Tinto Talks

[Marquoz]

Johan is posting a series of Dev Diaries for an upcoming Paradox game on the official boards. The link to the second is here: https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/developer-diary/tinto-talks-2-march-6th-2024.1626415/

The game's code name is Project Caesar, but that doesn't mean it is related to Rome. Paradox has an old tradition of code-naming games under development after various Emperors.

You'll note that the map screenshots have a global scope. Tinto definitely isn't making HOI5 or Victoria 4, and the CK series isn't global, so I think EU5 is by far the most likely candidate. But a brand-new title can't be ruled out.

[Ericus1]

Oprindeligt skrevet af Ashy:

Johan said his biggest mistake on Imperator was not listening to consumer feedback, so there's a chance the devs might involve the community more.

And I imagine Imperator's semi-resurgence is a good confidence booster, because it wasn't ever a terrible game

Well, there's a bit of revisionistic glossing over there he's doing, although I don't doubt he's convinced himself that was how it happened to make himself feel better. He didn't just "not listen to feedback", he practically gave the community the middle finger and told them to eff-off in the most condescending way possible, multiple times. One of the better remembered lines of his was "then this game won't be for you", right up there with "Rome doesn't need 2 consuls".

Looking at the analytics of how negative community reaction was, and how participation dropped like a rock after several key dev diaries and his responses to criticism practically foretold the future arc Imperator would take. It wasn't until it completely bombed that he was forced to eat crow and face the reality of how badly he screwed up, which he still only grudgingly did before be shipped off the project team.

[LP Kaiser]

I'm cautiously optimistic. While I have no doubt this will become a great game eventually, when was the last time Paradox released a well-received sequel? Imperator: Rome, CK3, Victoria 3 and City Skylines 2 were all terribly received at launch.

[Paddy]

Oprindeligt skrevet af LP Kaiser:

I'm cautiously optimistic. While I have no doubt this will become a great game eventually, when was the last time Paradox released a well-received sequel? Imperator: Rome, CK3, Victoria 3 and City Skylines 2 were all terribly received at launch.

CK3 was actually pretty well recieved but agree with you about the other titles. Cities Skylines 2 however was Paradox's biggest failure in recent years and perhaps ever as it's one of the most popular franchises and it's an absolute mess. HOWEVER this hurt Paradox hard and so the misfortune of this title means that EU5 may end up benefitting from a Paradox who don't want to re-create the same mess. It's clear with Tinto Talks that Paradox really want to get this title right and want to listen more.

[Rialm]

1337. mmm don't know about that. I understand that Pop system and I imagine they are going to make a way more interesting internal politics but damn imagine playing in America, it's going to be devastating boring until we get a proper expansion in that region. In Europe and maybe Asia won't be that much of an issue.

But hey maybe the make age of discovery more interesting.

[Malvastor]

Oprindeligt skrevet af Rialm:

1337. mmm don't know about that. I understand that Pop system and I imagine they are going to make a way more interesting internal politics but damn imagine playing in America, it's going to be devastating boring until we get a proper expansion in that region. In Europe and maybe Asia won't be that much of an issue.

But hey maybe the make age of discovery more interesting.

Depends on how populated the Americas are, and how much there is for natives to do before Europeans show up.

[RCMidas]

Done properly, the New World could be a fascinating start. Diplomatically speaking, the formation of great federations and extensive trade routes could offer intriguing gameplay if the system is built for it. With the arrival of the Europeans, staggering population loss gives you a "mid-game crisis" truly worthy of the name.

Fighting to claw your way back from the brink would be a fantastic challenge, perhaps akin to deliberately triggering the Mingsplosion AS Ming to return to your former majesty. So long as the difficulty of such is properly telegraphed and explicated, so that only the whiniest of players need be ignored, I see no issue there.

[darkestkhan]

Oprindeligt skrevet af Rialm:

1337. mmm don't know about that. I understand that Pop system and I imagine they are going to make a way more interesting internal politics but damn imagine playing in America, it's going to be devastating boring until we get a proper expansion in that region. In Europe and maybe Asia won't be that much of an issue.

But hey maybe the make age of discovery more interesting.

It may be 1331 - the start of the black death (in China).

[Marquoz]

Johan has said the start date is 1337. I copied his post about it earlier in this thread,

[darkestkhan]

Oprindeligt skrevet af Marquoz:

Johan has said the start date is 1337. I copied his post about it earlier in this thread,

Must have missed it. I do like that we will have pops instead of arbitrary dev. Maybe at last an oasis of peace and prosperity can grow into a mighty country, instead of being a stupid move that leads to being blobbed out. Of course, this is assuming that the country is big enough to begin with (for example 1444 Lithuania, as opposed to HRE OPM).

[Ericus1]

I'm just sick of seeing every tiny little 2-bit province in Germany having double the development of major national capitals, like Paris or Constantinople. It is utterly inverted to how it should work - it was the wealth these large nations brought in that enabled those cities grow, not piddly little pissant OPM cities that just sprout into major metropolises from nothing. The intersection of dev and MP has created a perverse inversion of how economies work.

[Marquoz]

A population system is likely to fix that problem, Ericus1. I've never liked province development and will be glad to see it go. Monarch points have strengths and weaknesses. I'm curious how Project Caesar will model the importance monarch abilities (or lack thereof) had during this period.

[Ashling]

Didn't they have a population system in EU3?

[Marquoz]

Not really. Provinces had population, and that had effects on how valuable they were. But the population was uniform, not divided by class or estate or religion or whatever.

[darkestkhan]

Oprindeligt skrevet af Marquoz:

A population system is likely to fix that problem, Ericus1. I've never liked province development and will be glad to see it go. Monarch points have strengths and weaknesses. I'm curious how Project Caesar will model the importance monarch abilities (or lack thereof) had during this period.

Yeah. The main problem was the "press the button, turn the province into a giant metropolis". The main reason why HRE is such a slog to conquer later on is due to the number of OPMs using mana to dev their provinces. Soon you see plenty of 30 dev provinces. Add to this the AE in HRE and you can't just eat them up or you will be swarmed by 10-15K armies - many of which will have discipline and CA bonuses from their national ideas.

Simulating the population should resolve this issue. Considering the effect that war will likely have on population it will also make it less viable to go to constant wars of conquest (or any other wars for that matter). It should also make it viable to become a great power just by staying peaceful and developing yourself. It would also penalize not fortifying borders.

[Marquoz]

Agreed. We'll have to see how it all plays out, of course, but a population system has the potential to be more of a simulation and less "gamey" in its mechanics.