then why do you use event LAT 209006 , to cede the area to POL in 1454 instead of the correct time of 1466?
1454 is when the conflict started not when it ended
-
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.
then why do you use event LAT 209006 , to cede the area to POL in 1454 instead of the correct time of 1466?
1454 is when the conflict started not when it ended
First of all that would rather be a question for the Poland thread as it´s not about culture.
Second: We usually don´t do that. ;-)
Event 209006 only triggers when the Prussian Confedration is in revolt and if Poland has at least 5 provinces and the Teutonic Order less than 3 provinces or is already a vassal of Poland. As the Teutons start in 1419 with 4 provinces (Neumark/Küstrin, Pomerelia/Danzig, Prussia and Memel) event 209006 can only trigger if LAT had been losing provinces before.
If LAT at the time of the prussian confederations revolt has 3 provinces or more and is no polish vassal then it will not simply cede "Danzig" but have event 209005 and in option a select to risk a war with Poland.
splitting cultures in scandinavia etc
For game purpose it could be useful to split Scandinavian culture in Danish/Norwegian/"Swedish" even if I think i would be better to use a another world the Swedish. The reason for that is that ugric part of Sweden was as fully integrated in Sweden as the Scandinavian parts. The people in ugric part had the same nobles. They had the same laws. They where sending people to the Swedish parliament. (Not counting Estland and Livland here only parts that was swedish 1419).[/QUOTE]
But the cultures in scandinavia and the ugric areas was realy close.
In the game this could be simulated by making event that you as for as small cost could convert a province from Danish/Norwegian/"Swedish" to Danish/Norwegian/"Swedish" i you have kept the province in 60 years. This would be a simulation of the event that took place in Skåne (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Scania#1658.E2.80.931680) (The is a better article in swedish at http://www.svd.se/kultur/understrecket/att-gora-svenskar-av-skaningar_911003.svd but I don't know how good google translet will work on it ;-) ). It's probably that it the same could been done with Trondelag as in Skåne if Sweden have keept Trondelag 60 years from 1658 instead of returning it to Danmark-Norway after only 2 years (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trondelag#History).
Mabe there as nother way of getting the same results in the game. As I'm not against Scandinavian culture as such. The reason to split it would be to avoid it's the unhistorical result that is today.
Italian culture works well but ...
Concerning Italian culture I think there is reason both from the historical roots and from the huge difference in culture between north and south today (the last a seen on it was that difference in corruption is bigger between north and south of Italy then between individual countries is north europe). But I'm no expert on Italian history
And I think Italy usaly work out historical well in AGCEEP.
French culture in HRE ?
About French I really see no point in making a split. That France was much more lower centralization because of different cultures that for example Sweden could be showed in other ways - except concerning the eastern parts - as It don't effect the historical flow.
I could accept a different culture for the western part of Middle Francia (Kingdom of Arles, Lotharingia). That is the provices: Savoy, France Comte and Lorraine. If some one could argue for it historical.
The problem of the small countries in HRE disappearing unhistorical fast.
Concerning Germany I think it irritating that you usually get a unhistorical outcome. The fragmentation of the HRE with +35 countries that is when the game start at 1419 should be at 20-25 1648 but are usually much lower. (If if you play China ...) Maybe one why of strengthen the small German speaking states in HRE would be to give them production/tax at start but at the same time fragment there German culture in different parts. But maybe there is a better way to reach that end.
Scandinavian - use subcultures?
For game purpose it could be useful to split Scandinavian culture in Danish/Norwegian/"Swedish" even if I think i would be better to use a another world the Swedish. The reason for that is that ugric part of Sweden was as fully integrated in Sweden as the Scandinavian parts. The people in ugric part had the same nobles. They had the same laws. They where sending people to the Swedish parliament. (Not counting Estland and Livland here only parts that was swedish 1419).[/QUOTE]
But the cultures in scandinavia and the ugric areas was realy close.
In the game this could be simulated by making event that you as for as small cost could convert a province from Danish/Norwegian/"Swedish" to Danish/Norwegian/"Swedish" i you have kept the province in 60 years. This would be a simulation of the event that took place in Skåne (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Scania#1658.E2.80.931680) (The is a better article in swedish at http://www.svd.se/kultur/understrecket/att-gora-svenskar-av-skaningar_911003.svd but I don't know how good google translet will work on it ;-) ). It's probably that it the same could been done with Trondelag as in Skåne if Sweden have keept Trondelag 60 years from 1658 instead of returning it to Danmark-Norway after only 2 years (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trondelag#History).
Mabe there as nother way of getting the same results in the game. As I'm not against Scandinavian culture as such. The reason to split it would be to avoid it's the unhistorical result that is today.
Italian culture works well but ...
Concerning Italian culture I think there is reason both from the historical roots and from the huge difference in culture between north and south today (the last a seen on it was that difference in corruption is bigger between north and south of Italy then between individual countries is north europe). But I'm no expert on Italian history
And I think Italy usaly work out historical well in AGCEEP.French culture in HRE ?
About French I really see no point in making a split. That France was much more lower centralization because of different cultures that for example Sweden could be showed in other ways - except concerning the eastern parts - as It don't effect the historical flow.
I could accept a different culture for the western part of Middle Francia (Kingdom of Arles, Lotharingia). That is the provices: Savoy, France Comte and Lorraine. If some one could argue for it historical.
The problem of the small countries in HRE disappearing unhistorical fast.
Concerning Germany I think it irritating that you usually get a unhistorical outcome. The fragmentation of the HRE with +35 countries that is when the game start at 1419 should be at 20-25 1648 but are usually much lower. (If if you play China ...) Maybe one why of strengthen the small German speaking states in HRE would be to give them production/tax at start but at the same time fragment there German culture in different parts. But maybe there is a better way to reach that end.