Next week we’ll talk more in depth about how the tax base functions, how the food system works, and some other related issues.
 
  • 222Love
  • 192Like
  • 26
  • 6
  • 1
Reactions:
No monuments? That's disappointing, even CK3 and Imperator: Rome has them. They obviously shouldn't be as OP as they are in EU4, but just give local and realistic bonuses. They add interesting regional flavour.
Who cares about bonuses, it's nice just having pretty 3d models.
 
  • 20
  • 6Like
  • 2
  • 1Love
Reactions:
because food is another thingie
Is it? I get that food might work a bit differently than other trade goods, but why shouldn't the amount of money you get from selling food also be determined by a tax slider? I get that the mechanics for trade income haven't been revealed yet but I would be quite surprised if they were inapplicable to trade in foodstuffs.

In general it is just very strange that, if I am reading correctly, your peasants and merchants trading food and their profits somehow teleporting into the state treasury is one the primary sources of state income, which does not appear to resemble the real world.
 
  • 7Like
  • 1
Reactions:
from the sound of it the next 3 weeks will go more into it but i really hope we can bring in free food for our big cities like how Rome and Constantinople had so they can have massive populations.
 
  • 3
Reactions:
While the system is easy to understand especially for veterans of GSG because it does not overtly brings something new, there may be a couple of issues that do not seem maybe linked with the overall game design?

1) Minting: Vic3 has it but you can't touch it; EU4 has gold mines which is kind of akin to minting. So here we can modulate the intensity of minting but... shouldn't it be linked to the availability of (precious) metals in our nation? We don't know yet how trade/production/goods will work, but if it is Imperator's style, you may need to import metals in order to mint?

2) Pay gold for instability??? For me that's the weakest point of the system and an easy cop-out instead of adding good complexity to a potentially crucial element (stability in IR was extremely important), apart from generating issues in the form of immersion (am I "bribing" people for stability?). Taking into account that we have estates, shouldn't stability be more linked to the power and satisfaction of the estates (which depend also on how much i tax them) instead of the amount of gold I can invest? This, yes, is using gold as mana.
 
Last edited:
  • 12Like
  • 5
  • 4
Reactions:
I have a suggestion to make, the reduction in estate satisfaction caused by hiw much you tax them should be scaled, at least somewhat, to the maximum amount their privledges allow you to take. That is to say, if your privledges allow you to tax nobility at 15%, if you are in fact raising taxes to the full 15%, it should cause more dissatisfation than if they were taxed at 15% when the cap is 50%. Though perhaps the difference shouldn't be 100% corrected. This is to represent how people become accustomed to the privledges they have, and a society that is used to heavy taxation will be more tolerant of tax hikes than one that isn't. Though perhaps that could be represented with other mechanics.

Also, is there are a particular reason selling food is distinguished from trade income? I assume that what the former represents is duties on internal trade of foodstuffs, so it's broadly comparable to other kinds of trade income; it is domestic but I assume some normal trade income will be as well.
Disagree.
Not because the idea Sounds wird, but because in gameplay you Double Hurt the state for giving out proviledges :
Not only do now nobles have more rights, but now they complain even more for their tac burden ?
 
  • 3
Reactions:
I never really liked the "slider up, start war, end war, slider down" gameplay.

There is no real choice there and the only time you notice the mechanic exists is when your armies get wiped because you forgot to up the sliders again.

Will the new sliders be a bit more interesting?
 
  • 8
  • 2Like
  • 1
Reactions:
As for issues about regular armies,at that time some countries do have a number of regular armies.Do the new game take this into consideration?
At 1337,China(Yuan) had Wei-suo, a kind of regular armies.Later in 1400s,The Aztec Triad developed fearsome warriors and The Inca Empire(Tawantinsuyu,I like this name better) also have its enormous regular armies.
I'm not familiar with other regions,but these countries do had regular armies and they do played an important role in their military system.
 
