1.16: The Patch That Destroyed Russian Culture

[Shatterfury]

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

Wait....only 6 and 7 make the central one ? Only that thin line ? The Russian dialect map is a bigger nightmare than the German one.

I guess 11 and the northern part of 8 can form Smoleskian and the rest should be transferred to Muscovite.

 

[nalivayko]

Wait....only 6 and 7 make the central one ? Only that thin line ? The Russian dialect map is a bigger nightmare than the German one.

I guess 11 and the northern part of 8 can form Smoleskian and the rest should be transferred to Moskovian.

There is a difference between Russian and German dialects... as in there is little difference between Russian dialects (plus that thin line probably covers bigger part of Germany)

I am still not convinced the use of the cities is justified here. How about this:

Russian -> Northern Russian, Central Russian, Southern Russian cultures (the latter includes Ryazan lands + Russian lands under Lithuanian control)
Belorussian -> Litvin or White Ruthenian
Ukrainian -> Red Ruthenian, Ruthenian

There's six: three Russian sub-cultures under the potential rule of Tsar speaking Old Russian and three Ruthenian sub-cultures under Poland-Lithuania speaking (Old) Ruthenian/Old West Russian.

EDIT: before I am asked. Division between Red Ruthenia and Ruthenia signifies the division of southern Rus lands between the Duchy of Lithuania and Kingdom of Poland (thus, Southewestern and Southern East Slavic dialects in the end of XIV)

 

[Shatterfury]

There is a difference between Russian and German dialects... as in there is little difference between Russian dialects (plus that thin line probably covers bigger part of Germany)

I am still not convinced the use of the cities is justified here. How about this:

Russian -> Northern Russian, Central Russian, Southern Russian cultures (the latter includes Ryazan lands + Russian lands under Lithuanian control)
Belorussian -> Litvin or White Ruthenian
Ukrainian -> Red Ruthenian, Ruthenian

There's six: three Russian sub-cultures under the potential rule of Tsar speaking Old Russian and three Ruthenian sub-cultures under Poland-Lithuania speaking (Old) Ruthenian/Old West Russian.

EDIT: before I am asked. Division between Red Ruthenia and Ruthenia signifies the division of southern Rus lands between the Duchy of Lithuania and Kingdom of Poland (thus, Southewestern and Southern East Slavic dialects in the end of XIV)

Not bad, not bad at all.

I`m not really against or for using Muscovite, Novgorodian and Smolenskian or the Northern, Central or Southern Russian.

At the very least Ryazanian must be changed to Smolenskian if they still go with the current naming and readjust it`s size.

I don`t know about Ruthenian division, wouldn`t it make the group too small and very hard to accept ?

 

[nalivayko]

Not bad, not bad at all.

I`m not really against or for using Muscovite, Novgorodian and Smolenskian or the Northern, Central or Southern Russian.

At the very least Ryazanian must be changed to Smolenskian if they still go with the current naming and readjust it`s size.

I don`t know about Ruthenian division, wouldn`t it make the group too small and very hard to accept ?

And that would be a bad thing? As a Polish King I have no problems right now accepting Ruthenian culture... does that sound like history?

 

[Shatterfury]

And that would be a bad thing? As a Polish King I have no problems right now accepting Ruthenian culture... does that sound like history?

Well there was that whole Eastern Catholic Church episode and the Cossack troubles but those can be simulated with other mechanics.

We have Bretons in the French culture union, so it can be far worse !

 

[Standstill]

Italian here.

Just posting to add that Italian cultures are perfect as of right now. Could add a couple more, but it's not a big deal.

 

[Xellos Slayer]

Going back to dialects.
I'm a bit tired of this, but if you want to separate Russian cultures into some sub-cultures, you better use town-centres of Rus/Russia to represent it.
If you have Ryazanian on the map, there _MUST BE_ Smolenskian people. There _SHOULD BE_ Chernigovian, Zaporozhian, and Kievan people. Alongside with Vollhynian ones.
For the date when "Russian" culture was born... It would be better to use Battle of Kulikovo as a start point. Pretty much after that we've got powerful Muscowy which wanted to get together all of Rus' lands.

I still find it strange, that there are no German or Italian cultures emerging, if you manage to unite the land. It should take 50+ years after forming a cultural union tag, but still should.
Probably, dividing Russian culture amongst Princedomes lands would be a step towards implementing such a mechanic.

