As heart-warming as your sentiment is, it won't happen. Ireland at this time is a political and national non-entity.
The 3 tiers...
- Thread starter Johan
- Start date
-
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
As heart-warming as your sentiment is, it won't happen. Ireland at this time is a political and national non-entity.
while i do think ireland should put up a better fight(i usually tweak and make the irish provinces a touch richer(alongwith other regions) i view them like byzantium. In the hands of the AI both factions should usually be crushed but a skillfull player can find a way to survive. If the ottomans want to be able to survive they have to curb down cascading alliances. I tried an ottoman game and i was suprised at how annoying expanding into europe was. In my byzantium games half the time *insert western euro power here* would take a province or two in turkey due to half the world going after them.
Ireland should in most cases be steamrolled, i do think that EU should find a better way to simulate guerilla warfare
Ireland should in most cases be steamrolled, i do think that EU should find a better way to simulate guerilla warfare
Netherlands was way more important than Prussia or Brandenburg throughout the whole era. Brandenburg doesn't fit tier 1 under any circumstances.
Indeed. I feel Prussia's true importance occurs during the Napoleonic wars and in particular during 19th century. Historically, Prussia truly came into being during the 18th century. A bit too late for a tier 1 position.
Why? Let me finish wiping out the other Irish clans so I can become a problem for the English!
Shush a moment! I'm busy forming Ireland and defying history here! Some might say I'm playing a game.
eh id say netherlands had a larger impact but not at the way more important stage. Prussia from 1675(whatever year the great elector came around) onward was an important player in europe. Heck the netherlands technically only came around 100 yearish sooner(granted thats a decent amount of time)
I think netherlands and prussia are fine in tier 2. as for poland jk jk
So you're saying China and Japan instead of Sweden and Austria.
I could buy into China over Sweden (in fact I'm pretty sure I posted that a while ago) but Japan over the Habsblob? Yeah, no.
Because this supposed to be a game and not a movie about how the borders changed during the centuries. Just because Poland was historically devoured by its neighbors it doesn't mean that it wasn't far more important than Sweden and it wouldn't have more potential, or that it was a historical necessity that Poland should fall.
And just because Sweden kicked Poland's ass once, it doesn't mean they were more important. On this basis you could make Hungary tier 1 as they defeated the Ottomans several times before 1526. Or you could make the Golden Horde tier 1. I could go on for a while with these
Personally my top candidate for a Tier 1 position would be Brandenburg/Prussia instead of Sweden by the way.
I agree, you can't ignore either branch of the Habsburg Dynasty. What Japan should have is some special treatment though, some kind of Sengoku system, or at least as different OPMs under the vassalage of the Ashikaga. It's just a nonsense if it's represented as one, unified country.
You are aware that at times around 40% of the British army was Irish, right?
Irish revolts usually followed the same pattern, initial success against local forces, then after a while the regular army is brought in and the rebellion is crushed. The only one that can really be considered as a victory is the 1641 rebellion, and that also ended in the Irish being crushed, albeit after 11 years of self rule.
In this period, Ireland was united for those 11 years, nothing else IIRC. Sure, they were united against the English in the 9 years war, but not to the extent of being a nation from what I can remember. A country that existed 11 years, and for the rest of the period was getting nommed/digested is not a good candidate for any special events.
Because this supposed to be a game and not a movie about how the borders changed during the centuries. Just because Poland was historically devoured by its neighbors it doesn't mean that it wasn't far more important than Sweden and it wouldn't have more potential, or that it was a historical necessity that Poland should fall.
And just because Sweden kicked Poland's ass once, it doesn't mean they were more important. On this basis you could make Hungary tier 1 as they defeated the Ottomans several times before 1526. Or you could make the Golden Horde tier 1. I could go on for a while with these
The thing is, most, if not all, of the difference between the tiers is in historical flavor content. While some negative flavor content is fun/interesting (god how I loathed, in a good way, the time of troubles/oprichnina chains in EU & EU 2 for Russia), a general trend of only negative DHEs coinciding with your country gradually getting eaten by your neighbors (the sort of DHE available to Poland in later stages of the game) would probably not be a lot of fun. I'm sure there is some content available that would buck that general trend if you dig hard enough but I don't know how far the devs would have to dig to get enough "good" historical flavor events to counter the "bad".
You also have to consider that due to the actual history; "Poland" content will probably also include some of the "Lithuania" content so you probably have a t2+some of a t3.
Japan wasn't represented as one unified country in Divine Wind and won't be in EU4, so I'm not sure what you're talking about.
The first Dev Diary said the Shogunate was scrapped, then this thread said Japan was a country with a place on the tier ladder. Assuming that meant there would be a unified Japan was reasonable to most of us.
Because this supposed to be a game and not a movie about how the borders changed during the centuries. Just because Poland was historically devoured by its neighbors it doesn't mean that it wasn't far more important than Sweden and it wouldn't have more potential, or that it was a historical necessity that Poland should fall.
And just because Sweden kicked Poland's ass once, it doesn't mean they were more important. On this basis you could make Hungary tier 1 as they defeated the Ottomans several times before 1526. Or you could make the Golden Horde tier 1. I could go on for a while with these
History is history. You can't base flavour events on "what if's?", that defeats the entire purpose of flavour events. And I'm not saying that Poland shouldn't take Sweden's tier 1 spot because Sweden beat Poland in war, but because their decline started a century earlier than Sweden's, and were also much more devastating resulting in total annexation. Sweden at its zenith was arguably stronger than Polan under its zenith as well. So the only real argument for Poland as I see it is that they are in a stronger position compare to Sweden the first 100 years.
I thought the Chinese faction system would be scrapped, and not the shogunate system?
And Japen being a higher tier is just like the Netherlands or Prussia being one. They don't start unified / formed at the start of the grand campaign either.
Consider it in terms of uniqueness. What makes Austria unique? Besides the fact that they gobbled up a corner of Europe and digested it, there isn't any difference between them and any other European kingdom in terms of raw game mechanics, so beyond flavor, whats the point?
Japan, however, is pretty unique with the role of the Emperor, clans and Shogun and as such needs the extra effort so that it works. Austria should work anyways, as it will share the same mechanics as the rest of the European kings.
I was under the impression that EU4 would be a game instead of a day-by-day recreation of European history. Nations should have the resources they had at that point in history, but shouldn't be forgotten just because the got kerb-stomped in history.
However, Poland has a much more central role in European politics. Sweden only becomes a regional power after the Thirty Years War, while Poland has been a battle ground for decades by this point. I'd rather have a Poland that makes Europe interesting than a Sweden that will take some Baltic provinces and sit there.
Some people in this thread seem to be under the mistaken impression that making a nation Tier 1 will automatically make it more powerful. This is obviously nonsense.
We already know that one of the biggest DHE chains for England - which it receives because it's Tier 1 - is the Wars of the Roses. A massive civil war that will destabilise the country and tear it apart for 40 years. Russia will get the Time of Troubles, with a similar effect. These events don't make the Tier 1 countries England and Russia more powerful than Tier 2 countries, they make them weaker (but more challenging and fun to play).
As for Ireland, for most of the EU period they were a loyal part of the British Crown, contributing large amounts of manpower and tax income. They were almost certainly less rebellious than Scotland if you take the whole period into consideration: the Nine Year's War and the Ulster Rebellion aren't much when set next to Scotland's endless Jacobite uprisings, the bishops' wars, and so forth.
We already know that one of the biggest DHE chains for England - which it receives because it's Tier 1 - is the Wars of the Roses. A massive civil war that will destabilise the country and tear it apart for 40 years. Russia will get the Time of Troubles, with a similar effect. These events don't make the Tier 1 countries England and Russia more powerful than Tier 2 countries, they make them weaker (but more challenging and fun to play).
As for Ireland, for most of the EU period they were a loyal part of the British Crown, contributing large amounts of manpower and tax income. They were almost certainly less rebellious than Scotland if you take the whole period into consideration: the Nine Year's War and the Ulster Rebellion aren't much when set next to Scotland's endless Jacobite uprisings, the bishops' wars, and so forth.
Poland spent most of its time fighting Cossacks, Tatars and Russians. So if you don't consider Sweden's wars against Russia to be central then you should not consider Poland to be central either.
Last edited:
I must have written at least ten times by now in the dev diaires that Japan won't be a unified country from start.
Apparently, when you abandon a feature, you can only go to the opposite of that feature.
You forgot to mention Teutonic Order (Thirteen Years' War and other wars till 1525), Ottomans...
However this whole dispute is pointless... Everyone judges the history by the last 100 years of the game era. Poland was in decline and ultimately erased from the map therefore no one treats us seriously
well maybe except Ottomans, weird that sometimes the greatest respectcomes from our enemies... or maybe not- Status