• 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.
#(1419-1498) Schieringers and Vetkopers
event = {
id = 22010
random = no
country = FRI
name = "EVENTNAME22010" #Schieringers and Vetkopers
desc = "EVENTHIST22010"
#-#From 1392 to 1498, civil war raged between two parties, dominated by fighting between competing noble families. The cause of the fighting, aligned along two monastical orders, the Schieringers and Vetkopers, was due to complex family relations in which family loyalty, honour and blood revenge played an important role. In particular the fighting took place between important noble families and the influential monasteries. The Schieringers had their largest group of followers in Westergo. The Vetkopers had their power base in the east of the province.

date = { day = 2 month = january year = 1419 }
offset = 10
deathdate = { day = 29 month = january year = 1498 }

action_a = {
name = "ACTIONNAME22010A" #Well, we will have to make do...
command = { type = stability value = -6 }
command = { type = province_revoltrisk which = 337 value = 10 } #Friesen
}
}


new event
Code:
#(1419-1498) Powerful Citystate
event = {
	id = 171003
	random = no
	country = FRI
	name = "EVENTNAME171003" #Groningen and the Ommelanden
	desc = "EVENTHIST171003"
	
	date = { day = 22 month = july year = 1470 }
	offset = 30
	deathdate = { day = 29 month = january year = 1492 }

	action_a = {
		name = "ACTIONNAME171003A" #Hail free frisians
		command = { type = stability value = -1}
		command = { type = flagname which = "groning" } #*
                command = { type = relation which = HAB value = -50 }
		command = { type = relation which = OLD value = -50 }
                command = { type = relation which = GEL value = 20 }
		command = { type = relation which = KLE value = 20 }
                command = { type = provincetax which = 377 value = 1 } 
	}
}
#-#The province of Groningen consists of two historical parts, the (Saxon) city of Groningen and the (Frisian) Ommelanden. They were united exactly 355 years. During the 15th century Groningen consolidated it's power in the Ommelanden, and there were continuous struggles with foreign threats. Holland, which was ruled by the Bavarian House by now, tried to get hold of Friesland and Groningen. The Bishop of Utrecht tried to effectuate his rights on Groningen and Drente. And a powerfull count in Oost-Friesland tried to conquer the Ommelanden. In the end all these attacks were repulsed, and Groningen became effectively an independent citystate. She had direct rule over the Gorecht and the Oldambts, and a strong treaty with the Ommelanden that gave her political and economic preponderance. Westerwolde was in pledge from the Bishop of Munster, and she had garrisons along the Eastern border. Large parts of Friesland were subordinate to her and in several cities in Friesland she had blockhouses with garrisons. Her coat of arms was a double imperial eagle, sign of an free imperial city. The sovereignty of the Bishop had become a hollow formality. In 1490, Groningen lost its major seaport of Delfzijl, this loss slowly ebbed the demise as Emden which lies on the opposite side of the river gained in precedence, Emden was now controlled by the Cirksena dynasty, counts of east Frisia

* = http://www.crwflags.com/FOTW/FLAGS/nl-gr.html
flag to be based on their COA


Code:
#(1493) Ratification of the Charlemagne-privilege
event = {
	id = 22017
	random = no
	country = FRI
	name = "EVENTNAME22017" #Ratification of the Charlemagne-privilege
	desc = "EVENTHIST22017"
	
	date = { day = 1 month = january year = 1493 }
	offset = 300
	deathdate = { day = 1 month = january year = 1494 }

	action_a = {
		name = "SPLENDID"
		command = { type = stability value = 1 }
                [COLOR=Yellow]command = { type = flagname which = "" } #current frisian flag[/COLOR]
		command = { type = domestic which = aristocracy value = -1 }
		command = { type = domestic which = innovative value = 1 }
		command = { type = relation which = HAB value = 50 }
		command = { type = relation which = BUR value = -50 }
                [COLOR=Yellow]command = { type = provincetax which = 377 value = -1 } [/COLOR]
	}
}

#-#The legal basis for Friesland's lordlessness in this period was sought in the so-called 'Charlemagne-privilege'. In this now believed to be faked document, Charlemagne gives the Frisians the freedom to appoint their own lord. Emperor Maximilian ratified the document in 1493.
 
Last edited:
event fixes.........since no more HLL, a correction below (historical)

#(1425) Death of Jan the Mercyless Merciless
event = {
id = 213001
trigger = {
OR = {
owned = { province = 339 data = -1 } #Holland
owned = { province = 379 data = -1 } #Artois
}
}
random = no
country = LUX
name = "EVENTNAME213001" #Death of of Jan the Mercyless
desc = "EVENTHIST213001"
#-#Jan of Bavaria, husband of Elisabeth of Görlitz and as such pawnee of Luxemburg, died, probably of poison, on January 6th 1425. While his wife retained her pawn Luxemburg, the Duchy of Bavaria-Straubing was seized by Emperor Sigismund as a vacant Imperial fief and his part of the Dutch Wittelsbach inheritance passed to Burgundy, on the base of a treaty that had just been concluded, which is why the Duke of Burgundy was immediately suspected of having ordered the assassination of Jan.

date = { day = 5 month = january year = 1425 }

action_a = {
name = "ACTIONNAME213001A" #Honour the agreement with Burgundy
command = { type = secedeprovince which = HAU value = 339 } #Holland
command = { type = secedeprovince which = BUR value = 379 } #Artois
command = { type = independence which = FRI }
command = { type = breakvassal which = FRI }
command = { type = secedeprovince which = HUN value = 348 } #Ansbach
command = { type = removecore which = 339 } #Holland
command = { type = removecore which = 379 } #Artois
command = { type = removecore which = 348 } #Ansbach
command = { type = remove_countryculture which = dutch }
command = { type = trigger which = 137026 } #BUR: The Dutch Wittelsbach possessions
}
action_b = {
name = "ACTIONNAME213001B" #Don't turn over anything to the murderers of my husband!
command = { type = secedeprovince which = HUN value = 348 } #Ansbach
command = { type = removecore which = 348 } #Ansbach
command = { type = war which = BUR }
command = { type = stability value = -3 }
command = { type = remove_countryculture which = dutch }
command = { type = trigger which = 137027 } #BUR: The Dutch Wittelsbach possessions
}
}

Brabant will sell holland to BUR in the sale of zeeland event
 
YodaMaster said:
HLL exists but only as a revolter. Only FLA was removed. Did I miss something in the discussion here?

we agreed with garbon to remove HLL

besides, even if HLL still exist, the events need changing, because they where written for when HLL is in play from 1419
 
Toio said:
we agreed with garbon to remove HLL
Where?

Toio said:
besides, even if HLL still exist, the events need changing, because they where written for when HLL is in play from 1419
Ok for this.
 
In revolt.txt:
Code:
HOL = { #Netherlands
	date = { day = 1 month = january year = 1559 }
	expirydate = { year = 1820 }
	minimum = { 339 337 338 340 }
	extra = { }
	capital = 339
	group = latin
	#ai = "Holland_EEP.ai"
	ai = "HOL_1568.ai"
}
It was discussed to add Brabant and Flandern to minimum of HOL revolter but there is a problem with Burgundy surviving (player) and capital of Burgundy in Brabant that could be relocated in this case, especially if the player wants to release HOL as vassals, for any reason.

Cores on Brabant and Flandern are granted with HOL_3900 only.


OTOH, it is weird seeing these provinces defecting to another country while Netherlands are not formed, as Garbon said.

What could be the best solution?
 
