Brainstorming for Napoleonic Victory Mod

[Taylor]

I think if the republicans win more than just the aristocrats should leave. Also what sort of republic is it? Could it be a coalition of various anti-monarchist groups which after the civil war could then have one side or another emerge predominant? So for example there could be an aristocratic faction who would want landed voting rights and a lord protector as well as more radical republican groups (some of whom would want the whole of the British isles, others would be fine with Wales and Scotland being independant) in general have more variety of republican factions, is that possible considering the mods timeline?


As to the use of V.I.P. POP,s I think that you should use the British POP's and that is about it, as it would be more work to intergrate all the POP's (although using VIP India might be nice so as to give British India some British POP's) the world at large would have changed too much I think for it to be worth intergrating the V.I.P. POP's, and some V.I.P. POP's would not make sense (the Afrikaner type for example really ought to be Dutch in the timeline I think).

Also how much work have you done with Columbia? It seems to me that the settlers (who have come from Upper Canada as I recall) should not have reached the Pacific yet and would have settled more along the praries (although perhaps that could be wear a Metis Confederacy could be) while I think Canada should still have most of it's French population as well as perhaps a signifigant number of loyalists located in the Maritimes, I could see more French fleeing West so perhaps there could be a Metis Confederacy along the Red River with Franco Canadian and Metis as it's accepted cultures with a majority of the population being Metis along with perhaps a small minority of Franco Canadians and a large minority of Cree.

Also perhaps one of the sides could try and curry favour with the Welsh (gaining Welsh as an accepted culture) on of the ways to do that could be to change the flag to add Welsh symbology I am thinking the Welsh Cross whatever it is called could be used

About Columbia: Currently it's on the west coast, but the settlers did have the time (1812 till 1836) to travel to it. Maybe I can move some pops to halfway there though (including perhaps some french). Metis confederacy is a good idea for a native nation that can be carved up during the game.

The images the site provides are in indexed format at default so resizing them will cause them to be pixelated, you have to (in photoshop) go to mode -> and change it from indexed to RGB. This will help resolution.

Then I started to burn the image slightly so the 'lightness' that the small image has is taken away. This will add definition.

Hope that helps

Thanks for the tips! I will use your flag if that's alright.

V.I.P. POPs could be implemented on most of the world though, and any changes (Afrikaaner, Canada...) could be made in the VIP files...

That's true, but it's probably more work . For now, I'll stick to British VIP pops. Later we can add more detail with more edited VIP pops.

I have a thought for Liberia, how about we move it to South West Africa and name it Freedonia (a name which was historically considered as I recall) to increase the alternate historicalnes of the timeline.

Interesting idea. Where did you read about it almost being called Freedonia? I can't find it on the internet.

I prefer the one with the coat of arms.

Noted.

Hmm, however we must consider US history and the totally ASB split when we plan Liberia.

Yes the split can have some effect on Liberia.

Regarding the USA's split- note that I said 'a' Nullification Crisis, not 'the' Nullification Crisis- in other words, I didn't envision OTL's South Carolina-centred crisis going differently, nor did I envision the OTL northern-centred nullification sitation (which, in any case, happened in 1843), I envisioned an alternate Nullification Crisis- something like a reverse South Carolinan situation that escalated into secession. Unlikely, but not necessarily entirely ASB, given increased tensions beforehand.
Of course, there most likely needs to be something to *cause* those increased tensions, more than the Canadian annexation...

And aw, no united Scandinavia this time? I was hoping for Liberty And King to have a torchbearer near Europe...

Thanks, I was hoping you would post something on this, as I myself do not know that much about American history.

About Scandinavia: well, you are welcome to take one of the two powers and crush the other, maybe you can unite them by force! (or there can be some unification event in-game (after some conditions are met).

Nope!

Swedish/Danish hostility will remain, and Norway will hate them both!

At long last I think we might have a mod without a united Scandinavia!

Yes. Though it's probably still a possible course of action for the game after 1836.

Where does the idea for English seperatism come from (Yorkists, etc.)? I'm not sure it's feasible. Scottish or maybe even Welsh seperatism would be more likely should Napoleon have won and Ireland be freed.

On the topic of Ireland, I also doubt that the UK would've kept Northern Ireland if Napoleon had won. IMO that would've gone to Ireland.

English separatism: I don't think that's the right way to look at it. The English republic is more of an anti monarchy state than a nationalist English state. Yes Scottish and Welsh separatism is likely, but either one of the forces (UK vs. English republic) were strong enough to suppress them, at least that's the assumption.

Ireland: Hmm. I just gave those provinces to Ireland because I thought it would give more flavor if there would be some occupied provinces. But that could be toned down, yes. But remember the idea is that the British isles are really chaotic at the start year. (i.e. incomplete Ireland, though of course they will get those remaining provinces if they win the war; and UK and England having provinces that don't always connect etc.)

Still, why would those provinces choose UK instead of Ireland? (Irish being all nationalistic and all...) Well, the answer could be that it was not the people who chose, but the garrison there. And later on, that garrison was defeated by the Irish, so now the provinces are occupied provinces.

 

[jamhaw]

The Freedonia thing is from an alternate history timeline where the author claimed that Freedonia was historically suggested as a name. I think so anyway, I could double check it if you want. (although it could be Sierra Leone instead come to think of it)

Additionally I have thought of a cool (to me anyway) possibility for Scotland, if the Royalists loose the Second civil war, and Scotland gains independance then there could be a small chance of a Jacobite restoration. She would be the claimant till 1840 (which may not work well, as I envision any sort of Jacobite restoration occuring at least half a decade after Scotland wins independance but then again the POD having been so early we could probably fudge these things a bit) anyway I feel that there would be an event to the point that "Some Scots want a restoration of the monarchy specifically the Jacobites and that pro-Jacobite literature had been circulating throughout all levels of Scottish society for years. Now may be the time for just such as restoration" if the Jacobites came to power then a Jacobite Party (sort of like the Bonapartiste or the Legitimste in Vanilla France) could take power as well as Scotland becoming a monarchy and perhaps later some events could fire where the monarch could decide just how wide he wanted his claims to be whether to lay claim to the British isles or not or whether to lay claim to France or not. Of course the AI should probably have a somewhat low chance of restoring the Jacobites and the claiming of the throne of France should be very low indeed but it would be a fun thing to try for the player.

 

[jamhaw]

Also I cannot recall anything having been mentioned about who the King is. Victoria obviously would not be born in such a world so would Ernst August be king?

 

[Taylor]

The Freedonia thing is from an alternate history timeline where the author claimed that Freedonia was historically suggested as a name. I think so anyway, I could double check it if you want. (although it could be Sierra Leone instead come to think of it)

Additionally I have thought of a cool (to me anyway) possibility for Scotland, if the Royalists loose the Second civil war, and Scotland gains independance then there could be a small chance of a Jacobite restoration. She would be the claimant till 1840 (which may not work well, as I envision any sort of Jacobite restoration occuring at least half a decade after Scotland wins independance but then again the POD having been so early we could probably fudge these things a bit) anyway I feel that there would be an event to the point that "Some Scots want a restoration of the monarchy specifically the Jacobites and that pro-Jacobite literature had been circulating throughout all levels of Scottish society for years. Now may be the time for just such as restoration" if the Jacobites came to power then a Jacobite Party (sort of like the Bonapartiste or the Legitimste in Vanilla France) could take power as well as Scotland becoming a monarchy and perhaps later some events could fire where the monarch could decide just how wide he wanted his claims to be whether to lay claim to the British isles or not or whether to lay claim to France or not. Of course the AI should probably have a somewhat low chance of restoring the Jacobites and the claiming of the throne of France should be very low indeed but it would be a fun thing to try for the player.

About Scotland: Okay, that could be an option. Another option could be that Scotland gets ruled by the Hannover monarchs for a while, and then gets annexed by England later on. Or that the Scottish successfully revolt against the Hannoverians.

Also I cannot recall anything having been mentioned about who the King is. Victoria obviously would not be born in such a world so would Ernst August be king?

Good point. At game start, it would probably be William IV, but without Victoria, does anyone know who would be the rightful successor? (could be Ernst August)

 

[unmerged(81390)]

Republican England would not be happy about monarchy in Scotland, Jacobite or not. 4 times out of 5 I think England would (try to) enforce a republic in Scotland

 

[Taylor]

Republican England would not be happy about monarchy in Scotland, Jacobite or not. 4 times out of 5 I think England would (try to) enforce a republic in Scotland

Yeah, that's what I thought. So at some point if England is winning, the UK can ask for a cease fire, triggering an event for England, in which they have 20% chance of accepting (they get England and Wales, UK gets Scotland, and transforms into Scotland). The peace that thus ensues would not be stable though, and more fights will follow in this case.

But they have 80% of choosing "fight on", which, if they win, will net them England and Wales, plus either: Scotland as annexed territory, Scotland as satellite, or Scotland as friendly ally.

 

[yourworstnightm]

Scandinavia; Norway being a part of Denmark is about right, and obvioulsy we don't have Bernadotte in Sweden, who's the Swedish king??? Could there be a succession crisis where the danish king press some claims??

Metis Confederacy; Cool!!

 

[LordInsane]

Scandinavia; Norway being a part of Denmark is about right, and obvioulsy we don't have Bernadotte in Sweden, who's the Swedish king??? Could there be a succession crisis where the danish king press some claims??

Karl August could have been... except he'd likely be dead by 1836, sickly man that he was.
Now, as for the Danish King... no, not this close to 1809. He had a chance then, and he blew it with his reactionary position.

As for the entire by force thing and crushing the other... well, that's not exactly conductive to a stable union with a fairly democratic constitution, now, is it? No Liberty and King...

Nope!

Swedish/Danish hostility will remain, and Norway will hate them both!

At long last I think we might have a mod without a united Scandinavia!

Mention a few mods *with* a united Scandinavia. Interregnum doesn't count- Norway, and that.

 

[unmerged(81390)]

Mention a few mods *with* a united Scandinavia. Interregnum doesn't count- Norway, and that.

Well... United Scandinavia? There's got to be... Uhm... o

Alright. I don't know any. But it's sort of common in suggestion threads for mods that people come and shout about Scandinavia. Then some random Icelander says Finland should be excluded. The Finns shout that Iceland should be excluded. A Dane who won't even care to play the game claims that neither Finland or Iceland should be in and by the way the capital must be in Copenhagen. Then the Swedes get angry and want the capital to be in Stockholm. And when the Norwegians try to mediate, everyone else agrees that Norway should be excluded.

So no, you're right that there's no mod with united Scandinavia. We Scandinavians couldn't agree on the minor details!

 

[Taylor]

Anyhow, I don't see any reason why Scandinavia should be united.

It's true that a forceful unification (after 1836) might not be realistic. But I'm sure there can be a peaceful unification event, like there is in the vanilla GC.

 

[LordInsane]

Anyhow, I don't see any reason why Scandinavia should be united.

It's true that a forceful unification (after 1836) might not be realistic. But I'm sure there can be a peaceful unification event, like there is in the vanilla GC.

Well, as I noted, there is that 1809 situation, which as it so happened, almost united the three crowns in OTL. That said, the situation might still be more similar to Sweden being a Dominion of Denmark-Norway than an actual united Scandinavia by 1836, political union not being the case yet even if Scandinavism is on the rise (or stronger, anyhow), co-operation being more extensive, and there being a personal union.
Now, I suppose one could use Karl August, but the Danish King's last chance is likely to be when he dies- and he is noticeable more likely to die before 1836 than to die after.

Incidentally, for a projected united Scandinavia at this point in time Iceland would be included, since it was a part of Denmark at this point in OTL, and would be a part of Denmark-Norway in the current, Liberty and Kingless, version of the mod, Finland wouldn't be, what with 1809 and all (that, of course, does not hinder Scandinavia from having claims on Finland...), and the capital would be either Copenhagen or Göteborg (this makes perfect sense if one takes traditional borders into account- plus, of course, that the other kingdoms would dislike if the capital of the Union were to be the capital of one of the constituent kingdoms).

 

[Taylor]

Well, as I noted, there is that 1809 situation, which as it so happened, almost united the three crowns in OTL. That said, the situation might still be more similar to Sweden being a Dominion of Denmark-Norway than an actual united Scandinavia by 1836, political union not being the case yet even if Scandinavism is on the rise (or stronger, anyhow), co-operation being more extensive, and there being a personal union.
Now, I suppose one could use Karl August, but the Danish King's last chance is likely to be when he dies- and he is noticeable more likely to die before 1836 than to die after.

Incidentally, for a projected united Scandinavia at this point in time Iceland would be included, since it was a part of Denmark at this point in OTL, and would be a part of Denmark-Norway in the current, Liberty and Kingless, version of the mod, Finland wouldn't be, what with 1809 and all (that, of course, does not hinder Scandinavia from having claims on Finland...), and the capital would be either Copenhagen or Göteborg (this makes perfect sense if one takes traditional borders into account- plus, of course, that the other kingdoms would dislike if the capital of the Union were to be the capital of one of the constituent kingdoms).

Hmm, but in OTL, did the Danish king ever attempt to gain the Swedish throne? (could be, but I've never heard something like that)

Btw, why can't Bernadotte be king of Sweden? Wasn't Bernadotte elected because the Swedes figured it would be practical to choose someone who would be approved by Napoleon?

 

[Vesimir]

The thing is Napoleon didn't really like Bernadotte and would probably try to remove him after some time.

 

[Taylor]

I just had a thought: our divergence point is the battle of Trafalgar (1805). So with the UK defeated, there would probably not have been a need for forcing Sweden into the Continental System, and thus no pretext for Russia to attack Sweden in 1809. Therefore, the entire revolution of 1809 would probably not have happened. Hence, Finland should go to Sweden and Gustav IV Adolf is king (and will die shortly after game start, to succeeded by his son Gustav).

What do you think?

 

[unmerged(81390)]

Hmm...
That could mess alot with Scandinavia, I like that!
Would finnish nationalism still arise if Finland was part of Sweden?
If scandinavism (which might lead to unification if supported in Stockholm, Copenhagen and Oslo) becomes popular, it's quite likely that finns would want independence. If scandinavism doesn't have support in Sweden (an event?) then I think finnish should remain a national culture of Sweden and assimilation in Finland would go on like before...

I think it should actually be a lot of chance involved, public opinion isn't decided by the player...
Sweden can choose sometime in the 1860's or later to support Scandinavism or not.
If Sweden chooses to support it, there's a chance that finnish is lost as a culture and a chance it's kept as a national culture. If Scandinavia later is formed (Scandinavism supported by Denmark and Norway) there's another chance finnish is lost as a accepted culture.
If Sweden doesn't support Scandinavism, there will be a small chance that finnish is lost as a culture later anyways.

If Sweden/Scandinavia doesn't have finnish as a national culture finnish nationalism might lead to revolution. Not until after 1900 though...

 

[yourworstnightm]

And with UK defeated, there's no plotting to get a French general to switch side, and thus no need to lure Bernadotte to Sweden, and as said it wouldn't pay of since Sweden would not be a part of the Continental System, but it would keep being staunch anti- French. However I still think the Russian invasion was quite inevitable. The Russians wnated the fortress of Sveaborg as a part of their Baltic Sea defence, and the Russians felt the need to advance their positions in the Baltics to counterweight both France and Britain.

So I think Finland being Russian is very much inevitable at this point. The same would go for the coup against Gustav IV Adolf, the question remain; without Bernadotte, who'd be the Swedish king??

 

[Taylor]

And with UK defeated, there's no plotting to get a French general to switch side, and thus no need to lure Bernadotte to Sweden, and as said it wouldn't pay of since Sweden would not be a part of the Continental System, but it would keep being staunch anti- French. However I still think the Russian invasion was quite inevitable. The Russians wnated the fortress of Sveaborg as a part of their Baltic Sea defence, and the Russians felt the need to advance their positions in the Baltics to counterweight both France and Britain.

So I think Finland being Russian is very much inevitable at this point. The same would go for the coup against Gustav IV Adolf, the question remain; without Bernadotte, who'd be the Swedish king??

I really don't think Russia would have invaded Finland if they wouldn't have had the support of France. And with the UK is defeated in 1805, Sweden would automatically become less anti-French (there would have been no more point for being anti-French) and thus Napoleon would probably be against Russia expanding at the expense of Sweden.

As for the coup against Gustav IV Adolf, maybe there could still be a coup (after all Gustav was kind of an idiot), even without the disastrous war with Russia, but instead with his son succeeding to the throne. I.e. a less dramatic coup.

 

[yourworstnightm]

Russia would fear french influence over the Baltic, as mentioned the fortress of Sveaborg was one of Russia's main aims in the war of 1808-09, since they felt they needed it in their Baltic defence structure. On the other hand Russia might not capture all of Finland in this scenario. Without any Western ally they might leave Varsinais Suomi, Satakunta and Pohjola (Österbotten) in Swedish hands.

 

[LordInsane]

Hmm...
That could mess alot with Scandinavia, I like that!
Would finnish nationalism still arise if Finland was part of Sweden?
If scandinavism (which might lead to unification if supported in Stockholm, Copenhagen and Oslo) becomes popular, it's quite likely that finns would want independence. If scandinavism doesn't have support in Sweden (an event?) then I think finnish should remain a national culture of Sweden and assimilation in Finland would go on like before...

I think it should actually be a lot of chance involved, public opinion isn't decided by the player...
Sweden can choose sometime in the 1860's or later to support Scandinavism or not.
If Sweden chooses to support it, there's a chance that finnish is lost as a culture and a chance it's kept as a national culture. If Scandinavia later is formed (Scandinavism supported by Denmark and Norway) there's another chance finnish is lost as a accepted culture.
If Sweden doesn't support Scandinavism, there will be a small chance that finnish is lost as a culture later anyways.

If Sweden/Scandinavia doesn't have finnish as a national culture finnish nationalism might lead to revolution. Not until after 1900 though...

Actually, I'd argue Finnish nationalism would be at least as bad, if not worse, in a Sweden that doesn't back Scandinavism- though I'm going from AH.com Finns' suggestions here, and not deep knowledge myself- Scandinavia allows for the Finns to campaign for a Kingdom of their own as part of the Scandinavian Union (fills national aspirations and makes it clear they are a part of Norden- it's perfect), which Scandinavia might not be all that disinclined to deny. Scandinavian union also allows Finns to balance excessive Swedish meddling with appeals to Danes and Norwegians.

Hmm, but in OTL, did the Danish king ever attempt to gain the Swedish throne? (could be, but I've never heard something like that)

Btw, why can't Bernadotte be king of Sweden? Wasn't Bernadotte elected because the Swedes figured it would be practical to choose someone who would be approved by Napoleon?

1809 was a confused period. It must be admitted: it was not the Danish king that raised the subject of him gaining the Swedish throne, it was Swedes. The Danish king liked that, but he didn't like the constitution it seemed he would be saddled with. That made it all run out into the sand (for then, anyhow- there were people on both sides seeing Karl August as a chance to allow for a retry a decade or so in the future). So... in a way, yes, but it was not so much an active attempt on his part.

As for Bernadotte's election, partly because him getting the throne required an unlikely series of events- the Swedes choose someone else, he accepts, is Crown Prince for six months, then dies, before he has choosen his heir, forcing the Swedes to find a new Crown Prince again. Making friendly with Napoleon seemed like a good idea, so they send an envoy to ask Napoleon's advice. The envoy exceeds his authority, asks Bernadotte, who accept, and Napoleon doesn't veto it. The Swedes decide they might as well take Bernadotte, now that he has already been sent off with Napoleon's blessings...

 

[Taylor]

I think I'll go with a Finland that's split between Sweden and Russia. And Gustav IV's son will be king of Sweden. So that would be Gustav V.