• 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.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Nope, I don't know how you made that up, I guess you have a pretty wild imagination and give a whole new meaning to the words of the english language OR you have absolutely no idea of economics so I guess you are kind of forgiven.

Which part of: "The idea that Sweden fought in Germany to a substantialy degree on French money and was, in that sense, France's mercenary, is perfectly correct."- makes you think that Sweden's campaign in germany was self-funded? Btw have you also missed the part that says: "...and an even larger porportion of the specifically military section of the budget"- so let's fairly say 1/3rd of it and in reality almost half of the budget..

I'm not going to argue anymore, you either have problems understanding english or you (most probably) deliberately trying to defend a lost argument. I'll leave the decision to the fellow forumites.

With respect, Prussia.

Starting a discussion and then storming out when a disagreement happens is pretty lame. And you are surprisingly confident in your source considering you have most likely not even read the book. Personally I trust the info the devs have already posted in the thread more than the book you are referring to. Further more, I've been reading up on the treaty of Bärwalde that initiated the French subsidises to Sweden. 400 000 thaler every year for five years. Sweden's time in the war lasted for 17 years. So the numbers of the book may very well be true, but they seem to focus on only the first stages of the war.

And don't sign your posts "with respect", you are clearly not respectful.
 
Actually, Gustavus continued the ideas Maurice of Orange had started.
Which I did write in my post.

As for the Netherlands:
-Amsterdam was the financial centre until after the Wars against Napoleon
- William of Orange was the leader of the coalitions against Louis XIII
- Was a player in the War of the Spanish Succession (although that was pretty much the end of the Republic as major military power)
Not as cool as giving Austria a surprise beating up when arriving like a nobody with an army from nowhere though when everyone expected them to fail miserably.

As for Sweden in the 30 Years War: it relied heavily on French money and suffered some major defeats and was almost forced out of the war if not for the French intervention.
Sweden did not have French money for the first years of the war and that's when they scored their most major victories and penetrated deep into Imperial territory threatening Vienna itself, had it not been for the sudden death of Gustavus Adolphus then Sweden may as well have pulled off a swift victory before the French even got involved.

It was first after the death of Gustavus Adolphus that the French got involved, by that time the Swedish national army was also replaced by an army of allies and mercenaries commanded by Swedish general, it was that army that suffered ONE major defeat at Nördlingen.

So you are omitting a lot of facts in your post.
 
Which part of: "The idea that Sweden fought in Germany to a substantialy degree on French money and was, in that sense, France's mercenary, is perfectly correct."- makes you think that Sweden's campaign in germany was self-funded? Btw have you also missed the part that says: "...and an even larger porportion of the specifically military section of the budget"- so let's fairly say 1/3rd of it and in reality almost half of the budget..
With all due respect, "the national budget" was basicly the military budget, 95% of the Swedish state budget went into funding the army, there wasn't exactly any welfare programs around in the 17th century...

Which is probably true for most states of the era actually.
 
Starting a discussion and then storming out when a disagreement happens is pretty lame. And you are surprisingly confident in your source considering you have most likely not even read the book. Personally I trust the info the devs have already posted in the thread more than the book you are referring to. Further more, I've been reading up on the treaty of Bärwalde that initiated the French subsidises to Sweden. 400 000 thaler every year for five years. Sweden's time in the war lasted for 17 years. So the numbers of the book may very well be true, but they seem to focus on only the first stages of the war.

And don't sign your posts "with respect", you are clearly not respectful.

I seriously cannot understand how we can continue this discussion from the point you just throw my argument in the trashcan without making a single point on it. It's not a discussion when you make white to look like black. It also saddens me that you believe i'm not respectful. Because frankly- I am. Let's just agree to disagree, I just hate one sided statements/arguments. Now that the forum has seen both sides of the argument, I'll just leave the rest of forumites decide for themselves because obviously I cannot convience you (nor it was my purpose to).
With respect, Prussia.
 
I seriously cannot understand how we can continue this discussion from the point you just throw my argument in the trashcan without making a single point on it. It's not a discussion when you make white to look like black. It also saddens me that you believe i'm not respectful. Because frankly- I am. Let's just agree to disagree, I just hate one sided statements/arguments. Now that the forum has seen both sides of the argument, I'll just leave the rest of forumites decide for themselves because obviously I cannot convience you (nor it was my purpose to).
With respect, Prussia.

I throw people's arguments in the trashcan when they quote books they haven't even read to support their claims. Especially so when they are rude, and I don't think anyone who read your posts can think anything else. If you want nuance then don't bicker, or I will find it hard to take you seriously.
 
I throw people's arguments in the trashcan when they quote books they haven't even read to support their claims. Especially so when they are rude, and I don't think anyone who read your posts can think anything else. If you want nuance then don't bicker, or I will find it hard to take you seriously.
Sorry but I cannot take seriously people that don't cite any sources to back they claims. That's why I'm done with you, as I said, it's a waste of time and resources to make an argument with you. Goodbye. Just a friendly advice: Try to cite sources. Then people maybe will take you seriously. Until then, bye.
 
Sorry but I cannot take seriously people that don't cite any sources to back they claims. That's why I'm done with you, as I said, it's a waste of time and resources to make an argument with you. Goodbye. Just a friendly advice: Try to cite sources. Then people maybe will take you seriously. Until then, bye.

I have cited sources. Treaty of Bärwalde, 400 000 thaler each year for five of Sweden's seventeen years in war.
 
Didn't Johan post an updated list some where?

Tier 1
Byzantium - Our longtime Fan favourite.
Ulm - We even wrote several songs for it.
Golden Horde - We will not accept 'White Peace'.
Poland - We are even leaving their dev diary post mortem, best for last. Unlocks 'Into Space' national idea.
Gotland - Very influencal naval power of the period.
Sweden - Because we are in Sweden, it makes it that good.
Kingdom of Jerusalem - in history and with our new trade system, their impact in the first 2 centuries would have changed europe forever.
Mordovia - Comes with conquer Aragon mission.
 
With all due respect, "the national budget" was basicly the military budget, 95% of the Swedish state budget went into funding the army, there wasn't exactly any welfare programs around in the 17th century...

Which is probably true for most states of the era actually.

Yeah! Gustavus didn't waste too much money on holding parties and mascerades as other kings did for the money that didn't go to the army. :) But of course, without french money later in the war, Sweden would have had great problems to continue with the same scale of involvement. The peasents wouldn't have standed more taxes then they allready paid I guess.
 
Then he's clearly wrong.
View attachment 84515
1/4th of the state budget is a whole lot more than just "financing". Deal with it.

Source:Muscovy and Sweden in the Thirty Years' War 1630-1635
by B. F. Porshnev

First of all your source is incorrect, France provided 1 million livres the equivalent of 400.000 thalers in silver, not 640.0000 that your source states.

Secondly it was not a quarter of the state budget, it was a quarter of the cost for conducting the war between May 1631 and April 1632 (in all the war cost 2.2 million thalers during that time frame)
(Englund, Peter, Years of War, p.101)


The most important effect the treaty had was actually in raising the credit rating of the Swedish crown for borrowing more money as 2.2 million thalers was quite a bit more then the Swedish crowns income at that time.

Now we come to the fun part, Boris Porschnev was a Soviet historian that died in 1972, this paper was published for the first time in 1960. There are several problems with this, Firstly this is an old book, with old and outdated methods and sources. Secondly, Porschnev due to being a Soviet academic, becomes politically compromised, i.e. is he driving a political agenda with his work?

/regards
 
Sad to see Byzantium forgotten. East Roman Empire would be a very popular choose for players. And its only last in 3rd tier...
 
Sad to see Byzantium forgotten. East Roman Empire would be a very popular choose for players. And its only last in 3rd tier...

So what historical events do you suppose we create for the 300 years of gametime when Byzantium doesn't actually exist?

(Similar questions should be answered by everyone who wants Poland or The Netherlands for 1st tier.)
 
Not the place for historical debates, take it to the OT-History forums.

I think this thread has more than run its course, so closed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.