YodaMaster said:

post 671

I changed my mind for a revolter,....i agree we can remove HLL and save a tag, but we need a revolter. I thought we can use HAU if they did not exist. basically, if HAU is gone from 1432 , then from 1433 HAU can be a revolter under the name of Duchy of LIMBURG. its roughly the same area as brabant.
we can have flanders, zeeeland and brabant as its provinces, with zeeland its capital.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duchy_of_limburg

there is a combined COA of brabant and Limburg below
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dukes_of_brabant
 
YodaMaster said:
In revolt.txt:
Code:
HOL = { #Netherlands
	date = { day = 1 month = january year = 1559 }
	expirydate = { year = 1820 }
	minimum = { 339 337 338 340 }
	extra = { }
	capital = 339
	group = latin
	#ai = "Holland_EEP.ai"
	ai = "HOL_1568.ai"
}
It was discussed to add Brabant and Flandern to minimum of HOL revolter but there is a problem with Burgundy surviving (player) and capital of Burgundy in Brabant that could be relocated in this case, especially if the player wants to release HOL as vassals, for any reason.

Cores on Brabant and Flandern are granted with HOL_3900 only.


OTOH, it is weird seeing these provinces defecting to another country while Netherlands are not formed, as Garbon said.

What could be the best solution?

we can use LImburg as post 747

There currently is a Limburg in the netheralnds
 
Toio said:
we can use LImburg as post 747

There currently is a Limburg in the netheralnds

A Duchy of Limburg would be as anachronistic as a revolting Carolingian Empire in France. Limburg was annexed by Brabant in the 12th century, and had always been a very marginal power.

Removing FLA was a bad idea, as FLA had many opportunities to regain it's independence in the 15th century, within the rule of Philippe le Bon, with the regency of Maximilian. Revolts and alliances with the King of France were made to try and regain their independence in the transition period of Burgundy->Habsburg.

If you can spare the tag, reimplement FLA, really. I think FLA is much more important as a tag then HLL.
 
I think our best bet would still be to expand the Brabant revolter to cover Holland during the 15th century. A Flanders revolter doesn't solve the problem of having no revolter for most of the Netherlands. I always hate adding/having tags for non-revolters. (Wales...)


@Yoda, I'm not sure what to do with the Burgundy thing as after all, those provinces should rightfully be with the Netherlands in the case that I highlighted. Is it really that different from allowing the Mughals to release Delhi which could trigger a capital move? I guess I really don't think this is an issue.
 
You're right, it was just a warning of possible weird result. At least, it could prevent a Burgundian player from releasing Netherlands for HOL events exploit:
Code:
HOL = { #Netherlands
	date = { day = 1 month = january year = 1559 }
	expirydate = { year = 1820 }
	minimum = { 339 337 338 340 [COLOR=Yellow]378 380[/COLOR] }
	extra = { }
	capital = 339
	group = latin
	#ai = "Holland_EEP.ai"
	ai = "HOL_1568.ai"
}
We will have to clear [Brussels] flag for Burgundy in this case and maybe propose an ahistorical event if Brabant is owned by HOL for relocating Burgundian capital to Dijon (or Paris?).


Current revolt.txt entry for Brabant:
Code:
HAU = { #Brabant
	no = BUR
	date = { day = 1 month = january year = 1419 }
	expirydate = { day = 29 month = december year = 1481 }
	minimum = { 378 }
	extra = { 340 }
	capital = 378
	group = latin
	ai = "SmallTrade1.ai"
}
Do you mean extending expirydate only or adding Holland (339) in minimum too? And what about Artois (379) as County of Hainault if no more HLL revolter?
 
Yeah, I think we should extend the deathdate (perhaps until Netherlands can form) and then add Holland to minimum and potentially Artois/Flanders. Also, Zeeland should probably move from extra to minimum. The point is to have a revolter for the Netherlandish region prior to the Netherlands and I think either Flanders or Brabant have the best claims to the most land in the region. Seeing as how we only have Brabant, I think adding stuff to it is the best option.
 
