Now, I don't know what the current set up is, but it might help if you gave the CSA it's own culture. Have the USA start with it as a state culture, and then lose it...
-
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.
Something like "Southern" culture?
Texas might need its own culture also. California might need its own culture too while we're at it.
Personally I think US American is fine.
Texas might need its own culture also. California might need its own culture too while we're at it.Personally I think US American is fine.
Have the southern states have "Southern" culture and have the US lose it when the civil war breaks out. If the Confederacy loses and is reconqured then Southern culture in the southern provences would be changed as part of the peace event to standard US culture.
As OMM pointed out, if we have a Southern culture, we should have a Western culture, etc. And I don't see any point in Balkanizing the US.
Why a victorious North in the Civil War possibly change the culture of the South?
Why a victorious North in the Civil War possibly change the culture of the South?
RECONSTRUCTION..
After the civil war the southern people would not be as rebellious and seperative as they were before the war that is why southern culture would change to regular US culture after the south is defeated.
After the civil war the southern people would not be as rebellious and seperative as they were before the war that is why southern culture would change to regular US culture after the south is defeated.
Why does Reconstruction have anything to do with culture? Military occupation is simulated after Reconstruction is currently simulated with revolts (which have to do with politics, not culture). I see no reason why that's inadequate.
This is actually something I've been thinking about as well. I posted ahile ago asking about how to get a new state culture going but never got a response.
I think the USA should be divided into two cultures: "US Free State" and "US Slave State". At the beginning of the game, the province cultures are divided like their historical states. The US has both as state cultures. Events (which already exist... don't worry ) can deal w/ cultural changes.
For example, the Missouri compromise will make states north of Missouri province Free culture & those south slave. The emancipation proclamation event could make all states in Union hands into Free States, or at least it could expunge the slave state culture, and the reconstruction event could make all provinces Free State. There's a lot that can be done with state culture within the framework of events, etc. that already exist, and I definitely think we should do this.
LC
I think the USA should be divided into two cultures: "US Free State" and "US Slave State". At the beginning of the game, the province cultures are divided like their historical states. The US has both as state cultures. Events (which already exist... don't worry
) can deal w/ cultural changes. For example, the Missouri compromise will make states north of Missouri province Free culture & those south slave. The emancipation proclamation event could make all states in Union hands into Free States, or at least it could expunge the slave state culture, and the reconstruction event could make all provinces Free State. There's a lot that can be done with state culture within the framework of events, etc. that already exist, and I definitely think we should do this.
LC
Why the hell would anyone want separate cultures? The North and the South have the same traditions, eat the same foods, speak the same language, and both consider themselves Americans. Their differences are economic and political, not cultural. Do we have Liberal and Conservative cultures today in every country? By God no! Do farmers and industrialist consider themselves culturally different? No! Look at the English Civil wars in the original EU2, the political revolts are handled by events that decrease stability, change religion(n/a in this case) and change revolt rates for some provinces. This was the same way it was handled in the last release of AoN. Political events in AoN already simulate these political revolts perfectly. I realize some of you may think having a lot of cultures make the game more "interesting", but dividing the North and South into different cultures is unhistorical, unrealistic, and just plain illogical.
Yes what you say is true, now, but the civil war was not like the English civil war or a real civil war at all. There were not 2 sides seaking to control the government, the south was forming its own government its own country because northern and southern values no longer meshed. The divide was great indeed and enough to warrent a second culture. A second culture would only be around in the just before the civil war and during and would greatly represent the growing divide between the north and the south in the 1850's and 60's, look at what you get nationalisim, revolt risk, and lower production values.
I agree with vodka. The Civil War was not about conflicts of cultures; it was about the conflicts of political policies. The Civil War was about protectionism and slavery debates turning violent. Culture does not represent the military struggle between the North and West (by the same criteria that the North and South are different, they are two different cultures) and the South.
The war began because the southern states perceived that the northern states were encroaching and trying to change their way of life. In reality thru most of the 19th century every state should have their own culture as people held far more value to their state, north and south than to a distant and unseen federal government but there is no room for that not to mention it is far to complicated. Giving a new southern culture works well for the civil war only the basic beliefs of the two sides in basic freedoms, states rights, and views on the future of the nation as well as regional differences in there extreme forms ex: war time, warrant a new culture.
Culture doesn't properly describe the political differences between the North and West and the South either nominally or through game-play mechanics. It's better implemented through other game-play mechanics such as dp settings and revolt risks.
well you have to take in mind that the south really did have its own culture and the south broke away because of the US trade tariffs killing the south. and the south should always have its culture so itll be pointless to make its own culture once it breaks away. It really formed its own culture around the early 1800's
Do you believe there should be Texan and western cultures as well? This is my big problem with having a southern culture, if we have it then we have to have the other two and I do not think that balkanizing (as Ramo pointed out earlier) the US will help with much with anything.
Legal Counsel's suggestion about "Slave" and "non Slave" cultures would probably be a better way to go in my opinion.
Legal Counsel's suggestion about "Slave" and "non Slave" cultures would probably be a better way to go in my opinion.
Western peoples are just people transplanted from the east who have a more rugged life and are represented fine by colonists.
Texas is represented fine in Southern culture all states and regions have certain differences like New England and the Deep South. The way I see Southern vs. Northern culture is as representing beliefs that rose in the north and south that eventually lead the two halves of the country to diverge and end the end go to war and in that since Texas falls into Southern Culture.
As for slave and non slave cultures that may work but the differences were far more complicated than slaveholders vs. non slaveholders. For example most Northerners didn't care about slavery and most Southerners didn't own slaves. The most brutal war ever fought by Americans was about far more than just some political differences, it was a clash of cultures and this should be represented some how.
Texas is represented fine in Southern culture all states and regions have certain differences like New England and the Deep South. The way I see Southern vs. Northern culture is as representing beliefs that rose in the north and south that eventually lead the two halves of the country to diverge and end the end go to war and in that since Texas falls into Southern Culture.
As for slave and non slave cultures that may work but the differences were far more complicated than slaveholders vs. non slaveholders. For example most Northerners didn't care about slavery and most Southerners didn't own slaves. The most brutal war ever fought by Americans was about far more than just some political differences, it was a clash of cultures and this should be represented some how.
Slave-state and Free-state cultures make perfect sense to me- doesn't having 1/4 of the population in bondage change things for a state? Texas should have the former (and Mexican, for crying out loud! The first vice-president was named Seguin!!). The US could lose the former at the start of the Civil War, and regain it if they win.
I think a more elaborate (and better) way to do it would be to keep US American until the Civ. War starts, then have the Union switch to US North culture and the Confederacy to have US South culture... then, once the South no longer exists or the event ending the war happens, they both go back to US American...