• 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.
 
  • 223Love
  • 200Like
  • 26
  • 6
  • 1Haha
  • 1
Reactions:
I know that placeholder UI is being used but I really hope the final UI will be better than the minimalist designs of CK3 and VIC3. Mobile game looking UI with no flair or characteristics of the era the game is taking place in will look boring.
 
  • 12
  • 5Like
Reactions:
you can set percentage how you like.. think steps are 0.1%
This level of finesse is fine and all, but it means a lot of annoying micromanaging.

Is there any chance that you could include options that would automatically set the percentage at the right value to hit certain goals once a month? For example, an option that would set the tax as high as possible without making the satisfaction equilibrium of a state go negative, or one that would lower it as much as possible without causing the treasury to have a negative balance?
 
  • 3Like
Reactions:
Hello Johan!

Super excited for the future of this project! I am very curious how the game will handle revolts, over extension and other systems of "player push back". They can be really difficult because they have to strike that balance between being engaging and interesting while simultaneously forcing the player to properly engage with the games other systems while limiting wild map painting.

It is something that I personally think a lot of other Paradox games struggle with, Eu4 in particular. In Eu4 revolts are incredibly tedious and often becomes a game of pausing and sending around dozens of armies on wild goose chases. Victoria 3s revolutions could be really interesting, as they are directly influenced by the politics and actions of your nation, and feel a lot more grand and impactful than Eu4 revolts. I do however think they didn't quite stick the landing, as they are often easy to avoid and aren't quite as devastating or perhaps rare as I think they should be.

So my question to you, how will Project Cesar manage revolts? I would really hope for a system that focuses on rarity but scale, as I think that is the best way to avoid tedium while still forcing the player to really manage their realm carefully.

Greetings from Sweden!

I hope that unrest acts as a modifer that affects provinces directly, rather than something that only causes uprisings and rebellions. If your peasants are unhappy, I hope they avoid the taxman, refuse to do their military duty, and refuse to construct buildings. As they get angrier, the consequences become direr: they might burn down your buildings, attack your mobility, flock to heretics, and even aid your enemies!


With this sort of system, you can suffer from a failure cascade. If your peasants get unruly, your nobility might start becoming unhappier because you aren't keeping them in line. If your mobility and your peasants are unhappy, you might not have the military capabilities to keep your nation together when Big Brother Blue comes a knockin'.
 
  • 7
  • 2Like
Reactions:
Is taxation uniform across all pops in an estate at all times or can it be made "discriminatory"?

If i conquer a new area full of pops of a foreign culture and religion, can i choose to give them lower taxes to reduce unrest, tax them ruinously (or attempt to, anyway) for more wealth or will they all always be taxed/contribute to the estate that is being taxed at the same rate?
 
  • 8Like
Reactions:
Part of me had been hoping that the tech system would be directly attached to the economic system, a la EU3. But I'll hold my powder until we see the brand spanking new tech system! I'm excited.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Is taxation uniform across all pops in an estate at all times or can it be made "discriminatory"?

If i conquer a new area full of pops of a foreign culture and religion, can i choose to give them lower taxes to reduce unrest, tax them ruinously (or attempt to, anyway) for more wealth or will they all always be taxed/contribute to the estate that is being taxed at the same rate?
Yes cam ne nice make a "foreing" tax like the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jizya can be nice for culture too.
 
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.

Question: do you need a gold / silver mine to print money? I am thinking in the gold and silver mines in Mexico and Peru.

If not, what is the difference between printing money with gold mines and do it without them?
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
I think it would be really cool if we could have a standing navy as well as levies from burgers for example for boats. It would make naval nations more interesting to play
 
  • 2
  • 1Like
Reactions:
maybe, but i find its better to have concepts with the same name..

it might change later on.
For what it’s worth, I think things like different terms there are small but very valuable flavor wins that help differentiate the vibe between tags.
 
  • 3Like
Reactions:
Your post seems to suggest that each province has its own food market, with penalties to your treasury if each province cannot feed its population. This made me wonder how large cities are portrayed in this game. In EUIV London, Paris, Rome, etc. are their own named provinces. Will these now just be represented by a single location or will e.g. London still be a province with locations like The City of London, Westminster, Southwark etc. The later could be a nice way to mimic the growth of urban sprawl over time. However, it would probably work poorly with the provincially based food market, if the whole province was eventually one big city. Any chance for a picture of the location/provincial map of Southeast England to see how London is represented? Please! :)
 
Very interesting as always, can't wait to see more - especially on [redacted]..

