Not so. Brabant can also form the Netherlands, and makes for a much easier game. The same is true for Flanders i think though Burgundy would have to release it first. Secondly i think that history is pretty good eason to keep it in the game. Thirdly it would be accurate, the area wasn't even remotely subjugated untill Charles V came along.bwyb00 said:
Kennelly said:
as you can see, you protested merging Huron and Iroquois cultures into 'Iroquoian' culture. I merely pointed out that the Huron, Iroquois and Cherokee were going back into the game. Merging all native nations cultures into 'native' culture is quite different than merging regional neighbours who share a similar culture into one broader culture. Which is again different from merging all empty provinces into a single 'native' culture. So it sometimes helps to elaborate when it comes to these kinds of things. Regardless, we share the same opinion, as you say.Kennelly said:I'm not exactly into that...ribbon22 said:'Huron' and 'Iroquois' cultures should be united into "Iroquoian". This saves us a culture tag
I was referring to in-depth debates about cultural changes, nothing more, and the comment was directed to the community, not just you. It is my personal preference to see in-depth cultural debates occuring in the proper regional thread. That's all.Kennelly said:
I am mainly focusing on Gelderland at this time and the problem i have is you gain no man power from the annexed Friesland. I guess removing the Frisian culture will solve this issue, but if the Frisian culture is important for any good reason, something else should be done to give Gelderland a little man power from the Friesen province.ribbon22 said:
Thats true, Friesland and Gelderland are not the only one, but personnaly i think Brabant should not be selected by a human player, it is too important for the Burgundy scenario.Registered said:
) taking over the County of Holland or the Duchy of Geldre without much resistance, and there are several examples of what happened when the Counts of Holland (no matter if they were Wittelsbachs, Valois or Hapsburgs) tried to subjugate Friesland - and Friesland has in addition, differently from Helvetia, a unique ethnicity and language.
this could be changed via an event that gave the Netherlands Dutch state culture. Or by making sure the Netherlands can't form from Friesland - ppl will complain about this suggestion I'm sure.bwyb00 said:
I don't see how splitting up German culture (ie. taking a more microscopic perspective on cultures in our project) makes the existance of Swiss culture less accurate, if anything wouldn't this make Swiss culture look more accurate?Twoflower said:
Twoflower said:
Joe000000 said:
#Creation of the Dutch Republic#
event = {
id = 28001
trigger = {
owned = {
province = 337
data = -1
}
owned = {
province = 338
data = -1
}
owned = {
province = 339
data = -1
}
owned = {
province = 340
data = -1
}
owned = {
province = 378
data = -1
}
owned = {
province = 380
data = -1
}
NOT = {
exists = HOL
}
}
random = no
country = FRI
name = "EVENTNAME28000"
desc = "EVENTHIST28001"
style = 2
date = { day = 1 month = january year = 1559 }
offset = 3600
deathdate = { day = 1 month = january year = 1648 }
action_a ={
name = "ACTIONNAME28001A"
command = { type = vp value = 200 }
command = { type = stability value = -2 }
command = { type = revoltrisk which = 48 value = 8 }
command = { type = domestic which = CENTRALIZATION value = 3 }
command = { type = domestic which = ARISTOCRACY value = 1 }
command = { type = domestic which = SERFDOM value = 1 }
command = { type = domestic which = INNOVATIVE value = -1 }
command = { type = gainbuilding which = -1 value = bailiff }
command = { type = gainbuilding which = -1 value = bailiff }
command = { type = gainbuilding which = -1 value = bailiff }
command = { type = gainbuilding which = -1 value = bailiff }
command = { type = gainbuilding which = -1 value = courthouse }
command = { type = gainbuilding which = -1 value = courthouse }
}
action_b ={
name = "ACTIONNAME28002B"
command = { type = vp value = -200 }
command = { type = inflation value = 10 }
command = { type = stability value = -1 }
command = { type = country which = HOL }
command = { type = religion which = reformed }
command = { type = sleepevent which = 3900 }
command = { type = domestic which = CENTRALIZATION value = -5 }
command = { type = domestic which = ARISTOCRACY value = -3 }
command = { type = domestic which = SERFDOM value = -2 }
command = { type = domestic which = MERCANTILISM value = -2 }
command = { type = domestic which = INNOVATIVE value = 2 }
command = { type = domestic which = QUALITY value = -3 }
command = { type = addcore which = 337 }
command = { type = addcore which = 338 }
command = { type = addcore which = 339 }
command = { type = addcore which = 340 }
command = { type = addcore which = 378 }
command = { type = addcore which = 380 }
[color=red]command = { type = addculture which = dutch}[/color]
}
}The religious question really ought to be considered seperately, and from the very beginning the real hotbeds of the reformation were in south Germany, not in the north. Big chunks of Northern Germany remained catholic, just a lerge parts of Southern Germany became and remained protestant.Kennelly said:
Added this to the list. Kennelly, if you can weigh in on this that'd be good.Isaac Brock said:
Which is hardly surprising given that various cities in modern Bavaria were strong exponents of the reformation from the very beginning. Not to mention that quite aside from Baden, Wurtemburg played an important role in the reformation. The generalization that northern Germany = protestant and southern Germany = catholic is a massive simplification. Most of Westphalia was Catholic. The early reformation picked up much of it's support in Southern Germany. The reformation was as sucessful in the Archduchy of Austria as it was anywhere else - it just never received any state support. Relgion in Germany was very diverse.Kennelly said:
Kennelly said:
