Denmark is bugged in new Beta patch

[Arilou]

That danish event is nasty, but have you seen the benefits?

GERMAN CULTURE! Sure, the AI can't take it, but for a human that's a tasty prize. German is (IIRC) THE best culture in the game, (possibly with the exception of Han?) It instantly makes any conquered german province 30% more lucrative fromt axes, reduces WE and gives you a far great chance of converting them... I'd say it's a fairly balanced deal. BUT. It needs to be moved to the ahistorical choice!

 

[unmerged(22171)]

Ok Lets have a History Lesson.

1) there is no such thing as Scandinavian Culture. The Phrase Scandinavian is better described as the dominions of Kalmr, Skåne, or Scania in Latin.

So Called Danish Culture is formed of Many Sub Cultures Be it Danes, Jutes ( now of Kent), Angles, Saxons, Vendsyssel, dominated by that of Sjaelland, who pushed the afore out more often than not.

Slesvig is definitely of Danish culture, (as is the area around Skåne/ Lund), with Hedeby (at least as early as 900AD) forming the centre of trade and an important land bridge (Drag boats across) between the Baltic and North Sea, to enable trade between the important centres of what is now Lund, Roskilde, Trelleborg, Fyrkat, Aalborg, to the Low lands etc. We even built a Wall remember?

Holstien stems from a dynastic break-off from Slesvig.

Subjugation of the Wends, should be noted... they were essentially Wiped out, at great cost. which left a population vacuum filled in part by People from Friisian, Holland, and Vestphalia, (hence Hamborg and Lubeck), as well as Danes.

The debts encountered presented possessions of Danish soil in the area to the Counts of Holstien (stillunder Danish feudal Rule).

Remember that in Ca 1200 Denmark ruled over Most of the Southern Baltic Coast, Estland (Estonia).

These debts are the basis of the then Slesvig and Holstien being separate. Bear in mind that the area was was continually divided in numerous ways. At the start of the Game Slesvig was Danish, and I fail to understand why Holstien as such is not a Vassel of Denamark?

it was only in 1658 that the are was forced (by truce) away from Denmark. Remember here that it was only foreign intervention that prevented Denmark holding all (the then) Swedish territories south of Hamburg.

the areas true cultural separation should be post Napolionc

------------


Ok About Denmarks in Game Plight.

I would agree that other regional cultures are needed. German as a Culture is relatively New in game terms, and still is IMO.

Slesvig Holstien, should be a Danish Vassal with the same culture as Denmark, under German State rule. Any rebellion there would render Slesvig Holstien reverting to Denmark.


In 1419 Denmark should be More than Capable to Subjugate Sweden (Militarily). Even at the time of Sweden's Glory years Denmark should hold her own in the area.

Further Denmark should be strong enough the Regain all her Baltic Possessions. What prevents her from this should be desire faced with a Merchant state alliance. as individuals they would have stood little chance, but together they kept Denmark from her ambitions.

Diplomatic And Dynastic relations.

It seems that it has been Conveniently forgotten Just how well Denmark was connected Dynastically!! While Sweden would be described as Nuvo riche, Denmark has a Dynasty that remains the oldest existing line. Her Royal ties were extensive, and remain the most extensive still.

It was Capitalism and The Merchant state that ended these ties and not some other form of decline.

Denmark should have (historically) some of the best diplomatic skills in game. As such having huge influence in Northern Europe. As a Nation her intent should be a Mercantile one and not an expansionist on in the games Time frame.


Solution. Make Denmark more than able to hold of Sweden and give her no desire to expand unless provoked.

Her land tech should easily a match for all but Spain, and her naval tech above all others in 1419.

How did she fund this? Through Trade, the sound due, and Royal connections.

I'm more than Happy with the strength of Sweden, but perturbed at the poor diplomatic links and relations of Denmark in the area.

Sjaelland should have a regionally dominating income at the games start (outgrown by others latter, much latter), it did/ dose after all form the basis of the oldest kingdom on earth, the unification of the Danish Kingdom, and the ability of Denmark to remain as it is today. The reality is that At no point in time would Denmark have been allowed to NOT exist.

As such if invaded she should be given allies. England, Russia, Holland, and even France if needed. A sort of Don't you dare expand but woe betide any who dare attack her.

I do agree with Denmark having a cocktail of Cultures, Because that is essentially exactly what she is, a unified Cocktail.

oh and lets have a Norman, Saxon & Gothic culture to boot.

