Brainstorming for Napoleonic Victory Mod

[Vesimir]

A civil war? Maybe a three side one?

Loyal to the french DoW (80% possibility to win.), A loyal to the Russians Kingdom of Warsaw (or something like that.) (15% possibility to win) and nationalist Commonwealth of Poland and Lithuania (Backed by Britain or not backed by anyone.) (5% possibility to win.)

The percents are the possibilities of the nations to win while controlled by the AI. That means less resources and armies.

 

[Parsley Magnet]

I can understand the need for the US to split for balance reasons, and simply to spice things up. But having the Confederate States exist doesn't quite make sense.

Just an idea here. Traditionally, the southern states valued a high degree of states' rights... so why not take that to its logical extreme and make all the Southern states independent? Then have all of the independent states plus the US in a permanent defensive alliance similar to the Deutscher Bund in Vanilla. I don't know how that would work into your ideas about a communist slave revolt, but I imagine it would work.

Florida should probably be a colony of France, or perhaps the Spanish satellite, since in OTL it passed from Spain to the US after the Napoleonic Wars. So they should get the provinces of Tampa, Tallahassee, Pensacola, Mobile, Biloxi, and Baton Rouge.

 

[Varning]

Thanks a lot everyone, this is definitely making me think about this concept a little more rigorously. As for when the history diverges, I think a trafalgar victory is basically impossible. Also, it diverges the path too early, without allowing some of the fun states to arrive. So the tentative history of the world is: Napoleon does not replace the Bourbons in Spain, thus crushing Portugal without sparking massive guerrilla movements in Spain. Also, he cultivates a better relationship with Alexander I, not necessarily to the point of alliance but a friendly neutrality. This allows the later states, like Warsaw, to exist. Without the peninsular "ulcer" and a guarantee of Russian neutrality at least, Napoleon can focus on building a fleet and simply overwhelm with sheer numbers the UK, invading in 1813, '14, or '15.

As to England/UK:

The UK will stay as such for a while, but at some point in the late 1800s/early 1900s, if they've had peace with England, they'll get a chance to give up cores and become Scotland. If the UK regains England and Ireland there will be some sort of British resurgence events. East India should get events for supporting one side or the other in the civil war.

Questions: Was there any sense of Welsh nationalism/national unity at the time that might separate them from England? Does Ireland make more sense as a conmon (where would they get a ruler) or a republic?

As to Persia/Egypt/Middle East:

Persia will have a reliable modernization chain, and will be considerably more powerful in the face of the Ottoman collapse and possible Russian disorder. I gave France the very northernmost Egyptian provinces along with the Sinai. I didn't think about making Egypt a French ally or satellite, though it's probably a good idea. France, Russia, and the Dutch will definitely compete for influence alongside a resurgent Persia.

Questions: To what extent should the Balkans be pushed into? I gave Moldavia and Wallachia to Russia, along with Armenia. Should Serbia have more land from Ottoman weakness? What about Austria-Hungary grabbing Bosnia?

As to Warsaw/Poland:

Unless Napoleon wanted to invade Russia (as we all know, a disaster) I don't think he could turn Warsaw into Poland. Also, while Warsaw was primarily French run and basically stripped for French military purposes, it was formally in a union with Frederick Augustus of Saxony. After the peace (not that Napoleon would really ever allow a lasting peace that didn't involve him as Emperor of Europe), Warsaw would go to Saxon control. So Warsaw should probably be a puppet of the Kingdom of Saxony. If Russia appears weak, Saxony might try to raise Warsaw's rank and achieve a dual monarchy of Saxony-Poland. There may also be events for Warsaw to break away and try to strike out on their own.

Questions: Would nationalist Poles be against Saxony because its a foreign country, or for it since it offered a chance to become Poland?

As for the USA/Confederacy:

The Louisiana purchase was in 1803, so they'll have that territory under control. The Adams-Onis treaty which gives Florida to the US could still occur, especially if Napoleon made the Bourbons pay some of his war debts (he would). In exchange for recognition of Texas as Spanish and some money, the US gets Florida, just like in our timeline.

The Confederacy seems to be difficult for some to swallow. I'm very curious as to why. Is the idea of the Confederacy inextricably linked to the Civil War? I'd be more than willing to change the name (suggestions) if something else seems more likely. Here's my justification for it: South Carolina had been threatening nullification since 1822. Economic concerns which might be worse after a costly war in Canada would be present. The tariff of 1828 provoked a crisis with Calhoun calling for at least the threat of secession. Only Jackson's (who might not be president in this timeline) strong personality prevented the issue from going further. Furthermore, in this history the North just gained at least two states, with maybe two more to eventually become states as well as unlimited Northwestern advancement. Strong Spain seems to suggest that Texas and west is lost. If the South doesn't leave, they are doomed to eventual congressional irrelevancy. It doesn't need to be the CSA, but a southern union of some sort seems likely to me. But I definitely want to hear people's thoughts on this.

 

[Taylor]

I don't know about France being able to build a fleet to rival Britain's. Remember that Britain had a naval blockade against France, which severely hampered their ability to deploy what fleets they had. And Britain would be building fleets in the meantime, as well. French victory at Trafalgar would not immediately be the end of Britain's fleet, but it would probably break the blockade against France, allowing them to effectively use their (presumably) superior resources to build a fleet to overwhelm Britain's. Why do you think that a Trafalgar victory was impossible? If Nelson somehow hadn't been there, he wouldn't have been able to use his unorthodox strategy, and it would have been a battle in which the French/Spanish actually had the advantage (superior numbers and firepower).

 

[yourworstnightm]

Thanks a lot everyone, this is definitely making me think about this concept a little more rigorously. As for when the history diverges, I think a trafalgar victory is basically impossible. Also, it diverges the path too early, without allowing some of the fun states to arrive. So the tentative history of the world is: Napoleon does not replace the Bourbons in Spain, thus crushing Portugal without sparking massive guerrilla movements in Spain. Also, he cultivates a better relationship with Alexander I, not necessarily to the point of alliance but a friendly neutrality. This allows the later states, like Warsaw, to exist. Without the peninsular "ulcer" and a guarantee of Russian neutrality at least, Napoleon can focus on building a fleet and simply overwhelm with sheer numbers the UK, invading in 1813, '14, or '15.

As to England/UK:

The UK will stay as such for a while, but at some point in the late 1800s/early 1900s, if they've had peace with England, they'll get a chance to give up cores and become Scotland. If the UK regains England and Ireland there will be some sort of British resurgence events. East India should get events for supporting one side or the other in the civil war.

Questions: Was there any sense of Welsh nationalism/national unity at the time that might separate them from England? Does Ireland make more sense as a conmon (where would they get a ruler) or a republic?

As to Persia/Egypt/Middle East:

Persia will have a reliable modernization chain, and will be considerably more powerful in the face of the Ottoman collapse and possible Russian disorder. I gave France the very northernmost Egyptian provinces along with the Sinai. I didn't think about making Egypt a French ally or satellite, though it's probably a good idea. France, Russia, and the Dutch will definitely compete for influence alongside a resurgent Persia.

Questions: To what extent should the Balkans be pushed into? I gave Moldavia and Wallachia to Russia, along with Armenia. Should Serbia have more land from Ottoman weakness? What about Austria-Hungary grabbing Bosnia?

As to Warsaw/Poland:

Unless Napoleon wanted to invade Russia (as we all know, a disaster) I don't think he could turn Warsaw into Poland. Also, while Warsaw was primarily French run and basically stripped for French military purposes, it was formally in a union with Frederick Augustus of Saxony. After the peace (not that Napoleon would really ever allow a lasting peace that didn't involve him as Emperor of Europe), Warsaw would go to Saxon control. So Warsaw should probably be a puppet of the Kingdom of Saxony. If Russia appears weak, Saxony might try to raise Warsaw's rank and achieve a dual monarchy of Saxony-Poland. There may also be events for Warsaw to break away and try to strike out on their own.

Questions: Would nationalist Poles be against Saxony because its a foreign country, or for it since it offered a chance to become Poland?

As for the USA/Confederacy:

The Louisiana purchase was in 1803, so they'll have that territory under control. The Adams-Onis treaty which gives Florida to the US could still occur, especially if Napoleon made the Bourbons pay some of his war debts (he would). In exchange for recognition of Texas as Spanish and some money, the US gets Florida, just like in our timeline.

The Confederacy seems to be difficult for some to swallow. I'm very curious as to why. Is the idea of the Confederacy inextricably linked to the Civil War? I'd be more than willing to change the name (suggestions) if something else seems more likely. Here's my justification for it: South Carolina had been threatening nullification since 1822. Economic concerns which might be worse after a costly war in Canada would be present. The tariff of 1828 provoked a crisis with Calhoun calling for at least the threat of secession. Only Jackson's (who might not be president in this timeline) strong personality prevented the issue from going further. Furthermore, in this history the North just gained at least two states, with maybe two more to eventually become states as well as unlimited Northwestern advancement. Strong Spain seems to suggest that Texas and west is lost. If the South doesn't leave, they are doomed to eventual congressional irrelevancy. It doesn't need to be the CSA, but a southern union of some sort seems likely to me. But I definitely want to hear people's thoughts on this.

UK;
I don't think Welsh nationalism was strong at the time, but neither was English, with England emerging there would be butterflies. I say a Welsh revolter could be in. Scottish and Welsh culture added. British culture changed to English.

Ottomans;
Don't have them lose too much territory in the beginning, instead make them weak so it's very likely they lose.

Egypt; Egypt, pro French against Pro- British Ottomans....

Poland:
those darned Poles are always tricky people. Yes, they would probably want their own kingdom in time. The Poles were always proud nationalists and seldom put up with foreign rulers.

America;
Balkanize it like shit. Have Metis Confederacy and Nova Scotia as independent nations. Have the US collapse, with every State and their mothers seceding.

 

[Vesimir]

We sure are tricky...

We weren't really so anti actually. Vasa's were great kings of Poland and they weren't troubled by anyone. Mainly because they bribed the nobles (All elected kings bribed the nobles), and because nobles were ruling the country they were safe.

And as I already stated there's almost no way we would revolt because of the fanatical faith in Napoleon. (Napoleon wouldn't probably like to lose the polish soldiers either. (I think their number was around 100 000/600 000 in his Grand army.) )

No one actually cared that a saxon ruled Poland. And the saxon king wouldn't do something like that. Why? Cause the french nobles ran everything in Poland.

It is possible however that polish nobles that wanted to bring back the serfdom and the golden times in which they were paid for everything they did would try to bring back the commonwealth.

 

[Taylor]

We sure are tricky...

We weren't really so anti actually. Vasa's were great kings of Poland and they weren't troubled by anyone. Mainly because they bribed the nobles (All elected kings bribed the nobles), and because nobles were ruling the country they were safe.

And as I already stated there's almost no way we would revolt because of the fanatical faith in Napoleon. (Napoleon wouldn't probably like to lose the polish soldiers either. (I think their number was around 100 000/600 000 in his Grand army.) )

No one actually cared that a saxon ruled Poland. And the saxon king wouldn't do something like that. Why? Cause the french nobles ran everything in Poland.

It is possible however that polish nobles that wanted to bring back the serfdom and the golden times in which they were paid for everything they did would try to bring back the commonwealth.

What about after Nappy's death and after decades of French running the country (I'm talking after the scenario's start), wouldn't the Polish people get fed up with them eventually and revolt? After all it's called Victoria Revolutions for a reason .

 

[molace]

I think the mod should have Hungary as a separate state as vassal of France, like Poland was. It's likely that Napoleon would have weakened Austria with this.
Italy should be 3 separate states Sardinia-Piedmont, Kingdom of Italy, Kingdom Of Naples, all of the vassals of France.
German areas could be separated to 4 diferent states. Prussia, Westphalia, Kingdom of the Rhine, Bavaria(controlling Tirol,Salzburg too)
And probably as France defated Britain, France should have more colonies.

 

[unmerged(81390)]

I think greece could be independent, at least with the provinces it owns in the beginning of vanilla Victoria. The Rest of the Balkans could be Ottoman, or perhaps independent greater Serbia and Bulgaria? What do you have in mind for Illiria? If it's still french perhaps the will have some satelite in Bosnia... Bulgaria, if independent, could be a russian ally or satelite

 

[Varning]

I say a Welsh revolter could be in. Scottish and Welsh culture added. British culture changed to English.

Yeah, maybe there should be a releasable Wales at least, along with events regarding Wales for the English republic. The English Civil War will be more governmental in nature than nationalistic.

Balkanize it like shit. Have Metis Confederacy and Nova Scotia as independent nations. Have the US collapse, with every State and their mothers seceding.

Haha! There has to be SOMEBODY to stand up to the French! Would there even be enough people to form a Metis Confederacy? If every state seceded, I doubt that situation would stay stable for long. They would regroup probably into northern and southern nations which is what I have already.

It is possible however that polish nobles that wanted to bring back the serfdom and the golden times in which they were paid for everything they did would try to bring back the commonwealth.

Hmmm... The constitution of the Duchy of Warsaw outlawed serfdom, extended the vote to even those of little means, and established Frederick Augustus as a powerful executive. So there should definitely be conflicts between Polish aristocrats trying to co-opt nationalism in order to regain their privileges and Saxony trying to appeal to liberal reforms to create a dual state. Along with events for both possibilities.

I think the mod should have Hungary as a separate state as vassal of France, like Poland was. It's likely that Napoleon would have weakened Austria with this.

I'm not sure yet what to do with Austria-Hungary. Assuming they don't fight another war with Napoleon after 1809, they shouldn't really lose any more territory. They'll probably have to bend to Hungarian nationalism earlier in this timeline, accepting the dual monarchy. I also considered separating Transylvania and allowing it to become Romania if it could retake Wallachia and Moldavia from Russia.

Italy should be 3 separate states Sardinia-Piedmont, Kingdom of Italy, Kingdom Of Naples, all of the vassals of France.

I had a map earlier in the thread. Italy is composed of Sardinia (Piedmont has been annexed into France), Italy (northeast Italy), Etruria (Tuscany, Lucca and majority of the Papal states), Papal State (just Rome), Naples (under a Bonaparte), and Sicily (under a Bourbon).

German areas could be separated to 4 diferent states. Prussia, Westphalia, Kingdom of the Rhine, Bavaria(controlling Tirol,Salzburg too)

I've got Bavaria, Westphalia, and Prussia. I don't think the Confederation of the Rhine was tight enough to be considered its own country, more like the HRE or German confederation. However, there will be the possibility of it forming one country at some point during the game.

And probably as France defated Britain, France should have more colonies.

Yeah, I'm not sure where French colonies would be though. I gave them all of South American Guyana, Northern Egypt, but where else? I was considering an early French interest in Madagascar maybe? France does not have the naval presence that the UK did in our timeline, though it will be the premier world power.

I think greece could be independent, at least with the provinces it owns in the beginning of vanilla Victoria. The Rest of the Balkans could be Ottoman, or perhaps independent greater Serbia and Bulgaria? What do you have in mind for Illiria? If it's still french perhaps the will have some satelite in Bosnia... Bulgaria, if independent, could be a russian ally or satelite

Greece is actually bigger, since the Russians could devote even more resources to their independence. Illyria is its own Kingdom. Does a large independent Serbia have any chance of not getting annexed by somebody? Bosnia could be a French satellite or independent nation.

 

[Vesimir]

I think that a revolution led by nobles happening soon after Napoleon's death would be the best answer to the polish question.

From my games as Britain in VIP i remember that france wanted to colonise New Zealand so that could be a possible colony.

If the austrian empire would collapse an event should spawn for DoW in which you can ask for Galicia. (If Napoleon would deny the request the relations would go down and increase the nobles claims that Napoleon is holding Poland back.)

 

[unmerged(81390)]

Greece is actually bigger, since the Russians could devote even more resources to their independence. Illyria is its own Kingdom. Does a large independent Serbia have any chance of not getting annexed by somebody? Bosnia could be a French satellite or independent nation.

Illira might have some kind of proto-Yugoslavian ideas, wanting to unify with (read: conquer) their south-slavic neighbours...

Bosnia could be divided between Illira and Serbia, if you can find a good way to do that...

 

[Varning]

From my games as Britain in VIP i remember that france wanted to colonise New Zealand so that could be a possible colony.

Hmmm... I looked into it and France did have some explorers to the area so New Zealand might be appropriate. England/UK will hold onto southeastern Australia with Holland interested in the north and west. Could make for some interesting Oceania conflict.

If the austrian empire would collapse an event should spawn for DoW in which you can ask for Galicia.

Warsaw got west Galicia after the war of the fifth coalition. Russia controls east Galicia.

Illira might have some kind of proto-Yugoslavian ideas

With the accelerated collapse of the Ottomans the idea of pan-balkanism and slavism seems to make some sort of sense. It certainly deserves events, at least.

Here's a tentative picture of the Balkan situation:

1)Kingdom of Illyria (French ally)
2)Kingdom of Bosnia (French satellite)
3)Kingdom of Serbia (allied or satellite to whom? Austria? Russia?)
4)Russian-occupied Wallachia and Moldavia
5)Kingdom of Bulgaria (Russian satellite)
6)expanded Greece

General situation in the Middle East. Russia grabbed Kars from Ottomans. France has North Egypt and Crete.

Bonus pic! After destroying Portugal in the Peninsular war, Napoleon annexed Portugal into France. He divided the remainder into (1) Northern Lusitania and (2) Algarve. Eventually the drain of administering Portugal from France became too much and it was transferred to the Spanish Bourbons. Sine Northern Lusitania is Bourbon as well, there may be events for Spain to take Northern Lusitania and Algarve and create an Iberian Union.

 

[Taylor]

Does Greece get Crete at some point after the game's start? (Bit like UK giving Ionian Islands to Greece IRL?)

I like the Iberian situation. So does this mean Portugal only has Brazil left?

Maybe Serbia can just be independent, but guaranteed by Russia/Austria. In-game they can ally Greece and Bulgaria?

What are you gonna do about Montenegro?

What have you done in Algeria? You silently gave that white country (what's it's name?) the French provinces there... (but the army still remains)

 

[yourworstnightm]

Still suspicous about North/ South split in US this early (and I want my Metis Confederacy).

There should be events for New Spain to rename itself Mexico.

Balkan (the one thing that cause more headaches than Poland); Bosnia seems like a nice addition. Make Serbia and Bulgaria smaller, they should be more challenging. Does Montenegro have to be in??

Which culture should Illyria have?? I guess French might be sufficient (making it more a occupier than a nation state).

Austria; that requires hard work, Austria has lost important German speaking territory, how will she prevail?? Perhaps brutal revolts!!

 

[General_Grant]

Klagenfurt should be 'Illyrian':http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fichier:Italy_c_1810.png

And Parma French. It really does add to the map prspective and its historical.

I'd suggest lettin Bosnia be completly independent, and Serbia allied with Russia. Thats in France's interest since it isolate Austria from the Balkans.
And that would give the chance to eitheir Serbia or Ilyria to gain power in the Balkans (maybe an eventual split? Mostar, Bihac and Livno to Ilyria and the rest to Serbia?)...

Kotor should also be Montenegrian, like it was prior to the Victorian era. It would allow a small buffer between Ilyria and the Ottomans (both Serbia and Ilyria could rivalise to interate it into their borders?)

Maybe give Constanta to the Bulgarians, the region was not very 'romanized' in the early 1800's.

Ilyria, Serbia, Greece and Bulgaria should have large ambitions (see map below), and each one should be playable. All those claims would make the situation in the Balkans even more interesting. Making too much of those countries puppets would make the region static and uninteresting.

Dots are cores and straight lines starting positions. (Rhodos & other islands should ohlny be cores however)

 

[unmerged(81390)]

Klagenfurt should be 'Illyrian':http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fichier:Italy_c_1810.png

And Parma French. It really does add to the map prspective and its historical.

I'd suggest lettin Bosnia be completly independent, and Serbia allied with Russia. Thats in France's interest since it isolate Austria from the Balkans.
And that would give the chance to eitheir Serbia or Ilyria to gain power in the Balkans (maybe an eventual split? Mostar, Bihac and Livno to Ilyria and the rest to Serbia?)...

Kotor should also be Montenegrian, like it was prior to the Victorian era. It would allow a small buffer between Ilyria and the Ottomans (both Serbia and Ilyria could rivalise to interate it into their borders?)

Maybe give Constanta to the Bulgarians, the region was not very 'romanized' in the early 1800's.

Ilyria, Serbia, Greece and Bulgaria should have large ambitions (see map below), and each one should be playable. All those claims would make the situation in the Balkans even more interesting. Making too much of those countries puppets would make the region static and uninteresting.

Dots are cores and straight lines starting positions. (Rhodos & other islands should ohlny be cores however)

I think Bosnia could be divided between Serbia and Illiria (Whose national culture's should be Croatian, Slovenian and maybe Serbian). Illiria should be a French ally and to beef them up also annex Montenegro. To counter this french influence, Serbia should be a french ally.

In a similar way Bulgaria could be in the Russian sphere and Greece in the french sphere. On the other hand France might become to powerful, and Greece would probably be pissed if France kept Crete... Perhaps Greece should be neutral and have good relations with both France and Russia?

I think that France looks to territorialy influential in Egypt, you should consider giving it back to Egypt except for the Canal zone. In exchange Egypt might be France's satelite!
(Events for modernization perhaps?)

 

[Varning]

Does Greece get Crete at some point after the game's start? (Bit like UK giving Ionian Islands to Greece IRL?)

Maybe, though I think the French will want to hold it to continue control in the Eastern Mediterranean and their Egyptian provinces. That doesn't mean the people won't revolt and try to join Greece though, just like they revolted against the Ottomans in real life!

Interestingly, I just read that the Ionian isles were actually in the hands of the French Illyrian provinces until the end of the Napoleonic wars, so they'll probably go to Illyrian control.

I like the Iberian situation. So does this mean Portugal only has Brazil left?

They maintained control over their colonies in Southern Africa, but other than that, just Brazil!

Maybe Serbia can just be independent, but guaranteed by Russia/Austria. In-game they can ally Greece and Bulgaria?

Oh that's probably best. Serbia can sort of be managing a balancing act, stuck as it is between Russia, Austria, France, and the Ottomans.

What are you gonna do about Montenegro?

I'm not sure yet... Should they be subsumed into Serbia? Suggestions?

What have you done in Algeria? You silently gave that white country (what's it's name?) the French provinces there... (but the army still remains)

Oh, I gave Aldajazair (sp?) back the Algerian territory, since Napoleon's France is more concerned with Egypt and the Balkans than Algeria. I'm going to post a preliminary map of Africa soon with drawn out planned colonization (of course players can screw that up!) for each of the major powers.

Still suspicous about North/ South split in US this early (and I want my Metis Confederacy).

It may not stay, though if it does I'll work really hard to make it believable. What's the justification for a Metis Confederacy?

There should be events for New Spain to rename itself Mexico.

Yeah, it may start as Mexico anyways since there will be independent feelings, if not movements in the Americas to start with. I don't think a stronger Spain can actually keep its New World empire, just limp on with it for a while longer.

Balkan (the one thing that cause more headaches than Poland); Bosnia seems like a nice addition. Make Serbia and Bulgaria smaller, they should be more challenging. Does Montenegro have to be in??

Haha, yeah the Balkans cause all sorts of trouble. Serbia and Bulgaria Smaller? They are 5 and 4 provinces respectively. How challenging do you want them to be! :rofl: Montenegro may not be in, does it make more sense to be annexed by Serbia/Illyria?

Which culture should Illyria have?? I guess French might be sufficient (making it more a occupier than a nation state).

Illyria has Slovene and possibly Croat at the moment. They've been free long enough to not be completely French subservient (French ally or guaranteed, rather than satellite).

Austria; that requires hard work, Austria has lost important German speaking territory, how will she prevail?? Perhaps brutal revolts!!

Yay for brutal revolts! Haha but actually I don't know what to do with Austria. Her German speaking population has been pretty severely slashed, so the classis Austrian problem of a minority ruling over various troubled majorities is amplified. Maybe a movement for a federalized structure for Austria? I know it was tried but too late before the revolutions of 1848.

Klagenfurt should be 'Illyrian'

Yep, will fix that, thanks a lot! Austria loses more German territory, oh boy...

And Parma French. It really does add to the map prspective and its historical.

Yeah, you're right again! Except that I have some maps which definitely show Massa as Italian, so that's going to be the ugliest border ever. But it is more accurate.

I'd suggest lettin Bosnia be completly independent, and Serbia allied with Russia

The only reason I made Bosnia a French satellite is cause the only scenario in which I can see a free Bosnia is one in which the French forced it from the Ottomans.

Kotor should also be Montenegrian, like it was prior to the Victorian era.

I'm pretty sure Napoleon gave Kotor to the Illyrian provinces after taking it off Habsburg hands.

Maybe give Constanta to the Bulgarians, the region was not very 'romanized' in the early 1800's.

Oh yeah, that area will have a Bulgaria core and not a Romanian one, its just at game start it will be under Russian jurisdiction.

Ilyria, Serbia, Greece and Bulgaria should have large ambitions (see map below), and each one should be playable. All those claims would make the situation in the Balkans even more interesting. Making too much of those countries puppets would make the region static and uninteresting.

Thanks for the map, I was really confused about where to give cores out in the Balkans but this will be a big help. The only satellites will be Bulgaria (who will be freed after Russian instability events) and Bosnia.

I think Bosnia could be divided between Serbia and Illiria

The only reason I disagree with this is that despite being a "liberal" for the time, Napoleon tended not to create large, nationally united territories. Look at Italy for example, which he unnecessarily broke up and divided. Now, Illyria and Serbia will both have cores on Bosnia, so anything that happens in the future to divide it up might occur...

In a similar way Bulgaria could be in the Russian sphere and Greece in the french sphere

Greece should be more friendly with Russia (both are anti-Ottoman, helped during the Greek revolution) but also friendly with France.

I think that France looks to territorialy influential in Egypt, you should consider giving it back to Egypt except for the Canal zone. In exchange Egypt might be France's satelite!

Yeah you're right, I'll take away some French territory. Egypt will be a French satellite probably, with events for "disorder in Egypt" which result in France gobbling up increasing amounts. (Similar to how the UK expanded their influence)

That's a great map too, what's the reason for the HUGE Illyria? (Basically Yugoslavia haha)

 

[unmerged(81390)]

Yeah you're right, I'll take away some French territory. Egypt will be a French satellite probably, with events for "disorder in Egypt" which result in France gobbling up increasing amounts. (Similar to how the UK expanded their influence)

That's a great map too, what's the reason for the HUGE Illyria? (Basically Yugoslavia haha)

Similarly to the vanilla event chain for Persia, Egypt could perhaps choose between rebellions, prolonged french dominance togheter with modernizations or early independence, satisfied populance but without modernizations, weakening them for a future european invasion....

I think Illira definatly had the potential to become Yugoslavia. The french influence on culture would be huge in this timeline, and nationalism was a part of it.
Nationalism works the way that you want your country to be greater and larger, though (offically) without enchroaching on other nations "natural borders". This does of course become a problem, so if a nationalistic nation hasn't expanded in awhile, it will find some reason to claim more land as a part of it's "natural" domain.
In real life Germany for example, the nationalists were first satisfied with all the smaller german states and Alsace-Lorraine. After another fifty years though, the nationalism was still there and out of sudden Austria and Bohemia had to be incorporated as well... Another example is the United States, first they wanted independence, then they wanted the Appalachians, then they wanted Lousiana, then they wanted Oregon, then they wanted California then they wanted alaska... Actually, they didn't really want Alaska, but they bought in anyways...

I don't claim that Illiria basicly should be 19th centuary Yugoslavia, but the Illirians would definatly want it...

 

[General_Grant]

I don't claim that Illiria basicly should be 19th centuary Yugoslavia, but the Illirians would definatly want it...

I think that to keep the 'Ilyria' concept a bit more unique, core Serbia should be excluded of it, and Albania a part of a 'Greater Ilyria' (Kind of Adriatic-Oriented).