• 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 Dzoser
re Wamo

I plan my game as very catholic state so probably I will choose Austria or Spain. My main aim will be to crush all protestant important states in Europe to less important satelites/small states. So Sweden will be my first military aim since it is much weaker than Great Britain or Prussia. After this I'm going to write some very catholic AAR :D
Hmmm I think I have to play a game as Sweden and plunder Vienna, Rome and Madrid as vengeance ;)
 
re Ape

Hmmm I think I have to play a game as Sweden and plunder Vienna, Rome and Madrid as vengeance

Never! Rome can be plunder only by catholic armies :D
 
Originally posted by John Poole
Though the Arabs sacked it once but indeed most sacking was by Catholics.

Haesten's Vikings would have had it but the daft bugger got lost and sacked Luna instead, then pissed off home and told everyone they'd burnt Rome.
 
Originally posted by John Poole
Its funny because its true :D

Though the Arabs sacked it once but indeed most sacking was by Catholics.

I do not remeber the Arabs ever sacking Rome, when was this?

I think province culture can be changed by making a province particularly attractive to people of your state culture. The main way to do that would be through industrialization (jobs=incentive to move).

Of course, building industry in a recently conquered Sweden that is not very happy about being forced to covert to Catholicism might not be a good idea, especially if you build lots of weapons factories.
 
Originally posted by Ernst
What I understood - I may be wrong - is that you won't have "state" cultures.

Remember in EUII : state cultures influence economical and production outputs (managed by infrastructure and manufactory levels in Vic), and revolt risk (managed by the quantity of available goods and overall national decisions in Vic). Hence culture does not play such roles in Vic.

During this time period, the main revolts and internal turmoils in Europe were caused by political thoughts and fights, oppression of certain classes, not cultures.

...

But I repeat : I may be wrong :) .


You are wrong indeed. :)

Nationalism was arguably THE major force (well, Imperialism is up there too, but it is tinged with nationalism for the most part…there are others as well, don't get me wrong on that one) for most of the period the game spans. We'll probably see nationalism both as a major unifying factor (Germany, Italy) and one prime cause for dissent and revolts (for the Ottomans and Austria in particular).

If not then, I'd be very much surprised and disappointed by Paradox. But I very much doubt that will be the case.
 
Originally posted by John Poole
In 846 they left their mark by scratching the faces off many Roman monuments since that kind of representation was a big no-no to Arabs in those days.

Here is a link see about half-way down the page.

http://web.genie.it/utenti/i/inanna/livello2-i/mediterraneo-2-i.htm

That links seems to be broken...you wrote one a http too much it seems (or rather added one to the one present in the link function).

This version should work:


Fixed version of above link

EDIT: Rewrote link text to make it clearer.
 
Last edited:
Originally posted by Gothmog
That links seems to be broken...you wrote one a http too much it seems (or rather added one to the one present in the link function).



Try this one


This seems to be a very interesting site indeed thanks for posting.
 
Originally posted by Tunch Khan
This seems to be a very interesting site indeed thanks for posting.

Can't take credit for it, I only reposted the link John Poole misspelled. But thanks anyway.

As for the site, it seems to have a good overall view of chronology, but right off the bat it seems a bit overtly anti-islamic. That's just my first impression, though.
 
BTW, I'm sorry if I gave the impression that it was a new link (upon reading the post, it might seem as if that's the case).

It wasn't my intention, I'll edit the post.
 
Originally posted by Gothmog
Can't take credit for it, I only reposted the link John Poole misspelled. But thanks anyway.

As for the site, it seems to have a good overall view of chronology, but right off the bat it seems a bit overtly anti-islamic. That's just my first impression, though.

Information is information, of course we refine the knowledge we are acquiring, and can make our own comments, right? ;) So there's plenty of study and work there which i admire. And about facts, it just gives the information from a christian point of view, it does not imply that Arabs were inferior or something.
 
Originally posted by Tunch Khan
Information is information, of course we refine the knowledge we are acquiring, and can make our own comments, right? ;)

True. A critical mind is perhaps the most valuable resource when dealing with historical sources, whether they be primary or secondary. Actually I personally find propaganda of various kinds to be one of the most interesting sources to deal with.

Originally posted by Tunch Khan
So there's plenty of study and work there which i admire. And about facts, it just gives the information from a christian point of view, it does not imply that Arabs were inferior or something.

As I said, it was just my first impression. As for inferior, well not exactly, but rather oppressive, demeaning outsiders and primitives (again, a first impression. haven't checked the whole site). One could easily drag out much worse about Christians (well, then one could of course argue that that's not the point of the info up there).

But that's another discussion entirely.
 
Interestingly enough, the site states that the Arabs did not sack Rome, just destroyed a few churches outside the city walls.
 
Originally posted by Chengar Qordath
Interestingly enough, the site states that the Arabs did not sack Rome, just destroyed a few churches outside the city walls.

The best ones maybe?
 
Code:
For example. In OE most of the trade was controlled by Greeks-Armenians-Israelis. When Greeks and Armenians were out of the picture, Ottoman economy suffered. Could/should that be portrayed here as well?

Good point. The same can be said about the Chinese in east and southeast Asia. The same could be said if African nations gain there independence and then kick out the Europeans.
 
Originally posted by Collock
Code:
For example. In OE most of the trade was controlled by Greeks-Armenians-Israelis. When Greeks and Armenians were out of the picture, Ottoman economy suffered. Could/should that be portrayed here as well?

Good point. The same can be said about the Chinese in east and southeast Asia. The same could be said if African nations gain there independence and then kick out the Europeans.

I think the trade in Africa was controlled not only by Europeans but also by Arabs, especially in North and East Africa.
 
I'd say the only way to change a province's leading culture would be to make living there VERY diasgreeable. No jobs, no food, high taxes, that sort of stuff. After the undesirables were thrown out, you'd have to make living in the province very attractive, with hopes that the population from your cultural core emigrate there.

Of course, doing this may be EXTREMELy undesirable, especially if you have to use some nationwide policies to get everyone to move out.
 
Originally posted by treedom
Have you ever been to Toronto?
\


I know this is getting OT, but something like 80% of Torontonians were NOT born in Canada.
:)
I emailed the Toronto city library for this information once.