 

[unmerged(23962)]

According to your ideas you arnt revolutionary, but indeed you bring alittle new perspective on cultures....

 

[Arilou]

Ok Lets have a History Lesson.

1) there is no such thing as Scandinavian Culture. The Phrase Scandinavian is better described as the dominions of Kalmr, Skåne, or Scania in Latin.

So Called Danish Culture is formed of Many Sub Cultures Be it Danes, Jutes ( now of Kent), Angles, Saxons, Vendsyssel, dominated by that of Sjaelland, who pushed the afore out more often than not.

Slesvig is definitely of Danish culture, (as is the area around Skåne/ Lund), with Hedeby (at least as early as 900AD) forming the centre of trade and an important land bridge (Drag boats across) between the Baltic and North Sea, to enable trade between the important centres of what is now Lund, Roskilde, Trelleborg, Fyrkat, Aalborg, to the Low lands etc. We even built a Wall remember?

Holstien stems from a dynastic break-off from Slesvig.

Subjugation of the Wends, should be noted... they were essentially Wiped out, at great cost. which left a population vacuum filled in part by People from Friisian, Holland, and Vestphalia, (hence Hamborg and Lubeck), as well as Danes.

The debts encountered presented possessions of Danish soil in the area to the Counts of Holstien (stillunder Danish feudal Rule).

Remember that in Ca 1200 Denmark ruled over Most of the Southern Baltic Coast, Estland (Estonia).

These debts are the basis of the then Slesvig and Holstien being separate. Bear in mind that the area was was continually divided in numerous ways. At the start of the Game Slesvig was Danish, and I fail to understand why Holstien as such is not a Vassel of Denamark?

it was only in 1658 that the are was forced (by truce) away from Denmark. Remember here that it was only foreign intervention that prevented Denmark holding all (the then) Swedish territories south of Hamburg.

the areas true cultural separation should be post Napolionc

------------


Ok About Denmarks in Game Plight.

I would agree that other regional cultures are needed. German as a Culture is relatively New in game terms, and still is IMO.

Slesvig Holstien, should be a Danish Vassal with the same culture as Denmark, under German State rule. Any rebellion there would render Slesvig Holstien reverting to Denmark.


In 1419 Denmark should be More than Capable to Subjugate Sweden (Militarily). Even at the time of Sweden's Glory years Denmark should hold her own in the area.

Further Denmark should be strong enough the Regain all her Baltic Possessions. What prevents her from this should be desire faced with a Merchant state alliance. as individuals they would have stood little chance, but together they kept Denmark from her ambitions.

Diplomatic And Dynastic relations.

It seems that it has been Conveniently forgotten Just how well Denmark was connected Dynastically!! While Sweden would be described as Nuvo riche, Denmark has a Dynasty that remains the oldest existing line. Her Royal ties were extensive, and remain the most extensive still.

It was Capitalism and The Merchant state that ended these ties and not some other form of decline.

Denmark should have (historically) some of the best diplomatic skills in game. As such having huge influence in Northern Europe. As a Nation her intent should be a Mercantile one and not an expansionist on in the games Time frame.


Solution. Make Denmark more than able to hold of Sweden and give her no desire to expand unless provoked.

Her land tech should easily a match for all but Spain, and her naval tech above all others in 1419.

How did she fund this? Through Trade, the sound due, and Royal connections.

I'm more than Happy with the strength of Sweden, but perturbed at the poor diplomatic links and relations of Denmark in the area.

Sjaelland should have a regionally dominating income at the games start (outgrown by others latter, much latter), it did/ dose after all form the basis of the oldest kingdom on earth, the unification of the Danish Kingdom, and the ability of Denmark to remain as it is today. The reality is that At no point in time would Denmark have been allowed to NOT exist.

As such if invaded she should be given allies. England, Russia, Holland, and even France if needed. A sort of Don't you dare expand but woe betide any who dare attack her.

I do agree with Denmark having a cocktail of Cultures, Because that is essentially exactly what she is, a unified Cocktail.

oh and lets have a Norman, Saxon & Gothic culture to boot.

Actually Scandinavian comes from the Scandes (the chain of mountains between and covering Norway and Sweden) as well as the peninsula itself.

I think a Scandinavian culture is totally justified during the time-period. Attempts where made (several times actually) to unite the three Crowns (Norway, Sweden, Denmark) First during the Kalmar Union, later the swedes tried to absorb Denmark (by force and marriage) in the 18th century at least twice (and maybe thrice) a danish candidate was considered for the swedish throne. More historicall every province in Scandinavia (and the rest of Europe) should be given it's own culture, but that'd be impractical (for one thing, there's not enough culture tags) and so Scandinavian culture will continue to exist.

At the beginning of the game Denmark should (and is, in the hands of a human) capable of beating Sweden. For a human Denmark's position is strategically good, for the AI? Not so.
One thing I'd consider doing that might help though, is to remove the entire swedish starting fleet (at least in 1492) Sweden did not have any organized fleet (although they had a few quickly assembled ones) until Gustav Vasa, and that should *somewhat* help the danes keep the swedes out of Sjaelland.

Another idea might be to make the norwegian provinces non-adjacent to the swedish ones, and then making a crossable strait from Östlandet to Västergötland, this to simulate the hard-to-cross mountains, which prevented large-scale invasions into Norway.

I'd say that after the war of the 1640's I do not think the danes could have beaten Sweden alone (though holding their own is doable) note that during all the subsequent wars the danes where playing the game of diplomacy with great skill (often a danish-Russian alliance materializes in-game, whcih is good, the problem is that the danes then get involved in wars with Poland, which is bad) and usually the danes had larger coalitions on their side. I agree that after 1700 or so any of the countries annexing the other would be unthinkable (at least militarily) as it would upset the Balance of Power too much, but before that I could see it work (either way)

The problem, I think, is not the game but the AI (possibly I'd like to see a slight taxvalue improvement across the danish board, or a CoT in sjaelland) Removing the swedish starting navy and cutting them of from Norway (via a blockable strait) would, I think, greatly improve the danish survivability.

 

[unmerged(22171)]

Actually Scandinavian comes from the Scandes (the chain of mountains between and covering Norway and Sweden) as well as the peninsula itself.

As I implied, its a convenient geographical descriptor rather than a cultural group. Further, its an example of a descriptor of foreign origin and convenience. Look at a map of Rome and admire the casual naming of unknown territory such as Germanic tribes, Norsemen... The term Scandinavian (as a Culture) is simply wrong for the time period, and wrong today in its used coverage.

Yes there are similarities, but it is incorrect to label a culture by either its rulers, geography (Nomads) or a "damn i can't be bothered to conquer up there" generic label.

I think a Scandinavian culture is totally justified during the time-period. Attempts where made (several times actually) to unite the three Crowns (Norway, Sweden, Denmark) First during the Kalmar Union, later the swedes tried to absorb Denmark (by force and marriage) in the 18th century at least twice (and maybe thrice) a danish candidate was considered for the swedish throne. More historicall every province in Scandinavia (and the rest of Europe) should be given it's own culture, but that'd be impractical (for one thing, there's not enough culture tags) and so Scandinavian culture will continue to exist.

Co operation, annexation, and subjugation do not a single culture make. Whether by motive of peace or motives of power, Are we to say Estonians are Russian? or Basque people are Spanish?

Also Note the Word Land in so many Danish provinces. this illustrates how Danmark is a unified Kingdom in its own right.

So lets refresh.

Did Denmark, supply troops to the Germanic cause? oh Yes.
Were Danes spread across Europe, implying Cultural links to the outside? Well only if you count Anglia, Kent, England, Normandy, The Wendish lands, Northern Spain, Napoli, The Fens. Such cultural expansion is a two way affair.

The issue was if Denmark should receive German As a culture? I say Germanic yes, German No. There is a big difference...
Denmark should perhaps have received many cultural types... or in reality be given a great adaptability to settle without cost (or reduced cost) in many cultural areas? (5% of Danes live abroad even today)

One point. I fail to see how receiving a culture should increase revolutionary tendencies? why would a Jute care more if a Sjælland ruler command German soil? Why would a Sjællandske peasant be angry if his king has a larger tax base?

One thing I'm 100% sure of is that both would fight to the death if governed by a Swede...

Surely it must be scriptable to express countries that integrate well and often increase productivity? (Boosting agriculture , weapons tech, Naval tech, are all real examples)

 

[Arilou]

Fitzeraldo:

As I implied, its a convenient geographical descriptor rather than a cultural group.

Actually i'd say it's just that. A Cultural Group. Not a single culture but a grouping of related cultures. Sweden managed to rule Gotland and Jämtland without much problems, Skåne with more so (but assimilation was still relatively quick) Denmark had no *inherent* problems ruling sweden (the problems where ones of organization and lack of authority, not culture per-se. Look at the composition of forces at the battle of Brunkeberg!)

Yes there are similarities, but it is incorrect to label a culture by either its rulers, geography (Nomads) or a "damn i can't be bothered to conquer up there" generic label.

I totally disagree (surprising eh?) Rulers is a fully acceptable way to label a culture (since being under the thumb of the same rulers tend to create cultural cohesion, if the ruling power is strong enough) I don't get what you're saying about geography and the "damn i can't be bothered to conquer up there" is an acceptable division in a strategy game. Cultures in-game are, for better or for worse, game mechanical instruments. They're there to guide nations in relatively historical paths (Both Denmark and Sweden spent large amounts of the time-period trying to conquer each other, this is simulated by a shared Scandinavian culture (It could be split into "Norwegian" "Danish" and "Swedish" but in order to make sense every one of the countries would have to have all three cultures which would just waste tags)

Co operation, annexation, and subjugation do not a single culture make. Whether by motive of peace or motives of power, Are we to say Estonians are Russian? or Basque people are Spanish?

See above. When a country is supposed to be able to rule a country with relative ease tehy have the same culture.

The issue was if Denmark should receive German As a culture? I say Germanic yes, German No. There is a big difference...

I believe there are two reasons for giving denmark german culture: A) Historical, Denmark tried to expand in Slesvig-Holstein several times, and their ruling-class was to a large extent germanized. (note that this can also be said for Sweden, but here it comes down to) B) pure game-play reasoning. A Denmark with german culture is stronger (easier expansion/richer provinces) and thus has an easier time resisting eg. Sweden (or anyone else who comes a-knocking)

One point. I fail to see how receiving a culture should increase revolutionary tendencies? why would a Jute care more if a Sjælland ruler command German soil? Why would a Sjællandske peasant be angry if his king has a larger tax base?

I don't think the events makes much sense, but I believe it's supposed to represent the Count's Feud and the attempts to restore Christian II more than anything else (although for that it is ridicilously high)

One thing I'm 100% sure of is that both would fight to the death if governed by a Swede

Well, the danish Rigsråd did accept Karl Knutsson Bonde as the heir of Christian I (and vice versa I might add) this shows that they were not totally against the idea in principle. (keeping the union, and thus royal power weak and splintered, was more important than the nationality of the monarch)

Surely it must be scriptable to express countries that integrate well and often increase productivity? (Boosting agriculture , weapons tech, Naval tech, are all real examples)

That is more or less what adding culture does (increasing tax-income, reducing stab-costs and easing conversions) Addubg taxvalue is possible, but that means that someone conquering the province from the danes (like the swedes or another german state) gets the benefit as well.

 

[unmerged(12858)]

One thing I'm 100% sure of is that both would fight to the death if governed by a Swede...

Yes Indeed, we have facts for that. the danes of skåne did fight to the death when governed by swedes! Very good point and yes Im thinking of Helsingborg 1710....

For those not familiar wiht scand... ohhh no.. Swedish and danish history I would add that danish farmers living in skåne did stand up for their new rulers (the sweden) and thowed the danes back over the strait. Not even today the people of skåne consider themself as swedes, but obvios the prefered to be ruled by swedes then of danes...

Just couldent resist in thei inflamed thread...

About the original poster/subject..
Since this is the historical choice, we know what happend.. I think then the game should fairly much potrait this.. if there was revolts, let them be, if not... not so in the game either...

Since Im a SP player, (dont have any friends or fast itnernet connections) I found it irritating that Denmark send throps to the meditiranian and france and even deap inside Poland in early game, and then have this huge force on Gotland.. Unfortunatly the game dosent potrait "island" countries like Denmark and England verry well.. I think.

I agre that denmarks hould have more provinces, its more fun to play. Unfortunatly a small contry laike denmark whithaout forests and mountain is much easier to conqure than a contry like Russia, Finland or Norway

So it was histroicly, so it is in game. Denmark should be able to beat Sweden up to 1600 something ( in begining easy in the end more difficult)... atleast when Sweden is at war in the east at the same time. Denmark should have problem to controll the whole of sweden. (lack of manpower/size of Sweden+Finland and type of terain.) Sweden should not be able to controll whole norway, as same reason as Denmark against Sweden. From 1600 Sweden shoudl be able to (very eays) to controll the whole of "non island" Denmark and if naval succes(or allied with naval power) even be able to take the islands ( not the collonies) UNLESS Denmark is allied with some other powers. (not only russia)
From 1720 or so only russia should be able to help Denmark if russia is as great is was historicly.