  • 4Like
  • 1
Reactions:
I am not sure i am fond of this multi-tax slider per estate, on top of the different sliders per tax type (base tax, tariffs trade tax, production tax, …)

Is it not more efficient to have just one slider for all estates, since they already have privileges which affect their taxation or exemption ? (As in eu4, exemption for certain tradegoods, or exemption of tariffs…)
 
  • 17
Reactions:
Will there be better flags/coats of arms in Project Caesar? One of my biggest nitpicks of EU4 is seeing Somalia use the flag of the modern day country of Somalia or Illinois use a flag that was designed in the 1900s and never even used anyway.

We are using a similar system to CK3/V3 which has dynamic flags/coa.
 
  • 80Love
  • 62Like
  • 3
Reactions:
I think that stability refers to the general situation of the country, its well-being. Basically, if you have a lot of stability, people are happy with the reign, have (more or less) enough to live on and feel safe. On the other hand, a lack of stability means that people lack resources, the government is not liked and people don't feel safe.

Spending money would in fact be spending for the public good. A bit like the emperors who were known to give a lot of money to the people, to the military, for the construction of public buildings and so on.

That's my understanding.
Maybe the slider could be renamed to something like "public buildings/institutions" with exactly same effect of increasing stability. It is true that the name is on a different level of abstraction than other items on that list.
 
  • 11Like
  • 1Love
  • 1
Reactions:
lot of money goes into the ether when spent.

Why not have expenses in most cases flow back to one of the estates? E.g. standing Army Maintenance goes to Nobles or Commoners depending on whether your army is made more of knights or yeomen, Navy Maintenance goes to Burgher shipbuilders and Commoner sailors (and Noble officers?), Stability cost goes to estates in proportion to their power (whether you're building a cathedral for powerful Clergy, bribing powerful Burghers, or holding a festival for powerful commoners). Some of the expenses, like Cost of Court, may be too abstract to pin down a beneficiary, but with the way the estates are set up it seems like there's a good opportunity to make the economic simulation better and directly influence estate wealth and power through government spending
 
  • 4
  • 3Like
Reactions:
No monuments? That's disappointing, even CK3 and Imperator: Rome has them. They obviously shouldn't be as OP as they are in EU4, but just give local and realistic bonuses. They add interesting regional flavour.
I'd much rather monuments have like a real world benefit or simply be there and present on the campaign map and if you click it it tells you what they are etc. As for the real world benefit I would like if it meant something like: you control the pyramids as a western power and now more of the rich pops (or a subsection of them) visit that area and some then stay behind as immigration and that would help that province in some indirect way. I would rather the game do away nearly totally with modifiers and modifier stacking if possible.
 
  • 9Like
Reactions:
Love sliders but can we get more "enter desired amount" UI in general? I might want to max my taxes so a given state's equilibrium is above their influence and that might be finnicky with a small bar with 1000 positions. On a related note givings gifts in EU4 single handedly gave me arthritis.
 
  • 11
  • 1Like
Reactions:
While the system is easy to understand especially for veterans of GSG because it does not overtly brings something new, there may be a couple of issues that do not seem maybe linked with the overall game design?

1) Minting: Vic3 has it but you can't touch it; EU4 has gold mines which is kind of akin to minting. So here we can modulate the intensity of minting but... shouldn't it be linked to the availability of (precious) metals in our nation? We don't know yet how trade/production/goods will work, but if it is Imperator's style, you may need to import metals in order to mint?

2) Pay gold for instability??? For me that's the weakest point of the system and an easy cop-out to add good complexity to a potentially crucial element (stability in IR was extremely important), apart from generating issues in the form of immersion (am I "bribing" people for stability?). Taking into account that we have estates, shouldn't stability be more linked to the power and satisfaction of the estates (which depend also on how much i tax them) instead of the amount of gold I can invest? This, yes, is using gold as mana.
On 2) you could always view the investment in stability as a shorthand for the money you spend on rooting out trouble makers and providing the population with "bread and circus".
 
  • 6
  • 2Like
Reactions:
@Johan

1) Can you debase currency like in EU4?

2) Can you literally ruin a game due to losing a lot of your population or is there a mechanism that tells you “enough is enough” and makes you stop the war/surrender to peace terms?

3) Will some of the plunder end up in the commoner estates wealth?

4) Is there any benefit to having a wealthy estate? Maybe socioeconomic progress? Will the wealth be broken down in a per capita calculation?
 
  • 23Like
  • 10
  • 1Love
Reactions: