1.16: The Patch That Destroyed Russian Culture

[AndrejK]

Agreed. Personally I would like to see following split: Novgorodian in the north, Muscovite in the east and Ruthenian in Lithuanian areas. Then by 16th or maybe 17th century Cossack culture appears in areas taken from Tatars in the south, Ruthenian splits into Ukrainian and Belarusian while Muscovite and Novgorodian unite into Russian.

Maybe rename Novgorodian to Pomor ? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pomors as they were considered a highly divergent bunch of Russians.
Ukrainian and "Belarussian" should split only if a border exists between these two areas for say, 25 years.
Muscovite and Novgorodian also should unite only if one country controls both cities for say 25 years. If the area isnt unified politically, the identity of the people will develop and "Muscovites" will be Muscovites with heart and soul.

 

[nalivayko]

I was referring to the excessive use of word "Russian" in a proposal to call all East Slavic cultures "Russian" with corresponding adjectives.

Using this map as a starting point, what would you suggest instead? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_Slavic_languages#/media/File:Rus-1389-lg.png

 

[Shatterfury]

Cultural and (heck) linguistic divisions ran deeper in Germany (Italy, Spain and France) than in the Russian lands (various degrees in each scenario, of course).

First of all, edit your posts and add the reply you want to answer to so that you don`t double post.

Second of all you didn`t answer my question, we aren`t talking regional identities here, I asked you a simple question, do you think there wasn`t a German identity before the declaration of the German Empire in 1871 ?

 

[nalivayko]

Maybe rename Novgorodian to Pomor ? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pomors as they were considered a highly divergent bunch of Russians.
Ukrainian and "Belarussian" should split only if a border exists between these two areas for say, 25 years.
Muscovite and Novgorodian also should unite only if one country controls both cities for say 25 years. If the area isnt unified politically, the identity of the people will develop and "Muscovites" will be Muscovites with heart and soul.

If you were trying to split Novgorodian, Pomors would be one of the groups. Don't they cover just the areas around the White Sea?

 

[nalivayko]

First of all, edit your posts and add the reply you want to answer to so that you don`t double post.

Second of all you didn`t answer my question, we aren`t talking regional identities here, I asked you a simple question, do you think there wasn`t a German identity before the declaration of the German Empire in 1871 ?

First of all, drop the patronizing attitude and mind your own posts. Second of all, I have already told you my opinion on the German identity. The question is too complicated to answer with 'yes' or 'no'.

 

[Dicentis]

If Russian is split Ruthenian should also be split.

 

[Shatterfury]

First of all, drop the patronizing attitude and mind your own posts. Second of all, I have already told you my opinion on the German identity. The question is too complicated to answer with 'yes' or 'no'.

You didn`t say anything clear or remotely clear about the emergence of the German culture.

If you don`t have a somewhat clear opinion of the German culture how can you compare it the Russian culture ?

You have a link in your signature that makes a reference to a German Kingdom, that in itself is an answer on when the Germans identified as such.

On the other hand we know that the Russians are a direct splinter off the Rus` people along with what later become Ukrainians and Belarusians know for a very long time as Little Russians and White Russians in historical documents.
We know that the Kievan Rus` used Old Slavonic and we can conclude that the genesis of the Russian language and emergence of the Russian culture started after 1240.

So yeah, the German identity predates the Russian identity.

 

[giant_sloth]

Using this map as a starting point, what would you suggest instead? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_Slavic_languages#/media/File:Rus-1389-lg.png

As I said, I'm happy with how things will be in 1.16. Personally, I would merge Belarusian and Ruthenian into one, but that wound not be good for balance.

 

[nalivayko]

You didn`t say anything clear or remotely clear about the emergence of the German culture.

If you don`t have a somewhat clear opinion of the German culture how can you compare it the Russian culture ?

You have a link in your signature that makes a reference to a German Kingdom, that in itself is an answer on when the Germans identified as such.

On the other hand we know that the Russians are a direct splinter off the Rus` people along with what later become Ukrainians and Belarusians know for a very long time as Little Russians and White Russians in historical documents.
We know that the Kievan Rus` used Old Slavonic and we can conclude that the genesis of the Russian language and emergence of the Russian culture started after 1240.

So yeah, the German identity predates the Russian identity.

The reason I am not giving you "a clear opinion" about the German culture is because this a thread about Russian culture. If you want to hear that German identity predates Russian, fine, it does. For $u(k's sake... which part of the "Not even entering an argument" did you not understand? Start a different thread about the German culture, and I'll gladly join you there.

<mumbling to myself in stage whisper> I am just glad he didn't use Tacitus as a reference.

 

[DanubianCossak]

As I said, I'm happy with how things will be in 1.16. Personally, I would merge Belarusian and Ruthenian into one, but that wound not be good for balance.

Or this:

Spoiler

(this comes from a mod obviously)

 

[nalivayko]

As I said, I'm happy with how things will be in 1.16. Personally, I would merge Belarusian and Ruthenian into one, but that wound not be good for balance.

Again... it's either 5-6 subcultures or 2 bigger ones: Russian and Ruthenian (in the latter meaning of the word). Can't slice Russian branch into three and expect the union of the southwestern branches.

I have a lot to learn. Will go scour the Internets to learn about Ryazanian culture.

 

[Warial]

Or this:

Spoiler

(this comes from a mod obviously)

I know that Old Church Slavonic was the language of administration in the Grand Duchy, however split between Litvin and Samogitian with those cultural borders makes little sense to me.

 

[Shatterfury]

The reason I am not giving you "a clear opinion" about the German culture is because this a thread about Russian culture. If you want to hear that German identity predates Russian, fine, it does. For $u(k's sake... which part of the "Not even entering an argument" did you not understand? Start a different thread about the German culture, and I'll gladly join you there.

<mumbling to myself in stage whisper> I am just glad he didn't use Tacitus as a reference.

Well it is a point because there is no such thing as a German culture on the map but you want a culture to be named Russian in a 1444 start.

For all intents and purposes one can argue that the Russian cultural identity didn`t reach the fulminant point until later with the declaration of the Tsardom of Russia.
Old Slavonian language was still in use up until 15 century and we know that the Novgorodian dialect when extinct somewhere around 16, 17th century, you can check the internet if you don`t believe me. So why the need to have Russians written on the culture map ? The game is balanced for a 1444, I know that there should be some modifiers for Muscovite and Novgorodian to merge into Russian but what would that add to the gameplay ?

I`m sure that Russia isn`t the only one who could use some dynamic culture mechanics but for all intents and purposes it stands just as strong if not more.

Or this:

Spoiler

(this comes from a mod obviously)

I don`t see Muscovite and Novgorodian on the map.

Why split Romanians from Transylvanians ?

 

[DanubianCossak]

I know that Old Church Slavonic was the language of administration in the Grand Duchy, however split between Litvin and Samogitian with those cultural borders makes little sense to me.

Why? Samogitians are the Balts who conquered Slavs (Ruthenians), and Litvins are the mixed Slavs with Balt nobility, who are essentially Slavs by the time of EU startdate. And then on top you have Samogitians who are essentially today's Lithuanians. Makes perfect sense in my brain.

 

[Warial]

Why? Samogitians are the Balts who conquered Slavs (Ruthenians), and Litvins are the mixed Slavs with Balt nobility, who are essentially Slavs by the time of EU startdate. And then on top you have Samogitians who are essentially today's Lithuanians. Makes perfect sense in my brain.

First, Samogitians were just one of tribes and, if I recall correctly, Aukstaitians were more dominant among the Lithuanian tribes. Second, Lithuanian language was far more dominant to the east and south than in your mod. For sure Vilnus and its vinicites wasn't a region mixed ethnically between Slavic and Baltic populations. Though if you have any sources to prove the contrary, then I would love to read them.

 

[nalivayko]

Well it is a point because there is no such thing as a German culture on the map but you want a culture to be named Russian in a 1444 start.

For all intents and purposes one can argue that the Russian cultural identity didn`t reach the fulminant point until later with the declaration of the Tsardom of Russia.
Old Slavonian language was still in use up until 15 century and we know that the Novgorodian dialect when extinct somewhere around 16, 17th century, you can check the internet if you don`t believe me. So why the need to have Russians written on the culture map ? The game is balanced for a 1444, I know that there should be some modifiers for Muscovite and Novgorodian to merge into Russian but what would that add to the gameplay ?

I`m sure that Russia isn`t the only one who could use some dynamic culture mechanics but for all intents and purposes it stands just as strong if not more.

One could and one does argue the dates Russian cultural identity survived beyond the borders of Myscowy and no one seems to argue its origins prior to the declaration of Tsardom. That's beyond the point. I don't mind seeing Russian culture split into several ones. In fact, if you jump a page or two back, I did even agree with 5 subcultures roughly corresponding the linguistic divisions of the Russian language. It's the naming/borders of these branches that I find hard to accept.

I don't like seeing Ruthenian co-existing with Belorussian (two different timeframes). I have no idea what Ryazanian culture is (beyond the lands of the principality). I have problems imagining colonies in Alaska populated by Muscovites.

I also have a problem with Ruthenians not being able to form Russia... but that's a different thread altogether.

To summarize: not happy with the way Russian region is represented and not happy with the direction things take in the next patch.

EDIT: Agree that dynamic culture mechanics would help. Wish culture acceptance was tweaked.

 

[DanubianCossak]

I don`t see Muscovite and Novgorodian on the map.

Why split Romanians from Transylvanians ?

Never saw the need to split Russian culture tbh (although i have some valid-ish reasons in this thread).

Well Transylvanians are sorta a result of Hungarian rule (its a mix of all sorts of stuff including Germans), i kinda thought it would fit better with Hungarians.

 

[Martin_Mortyry]

View attachment 156433

I am all for dividing cultures even more! I hate when cores of dead tags disappear, which is especially irritating with the Zaporozhian ones.
About further division in Ruthenia - it could also be divided into two groups - East Slavic for Zaporozhian and Kievan, and some sort of Commonwealth group to put Volhynian and Polotskian ones, together with Polish and Lithuanian.
What do you think?

 

[Shatterfury]

One could and one does argue the dates Russian cultural identity survived beyond the borders of Myscowy and no one seems to argue its origins prior to the declaration of Tsardom. That's beyond the point. I don't mind seeing Russian culture split into several ones. In fact, if you jump a page or two back, I did even agree with 5 subcultures roughly corresponding the linguistic divisions of the Russian language. It's the naming/borders of these branches that I find hard to accept.

I don't like seeing Ruthenian co-existing with Belorussian (two different timeframes). I have no idea what Ryazanian culture is (beyond the lands of the principality). I have problems imagining colonies in Alaska populated by Muscovites.

I also have a problem with Ruthenians not being able to form Russia... but that's a different thread altogether.

To summarize: not happy with the way Russian region is represented and not happy with the direction things take in the next patch.

EDIT: Agree that dynamic culture mechanics would help. Wish culture acceptance was tweaked.

There we go, now we are getting somewhere !!!

I really do agree that a dynamic culture conversion for culture unions would be nice.

Ryazanian culture seems quite arbitrary would Smolenskian be more accurate ? I know it was an important city and regional centre, certainly much more important than Ryazan.

Ruthenians and forming Russia is quite an headache, Russia, as a name, is an adaptation of the Rus` so it can be used as a cultural union.
It could just be up to the player if he forms Russia or Ruthenia.

Agreed about Belorussian name as well and Romanian can be changed to Vlach while we are at it.

Germany has a wanky treatment as well, Austrians and Dutch don`t get to form Germany. In 1444 the Austrians don`t have their multi ethnic empire and the Duch didn`t split from the HRE and developed a separate culture based on maritime trade and Calvinism.

Never saw the need to split Russian culture tbh (although i have some valid-ish reasons in this thread).

Well Transylvanians are sorta a result of Hungarian rule (its a mix of all sorts of stuff including Germans), i kinda thought it would fit better with Hungarians.

Transylvanians will be included in 1.16 just so that Romanians and Hungarians can be content, that is way Romanians and Hungarians share the group.

To be honest Hungarians, Slovaks and Croats could be one group based around Catholic faith and the Romanians, Bulgarians and Serbians the second one based around common culture and the Orthodox faith. But this will to problems in representing Transylvania - Hungarian nobility ruling over a Romanian peasant majority with the help of German burgers.

 

[nalivayko]

There we go, now we are getting somewhere !!!

I really do agree that a dynamic culture conversion for culture unions would be nice.

Ryazanian culture seems quite arbitrary would Smolenskian be more accurate ? I know it was an important city and regional centre, certainly much more important than Ryazan.

Ruthenians and forming Russia is quite an headache, Russia, as a name, is an adaptation of the Rus` so it can be used as a cultural union.
It could just be up to the player if he forms Russia or Ruthenia.

The problem with Smolensk... it doesn't represent the "Ryazanian" region well. This region corresponds to the southern dialect group of modern Russian (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/88/Dialects_of_Russian_language-ru.png). The problem with that, of course, is that "southern" terms also applies to lands around Kiev, Turov, Pinsk and Pereyaslav (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4f/Rus-1389-lg.png). And the last map also places Ryazan into central dialect group during 14th century.

Where am I going with that? It's a mess when you diverge from three (or four, if you count Novgorod) main branches