Sweden shoudl have some allied to be able to do as well as I say above..

Thas sort of what i think history has shown. ( and yes sweden do more well in most (not all the games) than it did histrocaly but that what lots of contries does..

 

[Sikker]

For those not familiar wiht scand... ohhh no.. Swedish and danish history I would add that danish farmers living in skåne did stand up for their new rulers (the sweden) and thowed the danes back over the strait. Not even today the people of skåne consider themself as swedes, but obvios the prefered to be ruled by swedes then of danes...

Well, when Denmark lost Skåne to Sweden many peasants heavily resisted the Swedish invasion. And there was a general consensus that being ruled by the Swedes was a bad thing (you've probably heard of the the rebellions against the Swedish invaders during the first wars after final Swedish independence).
If the Scanians (sp?) were fighting Danes in a later war, I guess it just shows how fast assimilation occurred, but at the same time is a fine illustration of the sibling rivalry between Sweden and Denmark. A rivalry that goes back more than a thousand years and still lives just fine today (Danes loves to pick on Swedes (and I guess vice versa) - funny thing is, when Scandinavians meet outside Scandinavia we're all of a sudden best friends ... typical sibling rivalry).

Personally I think it is time to put these outdated nationalistic stupidities behind us. They serve no purpose. There are plenty of much more relevant enemies to look for. Scandinavians have as much in common as we've ever had. See sig.

 

[Arilou]

Well, when Denmark lost Skåne to Sweden many peasants heavily resisted the Swedish invasion. And there was a general consensus that being ruled by the Swedes was a bad thing (you've probably heard of the the rebellions against the Swedish invaders during the first wars after final Swedish independence).
If the Scanians (sp?) were fighting Danes in a later war, I guess it just shows how fast assimilation occurred, but at the same time is a fine illustration of the sibling rivalry between Sweden and Denmark. A rivalry that goes back more than a thousand years and still lives just fine today (Danes loves to pick on Swedes (and I guess vice versa) - funny thing is, when Scandinavians meet outside Scandinavia we're all of a sudden best friends ... typical sibling rivalry).

Personally I think it is time to put these outdated nationalistic stupidities behind us. They serve no purpose. There are plenty of much more relevant enemies to look for. Scandinavians have as much in common as we've ever had. See sig.

Exactly, and Skåne was, if not the "Heart" of Denmark at least some vaguely important internal Organ. If the Scanians where assimilated that easily do you really think it would have been any harder to assimilate danes from other parts of the country? (And Vice-versa of course, Gotland was assimilated by the danes relatively rapidly as well)

 

[unmerged(12858)]

Well, when Denmark lost Skåne to Sweden...

I agree with you... We actually love denmark, where else can we get our cheep beer and who should we beat in soccer... o

To be serious, I think that scandinavians is fairly similar. i think that there is someting called scandianavain culture, even if we are different, compered with others we do stick out as one group...

Adn Sweden ruled skåne until 1361.. so you could have made my points in my previos thread the other way around


I have lived outside scandinavia some years, loved that, meet lots of people from al over the world. And see, I could start to hug a dane after som beer when I meet them in a dessert...

 

[unmerged(16599)]

I agree with you... We actually love denmark, where else can we get our cheep beer and who should we beat in soccer... o

To be serious, I think that scandinavians is fairly similar. i think that there is someting called scandianavain culture, even if we are different, compered with others we do stick out as one group...

Adn Sweden ruled skåne until 1361.. so you could have made my points in my previos thread the other way around


I have lived outside scandinavia some years, loved that, meet lots of people from al over the world. And see, I could start to hug a dane after som beer when I meet them in a dessert...

As a dane living in Sweden I have to tell you a secret: Sweden is just like Denmark (schhh)

 

[Arilou]

As a dane living in Sweden I have to tell you a secret: Sweden is just like Denmark (schhh)

Except that danes seem to have something stuck in their throat.

 

[unmerged(22171)]

If the Scanians (sp?) were fighting Danes in a later war, I guess it just shows how fast assimilation occurred.

Alas that is a very large and false assumption, and here is why.

It may be of interest to know that in Aarhus there is a very large war memorial. Listed on the walls are the names of Danes... With place of death being obscure locations such as Stalingrad.

Hmmm why would this be? well because many were forced to fight for Germany. There are threats that can be made that motivate such action against free will.

 

[unmerged(28604)]

Alas that is a very large and false assumption, and here is why.

It may be of interest to know that in Aarhus there is a very large war memorial. Listed on the walls are the names of Danes... With place of death being obscure locations such as Stalingrad.

Hmmm why would this be? well because many were forced to fight for Germany. There are threats that can be made that motivate such action against free will.

If a noble became POW in the hundred years war, or the other wars in the early EU2 timeframe, then he could almost always be free for a ransom. Ordinary soldiers was another case. They were often forced to enlist in the enemy army. There was soldiers who changed side several times in a row. It was considered normal in those days. I think you are wrong when you make paralells to modern time. It was not considered normal to fight for the enemy side in the timeframe around the battle of stalingrad. You were considered a traitor if you did that, no matter how good reasons you might have. Its not equivalent. But I think you are right about the assimilation being a false assumption.

 

[unmerged(5822)]

Would a CoT be more reasonable than (or a good compliment to) the sound due tax increase for Sjaelland, in order to strengthen Denmark? Basically, the sound due was about seizing control of the trade passing through the sound... (but then, Västergötland might eventually deserve a small CoT as well since Gothenburg became an important trading port for Sweden once the Göta channel was completed; dunno when that happened though, could even be outside the game's time frame...

 

[Prugel]

Adn Sweden ruled skåne until 1361.. so you could have made my points in my previos thread the other way around

Oh dear - Crusader Knights is seriously bugged then......

 

[unmerged(11216)]

Oh dear - Crusader Knights is seriously bugged then......

Actually Sweden bought Skåne from Denmark 1332, but the bastards later took it back

 

[Dimes]

Actually Sweden bought Skåne from Denmark 1332, but the bastards later took it back

It didn't happen quite that way

http://www.smb.nu/svenskakrig/1332.asp

http://www.smb.nu/svenskakrig/1360.asp

Again I use a Swedish source, or I guess you won't believe me

 

[Dimes]

If a noble became POW in the hundred years war, or the other wars in the early EU2 timeframe, then he could almost always be free for a ransom. Ordinary soldiers was another case. They were often forced to enlist in the enemy army. There was soldiers who changed side several times in a row. It was considered normal in those days. I think you are wrong when you make paralells to modern time. It was not considered normal to fight for the enemy side in the timeframe around the battle of stalingrad. You were considered a traitor if you did that, no matter how good reasons you might have. Its not equivalent. But I think you are right about the assimilation being a false assumption.

If I remember right from what I have read, large numbers of Scanians were driven from their land and replaced by Swedes. Most were forced to relocate in the Swedish Baltic lands. And large numbers were forcibly enrolled in the Swedish Army, for garrison duty. But they were considered so untrustworthy that they weren't issued weapons

And yes they were assimilated rather fast, but thoughts come towards ethnic cleansing more than assimilation Well, it seems to have worked, I think few people in Scania consider themselves not to be Swedes

 

[Arilou]

Alas that is a very large and false assumption, and here is why.

It may be of interest to know that in Aarhus there is a very large war memorial. Listed on the walls are the names of Danes... With place of death being obscure locations such as Stalingrad.

Hmmm why would this be? well because many were forced to fight for Germany. There are threats that can be made that motivate such action against free will.

And many also volunteered to fight for Germany (I've read some statistics that says more people died fighting for the germans than for the danish resistance...)

The entire assimilation issue is actually pretty funny (in a tragic sort of way) Skåne was ceded under Charles X's reign, on the condition that danish law would still apply. Now, swedish rule was considerably more centralized and efficient than danish one (which for normal people meant more government interference in their lives, more taxes and more drafts) which naturally caused some troubles, now, after the Scanian War the swedes got relatively fed up with this state of affairs, however, they could not legally change the laws in Skåne to suit themselves (seeing as they still obeyed under danish law, which, among other things, meant that serfdom was still allowed) So what did they do? They simply told the Scanian delegations that naturally they'd have no seats in the Riksdag, etc. They were after all under danish law, and the Riksdag was a swedish institution! This made most of the Scanian notables accept the facts as they were: Combined with replacing the danish schooling system (and most importantly danish as a liturgical language) with a swedish one meant that even after one generation or so the place was fully integrated... The difference between swedish and danish systems were quite large (the swedish peasantry having a lot more influence, but also a lot more duties) and I think this was a greater contributing factor than any sort of "cultural" differences. (You should not that eg. Dalarna and Småland showed the same sort of resistance a hundred years earlier!)