General Discussion

[lukew]

Isn't it more correct to have the Knights as Spanish/Italian culture rather than greek?Or was it made so that foreign nations wouldn't guarantee them?

It would be more accurate, but it's a pain that the Knights always have to take a -5 stab hit to avoid getting rebels on their capital. As such, it seemed easier just to give them the culture of their only province - ie Greek.

[polskaGOLA]

Actually Riga never had a majority German population, so it wouldn't be right to change it to Prussian culture. It was merely the chief Baltic port of the HRE, hence the large number of German traders there. And indeed I did think about how Latvia might be added and found it to be a complicated situation. My conclusion is that Livonia, not Latvia, makes more sense. Livonia actually existed as a duchy unrelated to the Order, so I might add them in at some point. One reason for this is because having a Latvian state would give rebels in the area an actual state to defect too, which is good because if there isn't one it can cause trouble. The other is to fix a minor historical error in which the Order sticks around as a substitute for the Duchy, even though the two were very different states.

Livonia is not a substitute for Latvia though. Livonians and Latvians were completely different things. Although Livonians are now nearly extinct, in D&T's timeframe, they were the dominant group in the Baltics.

As for Riga, I couldn't give you the absolute numbers, but in any case, the Baltic Germans (Read, completely different group of Germans from Prussians) consistent of a significant minority if not majority, and were by far the dominant class in Riga. The archbishopric that the tag in game is based off of for example, was ruled by German bishops, not Latvians or Livonians.

I'd say it would be correct to make a new German culture called Baltendeutsche (or some variation of that, I'm no German speaker) and give Riga as the revoltable tag.

Would be fun to attempt to form Germany with Riga, lol.

[Dafool]

So maybe we can see the Kingdom of Livonia in upcoming updates?

Most likely yes. I'm not sure if I'll make it formable, but it'll probably be releasable via decision and rebels.

Livonia is not a substitute for Latvia though. Livonians and Latvians were completely different things. Although Livonians are now nearly extinct, in D&T's timeframe, they were the dominant group in the Baltics.

No no. You read too much into the name. Livonia was the name of a Latvian duchy set up by the Lithuanians. It lasted something like 60 years IIRC.

As for Riga, I couldn't give you the absolute numbers, but in any case, the Baltic Germans (Read, completely different group of Germans from Prussians) consistent of a significant minority if not majority, and were by far the dominant class in Riga. The archbishopric that the tag in game is based off of for example, was ruled by German bishops, not Latvians or Livonians.

I'd say it would be correct to make a new German culture called Baltendeutsche (or some variation of that, I'm no German speaker) and give Riga as the revoltable tag.

Would be fun to attempt to form Germany with Riga, lol.

Prussian is simply the current name for die Baltendeutsche. Anyway, as I mentioned, Germans were prominent in Riga, but they never really formed the majority population of the area. They were simply the elite class (which happened in much of Eastern Europe). In any case, while the province of Riga is Latvian, Riga itself is a Prussian state, so you're more than welcome to form Deutschland from them.

[YuriKaslov]

Shouldn't Tuchel be Polish throughout the game?

[LightStalker13]

Most likely yes. I'm not sure if I'll make it formable, but it'll probably be releasable via decision and rebels.

That's too bad. I was hoping for a country decision that mimics the Ireland unification's bonuses, seeing as they would have a small amount of cores (4-5 provinces) and require some "help". It may seem a bit historically inaccurate, but I like the idea of nationalism and unification and Riga has little potential without a Latvian/Livonian state until further in the game.

This mod just keeps getting better and better.

[polskaGOLA]

No no. You read too much into the name. Livonia was the name of a Latvian duchy set up by the Lithuanians. It lasted something like 60 years IIRC.

The Duchy of Livonia wasn't anything but a puppet-state vassal of Poland. A Ruthenian noble even ruled over it according to Wikipedia. Anyway, I went through the Latvian wiki and didn't see any references to it being "Latvian".