To those who so deliberately and aggresively tries to make nowadays Ukraine into a true successor of Kievan Rus, I believe that you should read where was that Rus born. And how it was build. Indeed, Kiev was a capital city. But it was more or less equal to Novgorod. Not to mention, that Smolensk was a rather important middle point between them. Also, you shouldn't forget, that Kievan Rus fallen apart into a lot of Princedomes, all of which were equally Russian/Ruthenian/Whatever-you-want-to-call-it. And every single one of them could identify itself as a "True Rus' Successor".

In the end I will repeat what I've already told before. If you want to divide EU4's Russian culture, then you should do the same to other cultures in a region. Ruthenian, Polish, Ottomans, etc.
And I guess, that East-Slavic culture group should be renamed. Because whatever you say, but we've Germanic culture group and Italian as well. But no we have neither "Russian culture group", nor Russian culture on the map.

PS I wish that there will be less swearing here. 'Cause its rather boring to read. If you want to insult each other or force nationalistic crap, do so in private.

 

[giant_sloth]

To those who so deliberately and aggresively tries to make nowadays Ukraine into a true successor of Kievan Rus, I believe that you should read where was that Rus born. And how it was build. Indeed, Kiev was a capital city. But it was more or less equal to Novgorod.

As for two centers of Rus. Rurik arrived in Novgorod in 862. But in 860, there was a massive raid on Byzantium
Now, I can't imagine that this raid was launched from somewhere else than Kyiv.
So, even before Rurik showed up, there was a well organized Rus in modern capital of Ukraine.

 

[Omegador]

Going back to dialects.
I'm a bit tired of this, but if you want to separate Russian cultures into some sub-cultures, you better use town-centres of Rus/Russia to represent it.
If you have Ryazanian on the map, there _MUST BE_ Smolenskian people. There _SHOULD BE_ Chernigovian, Zaporozhian, and Kievan people. Alongside with Vollhynian ones.
For the date when "Russian" culture was born... It would be better to use Battle of Kulikovo as a start point. Pretty much after that we've got powerful Muscowy which wanted to get together all of Rus' lands.

I still find it strange, that there are no German or Italian cultures emerging, if you manage to unite the land. It should take 50+ years after forming a cultural union tag, but still should.
Probably, dividing Russian culture amongst Princedomes lands would be a step towards implementing such a mechanic.

To those who so deliberately and aggresively tries to make nowadays Ukraine into a true successor of Kievan Rus, I believe that you should read where was that Rus born. And how it was build. Indeed, Kiev was a capital city. But it was more or less equal to Novgorod. Not to mention, that Smolensk was a rather important middle point between them. Also, you shouldn't forget, that Kievan Rus fallen apart into a lot of Princedomes, all of which were equally Russian/Ruthenian/Whatever-you-want-to-call-it. And every single one of them could identify itself as a "True Rus' Successor".

In the end I will repeat what I've already told before. If you want to divide EU4's Russian culture, then you should do the same to other cultures in a region. Ruthenian, Polish, Ottomans, etc.
And I guess, that East-Slavic culture group should be renamed. Because whatever you say, but we've Germanic culture group and Italian as well. But no we have neither "Russian culture group", nor Russian culture on the map.

PS I wish that there will be less swearing here. 'Cause its rather boring to read. If you want to insult each other or force nationalistic crap, do so in private.

Pretty much stuff I wrote in my original post. Smolensk was a more important city than Ryazan'. Makes no sense to have Ryazan culture in Smolensk.

Ruthenian needs to be split into Kievan, Zaporozhian (Cossack), Volhynian, and maybe even Chernigovian. This would also allow for the cores of each dead tag to survive forever, maybe even break off and form Ruthenian. Shit you not I saw Galician separatists in Ottoman Chernigov, and sometimes I see Kiev break off of Hungary in Maramaros. Stuff like this makes no sense.

Besides this point, if you're gonna break big old Russian up you may as well break up anachronistic Ruthenian and Belorussian. See my map in OP.

 

[Omegador]

As for two centers of Rus. Rurik arrived in Novgorod in 862. But in 860, there was a massive raid on Byzantium
Now, I can't imagine that this raid was launched from somewhere else than Kyiv.
So, even before Rurik showed up, there was a well organized Rus in modern capital of Ukraine.

Before I see a debate spark up about semi-mythological Viking/Varagian kings from the 9th century, Kiev was a Slavic center of trade under the control of the Khazar Empire. Askold and Dyr (or the same person) sent by Rurik conqiered the city. Pretty much everything, this included, isn't historical fact as it is shrowded in mystery. Yes, there were raids on Byzantium, but they didn't start until after the Varagian Rus' host ruled the lands. Under Rurik & company (his brothers, friends, and later descendants).

None of the dates are even certain, with most of the raids on Byzantium not even accounted for by Byzantine sources. They did however have a lot of information about a certain Varagian Guard.

Also has nothing to do with EU4 as it's history that is almost 600 years prior to 1444, therefore it is as irrelevant as 1444 is to 2044.

 

[AndrejK]

Alright so I guess we all agree on Novgorodian in Russian Northern District, Muscovite in the Central parts.... then Smolenskian in Smolensk oblast plus eastern parts of Belarus, Litvin for western Belarus... RIP Ryazanian.
Ukraine be divided into Kievan in "Cental Ukraine" Cossack^/Zaporozhian in former Tartar hordes ruled under east Slavics and Rusyn in Galicia, Volhynia anf Subcarpathian Ruthenia.

 

[Xellos Slayer]

So, even before Rurik showed up, there was a well organized Rus in modern capital of Ukraine.

I don't really want to argue on this, but that doesn't make it into a "well-organized" Rus. As well as it doesn't mean that those, who lived there considered themselves to be Ukrainian (or Russian as well). As you may know, there were guys like Dregovichi, Severyane, Illmens, and other in the modern-day Russia/Belarus/Ukraine. So, lets stop here.
I don't like an idea of a viking Rurik which came from Scandinavia to bring State to Slavic barbarians, but (at least for now) it is considered that Rus started with him. Once there will be enough support to overthrow this statement – ok, I'll be glad to hear it. Until it is done – sorry.

Pretty much stuff I wrote in my original post. Smolensk was a more important city than Ryazan'. Makes no sense to have Ryazan culture in Smolensk.

Yeah, we are pretty much on the same wave on this. Besides, I've already written the same stuff about 2 pages back...

 

[al.gb]

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?

Agree about Zaporozhye, it deserve they own culture for cossack proto-state.

About the rest, Principality of Galicia–Volhynia was conquered in 1392, just 52 years before the game start. People of this land speaking the south-western dialect of old russian and, what is even more important, they are being orthodox. There is no way to put them into west slavic group.

If anyone should be in the West Slavic group is Slovak culture, that's for sure.

 

[Martin_Mortyry]

About the rest, Principality of Galicia–Volhynia was conquered in 1392, just 52 years before the game start. People of this land speaking the south-western dialect of old russian and, what is even more important, they are being orthodox. There is no way to put them into west slavic group.

If anyone should be in the West Slavic group is Slovak culture, that's for sure.

What? No, West Slavic group should be abandoned! Poles, Volhynians, Lithuanians, Byelorussians(Polotskians?) and maybe Latvians would be better off in some common(heh heh) group to replace it, Czechs and Silesians could go to Germans.
Also, Duchy of Galicia-Lodomeria was annexed by Poland back in 1349, 100 years from the game start. If we're talking about this war, it was closer to series of conflicts, like HYW.

 

[al.gb]

I am still not convinced the use of the cities is justified here. How about this:

Russian -> Northern Russian, Central Russian, Southern Russian cultures (the latter includes Ryazan lands + Russian lands under Lithuanian control)
Belorussian -> Litvin or White Ruthenian
Ukrainian -> Red Ruthenian, Ruthenian

Totally agree. There is more sense to have Central Russian culture in siberia and far east than the silly "muscovite".

In the end I will repeat what I've already told before. If you want to divide EU4's Russian culture, then you should do the same to other cultures in a region. Ruthenian, Polish, Ottomans, etc.
And I guess, that East-Slavic culture group should be renamed. Because whatever you say, but we've Germanic culture group and Italian as well. But no we have neither "Russian culture group", nor Russian culture on the map.

If devs divided russian culture they should add more provinces in the russian region. By the "russian region" i mean exactly Moscow, Novgorod and russian minors. And no need to tell me that they will do it in 1.16. Three or four provinces are not worth it.

PS: Polish culture should be divided into Polonian, Kuyavian and Mazovian.

I'm joking. But serious.

 

[nalivayko]

Going back to dialects.
If you have Ryazanian on the map, there _MUST BE_ Smolenskian people. There _SHOULD BE_ Chernigovian, Zaporozhian, and Kievan people. Alongside with Vollhynian ones.

In the end I will repeat what I've already told before. If you want to divide EU4's Russian culture, then you should do the same to other cultures in a region. Ruthenian, Polish, Ottomans, etc.
And I guess, that East-Slavic culture group should be renamed. Because whatever you say, but we've Germanic culture group and Italian as well. But no we have neither "Russian culture group", nor Russian culture on the map.

Xellos Slayer, I would agree on consistency thing... if there is Ryazanian, add Chernigovan, Kievan, etc. Like stated before, I favor a different approach (Northern, Central, etc.). After all, going forward in the game, if the Russian player extends Southern Russian (Ryazanian) culture into the steppes it looks... logical. However, if we start seeing Ryazanian and Chernigovan near the Caucasian mountains, it would be an immersion breaker.

As for renaming East Slavic group... that's a no-brainer. It should Russian.

Alright so I guess we all agree on Novgorodian in Russian Northern District, Muscovite in the Central parts.... then Smolenskian in Smolensk oblast plus eastern parts of Belarus, Litvin for western Belarus... RIP Ryazanian.
Ukraine be divided into Kievan in "Cental Ukraine" Cossack^/Zaporozhian in former Tartar hordes ruled under east Slavics and Rusyn in Galicia, Volhynia anf Subcarpathian Ruthenia.

Where did you find 'we all agree'? I am still for Northern, Central and Southern Russian cultures not based on any particular city. I am also for three Ruthenian cultures: Red, White and just Ruthenian.

Agree about Zaporozhye, it deserve they own culture for cossack proto-state.

Ouch. Zaporozhian culture? That opens a can of worms - now you have to add a dynamic culture system to accommodate all Cossack hosts in Russia. I'd rather see Cossacks represented through estates or marches or some other military frontier mechanic.

What? No, West Slavic group should be abandoned! Poles, Volhynians, Lithuanians, Byelorussians(Polotskians?) and maybe Latvians would be better off in some common(heh heh) group to replace it, Czechs and Silesians could go to Germans.

Martin... you'd discard Silesians for Belorussians? This thread did lack of bit of Polish nationalism and I am surprised at the mild extent of your demands. I'd claim 'Ryazanian' and 'Muscowian' too if I was you. After all, Vyatichi and Radimichi tribes are supposed to be of Polish origin according to Nestor's Primary Chronicle. Thank you for your modesty.

RE: Rurik, Varyags, Rus, etc... while I would love to add my two cents here, it's a different time-frame. Let's leave all that talk to the CK2 forum.

 

[nalivayko]

Totally agree. There is more sense to have Central Russian culture in siberia and far east than the silly "muscovite".

PS: Polish culture should be divided into Polonian, Kuyavian and Mazovian.

RE: Russian culture

You could also extend accepted cultures, pushing Northern Russian into Siberia instead, Southern Russian into the steppes and Central Russian elsewhere.

RE: Poland

I have a friend with Mazur as last name. He is still trying to convinces me that Mazurs are not really Polish. That's the joke part. The serious reply: yes, if German, Russian and French are split, let the Polish culture fall too

Let's let the Poles divide their own culture though. Perhaps, Małopolska, Wielkopolska, Mazovia would work better.

 

[Elin]

I really don't understand all those complains about this.

Ok in early you won't get a full acceptance of the culture group territories but once the empire rank reached, you have an even greater advantage than in 1.15

 

[nalivayko]

I really don't understand all those complains about this.

Ok in early you won't get a full acceptance of the culture group territories but once the empire rank reached, you have an even greater advantage than in 1.15

It's not about what's advantageous and what's not. It's about an immersion factor and historical accuracy (as much as we can get at this point). To understand better, you could re-read the thread from the beginning, there are plenty of good explanations (alongside with plenty of crazy).

EDIT: improving my manners

 

[Elin]

It's not about what's advantageous and what's not. It's about an immersion factor and historical accuracy (as much as we can get at this point). To understand better, read the thread from the beginning.

Well i leave pretty far from Russia so i am not really accurate to historical cultures in this country but what i know is that i could complain as much as you do about irrealistic cultures in my country.

Remember it's just a game and that the culture map can't be perfect