• 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 #8 - 17th of April 2024

Hello, and welcome to the eighth iteration of Tinto Talks where we talk about what we are doing in our very secret future game, with the code name Project Caesar.

Btw, on a completely unrelated note, Paradox Tinto has just announced our new expansion ‘Winds of Change’ for EU4. Go check out its cool contents and trailer!




This week we’ll continue talking about the economical part of the game. Last week we talked about the different items in the monthly budget, and now we’ll continue with explaining some of the core concepts of the economy. Please be aware that all images here are tooltips or parts of tooltips, and some are very much Work in Progress!


Loans and Bankruptcy
Let's start with Loans, which will work a fair bit differently than any other previous Paradox GSG. At first glance, it is kind of similar to previous games, where you can take a loan, you get money, and you pay interest on it for a set period of time. However, in Project Caesar, there are some new changes. Take a look at this WiP tooltip for taking a loan:

nCUH7H-1ErsukKQS9473NBnKTsR05CWHRCYIaB9ntYszKs6rU5K0qzaJ1m4OimczgJtGgcJqfhzX94L9kRwi7qoi-A3J1yaQWyPzYx7e0NjbAXY3eGRsd27ZKVoXYabnz0OG_kwl1t3lpUCMsjzapNE

Yeah, 10% interest is perfectly fair…

In this game, you are not borrowing money from an abstract national bank, but instead, your internal loans are taken from what the estates have made available. The estates invest money they have, not only in immediate gains for their own power, or other ways that benefit the country, or other [REDACTED], but they also invest in having money available for the country, where they will benefit from the interests.

If there is no money to borrow from the estates available and you have no ducats left, you will go bankrupt, which is a little bit more severe than in, let's say EU4...

There is also another way to get gold, you can send a diplomat to one of the banking countries, like Peruzzi and Bardi, if there is one that you know of within diplomatic range, to request a loan. Make sure you don’t forget to pay them on time, or default on the loans, or you may never be able to loan from them again.


Core Concepts
So let’s continue, by taking a look at the tooltip for a location, so we can quickly have a reference to some important aspects in the rest of this development diary.

av2ohVCnmA8MfMHXUexuoSX7wbs5Tz0VGuP-pAGPyjo6bS_yDc4UK0pp8B0jRMDkvwXAwx9uI2Cegs3jpcIKdyR7v0kO5WtLCTD9taUF98vYzSaED6YUjOgV-oXjxgVsswlfOqlUqMoRYs8a5eu-w5k

Enjoy the nice placeholder icons, sadly the forum does not allow for nested tooltips, like the game does…


Food
If you notice the line of food above, you see that Kalmar is not self-sufficient in food, and needs to rely on the rest of Östra Småland for food, unless they buy it from the local market.
kib0U5HlyH-L2LLv71VDVZ6iOxXPS4YyDFTAS18O4FmhFnZi9XNoC67LnjO32Gnpqls7-nhY53fDQBCG3XOKR6fX1lVaOCOmLA-n2Vhq8ivty4UmijPYiazrqSpNAV5eSxchS3SvzMXPY5N266lbeV0

Even the small town of Kalmar needs food from nearby locations…

Primarily, there are a lot of burghers here that consume a lot of food. There are also a lot of modifiers that impact how much food the location produces as well.

If the granaries in Östra Småland are close to full, we would sell their surplus to the local market in Riga, but only get about 56% of the profit, as we only have 56% control in Kalmar. If the entire province lacks food, we would have to buy food at 100% of the current price in that market. The price for food is different in each market, and depends entirely on how much food is sold to that market.





Taxes
We mentioned taxes in last week's Tinto Talk, and specifically mentioned Tax Base there. The tax base of an estate is based on the total of all their Tax Base in all the locations they are present in.


aGfWyrqBlFKjmUSP_b-3bnRVeXPVVdZj8xLUgyu48qKLbW66a_hWwg7Z36YmC9E4zPYOI-CsSwPZFitdxahwe5-xuTPdp_YCA1sF_4g0aiBL_3y9Eetnak6lZfL67ql0e1ioCL1hbXYE3EmJ5-NYYaI

Quickly find the error in the text in this tooltip!

We are slowly increasing our control over Kalmar up to 58.2%, so the tax base will be slowly increasing, and if we would get it to the 100 maximum, it would be even bigger.

As you can see here, the nobility and the burghers have a fair bit of power here, and the peasants have basically none. Currently, we are able to tax more from the burghers each month, and could probably go above the 25% tax rate we have currently set on their estate.

To clarify, only the money that is in the “potential” row exists, and anything you don’t tax on that goes to the estates. So you get 0.05 ducats there (perhaps more, but Paradox rounding), and the remaining 0.37 goes to the estates.



Raw Materials
As you noticed in the tooltips above, we talk about Raw Materials and Resource Gathering Operations. Every location has one raw material possible that can be extracted, this includes things like lumber, stone, grain, amber, or copper. Of course, there are other ways to get access to the raw materials than merely owning and controlling a location.

Only peasants and slaves will work on gathering raw materials, and how many will work with it depends on how big of an infrastructure you have built up for that. Pops that are working with this will not be producing food, unless the goods are food related.

The maximum size of an infrastructure that can be built up depends on population, development, technologies, and societal values.


goa9yXee37SXwcMqzUuhChETBoZB7CLw9Q1xfT6Z4x60C1pcSOkvvUSKfdi__IrWjZbby4oVOI-LAvFOhxYbWT8LrF_kWbFBh7PQpAw3OYZjr6E17qfS9k2XZkA5LZ-7NlTD2bcbk3_0JWIOY3rHklI




We mentioned buildings in one tooltip earlier, and next week we will talk about how they work in Project Caesar.
 
  • 255Like
  • 176Love
  • 15
  • 12
  • 6
Reactions:
Can a country run out of lumber? (Can lumber/other resources be depleted?)
Doesn't look likely, but that's definitely something that was important historically.
For example, Central European forestation was at a minimum at the start of the game and it only fully recovered after the Thirty Years War. France's forests suffered tremendously during the Hundred Years War.

Due to the massive population growth during the middle ages, a lot of new agricultural land needed to be made available. After populations dropped significantly due to several horrible things happening in the 14th century, the less fertile plots of land would be abandoned again (and at the same time, agriculture became significantly more efficient in the 15th century).
So from a historical perspective it doesn't really make sense to have a static differentiation between land that produces food and land that produces lumber - usage can change quickly and we're talking about a timespan of several hundred years here.

However, it looks like there is potential for a modifier that limits how many peasants can work on lumber production in a location, which can become more and more strict as the forest is depleted. And then these peasants would move on to grow food on that land, so that's nice.
 
Last edited:
  • 3
Reactions:
What would the estates use the money on?

The current design where estates can do things in your country that is beneficial to you would have to be scrapped, as control is not something you need, you could just keep conquering and estates would instantly benefit from anything.. So no construcing or building?

Investing in a bigger loan pool for the country? same as above.

Funding a rebellion? yeah, but if they are happy and have all privileges?

ok, they could invest gold to make more power to themselves, but so would all estates then.. and you'd just be a nice figure head conquering the world.
It seems like there should basically be a system for local "estate(s)" (ie. petty nobles or priests in that province; or just one: "local leaders"). All the control that the state (and national estates) lacks is in the hands of the locals. It's this estate that collects the "uncollected" money, leads revolts, etc.

Thus, uncontrolled areas would be able to (maybe) prosper as their local leaders are empowered unto themselves. It would also mean that trying to then assert control against a province that has been for too long under local leadership and built up a resource pool would be harder and cause more unrest.

I think the concern is that no control shouldn't necessarily imply that the province is neglected or remains impoverished. Powerful local burghers or nobles may be able to not just run, but enrich the area on their own expressly because there isn't any state control. If the money just vanishes and nobody is investing in the area, it seemingly implies that that location/province should WANT state control or no buildings or anything will ever be built...
 
  • 3Like
Reactions:
I'm getting tired of of the money must go to estates regardless of control brigade. The estates are political organisations, not the peoples bank accounts. The abstraction being implemented is perfectly fine
 
  • 18
  • 2Like
  • 1Love
Reactions:
Personally, this dev diary was rather disappointing. The control <-> tax base system still seems really opaque and counterintuitive, not to mention the fact that low control means a reduced local economy. According to this metric, when the Portuguese conquered Goa all economic output in the region should have halted because the connection to Lisbon was bad.

The value a provincial economy produces should be calculated and then divided up between the locals and the state depending on the control. Estates should be able to take from both shares. In the local share, estates get rents and tithes from peasants. In the state share, estates get money through corruption and salaries (e.g. a judge). Estates should also be able to make money from their own property.