The borders of the Duchy also happen to correspond neatly with the historical Livonian population. The only Latvians living in that duchy were the Latgale in the south-eastern bit of the duchy.

Prussian is simply the current name for die Baltendeutsche. Anyway, as I mentioned, Germans were prominent in Riga, but they never really formed the majority population of the area. They were simply the elite class (which happened in much of Eastern Europe). In any case, while the province of Riga is Latvian, Riga itself is a Prussian state, so you're more than welcome to form Deutschland from them.

Someone can feel free to correct me, but I am pretty sure the Prussians and Baltendeutsche were different types of Germans.

I think the situation in Riga is atypical to that of most of Eastern Europe from what I've read personally. The German class' dominance over the other classes in Riga was more comparable to cities like those in Transylvania like Sibiu than to for example, the German minority elite in Lwow.


I'd love to hear from someone who is well acquainted with the history of the region though.

Shouldn't Tuchel be Polish throughout the game?

It should be German. Not quite sure which Germanic though, probably Prussian though.

Tuchel and it's surrounding area's villages had Germanic names at this point of time last time I checked.

D&T's map doesn't exactly do a good job at representing Poland. Actually the DAO map is terrible at representing Poland. (If you want to see a properly represented Poland, wait for the next version of MPM)

Anyway, for reference, I quickly went through each region in modern day North-Eastern Poland and labeled next to them what cultures they should be and if they should have a Polish core for the time around the two startdates (1356 & 1399).

Danzig - Prussian (Polish Core) *
Tuchel - Prussian (Polish Core) *
Torun - Polish (Polish Core) **
Kulmerland - Polish (Polish Core) **
Marienburg - Prussian
Elbing - Prussian
Osterode(Western bit of the current Masuria province that touches Pomerelia, modern day Ostroda) - Prussian
Masuria(Masuria proper, the part above Mazovia) - Polish (Even in the Second Reich, Germans didn't win majority over Poles in this area) (No Polish core)
Warmia - Prussian
Konigsberg - Prussian

* - Kingdom of Poland still claimed Pomerelia and Danzig as theirs.
** - Kulmerland and Torun was highly contested region between Teutons and Poland, often exchanging hands in the 1300's, but the area always remained Polish.

[Sun_Wu]

Livonia is not a substitute for Latvia though. Livonians and Latvians were completely different things. Although Livonians are now nearly extinct, in D&T's timeframe, they were the dominant group in the Baltics.

As for Riga, I couldn't give you the absolute numbers, but in any case, the Baltic Germans (Read, completely different group of Germans from Prussians) consistent of a significant minority if not majority, and were by far the dominant class in Riga. The archbishopric that the tag in game is based off of for example, was ruled by German bishops, not Latvians or Livonians.

I'd say it would be correct to make a new German culture called Baltendeutsche (or some variation of that, I'm no German speaker) and give Riga as the revoltable tag.

Would be fun to attempt to form Germany with Riga, lol.

Challenge accepted

[Dafool]

The Duchy of Livonia wasn't anything but a puppet-state vassal of Poland. A Ruthenian noble even ruled over it according to Wikipedia. Anyway, I went through the Latvian wiki and didn't see any references to it being "Latvian".

The borders of the Duchy also happen to correspond neatly with the historical Livonian population. The only Latvians living in that duchy were the Latgale in the south-eastern bit of the duchy.

Despite it's Lithuanian and later Polish overlords, the duchy of Livonia was essentially a native duchy, especially when compared with the foreignness of the Order. It comprised of almost all Livonians, who were still fairly numerous, although a minority in most areas, along with about half of the Latvian lands and a some of the Estonian lands. Like most early modern states, it was not designed with the people in mind. I can't time travel back to confirm whether Latvian or Livonian was dominant, but I can assure you that "Livonia" was defined by geography, not ethnicity, so regardless of whether it's Livonia or Latvia, it refers to the same general state. This hardly matters when you remember that the game forces us to lump the Livonians under the name Latvian when it comes to culture, so you can really imagine it however you want.

