Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
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.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly. You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
The purpose of this thread is to compile my own suggestions for how to improve France (a nation currently portrayed anachronistically as being a homogeneous blob) in the hope that some of these ideas may find their way into the game.
To start, I am going to say that this is in no way a buff or a nerf to France, but rather an overhaul. The main challenge I have faced in compiling these suggestions, and the biggest question for whoever at Paradox reads this to consider: How do we make France more interesting, immersive and historically accurate, but also bring plenty of challenges at the same time?
With that question in mind, I’ll go through a comprehensive list of the changes that I am proposing in posts throughout this thread, complete with my reasoning for each change.
NB:Everything I post in this thread may be subject to change when necessary.
While the 1.25 patch has indeed given France a much-needed facelift to better reflect its historical provinces and balance out the changes to the British Isles, there is still room for more improvements to the map if the EU4 team are willing to do so.
I'm not going to go too in-depth here as the other aspects of my suggestions are more important, but this is what a revised France could look like (note this will be subject to change):
In total, 12 new provinces. Most of the changes were done to give France’s subjects (which I’ll cover later on in Part II) a better historical representation of the land they held. Some large provinces were also broken up and a few provinces given to surrounding nations to balance out the changes in France.
I tried to be as conservative as possible with the changes and avoided changing borders too drastically. This is merely a guideline for what the EU4 team could include were they to revisit this region again.
Seeing as you guys at Paradox really like maps to go alongside suggestions, here are some useful ones for reference that show France and the surrounding nations in the 15th century:
The Lordship of Albret, although less significant than France’s other appanages, was included because it allowed for better representation of England’s Gascon holdings near the end of the Hundred Years War. Bordeaux and Labourd will now be divided by a French appanage, making England’s hold more untenable. Albret will also be represented by a new tag who will be an appanage of France, for reasons I’ll discuss in Part II.
Although by 1444 Bearn had become the chief residence of the counts of Foix, the county of Foix was still considered to be a separate entity to Bearn despite being ruled together for decades. It also had a strategic position on the foothills of the Pyrenees.
Carcassonne was added to split up the unreasonably large province of Toulouse. Given the complicated history of this part of the Languedoc, from its role in the Albigensian Crusade as a fortified stronghold for the Cathars, it is the only province I added that would be owned by France in 1444.
Carcassonne had long had a history for being a strategically placed fortified bastion; its fortifications were consistently expanded on and even today it is regarded as being the largest walled city in Europe. In 1355 the English attempted to take the city but were unsuccessful. Although after 1659 its strategic importance diminished, it still held importance as an economic centre for the textile industry.
La Marche was one of the historical provinces of France, and its merger with the province of Limousin made the latter province look like a sore thumb. In 1444 La Marche was owned by the Counts of Armagnac (whose holdings were historically all over the place; they also held the county of Rodez (Rouergue in EU4) in 1444), which is the main reason why it becomes a new province.
Forez was yet another province added for its historical significance as a county under the ownership of the Dukes of Bourbon in 1444. The Lyonnais (in the royal domain) was a smaller region than is currently portrayed in EU4 and so the split attempts to reflect this. The province is given livestock due to the capital, Montbrison’s blue cheese.
Toulon was one of the most important cities in southern France throughout the time period, playing a major role in France’s rise as a naval power. In 1494 Charles VIII of France began the construction of a military port there, and was again expanded on during the reign of Louis XIV.
It deliberately starts with a lower development, as it wasn’t as important in 1444. Perhaps a flavour event should simulate the growth of Toulon if France owns it in the 1490’s (suggested by @mechanical_Critter).
Mâcon (or the Mâconnais) was added to split up the large province of Charolais and also to give Burgundy proper a slight buff. It was an important regional centre in the south of Burgundy on the border with the duchy of Savoy.
Blois was a major settlement on the river Loire and was under the control of the dukes of Orléans in 1444. It is known for its iconic Chateau, which was the residence of several French kings.
This province could be added to split up Franche-Comte, and with good reason. Firstly, Besancon was closely connected to the Holy Roman Empire, having been designated a Free Imperial City (although the territory it controlled was so miniscule that it may be better to just show the area as part of Burgundy, as they effectively influenced and surrounded the city). It is separate from the Franche-Comte province already on the map, which should be renamed Dole (the capital of Franche-Comte during Burgundian ownership).
Vermandois has always been wrongly represented in EU4, having never been shown to be a part of Burgundy despite the fact that historically it was. The Treaty of Arras in 1435 gave Vermandois to Burgundy in exchange for their help against the English during the HYW. This should be fixed, with Vermandois finally being added back in under the ownership of Burgundy.
Valois on the other hand is moved further east to better resemble the county of Valois, which in 1444 is an exclave of the duchy of Orleans.
11. Évreux (Capital: Évreux) Development: 11 (4/4/3) Trade Goods: Livestock (suggested by @Metroidkirby ) - Owner: England
England had to get at least one province, right? Évreux was another important settlement in Normandy, plus it had its own county and diocese.
Finistére is the name for the department that covered most of the historical provinces of Leon and Cornouaille which came into use after the French Revolution, and didn’t even exist for most of the timeline. The same could be said for Armor too. So Finistére’s name should be changed to Leon with the capital in Brest, and a new province of Cornouaille added. It has glass due to the “Quimper faience”, which was technically a kind of pottery, but since glass is already a widespread trade good in Europe I opted to use that instead.
For a bit of flavour, its trade good could change to Chinaware through an event in the 1700’s for the province (suggested by @mechanical_Critter).
In Part II I'll discuss the new nations being added (or rather re-added) in this potential overhaul.
Mâcon (or the Mâconnais) was added to split up the large province of Charolais and also to give Burgundy proper a slight buff. It was an important regional centre in the south of Burgundy on the border with the duchy of Savoy.
This province could be added to split up Franche-Comte, and with good reason. Firstly, Besancon was closely connected to the Holy Roman Empire, having been designated a Free Imperial City (although the territory it controlled was so miniscule that it may be better to just show the area as part of Burgundy, as they effectively influenced and surrounded the city). It is separate from the Franche-Comte province already on the map, which should be renamed Dole (the capital of Franche-Comte during Burgundian ownership).
While I like most of the proposed provinces and/or name-changes, I'm very much iffy about Vermandois and Albret. Vermandois was a very old name for a county that was under partial Burgundian control in 1444, the current map portrays this quite well (with no Vermandois-province, but its territory split between some Walloon provinces and Valois).
Albret was just a small village and the location of the manor of the Albret family, which were rich themselves and had a lot of influence at the French court. Albret is located in a quite forested region with a low population density, it doesn't warrant inclusion at all. The importance of the family didn't last long in the 17th century, either.
Foix and Toulon would certainly be worthwhile additions. Carcassonne would split up Toulouse nicely. Not sure about Albret for the reasons Mingmung stated above.
I'm quite happy with the current map of Northern France, I'm not sure that it needs more provinces.
Not that Evreux shouldn't be made a province (Rouen should be more urgent, but Evreux also needs its own province). My disagreement is about your choice for this province. Half of this province in your suggestion is the "Pays d'Auge" which was always under the influence of Caen, and Evreux never extend its influence toward the coast. Evreux shouldn't go this much westward, and shouldn't be a costal province, nor producing fish.
There is only one province I disagree with you on the list:
Not that Evreux shouldn't be made a province (Rouen should be more urgent, but Evreux also needs its own province). My disagreement is about your choice for this province. Half of this province in your suggestion is the "Pays d'Auge" which was always under the influence of Caen, and Evreux never extend its influence toward the coast. Evreux shouldn't go this much westward, and shouldn't be a costal province, nor producing fish.
Not sure where I got the choice of trade good from. If you have a better suggestion as to what it could be, that'd be appreciated.
Also, I could shift Evreux to the east so it's south of Caux to better represent the Pays de Caux, where the province takes its name from.
Maybe something like this is more accurate? Caux still includes its capital in-game, Rouen.
I have a few general comments and then specific questions.
You add a lot of provinces, which is a bit worrying in terms of balance of the overall region, since it's rather easy for France (even AI france) to grab all this by virtue of their missions. I won't advocate either way, but maybe it's sensible to mention a few provinces that deserve nerfs? Also, you don't mention which states your new additions should belong to. In some cases it's straightforward but in other that means having 6+ provinces in there which looks to be out of question!
Also, you're adding a lot of wool producing province, probably putting the emphasis that rural agriculture was sheep dominated? Was it THAT MUCH, though? Can you make a case for it at least? And from an achievement perspective, it makes the Black Sheep achievement suddenly super hard to grab I think it would be deserve to move all wool that you suggest to cloth, wine, naval supplies, salt and most importantly livestock (mb grain? idk).
The Lordship of Albret, although less significant than France’s other appanages, was included because it allowed for better representation of England’s Gascon holdings near the end of the Hundred Years War. Bordeaux and Labourd will now be divided by a French appanage, making England’s hold more untenable. Albret will also be represented by a new tag who will be an appanage of France, for reasons I’ll discuss in Part II.
Carcassonne had long had a history for being a strategically placed fortified bastion; its fortifications were consistently expanded on and even today it is regarded as being the largest walled city in Europe. In 1355 the English attempted to take the city but were unsuccessful. Although after 1659 its strategic importance diminished, it still held importance as an economic centre for the textile industry.
Toulon was one of the most important cities in southern France throughout the time period, playing a major role in France’s rise as a naval power. In 1494 Charles VIII of France began the construction of a military port there, and was again expanded on during the reign of Louis XIV.
That's great. Toulon is still a major port. However it GAINED importance over time. So rather than starting it with high dev, I think it would be fair to have it low dev in 1444 (maybe 2/2/1) and then have a flavour event "growth of the port of Toulon", adding some dev (+3/3/3?) OR some %dev cost (-15%?) as a -1 day static province modifier. Said event could also modify the trade good, from… livestock? wine? to naval supply.
I'm not sold on the names of the provinces, though. Nearby is Camargue, a region known for its salty swamps if I'm not mistaken? Camargue is a famous name thanks to Monty Pythons, and salt is an in game relevant trade good so maybe moving Provence on the Toulon capital and calling Camargue the province with Marseille could work? Probably some nerf required.
Mâcon (or the Mâconnais) was added to split up the large province of Charolais and also to give Burgundy proper a slight buff. It was an important regional centre in the south of Burgundy on the border with the duchy of Savoy.
Blois was a major settlement on the river Loire and was under the control of the dukes of Orléans in 1444. It is known for its iconic Chateau, which was the residence of several French kings.
Maybe starting it with 13 dev is a bit overboard? Starting it with 8-10 would be already a strong addition, and then having a flavour event with 2-5 extra dev would make up for it? Also that should reduce dev in Touraine. And idk how the Loire state fares overall after that, it's already a highly crowded state
This province could be added to split up Franche-Comte, and with good reason. Firstly, Besancon was closely connected to the Holy Roman Empire, having been designated a Free Imperial City (although the territory it controlled was so miniscule that it may be better to just show the area as part of Burgundy, as they effectively influenced and surrounded the city). It is separate from the Franche-Comte province already on the map, which should be renamed Dole (the capital of Franche-Comte during Burgundian ownership).
Finistére is the name for the department that covered most of the historical provinces of Leon and Cornouaille which came into use after the French Revolution, and didn’t even exist for most of the timeline. The same could be said for Armor too. So Finistére’s name should be changed to Leon with the capital in Brest, and a new province of Cornouaille added. It has glass due to the “Quimper faience”, which was technically a kind of pottery, but since glass is already a widespread trade good in Europe I opted to use that instead.
"Finistère" and "Cornouailles" would be better spelling. That would mean having 6 provinces in the state of Brittany though, it looks out of question. 5 provinces garanties a healthy growth.
I love that idea of including faience. But then maybe it should be Chinaware rather than glass? And maybe it should spawn by event? So rather than having a map change here, it would be a name change and the addition of a flavour event "Quimper faience", changing the trade good (and probably giving some prestige would be appropriate).
Before concluding, I must say I'm not too convinced about Forez and Mâcon, which make the map visually worse imho. Looks like trying to pack too much dev, also your proposed map changes makes Burgundy a 7 provinces state (unless you move Besançon/Doubs to the Lorraine state and give up on Mâcon maybe?). Valois looks visually small compared to Reims, maybe it's an issue idk.
You might also want to touch on the terrain type you think should be bestowed and where the forts should be placed/moved. Historical data/links would be welcome.
Caux should just be renamed to Rouen. And I honestly like Franche-Comté, not sure why it should change. Having bigger provinces shouldn't be a taboo, especially not if there's a good reason for no split and the region is already satisfied.
@neondt Agreed. Although Brittany has two anachronistic province-names which are quite easy to fix. OP already pointed that out, as does an old thread of mine. La Marche has some historical value, too. Blois, if you have the space. Forcalquier is still in the position of Draguignan (the old name of the province), so this has to be fixed, as well.
