• 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 #17 - 19th of June 2024

Welcome everyone to the 17th Tinto Talks, in this Happy Wednesday, we will give you further information about the most secret game you could ever think of, the one with the codename Project Caesar.

Today we will delve into the depths and mechanics of how the population system of the game actually works.

As a recap, we have 6 different social classes, with Nobles, Clergy & Burghers viewed as upper class, while Peasants, Tribesmen & Slaves make up the other three. Every location has a population, and each combination of social class, culture and religion creates a unique “pop” in the game. That Pop may contain 1 person, or 250 Million, but it is still referred to as a “pop”.


pop_browser.png

Design copied from an old game I made a decade or two ago… UI is a bit placeholdery, but i like the browsing capabilities..


Population Capacity
Each location has a population capacity which depends on quite a lot of factors. The core of it is vegetation, topography and climate, while the amount of buildings and development increases it as well. If your population is higher than its current capacity, then there is a very large impact on its migration attraction and population growth.

While there are no restrictions on how many peasants, slaves or tribesmen there can be in a single location, the amount of upper class pops there can be is limited, and depends on what infrastructure there exists for that type of pop. Of course, if their estates have money, they tend to want to construct buildings that increase how many they are to further increase their power in the country.

There are reasons why you want upper class pops, and not just always creating an egalitarian “all are peasants” society, and that is when the capital economy developing during this era depends heavily on burghers, so you want to have a fair amount of those. You also want clergy of your national religion as they will help with stability, and having nobles of proper culture will help with your diplomacy and warfare.


burgher_capacity.png

Having levies raised from a specific class, reduces the maximum population there can be for that certain class.


Promotion & Demotion
If there can be more pops of a certain social class, pops will promote to become that class over time. While there is a base value, promoting to some classes like nobles will just be a fraction of that each month. If you wish to speed this up in your country, you can use a cabinet member to increase it. There are many factors that impact how quickly pops can be promoted, some are affecting your entire country, some others are more local, like during Devastation or a Lack of Control. Demotion happens when you have pops over your capacity, and will happen much, much quicker than promotion.

promotion.png

16 peasants will be promoted every month to become what is needed in Kalmar...


Population Growth
Only peasants and tribesmen grow organically on their own, but all types of pops can die off from negative growth.

Overpopulation, Lack of food, War exhaustion and Devastation have a significant negative impact on population growth, while having access to free land & lots of food increases the growth.

Not to forget, the population can die directly from diseases and warfare as well.

pop_growth.png

Peaceful and nice, the population should grow nicely here…


Assimilation
Assimilation is a very slow process, and pops will assimilate to the primary culture in core locations if they belong to a culture that your country does not appreciate. Societal Values and Lack of Control have a significant impact on this, but there are buildings and other things that can impact it. In most majorly populated areas the natural growth of pops will outpace the assimilation. However, there is a cabinet action where you can increase assimilation in a specific province.

monthly_assimilation.png

Sadly this is a slow process in this location, 3 pops will assimilate next month..

Conversion
Converting pops works similarly to assimilation, but there are two major differences. First of all, there are mechanics and systems that sometimes change the religion of pops from what your country may desire. Secondly, there is normally no conversion, but you have to actively enforce religious conversion in a province by using a cabinet. The amount of the population that convert each month depends on what type of buildings you may have, your societal values, laws you can enact, or the privileges given to the clergy. If your clergy is very powerful as well, conversion is quicker.

monthly_conversion.png

103,26% of 0 base conversion is still going to be 0 pops.

Migration
There are several ways for pops to migrate, multiple ones regarding the colonization aspect of the game will be talked about in a later Tinto Talks. There is also content that does migration, where events, disasters or other scripted content will set up specific migration from one place to another.

However, there is also a natural migration mechanic, where the population will move between locations. Pops will move away from locations that have a negative migration attraction, and will go to one with higher migration attraction in the same market. Upper class pops are usually allowed to migrate, while not many countries allow their peasants to move freely.

As for other things, you can use your cabinet to control this, where you can have one member of the cabinet leading an effort to expel people from one province, severely reducing their migration attraction, while another one could attract people to another province. You can also construct buildings in lowly populated locations to attract pops to move there.

migration_attraction.png

The price of stone in Kalmar is not inviting, but it's calm and plenty of land is available..


Literacy
Each pop keeps track of its own literacy as well, and there are buildings, advances, laws and other things that impact how quickly it can grow and how high it can be. The average literacy of a country has an impact on the research speed of that country, and the literacy of a pop has some impact on its satisfaction. However, there is also an immediate impact on the location of the average literacy of all of the same social class. Amongst other things, the average literacy of the nobles in a location has an impact on how quickly control can increase there, and the average literacy of slaves in a location increases the unrest of the location.

literacy.png

Literate Burghers will definitely make you richer over the long term..


Population Needs
Each pop has its own needs for goods, and if they can’t get all of those goods, their satisfaction will be lower. The goods that a pop requires depend on their social class, their culture, their religion and where they live. They also may start caring about goods when they know about them, as the demand for tobacco will only appear in Europe when the pops actually know about it. Obviously people in colder climates want more lumber or coal, while a Jain pop is not wanting any fur at all.

pop_needs.png

I am not entirely sure why these burghers want mercury…

Satisfaction
The population needs impact their satisfaction in two ways. If they can't get the goods that they want, it's a penalty to their satisfaction. However, the prices of the goods also affect their satisfaction, as if the prices are high, then satisfaction drops, but if you can get the goods they require cheaper in the market they live in, their satisfaction will increase, but their literacy impacts how much they understand the price impact though.

Satisfaction also depends heavily on the status of their culture in the country, the religion they belong to, and how satisfied their estate currently is. There are other ways to make pops more satisfied like certain buildings, or the good old method of stationing armies.

Pops with low satisfaction will join and start supporting a rebel faction.


satisfaction.png

Of course, these poor pops lack one of the most important things in life.

Even though pops may not be upset enough to rebel, their satisfaction has other impacts, as the average satisfaction of all pops in a location has an impact on prosperity and control.


average_satisfaction.png

Here even the paradox maths check out!


Stick around, as next week we’ll be talking a bit about laws!
 

Attachments

  • monthly_conversion.png
    monthly_conversion.png
    118,2 KB · Views: 0
  • 190Love
  • 174Like
  • 8
  • 4
  • 1
Reactions:
The problem is that for the game, we would have to create a hierarchy of cultures that would not be acceptable to the modern population. I may think of some system that could be less problematic but it would take time.
It would be nice if the different attitudes towards other cultures that existed historically can be represented in the game. Some places had a strict hierarchy, like Spanish colonies, in other places your culture didn't matter as long as you had the right religion.
 
  • 3Like
Reactions:
I think that you could represent this not by giving certain cultures magic powers that make their fisheries or collieries give out more material, but instead having these settlers be divorced from the politics of local pops (so more loyal to you) and/or importing foreign production techniques and expertise that can improve production.

I'm not quite sure how you'd present this in a simple and digestible way, but I think it should be possible to do without giving Germans a genetically innate ability to manufacture iron better, for example you could have certain buildings grow in expertise and technological development over time, and then the people who work at those buildings becoming experts with useful knowledge that could bring those production techniques in as settlers for you.

So for example, German settlers might have developed the three-field system in response to economic pressures (modelled here by some simplification like a technology/expertise meter linearly increasing) which they would bring with them to their settlements, increasing production and making it easier for you to slowly promulgate that system to the rest of your country.
 
Last edited:
  • 1Like
Reactions:
It would be nice if the different attitudes towards other cultures that existed historically can be represented in the game. Some places had a strict hierarchy, like Spanish colonies, in other places your culture didn't matter as long as you had the right religion.
This may be a better option, considering the Croatian nobility in my example were already accepted given their previous resistance to the Ottomans and their good relations with the Catholic church. It may be more correct from the Austrian perspective as "better the Croats take the brunt rather than our own people."
 
More thoughts...

1) Demotion/Promotion - A Reform/Revolution Mechanic - The Argument for Privilege/Demographic Cycles:

Why not have a switch for "allow expansion of noble titles"? When on, noble titles would be available for purchase as part of royal land/venal office sales. When off, titles would not be available. The player would have to manage the happiness of nobles who don't want titles to expand versus non-noble elites who do. When there are a low percentage of noble titles, nobles don't care about expansion. So, that's an easy choice. However, when noble titles get too high, nobles want shut off the spigot. This forces the player to "pick their poison" between satisfying nobles and satisfying non-noble elites at times.

Okay, why do this? This was real life. Population pressures weren't just for peasants. Nobles felt them too. There have been many posts about players thinking it a benefit if they avoid getting hit with the Black Death, but the opposite is the case. Ruling is easier and more fun when population pressures are low. When population pressures are high, peasants starve *and* non-noble elites get pissy because they are locked out of nobility.

There was a reason why the pot boiled during times of high population pressure. After a plague or war or famine killed off a ton of people, that pressure was released.

This could also be a part of a reform/revolution mechanic. I have a book on reform/revolutions (Revolution and Rebellion by Jack Goldstone) that includes this idea as part of a general concept of what leads to reforms/revolutions. When population pressures are high, people get unhappy - both peasants (starving) and non-noble elites (denied advancement). This creates the ingredients for backlash against the state. Critically, that backlash is directed not just at the thing that is making the two groups unhappy (food/noble positions), but also at other areas of concern.

These backlash movements often led to structural change in government and society that were not normally possible. Normally, a ruler might struggle to implement reforms - reducing noble privileges or removing nobles from venal offices, for example, but during a crisis period, there would be less resistance because it is, well, a crisis. This is what happened in real life following the long 16th century and in the late 18th/early 19th century. BTW - The book includes examples from Europe and Asia.

I think there are some very important benefits of such a system. Two off the bat:
1) Providing Some Structure/Breaking Up Monotony - If you know that there are reform/demographic cycles, then that provides a structure to playing through the game. It makes it so that there are "seasons". This is a good thing because it breaks up the monotony of sameness. Even if you are playing in a quiet corner of the world and nothing is going on, you know that there will still be some excitement - to a purpose! - when you reach these revolution/reform periods. You will get to push through some big reforms and make major changes to your country after going through a bunch of turmoil.

2) Managing Privileges - It provides the basis for a privilege management system. The biggest problem with managing privileges is figuring out how to remove them. M&T currently has a system where you can remove them every X years, but it pisses off nobles. This is effectively a gold sink. You throw gold to nobles, which raises their happiness, then remove a privilege every once in a while to reduce that happiness. Cycle. This does not work in my opinion. It isn't fun. I think a breathe in, breathe out system works better. You breathe in and slowly gain privileges over a period of time, then breathe out and get rid of a bunch at once. This has the benefit of providing a permission structure for granting privileges because it isn't such a pain in the ass to get rid of them.

I would think the main objection is that this would feel artificial. You know this is coming, which would make it less interesting/cheapen the experience. It doesn't have to be that way. If you don't have population pressures because you manage to fight enough wars that you are killing off nobles as fast as they are promoted and never exceed population capacities, then you either don't go through the revolution/reform period or it is much reduced in intensity. I don't see it as artificial, but rather as a consequence of natural forces that make sense to simulate.

This is a much bigger idea than "should there be 'allow noble titles' button?", so it probably deserves its own thread at some point, but there it is. If there is interest, I'll create a thread for a discussion.

2) Migration Only With-in Market -

I'm sorry, but I hate it. Like really, really don't like it. I don't like markets because they are too big, so I want to mod them. I think there should be roughly twice as many markets as there are. Tying migration to markets would potentially screw that up. Guh, I am so annoyed by this idea. I am Vic3 level annoyed by this. Worst idea thus far. I'll think of something better and suggest it. Right off the bat, I would prefer country-wide migration.

3) Peasant Freedom -

Peasants were *largely* mobility free by this period in Europe. There were still pockets, but in general there was not a lot of serfdom left. If there is any debate over this, I can look up some sources. I've read it in many places. It can't be hard to find some of them.
 
  • 2Like
  • 1
Reactions:
It would be nice if the different attitudes towards other cultures that existed historically can be represented in the game. Some places had a strict hierarchy, like Spanish colonies, in other places your culture didn't matter as long as you had the right religion.

I agree but I understand why they don't want to open this can of worms.

I also wonder if there is a way to simulate inviting pops of some culture for their skills (like german and silesian folks to Poland) if we do not tie those skills to culture.
 
Lets goooo!!! This is what I wanted! I also appreciate making tribespeople different pops. Thanks Johan! I still have some concerns over assimilation. How does the game decide which strata of pops to assimilate? Obviously assimilating 5 nobles is wayyy better than assimilating 5 slaves. For me, not knowing which pops will get assimilated is one of the major pain points in I:R. I think assimilation should start at the top and spread to the masses later like how it happens irl, as in: nobles > burghers > clergy > peasants > tribespeople > slaves.

Also literacy and same religion should effect the assimilation process imho.
 
Okay, why do this? This was real life. Population pressures weren't just for peasants. Nobles felt them too. There have been many posts about players thinking it a benefit if they avoid getting hit with the Black Death, but the opposite is the case. Ruling is easier and more fun when population pressures are low. When population pressures are high, peasants starve *and* non-noble elites get pissy because they are locked out of nobility.
That's not really supported by what actually happened after the Black Death. Nobles lost significant power due to labor shortages, which allowed peasants to demand more rights or lower tax rates. Grain prices also fell dramatically, which hurt the nobility (whose income mostly depended on their agricultural estates) and benefitted cities (who purchased grain). Ruling elites generally benefit from cheap labor. Landowners tried to reverse this process somewhat in the HRE by the 16th century, which was the main cause for the peasant revolts (i.e. they wanted to keep their rights).
When population pressures are high, people get unhappy - both peasants (starving) and non-noble elites (denied advancement). This creates the ingredients for backlash against the state. Critically, that backlash is directed not just at the thing that is making the two groups unhappy (food/noble positions), but also at other areas of concern.
I personally favor the Youth Bulge theory, i.e. that conflict, war, civil war, colonization, terrorism, etc. is not caused by high population per se, but a large spike in fertility rate which produces many young men that can't find a place in society. I don't think it would be possible for the game to simulate something like that.
2) Migration Only With-in Market -

I'm sorry, but I hate it. Like really, really don't like it. I don't like markets because they are too big, so I want to mod them. I think there should be roughly twice as many markets as there are. Tying migration to markets would potentially screw that up. Guh, I am so annoyed by this idea. I am Vic3 level annoyed by this. Worst idea thus far. I'll think of something better and suggest it. Right off the bat, I would prefer country-wide migration.
This keeps getting brought up, but Johan explicitly wrote: "There are several ways for pops to migrate, multiple ones regarding the colonization aspect of the game will be talked about in a later Tinto Talks. "
So migration clearly won't be limited to within a market. He also confirmed in the replies that there are other mechanics for migration.
3) Peasant Freedom -

Peasants were *largely* mobility free by this period in Europe. There were still pockets, but in general there was not a lot of serfdom left. If there is any debate over this, I can look up some sources. I've read it in many places. It can't be hard to find some of them.
Really depends on which part of Europe you're talking about. In what is usually called Western Europe (England, France, HRE, Low Countries, Northern Italy), serfdom was pretty weak and disappeared during the time period. In Eastern Europe, serfdom actually became enforced even more strictly over time, despite not really having been present as early as in Western Europe.
 
  • 2Like
  • 2Love
Reactions:
Lets goooo!!! This is what I wanted! I also appreciate making tribespeople different pops. Thanks Johan! I still have some concerns over assimilation. How does the game decide which strata of pops to assimilate? Obviously assimilating 5 nobles is wayyy better than assimilating 5 slaves. For me, not knowing which pops will get assimilated is one of the major pain points in I:R. I think assimilation should start at the top and spread to the masses later like how it happens irl, as in: nobles > burghers > clergy > peasants > tribespeople > slaves.

Also literacy and same religion should effect the assimilation process imho.
currently for 50 peasant convering there is like 1 noble.

which for an average location with 50 nobles and 20,000 peasants means maybe 2.5k peasants have assimiliated when the nobles have.
While less nobles assimilate on a per pop basis, they convert much faster as a percentage of total pops
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
That's not really supported by what actually happened after the Black Death. Nobles lost significant power due to labor shortages, which allowed peasants to demand more rights or lower tax rates. Grain prices also fell dramatically, which hurt the nobility (whose income mostly depended on their agricultural estates) and benefitted cities (who purchased grain). Ruling elites generally benefit from cheap labor. Landowners tried to reverse this process somewhat in the HRE by the 16th century, which was the main cause for the peasant revolts (i.e. they wanted to keep their rights).

I never mentioned the Black Death. The book is specifically about the 16th century and 18th/19th century reform/revolution cycles (its in the name of the book - Early Modern :)). I guess you could argue the Black Death occurred before pressures built up sufficiently to cause a backlash. Or maybe there were other factors that prevented - maybe balance of power between nobles and non-noble elites wasn't enough to make as big of a difference. Anyway, I was specifically talking about the 16th century and 18th century reform/revolution cycles.

I also think you misread what I am saying.

During a period of high-population, there will be all sorts of problems - for non-nobles. There isn't enough food for peasants. Nobility closes ranks and excludes new-comers (because there are too many nobles/nobility loses some of its exclusivity). So, peasants and non-noble elites get upset. You can extend that to other maladies that build up (privileges and/or venal offices in later periods).

During a period of low-population, life will be easier - for non-nobles. There is plenty of food for peasants. There are plenty of available spots for non-nobles to join nobility.

Nobility is the group that loses when population pressures go from high to low. That is why it requires a crisis to instigate the change. Nobles don't give up power lightly.

I personally favor the Youth Bulge theory, i.e. that conflict, war, civil war, colonization, terrorism, etc. is not caused by high population per se, but a large spike in fertility rate which produces many young men that can't find a place in society. I don't think it would be possible for the game to simulate something like that.

It isn't about high population, but rather the consequences of high population - high prices for food relative to income. As I said - nobles deciding to close ranks. Gladstone also mentions lack of education opportunities. Basically, there isn't enough of everything to go around. That creates problems.

I think you can simulate all of that quite easily. Why not do that? If you can't simulate what you are proposing, but you can simulate what I am proposing, then isn't it better to have something - a thing that is based on real factors - than nothing?

This keeps getting brought up, but Johan explicitly wrote: "There are several ways for pops to migrate, multiple ones regarding the colonization aspect of the game will be talked about in a later Tinto Talks. "
So migration clearly won't be limited to within a market. He also confirmed in the replies that there are other mechanics for migration.

Well, I'm specifically talking about non-colonial migration. It at least sounds like non-colonial migration is mainly going to be market based. If that information changes, then I'll change my position.

Really depends on which part of Europe you're talking about. In what is usually called Western Europe (England, France, HRE, Low Countries, Northern Italy), serfdom was pretty weak and disappeared during the time period. In Eastern Europe, serfdom actually became enforced even more strictly over time, despite not really having been present as early as in Western Europe.

At the start of the time period, peasants were largely free (mobility wise) in Western Europe (according to what I have read) and were even"free-er" in Eastern Europe (excluding Russia) because colonization was ongoing (supply and demand). The Second Serfdom did not come until later.
 
  • 1
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Really depends on which part of Europe you're talking about. In what is usually called Western Europe (England, France, HRE, Low Countries, Northern Italy), serfdom was pretty weak and disappeared during the time period. In Eastern Europe, serfdom actually became enforced even more strictly over time, despite not really having been present as early as in Western Europe.

As I stated elsewhere - in Poland we are 150 years ahead of clear distinction between nobles and serfs and "free kmiec" are still a thing in many places and thrive economically. I really hope they would not just make every place in Europe based on France and HRE.
 
  • 3Like
Reactions:
Maybe you should open your eyes and read the post by one of the artists responsible for these pictures, who clearly stated that these weren't AI generated?

You bunch of geniuses who think that all imperfections in art must mean it's AI generated completely blown tf out. As always, people love talking about things they have no clue about.
Notice how the response was basically "not all of the instances include ai image generation", not "none of the instances include ai image generation". If you can't tell the difference between those two statements it is entirely on you.
 
  • 3
  • 1Haha
  • 1
Reactions:
Demotion happens when you have pops over your capacity, and will happen much, much quicker than promotion.
Upper class pops are usually allowed to migrate, while not many countries allow their peasants to move freely.
How do these system interact with each other?
If a nobleman decides to migrate to a different location, but that location has no building that provides nobles capacity, wouldn't he immediately demote?
How does that make any sense?

If most of this migration is usually upper class pops which have a capacity that is granted by buildings, shouldn't this migration for upper class pops be tied to that available capacity for their poptype? Why would a burgher move to a rural location just because it has a lot of open land and an expensive raw material, when the lack of burgher capacity means he's just going to become a peasant?
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Hi there! A side note on the 'tribesmen' pop concept, and why we chose it. The design vision for them is more or less what has been stated: people with a parallel social organization, which is not exactly the same as that of the majority of their country; in game terms, it means that they can't work on RGOs, buildings, etc. We discussed internally what would be the best possible term for them, and we obviously took a look at the trends in Social Anthropology research. We decided to go for 'Tribesmen' for the pop and 'Tribes' for the estate as they're still useful anthropological concepts; however, they obviously need to be used with caution, as the state of the art is not the same today as it was in the 1950s and 60s; a good starting point to know more about the controversy that is the Wikipedia page, as usual.

And precisely because of that, we've tried to be careful about how they're described as a game concept:
They must pay TAXES!!(Furs)
 
Define what is a tribe and what makes it different from a monarchy.
exactly what was explained, people who are not neccessarily part of the of the nation, more decentrilized, like the cossacks. who were allowed more autonomy. very different from peasants, thats why its neccessary to differentiate them, they will have a different role in the game, so there's nothing wrong with calling them tribes, its not a european "supremacists" term. your objection has no basis, dont bring ideology into a game.
 
  • 3
Reactions:
Would buildings like brewery and blacksmith be better if they were "villages"? It is a bit strange to see 300 people working in a medieval blacksmith and brewery. You did have villages that were built around or became highlighted because they possessed people with certain useful skills. So maybe instead of having a blacksmith or a brewery you could have a "blacksmith village" and a "brewery village" who would then supply the town with the goods. I would even had "blacksmith hamlet" and a "brewery hamlet" as a previous level that adds +100. City would then just be a mega town with a strategic/important trading location.
 
in theory yes.

assimilation is usually to primary culture, but yeah..

Will ethnicity play a role in the game, such as some ethnic groups being blocked from assimilation/integration due to discrimination policies? Native Americans and Meso American tribes for instance not becoming English/France/Spanish. Let's suppose that the Portuguese don't discriminate and Amazon tribesmen become Portuguese but then those locations are conquered by the Dutch who do discriminate. Would those Portuguese then convert to Dutch as if they were European in the first place or would there be an indicator (or new culture) to mark new world hybridization/ethnogenesis of people?
 
While this happened historically, I'm a bit ambivalent about portraying "culture x is better at Y than Z"

Would be fun to tie technologies to culture groups where each culture chips in to progress. Some cultures getting a boost where they historically did well (Dutch trade, Portuguese seafaring, etc).