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.
I was doing 100-province France for myself and can share of my findings as well
100 provinces would bring France on same level of detail as its neighbors Germany & Great Britain are now.
First of all best map I've found would be this:
It shows all provinces and bailliages of united France.
For year 1444 some potential provinces might be a bit different, but still it would feel so much better if provinces like Ile-de-France or Champagne would be similar to shapes from this map and not of those weird forms we have in game now.
I haven't really finished my France yet, but Northern France looks like this:
Shapes not ideal, but really not so bad.
NORMANDY
Upper Normandy
Caux
Rouen
Evreux
Lower Normandy
Caen
Contentin
Alencon
Channel Islands (strait to Contentin)
Normandy was the richest region of France since Middle ages and fact that it was battlefield in year 1444 doesn't change this. With this I want to say that Normandy should have higher development than now and province of Rouen should be among 3 highest development provinces in France others being Paris and Bordeaux.
Coast of Rouennais bailliage came nearly all the way to Caen, so there are plenty of space to make Caux as separate province.
Channel Islands is very optional province, but it's no less in size and historical weight to such island provinces like Ibiza, Menorca or Isle of Man, and could offer some interesting tactical options - safe place for English army where to escape.
Brittany
Upper Brittany
Nantais
Rennais
Saint-Malo
Saint-Brieuc
Lower Brittany
Brest (Pays de Leon)
Cornouaille
Vannetais
Lower & upper Brittany are historical divisions, Brittany is independent tag, so it can use more provinces than 5 easilly. And just like Normandy Brittany should have higher development, it was among richest areas overall especially during golden age on Nantes port.
Ile-de-France
Paris
Beauvais
Valois
Nemours
Beauvais is absoulute must to include.
Picardy
Amiens
Calais
Vermandois (Saint-Quentin)
Extra province for Picardy would allow to move Artois into region of Low Countries as it was part of Low Countries for most of EUIV years.
Champagne
Reims
Troyes
Meaux
Rethel
Langres (or Chaumont)
Lorraine
Metz
Nancy
Vosges
Bar
Metz, Nancy and Vosges are 3 historical divisions of Lorraine, so why not to include Vosges province.
Franche-Comte
d'Amont
du Milieu
d'Aval
Franche-Comte had 3 historical divisions, so why not to split it.
Burgundy
Dijon
Charolles
Auxerre
Nevers
Burgundy is bigger on map now than it should be, and bailliages of Burgundy usually where grouped into 3 big groups + Nevers as separate division, so I think 4 provinces are ok there.
Valley Loire
Beauce (Orleanais)
Orleans
Blois
Chartres
Berry
Bourges (Upper Berry)
Chateauroux (Lower Berry)
Anjou-Touraine
Anjou
Touraine
Saumur
Maine
Maine
Laval
Perche
A bit difficult to divide Loire area properly, but Blois and Laval are most obvious additions.
Poitou-Charentes
Poitou
Poitiers (Upper Poitou)
La Roche (Lower Poitou)
Niort (Pays de Gatine)
Charentes
Saintonge
Angouleme
Aunis (La Rochelle)
Aunis is small, but it's most welcome addition there I think.
Limousin-Auvergne
Limousin
Limoges
La Marche
Turenne
Auvergne
d'Auvergne (Upper Auvergne)
Aurillac (Lower Auvergne)
Bourbonnais
La Marche & Aurillac are must additions.
Guyenne
Lower Guyenne
Bordelais
Perigord
Agenois
Bazadais
Upper Guyenne
Quercy
Rouergue
Montouban
Most important is to bring back Bordeaux - historical capital of Guyenne into state of Guyenne. Then Agenois is nice province option as well.
Gascony
Armagnac
Bearn
Landes (Albret)
Bigorre
Cominges
Bigorre-Cominges possibly as 1 province.
Languedoc
Languedoc
Montpellier
Nimois
Vivarais
Velay
Gevaudan
Toulouse
Toulouse
Carcassonne
Foix
Albigeois
Velay-Gevaudan possibly as 1 province. Narbonne I would get rid of and merge with Carcassonne.
Provence
d'Aix (Marseille)
Draguignan
Avignon
Digne
I think Draguignan is more reasonable option to take place as 2nd coastal province instead of Toulon.
Rhone Dauphine
Vienne (Grenoble)
Valentine
Briancon (Upper Dauphine)
Rhone
Lyon
Forez
Savoy
Savoy
Chambery (Lower Savoy)
Annecy (Upper Savoy)
Bresse
Romandie
Vaud
Valais
Geneve
Geneve would be very small province.. But city was very important. Anyways Bern should be brought back to German Switzerland.
New independent (or vassal) nations
House of Bourbon
Bourbonnais
Auvergne
Aurillac
Forez
House of Foix
Foix
Bearn
Bigorre-Cominges (in year 1444 both were part of Foix)
House of Armagnac
Armagnac
Rouergue
La Marche
Nemours (potentially)
House of Albret
Landes
Perigord
Limoges
Perigord & Limoges in year 1444 were held by House Chatillon, but I don't know if such tag is needed and as provinces were later sold to Albret, potentially it can be held by Albret from 1444 for more interesting game play.
Other Houses were either very small or ended up as kings of France, so I'm not touching them.
I liked all you've done for now but this is where I have to disagree. Don't worry, this is not against you, it's just a common mistake people are doing. Probably because of the modern satellite imagery, even Paradox did it! i'm just here to help.
Most of our forests in western europe are just remains since the massive deforestation during the medieval era. But not this one! Until the middle of the 19th century all the place is just a big marshland. Full of dirty swamps, morass, bogs and all the diseases that comes with it. It was unhealthy, dangerous and poor. In fact, this was only one of the concerns when authorities decides to plant the largest artificial forest in Europe there (The Landes Forest), because it was first of all to prevent the dune barrier from advancing inland and burying coastal cities.
So, when did this decision came? Well.... June 1857... And it was only a first step. Take a look at this map right after the beginning of plantation, and later. Taken from [Géographie historique de la France / Xavier de Planhol / 1988]:
I really don't want to have provinces named "upstream", "middle" and "downstream".
Other thing, it's really fishy to have Alençon and Perche as separate provinces (as both were controled by England at game start, were an appanage of the same duke of Alençon until return to the french royal domain, and part of the Généralité of Alençon).
I liked all you've done for now but this is where I have to disagree. Don't worry, this is not against you, it's just a common mistake people are doing. Probably because of the modern satellite imagery, even Paradox did it! i'm just here to help.
Most of our forests in western europe are just remains since the massive deforestation during the medieval era. But not this one! Until the middle of the 19th century all the place is just a big marshland. Full of dirty swamps, morass, bogs and all the diseases that comes with it. It was unhealthy, dangerous and poor. In fact, this was only one of the concerns when authorities decides to plant the largest artificial forest in Europe there (The Landes Forest), because it was first of all to prevent the dune barrier from advancing inland and burying coastal cities.
So, when did this decision came? Well.... June 1857... And it was only a first step. Take a look at this map right after the beginning of plantation, and later. Taken from [Géographie historique de la France / Xavier de Planhol / 1988]:
Arpitan could be an interesting addition. Right now there's only Gascon and Occitan in the south of France, and this culture looks large enough to add.
Yes marsh, and wool as trade goods. The main activity was pastoral farming, especially sheeps. Labrit as capital city is ok since the game starts in 1444.
I'm not that sure for Labour and Bordeaux because most of the activity was concentrated in costal cities and estuaries, not inland. It depends if the main objective is to represent human activity and the possibility to develop the province or the difficulty for troops to progress.
I really don't want to have provinces named "upstream", "middle" and "downstream".
Other thing, it's really fishy to have Alençon and Perche as separate provinces (as both were controled by England at game start, were an appanage of the same duke of Alençon until return to the french royal domain, and part of the Généralité of Alençon).
Yeah, I agree, some names of provinces from my list should be different and follow same concept. But I just wanted to be sure that it's clear what are the reasons for dividing Franche Comte into 3. Divisions can be named after cities, but then it's a bit tricky with Franche Comte there as main seats of divisions changed over time and I cannot really tell if it's better to call middle province Dole or Besancon.
Unlike any other country France has crazy number of "Lower something" and "Upper something" divisions.
And Perche later was detached from Alencon and was province on its own. So it's not that it cannot exist as separate province. But yes, it's minor province, just like Saumur and some others. Realistically I do not expect that France can get more than some 15-20 new provinces in its next update, but Loire Valley is one of those places where provinces are just way too huge now.
Anyways the biggest focus and game changer should be new nations in France which could slow down expansion of France at least a bit. Now France swallows Brittany and everything else in its lands way too fast. I really cannot remember when I saw Brittany still existing in year 1500 while historically it did.
Yeah, I agree, some names of provinces from my list should be different and follow same concept. But I just wanted to be sure that it's clear what are the reasons for dividing Franche Comte into 3. Divisions can be named after cities, but then it's a bit tricky with Franche Comte there as main seats of divisions changed over time and I cannot really tell if it's better to call middle province Dole or Besancon.
Unlike any other country France has crazy number of "Lower something" and "Upper something" divisions.
And Perche later was detached from Alencon and was province on its own. So it's not that it cannot exist as separate province. But yes, it's minor province, just like Saumur and some others. Realistically I do not expect that France can get more than some 15-20 new provinces in its next update, but Loire Valley is one of those places where provinces are just way too huge now.
Anyways the biggest focus and game changer should be new nations in France which could slow down expansion of France at least a bit. Now France swallows Brittany and everything else in its lands way too fast. I really cannot remember when I saw Brittany still existing in year 1500 while historically it did.
15-20 new provinces? That's not going to happen. I see 5, maybe 6 new provinces happening. Not every big French city can be reflected in the game, not with current standards at least.
Anyways the biggest focus and game changer should be new nations in France which could slow down expansion of France at least a bit. Now France swallows Brittany and everything else in its lands way too fast. I really cannot remember when I saw Brittany still existing in year 1500 while historically it did.
To be fair, Brittany was under french PU in 1491, so "existing" might be tricky here. It was never military annexed though. But I see what you want to say, and I think the main reason is the french mission tree. Historically Brtittany came after Burgundy, while it's before ingame. The other thing to do would be to add a new disaster, or event chain, on the League of the Public Weal (Ligue du bien publique), which were opposing Louis XI, to his brother, Charles the bold, the duke of Brittany, and many other french nobles.
I think the problem with Arpitan is that it would have to get cc'd fairly soon into the game; it's realistic to add them but doesn't do much for gameplay. Kind of stems from the way EU4 handles culture in general in that it doesn't provide for shifts over time as opposed to gov. campaigns.
Not to divert topic but also, Perigord, Quercy and Limousin should be Occitan. Could provide evidence but any random google search will say that they have nothing to do with Gascon. An Arpitan or Provencal culture could go towards splitting up the Occitan blob, if that's desired.
Great Map! Do you have a larger version of this map, it is not very huge for me to find out these baliages?
By the way, the Ancien Regime has very complex structure even than all dynasties of China,like:
Gouvernment > Bailiage
Généralité > Élection
Parlement
while in wiki, below Généralité also bailiage listed, like: Bailliage de Beauvais, 4 députés ;
It is too strange for me a foreigner....
and, what the really subdivisions of Gouvernment?
while in wiki, below Généralité also bailiage listed, like: Bailliage de Beauvais, 4 députés ;
It is too strange for me a foreigner....
and, what the really subdivisions of Gouvernment?
It's tricky, yes, the main reason for the creation of the Départements under the Révolution was the administrative imbroglio:
A Généralité is a fiscal, then an adminsitrative division, created in the XVI century to ensure the king's control over all of France. There are two type of Généralités: Pays d'Election (with more freedom) and Pays d'Etat (more under the king's control).
A Baillage or a Sénéchaussée is more older (since central Middle-Ages) and more diverse (it was a fiscal, adminsitrative and military division) but on a really tiny territory (usually around a town). These Baillages (and Sénéchaussées) were also the electoral circonscription for the election before the Assemby of the Etats Généraux in 1789 (which is a good way to know which town was in which Généralité, as some are really tiny and not well documented).
A Gouvernement is mostly a military division (with other prerogative like policing).
A Parlement is the judicial and legislative authority in a Province (it create and apply the local customary norm).
These territorial division are overlaping themselves. If you add ecclesiastical and noble divisions on top of it, it's more and more incomprehensible.
It's tricky, yes, the main reason for the creation of the Départements under the Révolution was the administrative imbroglio:
A Généralité is a fiscal, then an adminsitrative division, created in the XVI century to ensure the king's control over all of France. There are two type of Généralités: Pays d'Election (with more freedom) and Pays d'Etat (more under the king's control).
A Baillage or a Sénéchaussée is more older (since central Middle-Ages) and more diverse (it was a fiscal, adminsitrative and military division) but on a really tiny territory (usually around a town). These Baillages (and Sénéchaussées) were also the electoral circonscription for the election before the Assemby of the Etats Généraux in 1789 (which is a good way to know which town was in which Généralité, as some are really tiny and not well documented).
A Gouvernement is mostly a military division (with other prerogative like policing).
A Parlement is the judicial and legislative authority in a Province (it create and apply the local customary norm).
These territorial division are overlaping themselves. If you add ecclesiastical and noble divisions on top of it, it's more and more incomprehensible.
Wait, France’s subjects? Weren’t those removed for a reason? Yes, but bear with me as I explain why I’m bringing this up.
Background.
In my opinion, France is one of the least accurately represented European nations in the game (Switzerland, the Papal States and the Livonian Order being among the many contenders). This has largely been made more of an issue by the removal of its vassals in the Common Sense patch, once considered to be the staple feature of playing in France.
But from a gameplay perspective, at the time their removal was well justified; the vassal swarm simply made France too powerful, and they didn’t really hold much value before they met their end with the use of a few hundred diplomatic points. In short, they were a bad aftertaste from the days of EU3.
However, the game has moved on a lot since the last sixteen patches. With the recent addition of new subject types like Tributaries, it would not be impossible to resurrect France’s subjects, but this time apply a new subject type to them in order to make them feel polished and feel balanced.
For the sake of clarity, we’ll name this potential new subject type ‘Appanage’ as it best describes what France’s subordinate states were. I’ll discuss the unique aspects of this subject type in Parts III and IV, coming soon.
Why not just use the Nobility estate?
The current situation is that the game opts to give partial representation to France’s subjects by using the Nobility estate, however there is a major issue with this:
With the current system, there is no consolidation of the French state like what historically happened.
Most other kingdoms in Europe have the nobility estate, so France’s situation doesn’t feel unique at all.
The Nobility are already a part of your country, and there’s not much incentive to revoke estates’ provinces because the nobility don’t actually pose a threat to you unless they reach 100% influence.
Furthermore, until 1.26 the estates themselves were locked behind the Cossacks DLC, so you had the same experience managing your realm as a more centralised one up until recently if you didn’t have the DLC.
So I don’t believe that estates, in their abstract nature, are able to solve the ahistorical representation of France without a major change to internal politics, but that could be a whole new suggestion of its own.
There’s also a few other issues:
Estate distribution is quasi-random; France tends to have a high proportion of their state development under the control of nobles, which seems accurate on the surface, but that’s mainly because some provinces will always have nobility no matter what because of the history files. However, this randomness means that it fails in truly representing the historical situation.
The estate system in its current state means that interactions with the nobility are very limited, usually consisting of clicking a few buttons to balance out their loyalty, influence and land. Whereas in reality these interactions defined the struggle between the French monarchs and the remnants of a disappearing feudal age.
You can’t play AS the nobility. This was probably the biggest drawback to the removal of the old subjects, even if they were broken. And so the gameplay feels much shallower in a region which before the early modern era was as fractured as the HRE, with almost no unique mechanics to speak of (unlike the HRE).
Some historical context.
To understand the role France’s appanages played in the history of the ‘ancién regime’ we need to consider the situation of France in 1444.
To call it a ‘centralised’ nation-state is a far cry from reality: while the French king did hold sway over most of the defined boundaries of the Kingdom of France, there still existed a myriad of appanages each ruled by their own Counts and Dukes. Around half of the territory of France was under the domaine royal or Royal Domain, ruled by the Capetians up until 1328, and thereafter by the Valois who are ruling France in 1444.
From the ascent of the Capetians to the 15th century the monarchs gradually gained more territories, expanding their realm from an area around Paris to nearly half of the country. However, the system of appanages originating from the Middle Ages prevented French kings from fully consolidating the entire kingdom, and could also create dangerous threats like the Duchy of Burgundy, which in theory was subordinate to France but by 1444 had grown its borders northward to pose a serious threat to them. Also, many appanages saw themselves as more distanced from the French crown, with many especially in the south of France being de facto independent such as the county of Foix.
It wasn’t until the mid-1500s that the French monarchs were able to successfully unite their lands into one homogenous kingdom, and some states survived as late as 1589, so it definitely had an impact during the game’s timeline on the historical development of France.
Once again I’ve linked a few maps below showing the development of France during the Capetian era:
In order to better represent France as it was historically I propose to break the kingdom down into more playable subjects once again, all but 1 of which are existing tags:
New Tags:
1. Duchy of Orléans
Provinces: 3 (Orleanais (capital), Blois, Valois), has core on Touraine Culture: Francien
Orléans was historically one of the most important appanages in France. Not only did it control the cities of Orleans and Blois on the rich Loire Valley, but also since the duchy’s creation in 1344 the title was bestowed upon the eldest brother of the French king (which is why they were known as the princes du sang). It also controlled the county of Valois north-east of Paris. Though it met its end early on in 1497 with the rise of Louis XII (who was previously Duke of Orleans) to the French throne.
Considering it already has a unique National Idea set in-game, it should definitely be included if the region were ever to be revised.
2. County of Armagnac
Provinces: 3 (Armagnac (capital), Rouergue, La Marche) Culture: Gascon
The county of Armagnac had several far-flung territories in 1444, in parts of central and southern France, even acquiring Nemours later on. It reached its apogee in the late 14th and early 15th century but by 1444 was in the middle of a gradual decline. Even still, the counts held a large amount of land relative to others, and the fact that the tag already exists further supports its inclusion.
Also, some interesting info relating to Armagnac’s rebellious tendencies:
In 1442 there were negotiations between Armagnac and England relating to a marriage between king Henry VI and one of Jean IV’s daughters. Although the negotiations were abandoned after threats from Charles VII, Armagnac had still considered allying with the English side.
Jean IV acknowledged the king of Castile as his overlord in 1425. He then took part in the failed ‘Praguerie’ revolt against Charles VII, and afterwards Charles demanded Jean to renounce his claim that the king of Castile was his overlord. But, he refused, and he was eventually imprisoned in Carcassonne in 1443. Until the end of his reign in 1450 the county’s lands were ruled by a council of nobles, even after Jean was pardoned in 1446 (so a Regency Council could be ruling Armagnac in 1444).
3. Duchy of Bourbon
Provinces: 2 (Bourbonnais (capital), Forez), has cores on Auvergne and La Marche Culture: Francien
The dukes of Bourbon were among the most important in the patchwork of feudal states, despite not being the largest. In 1327, the duchy of Bourbon was created for the eldest son of the French king. The Bourbons, unlike the Armagnacs, had a history of being loyal to the Valois rulers of France up until their annexation into the French royal domain in 1527. Their extra cores on territory they historically ruled over at one point or another can allow them to consolidate a large power base in central France, and maybe even get their dynasty on the French throne (like what historically happened).
They also had a strong claim to Auvergne, which at the time had 4 components: the Duchy of Auvergne, the Dauphinate of Auvergne, the Bishopric of Clermont and the County of Auvergne. Bourbon could claim the first two titles, while the County was ruled by separate Counts who resisted the Bourbon influence. The Bishopric of Clermont was known for its rivalry with the counts of Auvergne, however I didn’t include them as the territory they controlled was very small in comparison to the County.
4. County of Auvergne
Provinces: 1 (Auvergne (capital)) Culture: Occitan
This tag, if it were added, would represent the County of Auvergne (NOT the Duchy, which at the time was under the control of Bourbon). Although there are a few reasons to make them separate from Bourbon in the timeline, if the goal is to minimise the number of tags added, then Auvergne can be a part of Bourbon. Otherwise, Auvergne may make for a very challenging start. Not only do they have France to contend with, but also Bourbon who has a core on their only province and is more powerful than them. In 1444, the County was ruled by Bertrand V de la Tour.
The County of Foix for most of its history remained more independent of French control than the other subjects, due to it being sheltered by the Pyrenees against an invasion from the south. The Counts would play an important role in the history of the region, acquiring Narbonnais (in 1447), Roussillon and Cerdagne later on, and also briefly ruled as kings of Navarre. They were absorbed into the royal domain at a later point than most other subjects, in 1589 when Henry III of Navarre ascended to the French throne as Henry IV of France.
6. Lordship of Albret
^ (a design similar to this should be its flag).
Provinces: 1 (Albret (capital)) Culture: Gascon
Albret’s inclusion as a tag at first doesn’t seem all that justified; it was not a rich land by any means, mostly situated in the Landes forest, and its status as a lordship also makes it seem less significant.
However, the lordship played an important role in various conflicts. In the Hundred Years’ War, it at first fought on the English side, but then switched to the French side after a secret agreement in 1368. Albret was also the centre of the “Mad War”, fought between 1485 and 1488, brought about in part by the ambitions of the Lord of Albret, Alain “the Great”, to acquire Brittany.
The Albret family itself would also rise to unexpected prominence during the timeline with the acquisition of Navarre, and so I was led to put this tag on the map. It is the only completely new tag that would be made playable in 1444.
Albret will be another very challenging country, but its access to the sea means that it does have a few options for expansion. Albret starts under Charles II of Albret in 1444, whose heir (Alain “the Great”) should have a very high monarch skill.
With these new tags added, here’s what the setup would look like alongside the revised map. Each nation’s flag is used to help distinguish who owns what:
This concludes Part II; in the next part I’ll be going over my ideas for a unique subject type, as well as government type, the Appanage, for these minor nations.
I was doing 100-province France for myself and can share of my findings as well
100 provinces would bring France on same level of detail as its neighbors Germany & Great Britain are now.
First of all best map I've found would be this: View attachment 433053
It shows all provinces and bailliages of united France.
For year 1444 some potential provinces might be a bit different, but still it would feel so much better if provinces like Ile-de-France or Champagne would be similar to shapes from this map and not of those weird forms we have in game now.
That picture's from DeviantArt and the guy who posted it said it's alternate history. You can see that in this alternate timeline France owns Flanders, Brabant and even Vaud.
So I can't really be sure if those bailliages are historical.