I don't think Estates should be universally happy that state control is increasing. But at this time they are because it raises their income too.
 
  • 12
  • 3
  • 2
  • 1Like
Reactions:
One thing I'm wondering about food production, seeing all these modifiers in the tooltip: what about a modifier that reduces efficiency based on how many peasants are working to produce food, like a reverse economy of scale modifier?

Land isn't equally fertile - the more land you use for agriculture, the less efficient it is going to be, because you have to use less fertile land. Without access to large quantities of artificial fertilizers, this was a limiting factor for population growth.

Particularly fertile locations would obviously be less affected by this modifier.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
If you are not close to the King, you lack power.


Local power blocks would be subjects. We are still in basically a feudal society for the first 200 years of the game.
Thing is, doesn't estate influence directly depends on their pops, wherever they may be? Control only influences what power the crown gets from pops, doesn't it? Why doesn't that apply to money as well?

This could create very dissonant situations, where you have very powerful (due to raw pop numbers) but very poor (due to low control) estates.

The design concerns are valid of course, but it isn't an unsolvable issue. The way I see it, this only means that estates will have (far) more money with lower control, which creates an issue where you could tax them even without increasing control.

The solution I see here is having a separate income pool for the estates, an "untaxable income" pool if you will, which cannot be taxed. This pool would heavily favor low control areas to build improvements, while the "taxable income" would be the opposite, basically what's implemented now.

This would add very little overhead to the calculation, after all it is already done, it's just maximum - current tax, and only one new variable in the estate itself. Same thing for the investment calculation, it is already done, it's the same calculations as if every country had 100% control everywhere, but using different variables.

That's just one solution I could come up with, I'm sure there are quite a few alternative to solving this issue.
 
  • 3
  • 1Like
Reactions:
in theory one could design such a system, but that would be far more complex, and I care about performance
Okay but please do not add useless feature like 3D portraits in this case, if you sacrifice THAT MUCH of the socio-economic potential right at the start, it has to be for a good reason. I am afraid of having another almost empty game with super ambitious graphs and mid to low performance... Wars, diplomacy, technologies... It has to be solid in compensation.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
The price for food is different in each market, and depends entirely on how much food is sold to that market.


This sentence made me a very happy man! A very-very happy man!
 
  • 1Haha
Reactions:
As the kind of player who didn't tend to min-max this stuff, a very pleasant DD.

One question I'm surprised no one is asking though is will there be a method to create a Central Bank later in the game? And therefore to set your own interest, lend without going through estates etc? And if that is a mechanic, would it be implemented through an event (as is more or less the case in 'generally-unrelated-game' EU4)? Or would it be unlocked through a heretofore undescribed tech system or decision system?

Obviously most of this wouldn't be talked about for awhile, but TLDR, central banking?
 
  • 2Like
Reactions:
Does control interact with estate pop numbers? E.g. in a 50% control location will 50% of the potential burghers instead be non-estate pops?
That would make the 'not created' portion of the local economic output make perfect sense to me.
 
You mentioned past week that there will be trade. Today you have said that we will have goods to produce. So imagine I am playing a country in India who produces a lot of exotic spices. Can I export them to make money. In EU4 there are no incentives to let goods 'flow out' of your country, you even lose money in the process. Will there be any incentives in project ceasar to export (exotic) goods.
 
  • 1Love
Reactions:
Personally, this dev diary was rather disappointing. The control <-> tax base system still seems really opaque and counterintuitive, not to mention the fact that low control means a reduced local economy. According to this metric, when the Portuguese conquered Goa all economic output in the region should have halted because the connection to Lisbon was bad.

The value a provincial economy produces should be calculated and then divided up between the locals and the state depending on the control. Estates should be able to take from both shares. In the local share, estates get rents and tithes from peasants. In the state share, estates get money through corruption and salaries (e.g. a judge). Estates should also be able to make money from their own property.

I don't think Estates should be universally happy that state control is increasing. But at this time they are because it raises their income too.

You bring up a valid point about distant territorial control, similar to the situation in Goa. Though uncertain about the game's handling of these issues, I believe taxation in Goa was probably internalized and overseen by the governor. The Portuguese main goal was trade, and Goa became renowned for its black pepper exports to Lisbon, to the extent that the Portuguese effectively monopolized black pepper in Europe. I look forward to learning more about distances and control affects.
 
  • 3Like
Reactions: