• 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 #29 - 18th of September 2024

Welcome everyone to another Tinto Talks, the Happy Wednesday where we inform you about how things will work in our super secret game with the codename Project Caesar.

In today's Tinto Talks we will delve into a few different and not entirely related topics, but they are important for what we need to talk about as they will be referenced a fair bit in future Tinto Talks.

Prosperity & Devastation
In Project Caesar this is a single value in a location ranging from -100% to +100%, where positive is prosperity and negative is devastation.

Prosperity represents how prosperous and resourceful a location is. A prosperous location increases development over time. Prosperity will slowly rise, unless different negative circumstances reduce it. If it goes negative it will cause devastation.

There is no direct way for the player to increase prosperity, but having a peaceful country will have it increase slowly over time.

prosperity.png

‘Market Fairs’ is a nice privilege to give.


Devastation represents how ravaged a location is. It includes burnt-down farms and abandoned villages, and the biggest sources of devastation are blockades and occupation.

It has a rather huge impact on a location over time, reducing how much food and raw materials it produces and the population over time.

If you have high devastation in any location in a province, the Age of Renaissance has an advance that enables a cabinet action, where you can focus on recovering devastation in a province, until it has recovered fully.

Ideally, you do not want any sort of war or conflict happening on your own lands.

devastation.png

Not ideal, let's end this war asap…

Development
One concept that has been in many of our previous GSGs is development. It has been used for various things, but in Project Caesar development represents how cultivated the land is, and how much it is used by the pops living there. The higher the development, the more people can live there, and the more it can be exploited.

As mentioned in earlier Tinto Talks, this is a value that the player mostly only has indirect control over, but you can have your cabinet working on improving development in an entire province at once.

Development helps a fair bit in improving the quality of a location, but all of these values here are still constantly being balanced.

development.png

The Woods probably has some other advantage…


Roads
We have had roads in many of our former games, and this game will also have roads. In Project Caesar this includes one of the most in-depth systems of roads we have ever made. A road is basically a connection between two land locations that reduces the proximity calculations from 40 down to 20. Most settled nations start with the capacity to build gravel roads, but there are three advances in later ages that will introduce new types of roads that can be built. Those roads will reduce proximity further, and increase movement speed for armies.

Now this may sound like it could be a lot of micromanagement if we had used the ways railroads were built in Victoria 2, or how roads were built in Imperator, but we have a few easier ways to build or upgrade road networks.

build_road.png

Here we have Kalmar selected and we are looking at building a road to Idre, which technically is in Norway at the start of the game. You can always build a road INTO the location of any country that has a positive opinion of you, so road networks can and will be connected for trade.
  • The green locations are locations you can afford to build a road from Kalmar to at the moment.
  • Striped locations are locations with a road network.
  • The white-outlined locations are the proposed path for the road between Kalmar and Idre.

Road building is one of the most important and fun parts of the control-growing gameplay loop.


Piracy & Privateers
To clarify here, a privateer is a pirate sponsored by a specific country. The ability to sponsor privateers has several different ways to unlock. First of all, every nation has access to an advance in the Age of Absolutism called Letter of Marque that reduces the cost for privateers while also making them sturdier. There are also unique advances in the Age of Discovery for some countries that allow them to hire privateers, while if you pick the Diplomatic Focus in the Age of Renaissance you have the possibility to recruit privateers that early.

Sponsoring a Privateer can be done in an area, and cost about 250 sailors per privateer, and 10 sailors each month they are active. A pirate/privateer in an area, depending on its current strength, can reduce the maritime presence of all non-friendly countries in all sea zones in that area. This hurts relations and will give them a way to get a casus belli on you though.


So how do you fight privateers? Well, you have a fleet of ships in any location in that sea area, and they will actively reduce the capacity of those pirates. Galleys are a bit better than heavy ships at hunting pirates, but light ships are by far the best at dealing with pirates, where a single light ship is about ten times as effective as a heavy ship at the start of the game.


privateers.png

You need sailors for your privateers, or they disappear..

There is a situation in the later half of the 16th century where piracy will start to grow in certain areas of the map. Pirates also have a chance to spawn from locations with pirate covens. These are buildings that peasants will build in coastal locations where control is very low.

privilege.png

This privilege when granted to the Burghers will help your privateers be more cost effective…




Stay tuned, as next week we will focus on Conquest, Integration and Casus Belli’s.
 

Attachments

  • development.png
    development.png
    387,2 KB · Views: 0
Last edited:
  • 144Love
  • 138Like
  • 7
  • 5
  • 4
Reactions:
I don't really understand what you're trying to argue here... You say that in EU4 quantity of provinces beats quality, but then state the otherwise saying small German states outpace other regions in development by the end of the game.
German states outpace other regions because Germany region have higher location density and more countries. More locations means more money and manpower (since population mechanic added in Project Caesar I don't count it). And more countries mean faster development gain which means even more money and manpower.

Prosperity represents how prosperous and resourceful a location is. A prosperous location increases development over time.

It has a rather huge impact on a location over time, reducing how much food and raw materials it produces and the population over time.

One concept that has been in many of our previous GSGs is development. It has been used for various things, but in Project Caesar development represents how cultivated the land is, and how much it is used by the pops living there. The higher the development, the more people can live there, and the more it can be exploited.

Development helps a fair bit in improving the quality of a location, but all of these values here are still constantly being balanced.

This all shows that some factors still tied to location. Or these:

1000326091.png
1000326092.png
1000326093.png


Again, I still think they did a good job and it might not possible to equalize every region.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
X and Y are not adjacent so there's no 'road from X to Y.' You're describing 4 roads.
If we are being pedantic, per the UI image and the Dev diary we are creating a road from Kalmar to Idre.
build_road.png

"Here we have Kalmar selected and we are looking at building a road to Idre,"

The title is "Build a Gravel Road from Kalmar" the tool tip indicates "Build a Gravel Road to Idre" neither mention the ten other locations that it is passing through as shown on the map.

My alteration from what we have seen is that I was calling the smaller sections as road segments to better clarify as both are called roads in the game. So the Road from Kalmar to Idre as selected in the UI consists of 11 roads between the adjacent locations in the path shown on the UI map.
 
  • 2Like
Reactions:
1726758517260.png

So that is a development map rather than a prosperity map.

It’s a bit confusing to me having prosperity impact development the way it does. Devastation makes sense, but isn’t prosperity simply rising crop yields or something of the sort? The intent is to portray cultivation, but the way it works seems more like ‘cumulative prosperity’. It’s not that I don’t like development being either of these ways, but it does seem like it’s not exactly in line with cultivation.

If development is intended to represent cultivation, shouldn’t it be the suitability of land for cultivation instead? Additionally, seeing how pastoralists are pretty big in this time period (for certain reasons), will there be another mechanic for the suitability of land for pasturage?**

Putting that aside, for the actual development map I have more questions.
  1. What’s with that patch of land to the east of Kiev? It looks to be a geographic abnormality for the ‘Rus.
  2. Why is anywhere on the Nile as bad as neighboring desert? Was having a favorable climate and vegetation outlawed south of the Egyptian border? Did crop yields collapse in this time period?
    1. It would explain why the Baqt ended in this century, but I don’t think it would have been remotely feasible for Makuria to have the bargaining power to negotiate directly with Baghdad, become a rare ally of the Fatimids, or do anything but be conquered and/or converted much earlier if the land itself was this poor.*
  3. Why is it that the actually habitable parts of the Tarim Basin are the same? This doesn’t look like enough cultivation to support what was essentially a circle of oasis cities.

*Edit: Actually, now that I think of it, it would be just as unfeasible to pull that off if development was the value/amount of the improvements on it as well. It’s really good that the two usually go hand in hand with each other anyway.

**In light of that, I’d like to change my suggestion from “suitability” to represent land use in general and its intensity, and (if it’s agreed to be useful) divided into agriculture, urbanization, and pasturage categories. That should cover all bases as far as vital functions go while having important gameplay ramifications.
 
Last edited:
  • 3Like
  • 1
Reactions:
I am curious, Light Ships will be much better at hunting pirates, which makes sense, but will Heavy ships be better or at least similarly useful at protecting Naval Trade convoys? Is there even a difference between the two?

I assume the decision to make Light Ships better at hunting pirates came from the idea that they are much faster and can catch up to them, but that wouldn't exist when your only goal is protecting your own convoys rather than catching the pirates, right?
 
If you are selecting a road from X to Y on the UI and if to get from X to Y you have to pass through A, B, and C as such "X - A - B - C - Y", then you have created 4 road 'segments' indicated by the '-'

This is the way that I am understanding what has been stated.

A road connects two, and only two, adjacent locations.

Thanks for answers!
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Will roads be visible on the map after being built, like for example in Imperator where it connects provinces?
I always found it very satisfying building road systems in Imperator and seeing them pop up on the map and not being some invisible value/buff to the province.
 
I dont think development should impact the life expectancy, but rather the
(Current pop/ development based max pop cap )+ prosperity should determine the life expectancy

Otherwise India and China will always have high life expectancy because they have high population/development
The dev said that life expectancy is about characters stationed at the location. So I think it is ok because more developed civils tend to have their aristocrats live longer, who can afford ancient healthcare and pay for herbs and etc.

But, I think this should tide with trade goods and tech much more than only developments. In most occasions, eastern civils got better healthcare and diet than Europeans not because they born smarter but because the higher variety of foods (meat and veg), spices and herbs. Especially Chinese and Indian (Hindu) due to climate related higher bio-diversity. Which Europeans gained access and knowledge about only as late as 18th century onwards, by colonisation.
 
Last edited:
  • 2
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
German states outpace other regions because Germany region have higher location density and more countries. More locations means more money and manpower (since population mechanic added in Project Caesar I don't count it). And more countries mean faster development gain which means even more money and manpower.

Minor correction: more countries means more rulers and more mana power points, thus more mana spent on development.

All states in Eu4 only have 3 bank of mana regardless their size means that number of provinces get develop is in negative relationship to the size of the country. Pump all mana into developing the only province you have is basically the default option for AI city states in Eu4 HRE and that’s what happened all the time.

Hopefully the dev note that’s neither historically accurate nor long term sustainable in game. So that in this project we got population growth tide to more economic related stuff and not per country magic tricks. Which I think is what devs are doing.
 
  • 2Like
Reactions:
Will roads be visible on the map after being built, like for example in Imperator where it connects provinces?
I always found it very satisfying building road systems in Imperator and seeing them pop up on the map and not being some invisible value/buff to the province.

I think somebody have asked this and dev replied in earlier pages. But cool Q.
 
Life Expectancy value affects characters in the location, not pops. The idea is that a minister living it up in Versailles is likely to live a bit longer than one stationed in an undeveloped wartorn frontier, as he has better access to things like diet and healthcare.
uh oh, could we like, make an undersirable heir member of the cabinet and send him to develop siberia?
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
I cannot but feel some redundancy here. We have Prosperity+Devastation, Development, and "real development" - pops, buildings, infrastructure. Do they really represent different real world concepts? I feel like occupations and sieges should kill pops and destroy buildings, while long lasting peace should allow them to accumulate.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
Yeah I think I agree with this. The effects of occupation on its own can probably be simulated by low control.

Not sure about this on the other hand. A civil war for example should be a major source of devastation even though the combatants would be fighting in land of their own culture.
Occupation is a war’s ‘passive modifier’ for eating into prosperity, so it only substracts from the flow cumulatively. Battles are what immediately tank prosperity and create a lump sum of devastation. Sieges would be another adding to devastation, but cumulatively instead. And lastly sacking or even razing settlements should almost entirely destroy them, which I would interpret as a hit to development rather than an addition to devastation.

That civil war should be a major source of devastation. But that devastation shouldn’t come primarily from occupations unless occupying forces aren’t just living off of enemy territory but actively ruining it.

It’s when an occupation is large enough or has extended its welcome long enough that has no more prosperity to eat into where it should then start a ticking time bomb.
 
Do they really represent different real world concepts?
Sure. Think of the different areas of Japan affected by the big tsunami. Areas were more or less developed, more or less prosperous, and more or less devastated.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
The dev said that life expectancy is about characters stationed at the location. So I think it is ok because more developed civils tend to have their aristocrats live longer, who can afford ancient healthcare and pay for herbs and etc.

But, I think this should tide with trade goods and tech much more than only developments. In most occasions, eastern civils got better healthcare and diet than Europeans not because they born smarter but because the higher variety of foods (meat and veg), spices and herbs. Especially Chinese and Indian (Hindu) due to climate related higher bio-diversity. Which Europeans gained access and knowledge about only as late as 18th century onwards, by colonisation.
Every age already has an advance that slightly increases character life expectancy of all characters in your country. Interesting point about access to different goods, I'll think on that a little.
 
  • 26Like
Reactions:
It’s a bit confusing to me having prosperity impact development the way it does. Devastation makes sense, but isn’t prosperity simply rising crop yields or something of the sort? The intent is to portray cultivation, but the way it works seems more like ‘cumulative prosperity’. It’s not that I don’t like development being either of these ways, but it does seem like it’s not exactly in line with cultivation.
I think you're reading that too narrowly, and it's not worded as well as it could be (and has been). Johan says "development represents how cultivated the land is, and how much it is used by the pops living there" by which I think he means 'cultivation' and 'use' in a more general sense than you're interpreting. Previously Johan has said that development is "all those things you don't build as a player.. like wells, the streets in the cities, etc.." and "all the infrastructure that supports population" and "roads and houses." Development from my understanding is basically representing all the ancillary infrastructure and services, beyond the type of things the player can build, that are necessary to support greater population and greater exploitation. It's a little unfortunate that the description in this TT is actually the least clear of the descriptions.

I think prosperity affecting development growth makes perfect sense, when things are stable and the economy is good people are more likely to build ancillary structures and improve the capacity or efficiency of an area. I also don't know where you're getting that prosperity is about rising crop yields specifically, Johan just describes it as "how prosperous and resourceful a location is" and tbh I think the name itself is pretty self-explanatory in this case.

The number of comments confused about what development or describing it as an extreme abstraction are a little surprising to me, to be honest, but maybe I'm relying too much on having read Johan's previous comments in other TTs. With those in mind development is pretty clear in my opinion, and while obviously an abstraction doesn't seem crazy abstract or crazy disconnected from reality.
 
  • 5
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
uh oh, could we like, make an undersirable heir member of the cabinet and send him to develop siberia?

In theory you could use the cabinet system to do that, but cabinet actions are one of your most precious resources so there's likely going to be a more gainful usage
 
  • 19Like
  • 2
Reactions:
I think you're reading that too narrowly, and it's not worded as well as it could be (and has been). Johan says "development represents how cultivated the land is, and how much it is used by the pops living there" by which I think he means 'cultivation' and 'use' in a more general sense than you're interpreting. Previously Johan has said that development is "all those things you don't build as a player.. like wells, the streets in the cities, etc.." and "all the infrastructure that supports population" and "roads and houses." Development from my understanding is basically representing all the ancillary infrastructure and services, beyond the type of things the player can build, that are necessary to support greater population and greater exploitation. It's a little unfortunate that the description in this TT is actually the least clear of the descriptions.

I think prosperity affecting development growth makes perfect sense, when things are stable and the economy is good people are more likely to build ancillary structures and improve the capacity or efficiency of an area. I also don't know where you're getting that prosperity is about rising crop yields specifically, Johan just describes it as "how prosperous and resourceful a location is" and tbh I think the name itself is pretty self-explanatory in this case.

The number of comments confused about what development or describing it as an extreme abstraction are a little surprising to me, to be honest, but maybe I'm relying too much on having read Johan's previous comments in other TTs. With those in mind development is pretty clear in my opinion, and while obviously an abstraction doesn't seem crazy abstract or crazy disconnected from reality.
My thinking was that saying development has been previously described as something and then offering a different descriptor would mean a break from that previous description.

That does make a lot more sense than purely agriculture. But there’s still a bit of an abstraction reach here. Why is steppe land so useless when controlled by pastoralists?

All land use is not infrastructure, and not all production comes out of buildings. For agriculture, land use and productivity is located in the soil (quality). For pastureland it’s in the grasses on top of it. For aquaculture (which would be the primary source of food for at least some cultures located entirely on coasts), it doesn’t count.

Also, I still have those questions about the development map. Some places have lower development to neighboring locations that at least seem unexplained (the patch east of Kiev) while others have development that seems impossibly low for its history (the Tarim Basin, Nubia, Kanem’s capital, someone’s mentioned a city north of China proper).
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Hi devs,

I think for China you can use this map illustration. You don't have to read the Chinese out of it, each dot on it representing 15k recorded residence. The dashed lines are locations where people knew there were some notable population but numbers weren't available (various reasons, lost, missing, careless PhD students etc.) to researchers who made this.

The year 至元 refers to year 1290s (1264-94) as the Yuan lost count on their full population distribution very quickly afterwards. The illustration’s caption in the book also state this could be the case until at least 1320s. As the broad distribution shouldn’t change much since the distribution is almost identical to this one for first few years Ming made their demonstration draft. I took it from 《中国人口史》, which is an academic publication you can refer as professional and well regarded.

View attachment 1189578

For the record, there are bunch of researches still going on about Yuan’s demographic. The illustration only shows a collective study of some demographic archive and records and the view of historians who made it. But, the publication is good enough to the extent that we are talking about a game and we need at least some accurate representation than guessing.

The history behind why northern China is much less populated than south is a big topic. I believe some others would show up in the forum to discuss it when China leak is out. But now I just want to put things here so the dev can see it and have a second thought on numbers. Maybe.
Yeah. Obviously we have to wait and see for the DD, but frankly from the get-go I somewhat question the devs assumptions that Beijing should be the most developed location in China. Even that might bot necessarily be accurate to say, especially given the populations involved(but of course population does not have to directly corelate to development). I absolutely think you could argue that the Yangtze delta ought to have more developed provinces than around Beijing.
First time to see China in its entirety, but his terrain is too flat. In fact, the Yunnan-Guizhou Plateau in the southwest, the hills in the southeast, and the basin topography of Sichuan all have a large number of impassable areas, especially the "关中" area (now southern Shaanxi) and “巴蜀” (now Sichuan) are surrounded by a large number of mountains, which is an important reason for the rebellions in these areas in history.
Yeah, this is dissapointing. There should be a TON more impassable terrain throughout China. Yunnan, Zhejiang, Fujian etc. All throughout the south there should be an absolute ton of impassable terrain from the rugged mountains and hills forcing armies to go on more set routes. IMO the Qinling and Taihang mountains also could be made more impassable as well.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: