• 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.
 
  • 254Like
  • 176Love
  • 15
  • 12
  • 6
Reactions:
To be fair, isn't that kinda the case? Wasn't that the very system (conquering for the sake of getting money out of it) the sorta thing that propelled Timur's empire to such heights (and ultimately led to its swift demise when the wealth was all spent and everyone was too busy fighting each other to actually go and get more), and the Ottomans as well?

Conquering very much was lucrative in this time, but once you run out of stuff to conquer... well, things aren't gonna go too well for you with a whole lot of stuff you're having to pay for and no actual income generation to maintain any of it.
Wasnt that money coming from looting and reparation?
Timur should have had more control and better infra instead of relying of his war loot (I m not knowledgeable about this)


Anyway I think from a gameplay perspective it is very good that internal management is needed in between wars, its a big selling point to me as its can greatly improves pacing and enrich gameplay
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
If its under portuguese control, then yeah, its all more or less fine.

if its not, you create a subject of some sort.. feudalism works
What would be the cutoff point where a subject is better than direct ownership? I understand that you're better off keeping vassals if you can't integrate them to your infrastructure, but is that how the gameplay look actually works?

Do we have alerts and such when some land has very low control and we'd be better off releasing it as a vassal, or when we move to integrate one, doe the game show us that we will have control problems by doing so?

If feudalism is going to be this integral to simulating local wealth with low control, I feel like this is very important.

I might even go further and say you flat out shouldn't be able to integrate land in which you can't have a minimum threshold of control, if this alone breaks the simulation to this degree.
 
  • 2
  • 1Like
Reactions:
I don't really like the idea that bankruptcy should be hard on the player.
If you look at the period, default (forced debt restructuring) was the norm and quite expected, and thus the credit system was built around very high likelihood of default.
The DD mentions the Bardi and Peruzzi, whose failure, caused by the default of the king of England, marked the first well studied financial crisis and led to the development of credit risk management as a science. In general this period is a period of significant development and evolution of credit and fiscal system, which I would hope to see in game.
As I mentioned, default was the norm in the late middle ages/early modern era and to go around this problem creditors would
1)restrict credit
2)ask for significant interest rate.
So I think that rather than making the consequences of default particularly bad, it would be interesting to see the real situation: credit is hard to come by (for instance in england forced loans were asked by Charles I) and it is very costly, with default not that bad. Overtime though being a good creditor (and in particular tying your hands with good institutions) should be rewarded with better interest rates and plenty of credits: Venice for instance never had problems coming up with cash and had relatively low interest rates because the people lending the money were the same merchant elite that ruled the republic and so Venice never defaulted on its debt. England also managed to seriously surpass its competitors when the parliament managed to impose its will on the king, empowering the merchant elites that would never support a default on the credit they offered, leading to a significant decline in interest rates and increase in debt/GDP.
 
  • 7
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Are markets static? Will Riga always be a market or is there anything that will make that city lose market status? Conversely, can other cities claim market status?
It would be cool if a city loses attraction for merchants if there was a devastating war there, so it stops being a trade centre until repaired
 
  • 2
Reactions:
The game simulates the benefits a country can get out of land. I am pretty sure that Portugal instituted local systems for control in Goa to benefit from it, but considering the distance, there were less efficiencies and many pockets lined before the government in Lisbon saw their share. Many of the overseas territories of european powers were basically feudal subjects for all practical purposes, with local administrators and governors.


My question here though is "what is the economic output, that the government and the estates is not taking, used for, in a gameplay aspect ?"

Local pop wealth, local development, local consumption, etc.

I think that is what I am not understanding anyway.

If I am Portugal and I conquer Goa, but I don't build any control mechanisms so control = 0%, then my assumption is that while I am not going to benefit, the economy in Goa will continue to develop. The money will just stay local. You could argue that Goa will do even better without me extracting wealth from it. Locals will have more money with which to consume, develop, grow wealthy, etc.

That's what I am not getting. If I have 0% control, then Goa just stagnates? What happens to Goa?
 
  • 7Like
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
Wasnt that money coming from looting and reparation?
Timur should have had more control and better infra instead of relying of his war loot (I m not knowledgeable about this)


Anyway I think from a gameplay perspective it is very good that internal management is needed in between wars, its a big selling point to me as its can greatly improves pacing and enrich gameplay
Oh, Timur totally needed more infrastructure and control. His "empire" wasn't really much of an empire at all; local rulers were left in place up until the point where they decided "well there's basically no control; might as well stop paying whatever ridiculous taxes he's demanding" at which point he'd show up with an army, destroy the city, ship all the engineers and artisans over to Samarqand and kill the rest.

After all, why bother with control if you just kill the entire population? Just, uh... don't expect it to go over well when you actually need whatever state you've formed to survive any amount of time past the death of its founder.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
We had money not disapearing, and it didnt work.. it made it far better to just conquer stuff and not build up infrastructure.

The core of the game -systems has been semi-playable since autumn of 2020, and we have tested so many things so far.

We trust you on this one then. I am happy as it is to be honest as its so much better than EU4 already
 
  • 3Like
  • 1
Reactions:
To be clear, my position is that "conquest empires" should absolutely be a thing. The downside of course being that if conquest is the means that you fund your state, then once the conquest funds dry up (run out of places to reasonably conquer), well... you're gonna have a rough time.

If you wanna have Timur, you need this to be represented. If you wanna have the Ottomans, you need this to be represented.
 
  • 5Like
Reactions:
My question here though is "what is the economic output, that the government and the estates is not taking, used for, in a gameplay aspect ?"
Local improvements.

You say there's no system for this, but don't estates already make their own rounds of autonomous investment? If they used this money they'd make even more of it.

There's the the the issue of government taxing estates, fair enough, but if they had an untaxable wealth pool, it'd work just fine. They could invest proportionally then, say if they were about to invest in a province with 60% control, they could take 40% of the untaxable wealth and 60% of the taxable one to make the investment.

This does t break the abstraction, nor add new performance concerns.
 
  • 1Haha
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
If you do not start out as a Banking country can you still lend money or perhaps embrace some ideas or something to become one? Just thinking of how sovereign loan markets emerged in Amsterdam and later London towards the end what I assume will be the period here.

Also, this mechanic will work perfectly with a representation of the Bank of England, or indeed the only national bank that is older, the Swedish one. :)
 
  • 4Like
Reactions:
When should we expect «colonization» to show up in your Tinto Talks schedule ?
 
Last edited:
  • 2Like
Reactions:
hope not. levies/armies buying from market when raised is better

I dunno I'd want to see some more interesting war mechanics to allow for more tactical gameplay. So there would be a long supply lines that the enemy could cut off and starve your army. I think it might spice up warfare. Though there could also be an option to scavenge the local countryside for food.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
-Does that mean when playing as Russia you will not receive any tax money from Siberia?
-Can you send an army to a locations to force them to pay 100% taxes?
-Can you manually transport goods from one market to another, for example siberian wood to St. Petersburg to build a massive fleet?
 
  • 2Like
Reactions: