When the Slavs DO migrate over, the Slavs should convert to Bohemian, Polish, Lithuanian, and such.
[WtWSMS] Suggestions/Ideas
- Thread starter loup99
- 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.
When the Slavs DO migrate over, the Slavs should convert to Bohemian, Polish, Lithuanian, and such.
I have a suggestion. Could you please make downloading the mod easily accessible instead of making us having to wade through hundreds of pages of discussions to be able to find the latest download. It's really easy, just put the link to the latest download in the first post of the official thread.
The person who made that post is currently MIA, so they unfortunately can't do that.
African Romance culture doesn't have queen, emperor, or empress unique localization and it looks like that is what's intended.
What needs to happen is viceroys to be enabled for people who have that dlc. It would solve this.
They could have de jure kingdoms change by event depending on the era, if the kingdom title is not held, also dpending who who/what is in the area.
Last edited:
Lithuanian isn't Slavic. And I do not see the Slavs succeding often enough for that to happen. I have never seen a Slavic Empire, and the only kingdom I have ever seen in that region was Magyar.
Noted, but Migration still needs to be balanced.
Yes, they are on the todolist.
Oh, Ok. What I meant more were the civil wars that sometimes happened with multiple sides involved, but that might had been more generals than governors and is ingame represented by factions .
No need to have something forcing them, but what could be done, and has been mentioned in the dev group, is the snowball effect.
Well, melting-pots are a huge task and those cultures you mentioned appeared a lot of time later than the start date so they are not main priorities. But m,ore slavic melting-pots is a good suggestion.
Yes, I will try to get Enlil doing that. (the issue with this is that Enlil has not bee posting the latest release, and the subforum request is still processing).
Yes, it is, but do you have any specific suggestions on names?
Noted.
These are the dynamic duchies/kingdoms mechanic from Britania. I think that they got started on/are partially implemented in 0.9.0.
Yes, it is already on the queue, awaiting on Korbah.
Oh, ok then. Just checking
Maybe covering that by CA? If the Roman Empires have low CA or independend vassals governors may wage war on their own, whil medium and up they are bound to their Augustus.
Btw, why not ask the guys at CK+ if you can use the coronation mechanics, at least the ERE-part?
I'm sorry if this sounds harsh, but the mod shouldn't be designed for you to solely get enjoyment out of starting as the top liege of any realm. It should be just as enjoyable to start as a vassal.
That being said i would actually support internal wars being restricted as long as it is made possible for every provincial governor to claim the throne for themselves at any time. After the Severan dynasty came to power the only prerequisite for gaining the throne was that you controlled an army of some size. And seeing as the Administrative and Military side of provincial administration cannot be separate in the game like they were in the real life Late Empire/Eastern Empire, every Ducal/King character within the Empire should be able to claim the throne.
There is actually plenty of examples from Late Antiquity and the Byzantine Period of Theme Commanders and Imperial Governors acting independetly against foreign rulers despite the fact that the Imperial Bureaucracy and the authority of the Emperor were greater and felt more throughout the provinces than during the Principate for example.
Last edited:
Not necessary, we can create our own mechanics if necessary. Implementing other mods code is sometimes more heavy of a task than doing it from scratch.
True, a vassal should have playability too, especially if there is historical evidence for them having it with external wars. Currently, it is possible to claim the throne as direct vassal, and it will stay like that.
Maybe changing the Duchy of Cherson to 'Bosporos' if owned by a Bosporan?
Last edited:
Not sure if this has been suggested before, but it would be nice if there were more Indian melting pots for other cultures. With the Migration CB it is possible for a tribe or to end up in India. Suggestions: Indo-Slavic (in the Indian group because the Indians were more numerous), Indo-Greek.
I have a suggestion, for the appearance of Kutrigurs , Utigurs and Hunno-bulgars (wich represent the Onogurs, i think), the Kutrigurs and Utigurs, who at the starting date are Bulgars holding duchys with the same name, can become Kutrigur and Utigur culture wen each duchy obtains de-jure vassals, via de-jure shift (to represent how at the beginning they were just differently named Bulgars, and then became a separate but similar people) has for the Hunno-Bulgars it's a little more complicated, if a Hun has his capital on a Bulgar province and is NOT either the vassal of the hunnic emperor or the emperor himself should quite quickly become a hunno-bulgar ( and in turn the hunno-bulgar would become just a Bulgar via the same reasoning and by being ruled by anyone not either a Hun or hunno-bulgar) (this event should have a death date around the 600s or so), if the Hun is the emperor the hunnic empire or his vassal the conversion would take some more time, but could be sped up if he has a Bulgar wife (or husband if female), and if the holder of the hunnic empire is a hunno-bulgar himself the empire should be localized to Patria Onoguria (of course the event for Huns becoming hunno-bulgar within the hunic empire gets deactivated his it has de-jure vassals).
P.S. Sorry for my bad English I'm very tired.
P.S. Sorry for my bad English I'm very tired.
One more thing about the Kemetics.
Is it possible to make the Pharaoh a religion leader, like the Pontifex Maximus and the Caliph instead of a King title?
It is meant to be the emissary of the gods after all.
Maybe "Nesew" can be used for kings?
This dictionary I found can help in general:
http://www.ancientworlds.net/aw/Post/399761
(Also like I suggested in the other thread, give the Kemetics the Aztec map art, it'd fit them a lot. And those without Sunset Invasion wont be affected by it)
Is it possible to make the Pharaoh a religion leader, like the Pontifex Maximus and the Caliph instead of a King title?
It is meant to be the emissary of the gods after all.
Maybe "Nesew" can be used for kings?
This dictionary I found can help in general:
http://www.ancientworlds.net/aw/Post/399761
(Also like I suggested in the other thread, give the Kemetics the Aztec map art, it'd fit them a lot. And those without Sunset Invasion wont be affected by it)
Last edited:
Sorry for the formatting and any spelling error but it's late and I'm tired.
I know you are yet to finish Scandinavia, but so you do it as well as you can I'll share some of the things I know/have found here, in case you'll find them useful.
First of as I told earlier you can't show Trøndelag as a sami area. It had a much larger population and left more traces in the roman iron age than western Norway did.1 The area is flat and suited for farming, and is packed with burial mounds (bronze age - ca ad 800) and hill fortresses (no later than 600). Things that you find in areas with powerful people and enough farming to support building and maintaining them, and a need for them.
In Norway the coast up to Troms and the central areas of the inland were populated in the period. In a way the map would be more or less unchanged from vanilla when it comes to Norse/sami. The idea that the Farming and Nomadic population was separated by a horizontal line is wrong. And likely nomad does not always mean sami, and farmer not always norse. Before Christianization there was a lot of contact and coexisting.
I hope you will change the borders. The vanilla one is not at all accurate or even realistic.
Here's a quick drawing of how I understand the situation after some reading:
Same number of regions as vanilla (Though Trøndelag should really be split a bit. A lot of people there, and internal conflict). I have put some of the hill fortresses from the period that I found on the map as well.
Most of what's marked as "sami majority" is still sparsely populated to this day. But areas like Østerdalen is notable though. Sami precense there is controversial but it seems likely to me from what I have read. Not marked are areas where sami people exist, but not as much. They travel around a lot, and coexist with farmers. Places like on the Fosen peninsula still have sami names and such.
Jämtland I am not sure about. There was a hill-fortress on Frösön and signs of farming around Storsjön. Most of the region seem to have been quite deserted though. Possibly best represented by Norse ruler ruling a Sami population? Swedish wikipedia mentions it being part of a petty kingdom in Norrland.
Some sources
1 https://snl.no/Jernalderen_i_Norge
http://forskning.no/historie/2008/04/samisk-jernalder-i-osterdalen
I know you are yet to finish Scandinavia, but so you do it as well as you can I'll share some of the things I know/have found here, in case you'll find them useful.
First of as I told earlier you can't show Trøndelag as a sami area. It had a much larger population and left more traces in the roman iron age than western Norway did.1 The area is flat and suited for farming, and is packed with burial mounds (bronze age - ca ad 800) and hill fortresses (no later than 600). Things that you find in areas with powerful people and enough farming to support building and maintaining them, and a need for them.
In Norway the coast up to Troms and the central areas of the inland were populated in the period. In a way the map would be more or less unchanged from vanilla when it comes to Norse/sami. The idea that the Farming and Nomadic population was separated by a horizontal line is wrong. And likely nomad does not always mean sami, and farmer not always norse. Before Christianization there was a lot of contact and coexisting.
I hope you will change the borders. The vanilla one is not at all accurate or even realistic.
Here's a quick drawing of how I understand the situation after some reading:
Same number of regions as vanilla (Though Trøndelag should really be split a bit. A lot of people there, and internal conflict). I have put some of the hill fortresses from the period that I found on the map as well.
Most of what's marked as "sami majority" is still sparsely populated to this day. But areas like Østerdalen is notable though. Sami precense there is controversial but it seems likely to me from what I have read. Not marked are areas where sami people exist, but not as much. They travel around a lot, and coexist with farmers. Places like on the Fosen peninsula still have sami names and such.
Jämtland I am not sure about. There was a hill-fortress on Frösön and signs of farming around Storsjön. Most of the region seem to have been quite deserted though. Possibly best represented by Norse ruler ruling a Sami population? Swedish wikipedia mentions it being part of a petty kingdom in Norrland.
Some sources
1 https://snl.no/Jernalderen_i_Norge
http://forskning.no/historie/2008/04/samisk-jernalder-i-osterdalen