That's great. Toulon is still a major port. However it GAINED importance over time. So rather than starting it with high dev, I think it would be fair to have it low dev in 1444 (maybe 2/2/1) and then have a flavour event "growth of the port of Toulon", adding some dev (+3/3/3?) OR some %dev cost (-15%?) as a -1 day static province modifier. Said event could also modify the trade good, from… livestock? wine? to naval supply.
Admittedly that makes a lot more sense, it only rose to prominence in the 1490's. So yeah, an event or something like that if it were owned by France would do the trick.
I wouldn't dismiss Albret as a province so easily. Regardless of the size of the city itself or the importance of the family - in fact, let's say for a second that no tags are added at all and the vassals continue to be represented by Estates - that province is, as Isildur pointed out, very important in accurately reflecting England's holdings in Gascony and how vulnerable they were. In 1444, after the lords of Albret had long since defected to France and the surrounding land was liberated, England had been reduced to nothing more than pales around Bordeaux and Labourd.
(see dotted lines) :
EDIT: Awkward, I just noticed this map cites the shaded area as England's lands in 1429. Reading up on individual cities I was under the impression that that the English pales stayed pretty much the same. e.g. this claims Bazas was captured by the French in 1450 but the wiki page, at least, says it traded hands constantly until being definitively reconquered in 1441, citing Léo Drouyn's La Guyenne Militaire.
Also, Bordeaux was a major colonial port. How is that represented in game? Similarly, wouldn't it be better (and mb a necessary nerf) to give part of its dev through a flavour event rather than at the start of the game?
First of all, yeah I'll change Evreux's tradegood to grain or livestock.
Also, I didn't know Evreux was under French control. It was certainly true that the county of Dreux fell to the French forces in that year, but wasn't sure about the status of Evreux. Anyhow, it would make for weird borders (as England still held on to most of Normandy by the time of the Treaty of Tours), so I'm not sure if that would be represented if this suggestion made it in.
Plus, Caux's capital in vanilla IS Rouen. (Which technically is inaccurate, as Rouen wasn't even in the Pays de Caux, but in my map I still included it as the capital of Caux.)
Plus, Caux's capital in vanilla IS Rouen. (Which technically is inaccurate, as Rouen wasn't even in the Pays de Caux, but in my map I still included it as the capital of Caux.)
Which is an issue @neondt should take into account. It's nice to see that people from Sweden are happy with how things are, but this clearly cannot be the final territorial division.
With the division of England since Rule Britannia, I'm more and more eager for the same level of detail in France, Caux in its actual form is almost insulting.
Since it was pointed out above that Évreux was in fact a French possession, I've been looking at the status of other cities in the area and found, surprisingly, that even a major coastal city was in French hands in Nov 1444: Dieppe was recaptured on Oct 28, 1435 by Charles Desmarets and was held by France ever after.
It seems that the English lands in 1444 were something roughly like this, though there's a lot of room for interpretation. I know for sure they held Mayenne, Le Mans, Alencon, Perche, Rouen, and Gourney-en-Bray. On the flipside, France apparently owned Evreux, Dreux, Dieppe; I've never been able to find clear information on the status of Eu and Aumale:
Which is an issue @neondt should take into account. It's nice to see that people from Sweden are happy with how things are, but this clearly cannot be the final territorial division.
With the division of England since Rule Britannia, I'm more and more eager for the same level of detail in France, Caux in its actual form is almost insulting.
I mean no offense here, but I think it's important to set the tone for these discussions early: the suggestions and expectations of the community are valuable to the team and especially to me personally given that I'm most directly responsible for this kind of content. However, the tone of the discussion needs to be kept civil and constructive. Using words like "insulting" and taking a demanding tone do nothing to contribute to the discussion and make it less likely that I or other users will take your ideas seriously. I'm very pleased with the recent influx of European map suggestions so far, and there is plenty of material already that will be incorporated in some form into the game. Let's all keep up the good work and retain a positive environment for both devs and forumites to share their ideas.
With all that said, you are still free to make a case for more provinces in northern France. My feeling currently is that it is not necessary, but I'm open to having my mind changed by a good combination of gameplay and historical reasons.
I think it would be deserve to move all wool that you suggest to cloth, wine, naval supplies, salt and most importantly livestock (mb grain? idk). 
