• 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.
Originally posted by Atreides
On the Macedonia issue, how about a Byzantine event which triggers 1440 or so, it breaks her vassalage with the Ottomans and fires an Ottoman event. That Ottoman event lowers relations with Byzantiuma and declares war upon her.

That's what I had been thinking, but decided I'd leave making that situation work to someone else. :D
 
Just remember that if Venice doesn't loose Istria giving them Ragusa as representation of Durazzo is no option since giving them Istria, Dalmatia and Ragusa is plain weird - they can at most have two of the three. That said, IMO both Krain and Istria to Styria would look pretty ugly. Istria because they really didn't have much of the coast or at all of the geographic province and Krain because this province is really Northern Croatia and nothing else. How about giving Salzburg to Styria instead?
 
Originally posted by Twoflower
Krain because this province is really Northern Croatia and nothing else. How about giving Salzburg to Styria instead?

In general, I prefer to go by map names instead of geographic places. What does everyone else prefer?
 
Originally posted by Classique
In general, I prefer to go by map names instead of geographic places. What does everyone else prefer?

I guess I take each regional problem differently. In the case of Xinijiang&Sichuan(swappy) or Bure&Bambuk(totally misplaced), I think that its imperative that the situation is definitely best resolved basing it on geographic locations. However, in places like the Benin region, I went by map names simply because the provinces weren't out of place, it was just really bad map compression. So its okay for one to have a general rule ( I suppose;) ) but just be prepared for the reality that it can't apply to every situation (lest you want a lot of wierdness).

I'm not sure on the whole Krain issue.
 
Re: Romanian territories

Originally posted by Laur
I believe I posted before in the EEP and the AGC my view on the provincial claims of the Romanian principalities. As it is, the setup in 1419 and 1492 is totally unrealistic. There was no Moldavian claim over Wallachia (in fact the only time before 1859 the two countries were united was in 1600 under Michael the Brave). Instead the shields should be as follows:

Wallachia:
-CB shield on Transylvania: the Bessarab dinasty had also the fiefs of Amlas and Fagaras in Transylvania.
-CB shield on Banat: the province of Banat was a disputed area between Wallachia, Serbia and Hungary, and a cause of some wars between Wallachia and Hungary.
-CB shield on Dobrogea: was conquered by Mircea the Elder in late fourteenth century but, shortly before 1419 he was forced to cede it to the Porte.
-CB shield on the Bugeac: on EU2 map the Bugeac represents south-eastern Moldavia, a territory known at that time as Bessarabia (from the name of the Wallachian rulers). Later on it was extended to the entire region between the rivers Prut and Nistru (Dnestr). It was a disputed region between Wallachia, Moldavia, Hungary, while the main citadel of Chilia was a Genoese outpost (thus I suggest Wallahcian, Hungarian, Moldavian and even Genoese CB shields on that province).
-CB shield on Wallachia of course.

Moldavia:
-CB shield on Transylvania: the ruling family of Moldavia, the Musatins, descended from Bogdan Musat, originally voyevode of Maramures (northern Transylvania). The family was ousted but they never relinquished the claim. Throughout the fifteenth century the Moldavians and Hungarians would fight numerous border wars instead of uniting forces against the Turks. It would take a Papal intervention for Stephen the Great of Moldavia and Mathias Corvin to make peace.
-CB shield on Podolia: The city of Cernowitz (Cernauti) was in Moldavia until 1796 when it was annexed by Austria together with the entire Bucovina (Northern Moldavia and Southern Podolia on the E.U.2 map). To this one may add the long dispute over the territory of Pocutia between Moldavia and Poland that lasted until mid-sixteenth century.
-CB shields on Bugeac and Moldavia of course.

I also suggest some events for Wallachia in 1594 (Michael the Brave ascension to the throne). He fought the Turks in alliance with the voyevodes of Transylvania and Moldavia, but when the latter were replaced by Polish puppets (Andrei Bathory in Trans. and Ieremia Movila in Moldavia), Michael, with the accord of Emperor Rudolph, conquered Transylvania and Moldavia (1600). He was assassinated soon afterwards (with the knowledge, if not at the order of his one time friend, Emperor Rudolph) and the situation reverted to the previous status quo. Thus, Wallachia should get something like that Mughal event (army) + a CB shield on Moldavia, and in 1601 (year of Michael's death) should have the option of holding on to its conquests (at great risk: Austria and Poland should declare war)

Transilvania/ Siebenburgen/ Erdely ("what's in a name?" :) )

-CB shields on all provinces of Hungary (it considered itself Hungary after all).

Cheers!!

Laur

Alright, you're definitely the most knowledgeable person on Romanian history around here :) I'd be glad about more suggestions (and maybe events?) from you.
So does anybody object to these points (otherwise I'll add them as closed issues):

  • Moldavia has shields on Moldavia, Bujak, Transylvania and Podolia
  • Wallachia has shields on Wallachia, Transylvania, Banat and Dobrudja
About the shields on Bujak for Wallachia, Hungary and Genoa: Is it really appropriate for these three countries to attack Moldavia because of the shield? Were there any wars about the territory? Just wondering.
 
Re: Re: Romanian territories

Originally posted by Twoflower
Alright, you're definitely the most knowledgeable person on Romanian history around here :) I'd be glad about more suggestions (and maybe events?) from you.
So does anybody object to these points (otherwise I'll add them as closed issues):

  • Moldavia has shields on Moldavia, Bujak, Transylvania and Podolia
  • Wallachia has shields on Wallachia, Transylvania, Banat and Dobrudja
About the shields on Bujak for Wallachia, Hungary and Genoa: Is it really appropriate for these three countries to attack Moldavia because of the shield? Were there any wars about the territory? Just wondering.
Hard to argue with Laur's discription. ;)
But if no one can dig up a war where Genoa fought for it's possession I think that CB can be left out, will do more harm than good. Add a merchant in the CoT that province belongs to or whatever...
 
The main reason why I support Istria being Austrian is the Austrians DID have a navy, and a very good port, it's just that they tended to neglect it, which is just as easily represented by the fact that they are fully land.
 
Originally posted by Mad King James
The main reason why I support Istria being Austrian is the Austrians DID have a navy, and a very good port, it's just that they tended to neglect it, which is just as easily represented by the fact that they are fully land.

And I like it, because it prevents Venice from being able to build troops in its capital and walk them over to its beseiged provinces.
 
Yes, on a second thought my suggestion for having a Genoese CB shield on Bugeac was not a very good idea (actually, I don't think Genoa has a CB shield on Kaffa/Kerch either, I might be wrong, just writing from memory).

Now concerning the Moldavian - Hungarian relations, I believe the CB could be simulated through events. Moldavia begun her political history as a marc (outpost province) of the Hungarian kingdom against the tatars, and it broke away after the rebellion of Bogdan Musat. There were many wars between the two countries, but nevertheless, Moldavia managed to survive by balancing the Hungarian and Polish powers, allying with one against another, until the fifteenth century. By the middle of this century, as the Ottoman threat menaced Europe, and following a typical bloody war between Hungary and Moldavia, the Pope managed to negociate a peace between the two Christian rulers (I believe it was 1461, I'll confirm later), in effect ending their feud (the series of wars ended also because of Hungary's problems after Mathias' death). Mathias even guaranteed asylum to the Moldavian ruler, giving him the castles of Ciceu as a family posession. In our game, by this date Hungary should lose thel CB shields on Moldavia and Bugeac. I am not sure whether Moldavia should keep hers on Transylvania, as the border between the two countries remained relatively quiet until the First World War.

Ok, moving forward through time, I wander how do you think we should simulate the 1775 Austrian occupation of Northern Moldavia/Southern Podolia, namely Bucovina, and 1813 Peace of Bucharest by which Bessarabia (Eastern Moldavia + Bugeac) was annexed by Russia?

My view: These losses of territory were caused by the Turks losing the wars against Russia (1769 - 1774 and 1811), thus, the events that simulate them should fire only if the Ottoman Empire is entrusted with Moldavia's foreign policy - ie. if Moldavia is a vassal of the Porte. Also, Moldavia, obviously, needs to share a border with Russia (for both events) and Austria (for 1775). Also, the events should fire only if the Ottomans are defeated by Russia (don't want to see the Ottomans sacking Moscow and then losing Bugeac as a consequence).

1775: If Podolia is part of Moldavia, Podolia -> Austria + loss of tax income in Moldavia proper (1 quarter).

1813: If Bugeac is part of the Ottoman Empire or part of a vassal to the O.E., Bugeac -> Russia + loss of tax income in Moldavia (1 third; Bugeac was but the south of the territory that Russia annexed).

I also have ideas about some flavour events: the building of the monasteries of Northern Moldavia (fifteenth century), the opening of the Saint Sava college in Bucharest, Wallachia (late seventeenth century), the Socola Seminary in Iasi, Moldavia (same), etc. When I return to Toronto at the end of the month I'll provide you with more information.


Cheers!!

Laur
 
After the Ottomans conquer a chunk of the Balkans, perhaps there should be an event about the boy tribute, increasing Balkanian manpower?
 
Ooh ooh! I know!

if a province is christian, then boost the hell out of the taxes and manpower from the province (like +5 tax +3 manpower) but as soon as it becomes either sunni or shiite take that bonus away :D
 
if a province is christian, then boost the hell out of the taxes and manpower from the province (like +5 tax +3 manpower) but as soon as it becomes either sunni or shiite take that bonus away


Now that sounds interesting

Give an incentive to the Ottomans NOT to convert provinces to their religion... it would probably be wise to note in part of the Event Text that these bonuses will go away if the province becomes Sunni or Shiite.

I like the sound of it, should be worth testing.


Slightly off topic question:>

Is it possible to code a Random Event which checks date (post reformation), then checks to see if religion = Christian, and then randomly selects one of your provinces to change FROM your Religion to one of the other Christian religions?
 
I don't know about boosting the tax value, since I don't think the boy levy involved any additional taxes.
 
Originally posted by Mad King James
Ooh ooh! I know!

if a province is christian, then boost the hell out of the taxes and manpower from the province (like +5 tax +3 manpower) but as soon as it becomes either sunni or shiite take that bonus away :D

Writing events for this would be tricky and exploitable. If a Christian province is taken from Ottomans by, say Hungary, I suppose that boost should be removed by event? And if it's retaken by the Ottomans, new event?
 
Hmm, I really think we need to reach a consensus on the still controversial country setup questions asap. Pretty hard to go ahead and do further work like events otherwise. We really need to decide which province we want to represent what. These ones are pretty clear IMO (correct me if I'm wrong):
  • Steiermark represents Styria and Carinthia with its capital in Graz and is German cultured
  • Bosnia represents central Bosnia with its capital in Bobovaz and Slavonic culture
  • Serbia is Serbia with its capital in Smederevo and Slavonic culture
  • Albania is Middle Albania, the territory held by the Kastrioti, with its capital in Kruja and Albanian culture
  • Ragusa represents Durazzo and other Venetian holdings in the area, with its capital in Durazzo and Albanian culture
  • Bulgaria is western and central Bulgaria with its capital in Sofia and Slavonic culture
  • Rumelia is Eastern Bulgaria with its capital in Plovdiv and Slavonic culture
  • Dobrudja is Dobrogea with its capital in Silistra and Romanian (or maybe Slavonic? Dunno) culture
  • Hellas is the Duchy of Athens with its capital in Athinai and Greek culture
  • Morea is the Despotate of Morea with its capital in Mistra and Greek culture
The other ones are controversial. Let's look at each decision objectively and within the context of the whole setup:

Macedonia could either represent the city of Thessaloniki that was still held by Byzantium in 1419, turned over to Venice in 1424 and conquered by the Ottomans in 1430 (iirc) or the big Macedonia province that was firmly held by the Ottomans. Thessaloniki somewhat makes for interesting events and prevents an early annexation of Byzantium, on the other hand it is kinda strange to give Byzantium the province just because they had one city while the countryside was Ottoman, and it cuts off the Ottomans from their European possessions. If the province stays Ottoman, it would probably be necessary to change the city.

Kosovo could either represent Kosovo proper, with its capital in Nish, or Montenegro. I personally prefer Kosovo since it is consistent with the map name, gives the Ottomans another province (which could be particularly important when they loose Macedonia or any Anatolian province) and saves a tag.

Now we're lacking Croatia, Istria, Dalmatia and Krain, and have a real problem since there will be no perfect solution with these four. What we all agree on ís that:
- either Dalmatia or Istria will be given to Venice
- either Istria or Krain will be given to Styria
- Croatia will be given to Hungary

The problems are that:
- both Istria and Krain being owned by Styria does not look entirely right
- if Hungary does not have Krain, Croatia represents all of Croatia, with Zagreb its capital, and passes to the Hapsburgs in 1526. We would have to ignore that the southern part of Croatia (and the majority of the Croatia province) actually became Ottoman
- it would (for reasons already discussed) be good to give Bosnia a second province representing Hercegovina that becomes independent in 1448
- it might also be nice to have Cilli as a state

As I see it, we have these possibilities:

A: Croatia (capital Zagreb) to Hungary, Istria (capital Pula) to Venice, Krain (capital Ljubljana) to Styria, Dalmatia (capital Mostar) to Bosnia (independent in 1448)

My favourite solution, since it includes Hercegovina. The cons are that it has no Cilli and only one province for Croatia. Styria bordering Hungary, Croatia and Istria by owning Krain is basically right.

B: Croatia (capital Osijek) to Hungary, Krain (capital Zagreb) to Hungary, Istria (capital Trieste) to Styria, Dalmatia (capital Zara) to Venice

This setup has a two-province Croatia, however no Cilli and no Hercegovina. The Istria harbour will need to be removed.

C: Croatia (capital Zagreb) to Hungary, Krain (capital Celje) to Cilli, Istria (capital Trieste) to Styria, Dalmatia (capital Zara) to Venice
This includes Cilli, but not Hercegovina and not two-province Croatia. The Istria harbour will need to be removed.
 
Last edited:
Out of those choices, in order I support A, C, B.

For option A, what about Ragusa representing Hercegovina under Bosnian control? Could Dalmatia represent southern Croatia? Is there a goal to remove some of Venice's Adriatic coast provinces?