Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries
Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • 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.
Previous dev diary Next dev diary
Show only dev responses

Tinto Talks #31 - 2nd of October 2024

Welcome to another Tinto Talks, the Happy Wednesday where we spill the secrets of our upcoming game, with the codename Project Caesar.

Last week we talked about wars and wargoals, and today we are going to talk about how wars will end, as we discuss the peace system. If you have played other GSG games for Paradox, some of this may not be news to you though.


Peace Offers
To end a war you need to negotiate a peace with either the leader on the other side, or if you are the leader on your side, you can negotiate a separate peace with a single independent country on the other side.

One thing that is important to notice, is that if you declare war for a war goal to conquer a certain province, then you can not take any other land, UNLESS you take the wargoal.

To be able to take land, you also need to have control over the province capital.

A Peace Offer, will consist of a set of treaties that can have a total value of up to 100 Peace Cost. Of course the other side would have to agree, and they are very likely not to accept anything where the peace cost is higher than the current warscore.

message.png

Peace in our time?

Peace Treaties
A peace treaty can be the transfer of a location, province or area. It can also be to force another country to stop sending privateers, or transferring gold to you, or dismantling fortification in a location, humiliating them or any other of the dozens upon dozens of possible peace treaties of Project Caesar.

The cost of each treaty depends on many factors, whether it’s part of the wargoal or not, the population, the type of the treaty and so on.

peace_cost.png

Numbers are still being tweaked..


Aggressive Expansion
Aggressive Expansion is one of the drawbacks of strengthening your own country ahead of others. Taking territory is one of the easiest ways to increase it. While taking land impacts your own country a fair bit, it also impacts the opinions of other countries near the source of the aggressive expansion a fair bit. If you get your AE high enough, countries with a low enough opinion of you may join a coalition against you. A Coalition is an international organization oriented around severely reducing the power of a single country.

ae_impact.png

We can probably live with this AE though?


War Enthusiasm
When it comes to how willing a nation is to fight, much comes down to their War Enthusiasm. If this is high then the AI is unlikely to accept a peace that is not favorable to them. This is determined by the state of the country, with war exhaustion, control of capital and military strength are big factors. For the leader of a side in the war the overall military balance is a huge factor as well.


enthusiasm.png

Bohemia really wants to continue this war…


War Participation
Most of the time you bring allies to help you out in a war, but they expect to be rewarded for the part they pull. The War Participation is how much a country has contributed to the progress of the war. This is primarily done through battles, blockades and sieges.

You may sometimes have to convince your allies to join an offensive war that you are starting, and thus you can promise them part of the spoils of the war. If the part that they gain from signing a peace is less than their participation they will get upset.



Stay tuned, as next week, we’ll talk about the conflicts in the world that do not involve declarations of war, and negotiations of peace.
 
  • 305
  • 131Like
  • 39
  • 16Love
  • 5Haha
  • 5
Reactions:
Sort by date Sort by reaction score
is there anything that could block/disquialify a fortification from being dismantiled, not sure if wonders are going to be in the game but im certain modders would be interested in having (potentially alt-)historically significant fortifications in locations be invulnerable/incredibly high cost to having its fortification dismantled
 
  • 1
Reactions:
In CK2, the impact of aggressive expansion was progressive. I liked that countries would first unite defensively with related nations, and only later form an offensive alliance regardless of religion.
In EU4, the sudden shift from "we don't care" to "we're going to attack you" feels unnatural to me.

Edit:
I suspect it’s better to stick with one IO that has varied membership statuses depending on AE, for example:
35 AE - joins the IO and defends other members of their religion group
45 AE - additionally defends members of other religion groups
55 AE - will also support an attack by another member targeting a coalition target.
 
Last edited:
  • 42Like
  • 4
  • 1Love
Reactions:
Will the whole 'alliance' system in eu5 be less...static let's say? Of course in real life you had some strong, decades lasting alliances, but mostly these were more or less formal treaties of 2 or more countries in order to attack some specific target, or respectively, defensive treaties against some one common enemy. Not these everlasting alliances like in eu4, with this ridicoulus 'favor' points you were spending in order to have someone on your side
 
  • 14Like
  • 2
  • 1Love
Reactions:
Thrudgelmir2333 said:
I kind of feel like them being of the 'same religion' ought to be a negative factor for war cost and AE, not a positive one? Wasn't that one of the factors causing wars between christians to be really granular in border changes, and all? While territories of enemy religions were seen as fair game by your peers.
Click to expand...

I'd argue peace cost could be lower, but AE higher.
 
  • 80
  • 44Like
  • 5
  • 3
Reactions:
Im wondering,
-Can it be possible to have a "no peace / proxy war" system for some "situation" to symbolize" for exemple the Hordes attack or the "never ending 100 years war" wich have sevreal hot times and cold one during the 116 years of conflict ?
-Or maybe llike a CK3 system of "pillagers armys" to make like "you are not officialy at war, but its seems like it" ?
 
  • 3Like
  • 2
Reactions:
So... is it even technically possible in this system to have the Ottoman conquest of Egypt and the Levant in a single war, or is that just gonna have to come through a magical post-war effect or bespoke war goal that lets them accomplish that?
 
  • 28Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Johan said:
One thing that is important to notice, is that if you declare war for a war goal to conquer a certain province, then you can not take any other land, UNLESS you take the wargoal.

To be able to take land, you also need to have control over the province capital.
Click to expand...
Can I not take only locations from a neighbour in some small border conflict without taking the province capital?

Johan said:
You may sometimes have to convince your allies to join an offensive war that you are starting, and thus you can promise them part of the spoils of the war. If the part that they gain from signing a peace is less than their participation they will get upset.
Click to expand...
Does this apply to vassals and other subjects too? Does it depend on the subject type? If it depends, which vassals can be forced into an offensive war and which ones have to be convinced like allies?
 
  • 4
  • 2Like
Reactions:
AE calculation shouldn't be uniform.

A big country swallowing an OPM should generate way more AE than an OPM eating another OPM. Basically already being large and "threatening" should be a multiplier on all AE calculations.

I also think a big country taking some locations from another big country should generate less AE, as in the "threat" levels sort of cancel each other out.
 
  • 48
  • 22Like
  • 1
Reactions:
DoctorSnakes said:
I think this is strange. I have no doubt that there are historical examples of wars that were declared for one goal, only for a peace deal to happen where something else is agreed upon. No doubt often done as a compromise, or when the goal changes.
Click to expand...

Especially if you declare war on an OPM, and they call in their allies. If the OPM is annexed by another country at war with them during your war, you're kinda stuck unless it forces a white peace. Or if you declare war for a location, but someone else takes it during the war then you're definitely stuck. And declaring war on someone with a smaller alliance system than the one with the location you wanted was such an important strategy in HRE gameplay in eu4.
 
  • 3Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Are truce lengths dynamic in any way, shape, or form? Do they change duration based on what you take? CB used? War goal? Is the duration something specified in the peace offer?

Or is it just 5 years for everything?
 
  • 2Like
Reactions:
Would you consider changing the way white peaces work and rather than making the borders return to the pre-war situation, it instead just ends the war and all controlled territories switch to either side.

That way, a white peace is closer to a cease-fire rather than "let's just pretend we never had a war to begin with"
 
  • 11
  • 9Like
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
A huge shame we're not getting two-way peace deals at release, though I understand it would be really difficult to balance them for the AI. I hope we get some limited version of them at least, where countries can seize locations during the war that may latter be returned or not, for colonial or otherwise isolated possesions at least
 
  • 13Like
  • 5
  • 1
Reactions:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back