One question, though - seeing that only forts cost maintenance, does that mean that other buildings (like roads) only require an up-front payment, or do the local estates shoulder the burden?

I think maintenance costs would work really well towards creating a more immersive and believable world and also create some strategic dilemma so I'd love for them to be in.
I know that in medieval and early modern England, there was quite a lot of use of endowments for the maintenance of infrastructure, including both roads and things that EU regards as Buildings. So if you built a bridge or a school, you also endowed a trust with land to cover the maintenance costs forever. The classic example is the City Bridge Foundation, which was established in 1282 to maintain London Bridge and still owns many valuable plots of land in London for that purpose. So it would be in keeping with the period to regard infrastructure as a one-off cost.

That money should still not go to the crown. They aren't buying nor selling it.
Well, I think that depends upon the state and the era. In some early modern and medieval states, the crown's demense was a large part of the economy. In China the imperial court's grain purchases and famine relief operations (at least in the Qing, I'm less sure about earlier) could definitely move the balance of supply and demand. The Roman state was actively buying and selling grain well before the Project Casesar period. So I don't see why it couldn't be done, though it should be an interesting decision for the player and something which the AI only does if it has a sufficient level of state capacity and an appropriate worldview.

Agree, I like the age system.
I also wonder if they'll ever consider adding the option to activate a dynamic age system.
I've suggested the idea before but it would be a challenge to implement.

It brings more 'what if' to the table, but by dropping historicity, so it should probably need a toggle in game options. But imagine if you could prevent the Age of Reformation from happening, or start the Age of Revolutions a century earlier, or go back to an old Age, all depending on global values based on the evolution of the world in your game. Or starting completely new "what if" ages; Age of Orthodoxy, Age of Autarchy, Age of Traditionalism, etc. probably lots of DLC potential here. I think the longer timeframe of P. Caesar allows for more options than before.
If you haven't played it yet, you're really going to like Paradox's new game Millennia.
Will we be able to set a percentage on how much "Trade Income" goes into the state budget? With the rest of it going to the Burghers perhaps
I wonder whether the game might give you this, but in a different way.
You want: 100 Trade Income, slider is 40%, so State get 40 ducats and Burgers are left with 60 ducats.
The game might give you: 100 Trade Income goes to Burghers, Burgher Tax Rate is 40%, so State get 40 ducats and Burgers are left with 60 ducats.

But that might be totally wrong, as we have not yet seen the trade system.
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
IMHO the difficulty with this is that circularity makes it much more difficult for tooltips and the AI to forecast what will happen. E.g. if you cut Navy Maintenance, your Burgher Shipbuilders and Commoner Sailors get less income, which means they pay less Tax, which means your budget deficit might increase rather than shrink. Economists call this problem the fiscal multiplier. V3 puts a large amount of effort into reproducing this phenomenon (and V2 did even more, since it tried not have any 'money leaks' at all), but it eats up a lot of computing power and programmer time. I'm not sure that's the best use of Tinto's efforts for this era.

I imagine it would be something like leaders investing in local artists, scientists, poets, writers, engineers, architects and such to create cultural works of splendor. Happened a lot during the Renaissance, especially in Italy.

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.

I agree. I really would like to ask the devs what spending on stability actually means. What is that money in-universe being used for? What actually is stability exactly?
I do wonder whether either the Culture or Stability spending might go in part towards the Clergy (or equivalent in other worldviews). Clergy were very powerful channels for spreading culture, which is why in V2 they are essentially Literacy machines. You could also take a Marxist view and see them as a means by which the ruling élite ensure Stability in society. I hope Project Caesar's treatment of religion in general, and religious professionals in particular, will be much more sophisticated than that. But I wouldn't mind it being one piece of the puzzle.
 
Last edited:
  • 2Like
  • 2Love
Reactions:
maybe, but i find its better to have concepts with the same name..

it might change later on.
You know what would be a really cool idea? If you could tie an actual visual aesthetic mechanic with players choice to the amount the player spends on the court thing.

Think Civilization 3 with its palace building system, only actually challenging since getting those love the king/emperor/president days in that game was as easy as pie
 
  • 3Like
  • 1Love
  • 1
Reactions: