Causal breakdown tooltips

Any displayed derived value (mood, stability, price, income, work speed, battle strength) can be hovered to list its contributing terms, each with a label, source, sign, and magnitude, usually as base plus additive modifiers times multiplicative modifiers. Terms that are themselves derived or that name a game concept can be hovered again, opening a nested tooltip. The mechanic owns no simulation state but requires the simulation to compute values as explicit lists of labeled modifiers rather than opaque formulas. Update rule: on hover, read the modifier list for the value, sort and render it, and attach hover targets to sub-terms. Canonical forms: Paradox grand strategy (Europa Universalis IV, Stellaris), Crusader Kings III, which introduced nested tooltips on highlighted terms that Victoria 3 adopted, Victoria 3 tooltips breaking down battle calculations, RimWorld info-card stat breakdowns (skill and capacity factors behind work speed), and Civilization yield breakdowns.

The player can interrogate any number until the lever appears. Opaque systems become debuggable: why is stability falling, which modifier expires next, what would fix it. Players who enjoy optimization dig through several levels; others glance at the top line.

• recursion depth: one level of breakdown versus nested tooltips on every term
• whether tooltips can be pinned or locked so the player can move into them
• which modifiers are hidden from the breakdown, if any
• presentation of additive versus multiplicative terms, ordering, and rounding
• whether each modifier shows its remaining duration
• glossary links from terms to concept explanations

• Late-game modifier stacks grow into walls of numbers that no longer explain anything.
• Rounded or partial terms that do not sum to the displayed value erode trust in the whole interface.
• Values with clamps, caps, or nonlinear interactions are presented as simple sums and mislead.
• Hover-dependent design moves essential information off the main screen and works poorly with controllers and touch.

• Full transparency speeds up optimization and exploit discovery, pushing play toward spreadsheet min-maxing.
• Because each new effect appears in breakdowns automatically, modifier architectures are easy for modders to extend legibly.
• Players learn the simulation's causal graph by walking tooltips, which lowers the need for external wikis.

• When values come from a learned simulator instead of modifier lists, can attribution methods produce breakdowns players trust?
• Do counterfactual tooltips (what single change would flip this outcome) teach faster than additive breakdowns?