No, Sweden doesn't blob every game.
Might I ask the date and country played?
Because if you are Muscowy and Novgorod helped Sweden your game proves nothing.
Does Sweden *always* blob all over Scandinavia?
- Thread starter Ketilsen
- Start date
-
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.
Might I ask the date and country played?
Because if you are Muscowy and Novgorod helped Sweden your game proves nothing.
I think the Sound Toll should have a lot more effect, and make the Danish far more concerned on the control of Halland and the rest of Southern Sweden. When the controlled the straights they where placing massive taxes on imports to the Baltic and it should be represented in Denmark being able to fund its military well enough to control the region.
In the same sense, Sweden should be far more interested in taking on Denmark and not Norway, they normally grab the south but then go no further (at least for me). Letting the Hansa eat the rest of Denmark.
Norway was a poor region, and while Sweden did eventually take it, its not worth fighting over, its merely a stepping stone into the New World.
In the same sense, Sweden should be far more interested in taking on Denmark and not Norway, they normally grab the south but then go no further (at least for me). Letting the Hansa eat the rest of Denmark.
Norway was a poor region, and while Sweden did eventually take it, its not worth fighting over, its merely a stepping stone into the New World.
It was Skåne which was important the important part of Skåneland. Both economically, but also as part of the Sound Toll.
Here's what Sweden did in my only CS game so far. To be fair, we were steadfast allies virtually the entire game, So surely that helped them.
You're right, my Scandinavian geography is poor
and I didn't have a chance to look at the map during work, although I think the point got across. The sound, when fully controlled should be a hefty boost to the economy.
Again, that's not that significant. What, Scandinavia got Denmark, Norway, and a handful of the poorer Russian provinces.
You're right, my Scandinavian geography is poor
Actually even with the loss of Skåne it should be really important. We kept raking in cash until we were forced---and paid a large one time sum for it; of which Brazil never paid their partYou're right, my Scandinavian geography is poor
Oh I see, I didn't realize there was significance threshold to making a post. Noted.
You're suggesting Sweden blobbed by posting a photo showing them expanding. I'm suggesting they really haven't done much at all.
Well Sweden does not have any immediate strong enemies, so it can eat up norway and denmmark (or vice versa). Its first big enemy is usualy Russia but Muscovoy is weak now, so there is realy nothing to hold back Sweeden or Denmark who keeps its union.
Also Scandinavia, is that a real thing? Did the viking/blond people realy ever consider forming Scandinavia? Because it sound stupid to me, to call your country after a geografical region we know today. Maybe change it to Klamar kingdom or something cooler.
If Spain took Portugal would it be called Iberia?
Also Scandinavia, is that a real thing? Did the viking/blond people realy ever consider forming Scandinavia? Because it sound stupid to me, to call your country after a geografical region we know today. Maybe change it to Klamar kingdom or something cooler.
If Spain took Portugal would it be called Iberia?
Last edited:
Scandinavia has always been a geographical area. And yes in the 19th century there was a movement to unite Scandinavia. And the Kalmar Kingdom is stupid since it would never have been called that. Either it would have continued being Denmark or it would have been Scandinavia.
Also even a Denmark who loses the union---and even one which loses Norway too---should be able to hold back Sweden.
No. Spain. Spain comes from Hispania which encompasses the exact same area as Iberia. Hispania is Latin for the area which Iberia is the Greek name for.
The Commonwealth is a huge problem in and of itself. My understanding is that sheer land holdings made it a great power (comparable to France or Austria) early on, but the peculiarities of their elective monarchy led to it undergoing one of the most spectacular imperial declines of all time. The game does have disasters, but it doesn't seem to simulate just how awful the Polish government was.
I'm far from an expert on the region, though.
Here's my current game. My custom nation started in Genoa, with some provinces along the south of France.
Kiev was my doing, in the religious league war, Lithuania was on the opposing side, so I had them release Kiev and Pskov (which Kiev then consumed), the union with Poland failed in the 15th Century.
Everything else to the north and east of the HRE/Italy has been the AI's doing. Even within the HRE I've barely been involved, though I've been a member from the beginning and suffered a few wars in it. Now I'm the Emperor and starting to get more active in it.
I have no idea why any of the weirdness happened. Until I messed with Lithuania, them, Poland and Hungary have been quite stable and strong, though none of them like each other.
Kiev was my doing, in the religious league war, Lithuania was on the opposing side, so I had them release Kiev and Pskov (which Kiev then consumed), the union with Poland failed in the 15th Century.
Everything else to the north and east of the HRE/Italy has been the AI's doing. Even within the HRE I've barely been involved, though I've been a member from the beginning and suffered a few wars in it. Now I'm the Emperor and starting to get more active in it.
I have no idea why any of the weirdness happened. Until I messed with Lithuania, them, Poland and Hungary have been quite stable and strong, though none of them like each other.