Announcing: The Firenze Mod (MMtG edition)

[Narwhal]

What you're saying about rebalancing Italy is quite fascinating. Doesn't this disturbs the balance within the HRE? For example with Milan as a very likely candidate for Emperorship? Or doesn't this changes the protestant-catholic balance a lot (as Italian states usually don't convert)?
I'm at favor of having the most provinces possible everywhere as well, but balance-wise it's a real headache, but some good tips may help to convince Ubik about adding a few provinces here and there

What would be funny - but probably not moddable - would be the possibility for an Italian state to "re-form" a (third) Lombard League. While it did not occur, obviously, nor was it in anyone's mind, it is only because Imperial intervention in Italy became more rare during the Renaissance. A more assertive Emperor might, maybe, in some circumstances, have triggered a new League. Unifying Italy through the Lombard League à la European Union would be a lot of fun, too.

[Marco Dandolo]

I thought of this scenario already, but as you said, it wouldn't be plausible. The Leagues between the 1160s (I begin with the League of Verona) and the last one against Frederick II. (there were in fact six leagues, but only the first and the last are well known because of their battle ageinst the two von Staufen). The driving force of the leagues were the communes, which in fact do not exist anymore; the only state, who had some similar points was in fact Venice, as the other territories were held by monarchies. And with the reign of the Visconti, the empire had only very determined power of this region; the only step to give at least a sign of imperial authority was the investiture of the Visconti as dukes, so that the emperors accepted their reign, but kept the de jure authority regarding the Regnum Italiae.

When the power of the Visconti vanished in the first half of the 15th century, and Venice, Milan and Florence fought with their allies against and with them, there was'nt even a real, significant action of the empire. Venice and Florence managed to conquer new holdings, which were later recognized by the empire.* Even the Sforzas were not recognized as rulers of Milan until the 1490s by the empire. We see that the empire is interested to keep its power, but de facto the italian states were independent to do what they wanted. Only Savoy remained more close to the empire, but had also an ambivalent relationship with France. On the other hand, the italian states didn't want to leave the empire at any cost, as we see that they legitimized their power with imperial help.
Indeed, even Maximilian, who was not only a capable, but also ambitious and talented ruler, did nothing in the first months against the army of the french king, when he entered in 1494/1495 Italy to conquer Naples. It was more the intervention of Pope Alexander VI., who created the League of Venice in 1495; and this was after the devasting siege of Naples, in which the french lost a lot of their troops - and after his devasting campaign through Savoy, Milan, Florence and Rome, reshaping the whole order which existed before.

My initial idea would be a resembling of the Italic league (1454) per event, after the last Lombard War; it would trigger after every major italian is at peace. The Italic league was a system of treaties and alliances between the italian powers, which guaranteed the peace on the italian peninsular for fourty years (if we let the Salt war out). At my point of view, this treaty between the five great powers - Milan, Venice, Florence, Papal states, Naples - was the cause for the peace and security in the Renaissance, not the membership in the empire. If one of the five powers was attacked, the others would attack the aggressor; the allies of the five powers joined this guarantee. Some historians argue, that this was the first pentarchy, which proved a balance of power on a regional level. The Quattrocento (15th century) was the "most italian century", as the penisular was not controlled by foreign powers, as it was before and then (Meuthen).

This event would be more a chain of events, as it resembles a systems of balance, which would remain as the relationships remain good and that there is no war between the states. An expanded "Italian factionalism". Maybe it could be expanded, as the Italic League was one of the first thoughts of an italian federation, but resembled more the ideas of Machiavelli in the later Discorsi than our thoughts which we connect with the word "federation". It can be destroyed, clearly. A lot of work to do, so I'm not ready yet with this idea, but I'm thinking, that in terms of stability, plausibility and historical accuracy this would be an interesting solution for the problems involving northern Italy.

But be sure, I made also some proporsals to CJL reagarding the unification of Italy, with more ways than only the Regnum Italiae/Kingdom of Italy one. I think it should be a big difference, if you follow a unification with a monarchy or with a republic; and also, if you favor the pope and a more autonomous way, or you favor the empire and remain in it.

Ah, yes, and another flag, as the napoleonic eagle is a rather unhistorical standard for a free Italy.

_____________
*For example, Venice gained the so called Reichsvikariat (imperial vicariate) for the conquered cities, e. g. Brescia, Bergamo in 1437.

[Brynn]

This may be a bit out of scope for this mod, but I would love to see the implementation of the Anasazi cultures in the American southwest. These were fairly complex agricultural communities, and it would neat to see them in game. Honestly, I would just like to see that a native nation stands a chance at staying independant. If that can be accomplished by vanilla Magna Mundi, then great! Haha

EDIT: Also, is there any historical plausability in a united Basque country evolving during this time frame? I would love to see that, not just Navarre lol

[ubik]

This may be a bit out of scope for this mod, but I would love to see the implementation of the Anasazi cultures in the American southwest. These were fairly complex agricultural communities, and it would neat to see them in game. Honestly, I would just like to see that a native nation stands a chance at staying independant. If that can be accomplished by vanilla Magna Mundi, then great! Haha

Well, this mod can have the inclusion of the Anasazi culture in the American southwest. But not as a proper country.

EDIT: Also, is there any historical plausability in a united Basque country evolving during this time frame? I would love to see that, not just Navarre lol

You mean out of some french and Spanish provinces? Well... a tag could be made for it, yes. What would be the name of such country?

[Clophiroth]

Well, the native name for the union of the Spanish and French Basque lands: Euskal Herria. Euskadi is only the part that is actually called "País Vasco" (Basque country)... Or, if you want to put it in a non-native name, it could be name "Vasconia" or, simplily "Basque Country"

[Brynn]

Well, the native name for the
union of the Spanish and French Basque lands: Euskal Herria. Euskadi is only the part that is actually called "País Vasco" (Basque country)... Or, if you want to put it in a non-native name, it could be name "Vasconia" or, simplily "Basque Country"

This. I only used Euskadi because it was shorter lol. I prefer Euskal Herria or Basqueland or Basque Country to Vasconia. Too Roman lol but yea I think it'd be cool to have that union in game. Just my two cents. I'd love to colonize N America with them, since they were the first ones to really get there ( minus the Scandinavians lol)

[pirro]

Well, the native name for the union of the Spanish and French Basque lands: Euskal Herria. Euskadi is only the part that is actually called "País Vasco" (Basque country)... Or, if you want to put it in a non-native name, it could be name "Vasconia" or, simplily "Basque Country"

Euzkadi (as Sabino Arana said) is a XIX name, before that, it was called, Vizcaya (like in Don Quixote) or Vascongadas

[Clophiroth]

Ok, thanks XD Not an expert in Basque history, really...


I was going to suggest... In XVII century, when the Portuguese and Catalonian revolt, the Duke the Medina Sidonia, and some other high nobles of Andalucia, plotted to make an independant kingdom of Andalucia (I Don´t remember the exact name that they wanted to use, really)... But Olivares discovered them, and forced them to abandon their conspiration. If they wouldn´t have been discovered, they could have created the country... Then, could it be a plausible country? n.n

[CJL78]

been off the forums for awhile, busy with reading books for master's classes which can be both interesting and fun and sometimes boring so much so that I haven't even been able to beta the game very much but I am still around

I like the idea of adding some national flavor.
Here are two ideas for France :

-An Edit de Nantes decision enactable if more than x% of France becomes Protestant and depending on the country's religious fervor and relations with the Pope (and possibility many other things but I can only guess all the possible factors in game at the moment.)

-A Fronde event. If France becomes too centralized the nobility would rise up against the king to preserve it's privileges. The event would hurt your relation with the noble faction greatly, spawn rebels and so on. A victory against the nobility would allow further centralization, more taxes and perhaps a governement change to absolute monarchy.

The edict de nantes already exists, at least in EU3. If it has been taken out completely in MM, something like what you suggest would be a great.

The fronde is a good example of what should (hopefully) be represented through generalized events based faction mechanics (nobility)

I'd be interested to see how this mod will the tackle the issue of the formation of Safavid Persia, I've rarely seen Persia form let alone become a major power and a headache for the Ottomans like they did historically. I think one of the biggest reasons for this is that Qara Qyunlu usually maintain very friendly relations with most of its neighbors, specifically the Mamluks, Ottomans, and the Ak Qyunlu. Also I think that having the Safavids attack in the form of heretics is a very bad idea because heretics almost always destroy temples, and that makes it all the harder for Shiite Persia to convert its mostly Sunni population and maintain stability. I've seen Persia succumb to Sunni Zealots even after giving them a helping hand. What I would do is have an event that creates Persia in Azerbaijan signifying the start of the militant Safavid organization in the highly decentralized and unstable Qara Qyunlu state and then another event making Persian patriots/nationlists much more likely and deadly in all the Persian provinces under foreign control. I would somehow make the Qara Qyunlu less friendly with its neighbors and make it a tribal federation, I think MMtG is making it an oligarchic monarchy but I'm not sure.

I would also suggest making a couple of decisions for Persia:
-Become the Shah of Azerbaijan: Adds cores in all of Azerbaijan, adds 1 centralization, adds 5-10 prestige. Requires good military or administration rating, or both.
-Become the Shah of Persia: Adds cores in all Persian provinces, adds 1 centralization, adds 10-15 prestige. It would also be a good idea to make this decision add cores in all the Iraqi provinces as well, or at least Karbala. Requires good military or administration rating, or both. Also requires Persia to have at least one Persian province under its control, it doesn't make any sense for a ruler to declare himself the sole owner of an entire region unless he has a substantial claim to it.
-Move the capital to Fars: adds 3-5 tax base in Fars, moves the capital there, creates a center of trade in the province, and adds 1 centralization. Should probably require a ruler with a decent administration rating.


Also Persia should be a Despotic Monarchy, it makes no sense for it to be a Theocracy.

Believe me, the Middle East dynamics, particularly the Ottoman vs. Mamluks vs QK/AK/Persia power struggle will get attention in this mod. The specific suggestions you make are already in the game in one form or another. I do intend to improve on the Persia formation mechanics, to the point where Persia should form at some point in the game even if its not by the Safavids

What I would like to see in the mod is :

- The possibility to reunite Romania. Mihaï Viteazul did it very briefly in 1599-1600. More accurately he held the crown of the 3 Principalities of what would become Romania : Wallachia, Moldava, Transylvania. While he was himself not keen on creating a united "country of the Romanian-speakers" (Romania did not exist even as an idea by then, and Mihaï needed the support of the Magyar nobility), it could have been a way a sovereign of the 3 Principalities would have ended up justifying his power by 1700, especially in case of hostility against the Magyar nobility and Austria.

- also, the opportunity to recreate the Eastern Latin Empire would be appreciated

Finally, the completely unknown "Principality of Theodoro", which despite its Banana Republic name is in Crimea, could be in for added Lolz. It was the very last remaint of the Byzantine Empire to fall (in 1475), and not Trebizond as often thought. The cultural and military clout of Theodoro, though, was even below the one of Trebizond, so it is no wonder.

Romania and Latin Empire - yes. Romania will require more conditions than just owning the territory; any suggestions? I intend to make the Latin Empire formable by the left over crusader states like Athens, Cyprus, and the KoSJ; or releasable by western Catholic that captures Constantinople

Theodoro - - no.

As my idea for the prince-bishopric of Trent wasn't received well, I propose it here......

.

I will include Trent, at least at first, so long as it is very hard/unlikely for Austria to lose its influence over it. if it upsets balance of Austria, it may have to be axed in later versions but it will be given a fair shot in v1.0 at least

What you're saying about rebalancing Italy is quite fascinating. Doesn't this disturbs the balance within the HRE? For example with Milan as a very likely candidate for Emperorship? Or doesn't this changes the protestant-catholic balance a lot (as Italian states usually don't convert)?
I'm at favor of having the most provinces possible everywhere as well, but balance-wise it's a real headache, but some good tips may help to convince Ubik about adding a few provinces here and there

well Milan will likely not get much advantage as they will probably not get any new provinces in my mod (Pavia being the only province I would even consider adding for them and thats not likely anyway)

as far as my mod goes I will mostly be adding provinces for new states (currently considering Lucca, Montferrat, and Saluzzo) which will only add to the fracturing of Italy, and more provinces for the Papal States (separate Urbino and Ancona) or Venice (considering dividing Bologna and Ravenna, which would go to Venice, and adding Padua), which will add to their capability to resist the Empire and other powers

About the whole Ottoman expasion, capitulations, conquest of Egypt system. I have couple of suggestions, but i dont know how it will turn in game.

Main advantages with capitulations for Ottos and Egypt
-increased relations with some christian states
-attracting the trade back to mediterranean area
-"passifying" some christian stats so that Ottos could commence offensive operations against others in Europe
-possibilities for alliance with some christian states

Main advantages for christian states who had capitulations
-increased relations with Ottos&Egypt
- increased trade in the area

Its long term effect was:

-lower costs for agricultural producs---happier population
-Christian states taking over the trade slowly--->decreased trade efficiency and lower production for Ottos in the long term

In think you could use the capitulations like a drug for the Ottomans, firtst they get it for free and get lots of positive effects. Than it slowly looses its positive effects and not so free anymore and in the third phase its just stuck there without much chances to avoid it. Once it starts, Ottos get the chance to keep its trade efficiency(it should get harmed once the portuguise discovers the spice trade), a small discount on the revoltrisk(i.e. cheaper goods or agricultural products), huge boost of relations with the country it grants capitulations to and a BB reduction to show its better standing in Europe by granting the capitulations. This is the first phase of the game.

Once BB score of the Ottos goes up(i.e. if played historically or with the conquest of Alexandria COT) Capitulations become something that every new sultan renews(historically). Once the BB goes up a certain level, Ottos gets the oppurtunity from others than France for to give capitulations too. The constant reductions of BB will make it possible for the Ottos to expand as fast as they did in the 16th century without having the whole world against them.

After the 16th century, the capitulations should start to harm the empire more and more. This could be connected to difference in trade tech level between the christan states and the Ottomans. It could be penalties to Ottoman trade techs and production trades who slowly gets bigger and bigger. Also during the same time the advantages like BB reduction decreases since most of the europen powers are used to get this kind of capitulations. A sultan from now on who tries to NOT renew this capitulations gets several difficulties like increased revolrisk(higher costs for agricultural products), increased BB(a hostile act to christians) and a hit to trade efficiency or tech since the trade will move away from the region.

If every new the sultan continues to grant capitulations, it just continues to hit the Ottoman trade and production while more and more European countries starts to ask for those, in the 18th century the Empire will even be forced to give away capitulations to European powers when they loose a war to.

What do you think? It is feesable?

Great input. Somewhat what I was thinking. Other long term effects would also be a decrease in taxes, but I think our general thoughts are the same

This may be a bit out of scope for this mod, but I would love to see the implementation of the Anasazi cultures in the American southwest. These were fairly complex agricultural communities, and it would neat to see them in game. Honestly, I would just like to see that a native nation stands a chance at staying independant. If that can be accomplished by vanilla Magna Mundi, then great! Haha

EDIT: Also, is there any historical plausability in a united Basque country evolving during this time frame? I would love to see that, not just Navarre lol

Anasazi - no, sorry. not a state in any sense of the word

Basque country - I think Navarre is fine. Unless you have a critical historical/gameplay reason why Navarre can not suit this purpose?

I was going to suggest... In XVII century, when the Portuguese and Catalonian revolt, the Duke the Medina Sidonia, and some other high nobles of Andalucia, plotted to make an independant kingdom of Andalucia (I Don´t remember the exact name that they wanted to use, really)... But Olivares discovered them, and forced them to abandon their conspiration. If they wouldn´t have been discovered, they could have created the country... Then, could it be a plausible country? n.n

Possibly, maybe, but only through nationalist revolt. Let's ask Lok-y his opinion as a native Spaniard maybe? Low priority on that one, I think, but thanks for suggestion

[Clophiroth]

I am a native Spaniard too XD

The problem with Navarre being the basque country... Is that, traditionally, the Navarran nobility always has been Castillian, and only the peasants were basque. Then, it wouldn´t be a basque country... It would be a basque country dominated by Spanish. Other Basque country would be one where the people have rid off the Spanish minority, and formed their own nation...

[Dr. B]

Hey CJL78, now I dont know what has happened to Iceland in the real game, but last time I inquired about it, Iceland was still part of Denmark at game start. If this is still the case, maybe you could restore it to Norway where it belongs, and let game mechanics sort out the rest?

(Not that it is any benefit at all to have these (or this, if Iceland is one-provinvce) dirt poor province in the middle of the atlantic, but it annoys me a lot to see history go out the window.)

[ubik]

(Not that it is any benefit at all to have these (or this, if Iceland is one-provinvce) dirt poor province in the middle of the atlantic, but it annoys me a lot to see history go out the window.)

There's the benefit of enjoying a bigger administrative strain, for instance. It should never get discounted!


Anyway, the capability of stationing there 5 ships at full morale should not get discarded. Specially if coupled with an Admiral with the Explorer Personal Trait.

[Descri]

Hey CJL78, now I dont know what has happened to Iceland in the real game, but last time I inquired about it, Iceland was still part of Denmark at game start. If this is still the case, maybe you could restore it to Norway where it belongs, and let game mechanics sort out the rest?

(Not that it is any benefit at all to have these (or this, if Iceland is one-provinvce) dirt poor province in the middle of the atlantic, but it annoys me a lot to see history go out the window.)

AFAIK It's for the situation where Denmark-Norway falls apart, so it falls apart historically.

[RhoDaZZ]

AFAIK It's for the situation where Denmark-Norway falls apart, so it falls apart historically.

Besides that, Norway and Iceland were managed by governors approved by the Danish king separately throughout most of the period. Legally, Iceland was of course a part of the Kingdom of Norway, but administratively and de-facto it came closer to being run from Denmark. I'm not saying this is the case from the start of the game, but it's a process which started within the first 100 years, where you start to see Danish or German aristocrats having the appointment: http://translate.google.dk/translate...5C3%258Dslandi

[CJL78]

I am a native Spaniard too XD

The problem with Navarre being the basque country... Is that, traditionally, the Navarran nobility always has been Castillian, and only the peasants were basque. Then, it wouldn´t be a basque country... It would be a basque country dominated by Spanish. Other Basque country would be one where the people have rid off the Spanish minority, and formed their own nation...

If I understand you right, then, in game terms, Navarre should be Castilian primary culture?

Regardless, I think that Navarre CAN be "the Basque country" in-game whether it was in RL or not.

Hey CJL78, now I dont know what has happened to Iceland in the real game, but last time I inquired about it, Iceland was still part of Denmark at game start. .... it annoys me a lot to see history go out the window.)

The same reason I didn't like seeing "Tuscany" as a republic in Firenze at game start!

Iceland is now one province, and owned by Denmark at game start while Norway owns two little island provinces (Faroe and Shetland Islands, iirc) While, like has been said, Iceland was technically part of Norway, I think allowing Denmark to control the province from the start allows the Danes to get involved in colonizing, which is more important. However, if Norway does not have a core on Iceland at start, I will give it one, so that it can fight for it back if they break the union/revolt

[Clophiroth]

If I understand you right, then, in game terms, Navarre should be Castilian primary culture?

Regardless, I think that Navarre CAN be "the Basque country" in-game whether it was in RL or not.

It should START as castilian, but, as their only province is basque, then, they could end being basque... Then, they would become the basque country. Before that, they are a castilian one with basque subjects n.n Maybe, it doesn´t deserve an extra tag... But that is always nice, right? XD

[LoK-y-Yo]

It should START as castilian, but, as their only province is basque, then, they could end being basque... Then, they would become the basque country. Before that, they are a castilian one with basque subjects n.n Maybe, it doesn´t deserve an extra tag... But that is always nice, right? XD

I don't think creating a tag for the same provinces/same culture is really "productive". Each tag slows the game. Navarra with a Basque culture, wouldn't it be the basque country? also, I would thought about it being a noble republic or something like that But seriosly, Navarra starts as a kingdom, that's better as many one province countries. The same can be said to Andalucía, we already have Granada, which "could" rebel to every andalusian provinces. This could represent the independant kingdom of Andalucía.

I know it is not very popular, but creating new tags when there is one already for the same culture and the same provinces could be used for where they really are needed. Not that a Basque Country and an Andalusian Kingdom wouldn't be cool, but just when they can be added after other more important countries.

[pirro]

Well, actually navarre was more french and aragonese than castillian in cultural terms... Indeed, navarreses and castillians were fierce enemies

[Connor Mulhern]

I would seriously consider having a fully fleshed out "millet' system for the Ottomans, this really allowed for their expansion and stability in newly expanded territories. Allowing for the community decreases badboy, but it lowers cultural and religions assimilation eightfold, as well as decreasing all but manpower and core gain (which should be boosted in muslim provinces) This coupled with the autonomous statue modifier should allow for a realistic expansion, although a special casus belli for countries in the asian mediterranean should be included with extremly now infamy gain. Also a decision in the absence of the ottoman or malemuks to establish protectorates over the berber countries if they own constantinople, jerusalem and cario and the other rival does not exist.

[LouiST]

Will we have more provinces for China and Japan?