Someone can feel free to correct me, but I am pretty sure the Prussians and Baltendeutsche were different types of Germans.

I think the situation in Riga is atypical to that of most of Eastern Europe from what I've read personally. The German class' dominance over the other classes in Riga was more comparable to cities like those in Transylvania like Sibiu than to for example, the German minority elite in Lwow.


I'd love to hear from someone who is well acquainted with the history of the region though.

I'm fairly knowledgeable in all things German. The Prussians really didn't exist in 1356. That culture more or less covers the German crusaders, the elite Germans they put into place throughout the Baltic, and the eventual settlers who became the Prussians we know and love. While the Baltendeutsche would be different from the later Prussians who founded Germany, that split hadn't actually happened yet in 1356 and wouldn't for another two to three centuries.

[polskaGOLA]

Regarding Baltic Germans, that seems reasonable.

Also I think if any Livonians were still around today, we'd probably find them closer related to Estonians than Latvians. But who knows really.

[Dafool]

Regarding Baltic Germans, that seems reasonable.

Also I think if any Livonians were still around today, we'd probably find them closer related to Estonians than Latvians. But who knows really.

The Baltic is a messy place, as our conversation has inevitably proved. In any case, there's always room for improvement and we'll make sure it's given its fair attention. I've been been continually making improvements to the areas outside of Western Europe since Luke first invited me onto the team and I think we've come pretty far in that respect, although there's still plenty of room for improvement.

[zedyue]

I don't know if this is unreasonable or not since I don't know the history of the region. But with the baltic area being HRE territory it can cause problems, it always ends up being Bohemian/Austrian or some strange nations territory. It plays better as non-HRE territory even if a-historic as it causes the Russians/Lithuanians/Swedes to vie for the region much more often.

As a side note, I don't think the emperor should be able to demand territory from countries not in the empire, unlawful or not. Why should The Mamlukes care that Liguaria or Corsica are imperial territory and get stab hits for refusing to give it back to christians?

[Gunnarr]

I must say I highly dislike the unity of the Greek and Turkish cultures, and also the Ottoman cores over all of the Byzantine starting lands. I basically disagree entirely for the reasoning behind it. May as well get rid of the Basque and Finno Ugric culture groups while your at it...

[lukew]

I must say I highly dislike the unity of the Greek and Turkish cultures, and also the Ottoman cores over all of the Byzantine starting lands. I basically disagree entirely for the reasoning behind it. May as well get rid of the Basque and Finno Ugric culture groups while your at it...

Any chance you could tell me why you disagree with it? Greeks and turks were, ultimately, extremely culturally similar - with the main difference being the religion.

[lukew]

As a side note, I don't think the emperor should be able to demand territory from countries not in the empire, unlawful or not. Why should The Mamlukes care that Liguaria or Corsica are imperial territory and get stab hits for refusing to give it back to christians?

We already changed it so that non-christians don't get the 'Unlawful Territory' event (which is what I think you're referring to?). Christian non-HRE members do, but we did that to represent the diplomatic repercussions of unlawfully taking HRE territory.

[Dafool]

I don't know if this is unreasonable or not since I don't know the history of the region. But with the baltic area being HRE territory it can cause problems, it always ends up being Bohemian/Austrian or some strange nations territory. It plays better as non-HRE territory even if a-historic as it causes the Russians/Lithuanians/Swedes to vie for the region much more often.

The Baltic being in the HRE is... well, complicated. The region was conquered under the HRE's authority, but then handed over to the Livonian Order and Riga. I personally think it should be removed, but I'd like Luke's opinion before we make any changes there.

As a side note, I don't think the emperor should be able to demand territory from countries not in the empire, unlawful or not. Why should The Mamlukes care that Liguaria or Corsica are imperial territory and get stab hits for refusing to give it back to christians?

Once more, this is complicated. Even though we like to imagine this as the era of crusades, conversion by the sword, and Christendom vs Dar al-Islam, that's really somewhat of a myth. Christians and Muslims signed treaties with each other, fought together in wars, and generally respected each other on a national, although not always religious, level. The event that asks for the HRE province to be handed back is to simulate the fact that the HRE was considered a single "nation", even though it was very divided. In real life it would have been very hard to encroach upon the Empire without dealing the Emperor first, but we can do this in game because it's not hard to drag a HRE member into an outside war. That event is there to represent the Emperor's say in the matter. While it's debatable how seriously the Ottomans or the Aztecs (or whatever non-Christian state you want to use) would have taken the Emperor's authority, it was still part of the political situation in Europe, so anyone who is conquering there would inevitably be faced with it.

*Edit*
And as Luke has pointed out, non-Christians don't get the event. (I vaguely remember that now that I think about it.)

[zedyue]

I must say I highly dislike the unity of the Greek and Turkish cultures, and also the Ottoman cores over all of the Byzantine starting lands. I basically disagree entirely for the reasoning behind it. May as well get rid of the Basque and Finno Ugric culture groups while your at it...

What is the reasoning behind it? I assumed it was a gameplay balance thing due to culture group income and such. Sure its not REALISTIC but its a buff to both the Turkish nations and the Greeks so I don't see it as a big deal.



Side note V2~
I wish there were some sort of events that made revolts real big deals. Paradox spies are rather weak. A captured province, say, in Mamluk Syria, needs to be held by the rebels for over two years before it defects. The Mamluks usually can handle rebels unless they are dealing with 4 crusader wars at the same time. I can see where you don't want to overpower rebels, so that every succession crisis you lose huge swaths of territory, but having like 4 rebels pop up every now and then is just worthless.

Also one thing that annoys me is particular to patriot rebels. Upon success, they imbue some revolt risk to the province. Now if the country manages to take back control of the province before the two years are up. They usually have something on the order of 0.3% revolt risk. And there usually isn't even a core of the other culture nation to exploit unless it was there beforehand. IE Patriot rebels are completely worthless except when there is an isolated province.

Most of the rebels thing is the fault of Paradox design, but I think some events when you have horrible legitimacy or something that would spawn nationalist/patriot rebels over entire culture groups would be neat and somewhat realistic. Think maybe Castille inheriting the Portuguese crown by Obscure documents or somthing IRL, the Portugese Nobles would not be very happy to end up with a ruler with a crown they think they have more rights to. So rather than a few 3% revolt risk provinces in the Portuguese lands revolting with 8 stack once every 3 months, an event fires that spawns rebels on every Portuguese core.

Just ideas since rebels are boring.

We already changed it so that non-christians don't get the 'Unlawful Territory' event (which is what I think you're referring to?). Christian non-HRE members do, but we did that to represent the diplomatic repercussions of unlawfully taking HRE territory.

Ah ok. Could you possibly make a second event for christians not in the HRE with different effects than the main one? Rather than a stab hit, it gives a diplomacy hit with the entire HRE (-20 or something) and gives a CB.

For example the French wouldn't become 'Destabilized" for conquering Burgundy I don't think. I get it now though.

[lukew]

The Baltic being in the HRE is... well, complicated. The region was conquered under the HRE's authority, but then handed over to the Livonian Order and Riga. I personally think it should be removed, but I'd like Luke's opinion before we make any changes there.

I really know very little about the Baltic, it's one of my weakest areas in history. (PS You can tell which are my strongest by who has the most decisions ) I'm happy to go with your judgement Dafool, but I'm fairly sure that historically some of those provinces were in the HRE. Wasn't Riga an imperial city? Maybe there is a case for removing a few of the HRE provinces, but keeping some key ones like Riga?

[lukew]

What is the reasoning behind it? I assumed it was a gameplay balance thing due to culture group income and such. Sure its not REALISTIC but its a buff to both the Turkish nations and the Greeks so I don't see it as a big deal.

IMO it is realistic. I thought it was a much better match to have Greek and Turkish in the same group, than previously where Turkish was in the same group as all the Arabs and North Africans. Culturally, the two inter mingled so much that they became very similar and the only main difference was the religion. Greeks were given a lot of rights by the Ottoman empire which ultimately helped their cultural integration, and strengthened the similarities between them and the Turks. Really, every culture has slight differences. Admittedly Greeks and Turks are a bit further apart than the people in most groups, but it isn't a massive stretch.

Side note V2~
I wish there were some sort of events that made revolts real big deals. Paradox spies are rather weak. A captured province, say, in Mamluk Syria, needs to be held by the rebels for over two years before it defects. The Mamluks usually can handle rebels unless they are dealing with 4 crusader wars at the same time. I can see where you don't want to overpower rebels, so that every succession crisis you lose huge swaths of territory, but having like 4 rebels pop up every now and then is just worthless.

Also one thing that annoys me is particular to patriot rebels. Upon success, they imbue some revolt risk to the province. Now if the country manages to take back control of the province before the two years are up. They usually have something on the order of 0.3% revolt risk. And there usually isn't even a core of the other culture nation to exploit unless it was there beforehand. IE Patriot rebels are completely worthless except when there is an isolated province.

Most of the rebels thing is the fault of Paradox design, but I think some events when you have horrible legitimacy or something that would spawn nationalist/patriot rebels over entire culture groups would be neat and somewhat realistic. Think maybe Castille inheriting the Portuguese crown by Obscure documents or somthing IRL, the Portugese Nobles would not be very happy to end up with a ruler with a crown they think they have more rights to. So rather than a few 3% revolt risk provinces in the Portuguese lands revolting with 8 stack once every 3 months, an event fires that spawns rebels on every Portuguese core.

Just ideas since rebels are boring.


Ah ok. Could you possibly make a second event for christians not in the HRE with different effects than the main one? Rather than a stab hit, it gives a diplomacy hit with the entire HRE (-20 or something) and gives a CB.

For example the French wouldn't become 'Destabilized" for conquering Burgundy I don't think. I get it now though.

We already made rebels more difficult, by making every rebel stack have a general and be intelligent. I think any more buffs to them will just make the game boring, and a constant rebel-whacking exercise. However, if you have ideas to make rebels more interesting without creating a micro-management nightmare than let us know and we can discuss them

As for your second point, I really think the current system is fine. France takes a stab hit, and the emperor gets a CB on him. Feel free to disagree though

[zedyue]

We already made rebels more difficult, by making every rebel stack have a general and be intelligent. I think any more buffs to them will just make the game boring, and a constant rebel-whacking exercise. However, if you have ideas to make rebels more interesting without creating a micro-management nightmare than let us know and we can discuss them

Well I would much more like the idea of MUCH MUCH fewer 'random' rebels due to revolt risk, and more large scale rebellions. It's always annoying to chase down the 2-3 stacks popping up on the edges of your empire, but every 20-40 years having a full scale rebellions in one of your territories (say greece) if you had a crap ruler with low legitimacy would be interesting. Similar to the Yuan cede-provinces at-war rebels.

[Dafool]

I really know very little about the Baltic, it's one of my weakest areas in history. (PS You can tell which are my strongest by who has the most decisions ) I'm happy to go with your judgement Dafool, but I'm fairly sure that historically some of those provinces were in the HRE. Wasn't Riga an imperial city? Maybe there is a case for removing a few of the HRE provinces, but keeping some key ones like Riga?

Riga was a Hanseatic trading port that was given special rights by the Emperor, being very briefly (~20 years) an Imperial city. It's debatable whether or not it should actually be in the HRE. Riga was conquered in the 1500's and the HRE wasn't involved at all, so that would make me lean more towards them not being in the HRE.