Garbon said:
Yeah, I think we should extend the deathdate (perhaps until Netherlands can form) and then add Holland to minimum and potentially Artois/Flanders. Also, Zeeland should probably move from extra to minimum. The point is to have a revolter for the Netherlandish region prior to the Netherlands and I think either Flanders or Brabant have the best claims to the most land in the region. Seeing as how we only have Brabant, I think adding stuff to it is the best option.

I do not see a problem

Brabant/Limburg (revolter) , should have zeeland, brabant and falnders. .. zeeland as capital is a must because everyone takes zeeland.
artois will rebell to FRA and holland to either GEL or FRI , which would not be an issue, ..........the problem province is zeeland as it connectd to too many states/nations.

I agree that deathdate should be when netherlands form

HAU = { #Brabant/Limburg
no = BUR
date = { day = 1 month = january year = 1419 }
expirydate = { day = 29 month = december year = 1481 }
minimum = { 340 378 }
extra = { 380 }
capital = 340
group = latin
ai = "SmallTrade1.ai"
}

OR

HAU = { #Brabant/Limburg
no = BUR
date = { day = 1 month = january year = 1419 }
expirydate = { day = 29 month = december year = 1481 }
minimum = { 340 }
extra = { 378 380 }
capital = 340
group = latin
ai = "SmallTrade1.ai"
}
 
Toio said:
I do not see a problem

Brabant/Limburg (revolter) , should have zeeland, brabant and falnders. .. zeeland as capital is a must because everyone takes zeeland.
artois will rebell to FRA and holland to either GEL or FRI , which would not be an issue, ..........the problem province is zeeland as it connectd to too many states/nations.

I agree that deathdate should be when netherlands form

HAU = { #Brabant/Limburg
no = BUR
date = { day = 1 month = january year = 1419 }
expirydate = { day = 29 month = december year = 1481 }
minimum = { 340 378 }
extra = { 380 }
capital = 340
group = latin
ai = "SmallTrade1.ai"
}

OR

HAU = { #Brabant/Limburg
no = BUR
date = { day = 1 month = january year = 1419 }
expirydate = { day = 29 month = december year = 1481 }
minimum = { 340 }
extra = { 378 380 }
capital = 340
group = latin
ai = "SmallTrade1.ai"
}

Again, implement Flanders. Implementing Limburg is insane. It would be a historical abomination. If you don't want to reimplement Flanders(which would be a bad idea), then just keep Brabant the way it is. If a revolt would have succeeded in Habsburg times you probably would have had something like a Brabantine republic.
 
Fortuyn said:
Again, implement Flanders. Implementing Limburg is insane. It would be a historical abomination. If you don't want to reimplement Flanders(which would be a bad idea), then just keep Brabant the way it is. If a revolt would have succeeded in Habsburg times you probably would have had something like a Brabantine republic.

we are not using a tag on Limburg, its just its revolter name, its basically brabant. I suggested we only change the flag to the Limburg/brabant one so as to represent it as a revolter for the players .

Limburg (the revolter) will disappear or join into netherlands. The issue now is how do we keep the low countries to remain in a shape , for either Spain or Netherlands.

we are not going to waste a tag on FLA when the issue was to save a tag by removing HLL. If the issue was to use an extra tag, I would remain with HLL in play.
 
Toio said:
I do not see a problem

Brabant/Limburg (revolter) , should have zeeland, brabant and falnders. .. zeeland as capital is a must because everyone takes zeeland.
artois will rebell to FRA and holland to either GEL or FRI , which would not be an issue, ..........the problem province is zeeland as it connectd to too many states/nations.

I don't see why we should leave Holland out. It's a rather strange omission (although I'm fine without including Artois) I also don't see why we would move the capital to Zeeland, seeing as how if Zeeland only revolts it will make it the capital. The capital line just suggests the ideal capital location, which is Brabant. Also, I think we don't need to point out Limburg in the revolter (since it won't be in the name) but I'd be fine using their combined arms.
 
CoA is not a problem. Combined one could be the default hau set and Brabant at start will use the current one but renamed (hauBrabant, for example). If Brabant revolts, CoA will then be the correct one without need of events.

Code:
HAU = { #Brabant
	no = BUR
	date = { day = 1 month = january year = 1419 }
	expirydate = { day = 29 month = december year = [COLOR=Red]1481[/COLOR][COLOR=Yellow]1558[/COLOR] }
	minimum = { 378 [COLOR=Yellow]340[/COLOR] }
	extra = { [COLOR=Red]340[/COLOR] [COLOR=Yellow]379 380[/COLOR] }
	capital = 378
	group = latin
	ai = "SmallTrade1.ai"
}

Of course, we will have to rework all events mentioning HLL and especially Dutch revolts ones.

About events, there is a problem with The Brabant Revolution sequence by Archeolooginspe starting with HAB_179300 in 1789 and use of HAU tag for the United States of Belgium.
If we want to use HAU tag for this, we must expand expirydate but HAU will have to not be able to revolt from HOL.

EDIT: not sure for Artois (379).
 
Last edited:
Garbon said:
I don't see why we should leave Holland out. It's a rather strange omission (although I'm fine without including Artois) I also don't see why we would move the capital to Zeeland, seeing as how if Zeeland only revolts it will make it the capital. The capital line just suggests the ideal capital location, which is Brabant. Also, I think we don't need to point out Limburg in the revolter (since it won't be in the name) but I'd be fine using their combined arms.

Ok on holland province

On naming for forum....I use Limburg to indicated to myself and future viewers of this forum , that Limburg would represent only a revolter. The beauty of hainault was we never needed to do this.

On capital, the issue is , IF brabant/limburg revolt, then a capital in zeeland would not mess with a "spanish netherlands" in brabant and flanders , if it occurs. Because this "limburg" revolter can still revolt with Spain in the low countries
 
Proposed CoA for Brabant-Limburg:

shieldhaunw2.png

smallshieldhauad3.png


shieldhauaw9.png

smallshieldhaudh1.png


Flag is the same as current set.

As suggested above, current set is renamed as hauBrabant and will used at start in 1419.

Reworked event:
Code:
#(1430) The Succession in Brabant
#modified by Jester to nullify RevoltRisk generated by HAU_182002
event = {
	id = 3775
	trigger = { exists = BUR }
	random = no
	country = HAU
	name = "EVENTNAME3775" #The Succession in Brabant
	desc = "EVENTHIST3775"
	#-#

	date = { day = 1 month = august year = 1430 }

	action_a = {
		name = "ACTIONNAME3775A" #Let us be a part of Great Burgundy (End Game)
		command = { type = trigger which = 3776 } #BUR: The Succession in Brabant
	}
	action_b = {
		name = "ACTIONNAME3775B" #Let us elect a local Count as Duke
		[COLOR=Yellow]command = { type = flagname which = "" }[/COLOR]
		command = { type = trigger which = 3778 } #BUR: The Succession in Brabant
		command = { type = stability value = -3 }
		command = { type = revolt which = -1 }
		command = { type = province_revoltrisk which = 379 value = -8 } #Artois
	}
}
#-#The Duchy of Brabant had been under Burgundian influence for a while already in the decades leading up to 1430 with side branches of the Burgundian dynasty occupying the title of Duke but on the 1st of August, 1430 it formally passed to the control of Philip the Good of Burgundy further strengthening the Burgundian hold on the Netherlands and continuing Philip's moves towards unification of the Netherlands.

But in monarchs.hau, Nevers-Rethel dynasty was chosen for ahistorical b choice in this event. Is it correct with Limburg? According to this list, we should have the same rulers as Burgundy and Habsburgs in the end. With this list, ACTIONNAME3775B reworked for Limburg doesn't make much sense to me since Philip the Good will be the ruler in both cases.