Europa Universalis IV: Developer diary 38 - Ayutthaya, Viyanagar & Muslim Sultanates

[Red_warning]

Link plax.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_la_Gardie_Campaign

 

[unmerged(36209)]

While a Democratic testbed is important to a degree, that makes Corsica as important as Poland as they were the first country to have a Democratic Constitution (which also allowed women the vote I might add in grand old 1755). England/Great Britain's parliament was also coming into it's own since the English Civil War so democracy alone does not make a nation important. (I am not for one second arguing the shortlived corsican republic as important as Poland) I am however saying that just using democracy does not make your nation 'important' after all I believe one of the states in India was democratic or one of the castes could vote or something.

My overall point is Poland only affected eastern europe, most of the nations you would think of as 'Important' affected the world.

What you say is truth but you miss the point.
Developer diaries are for players and in theory should cover readers needs.
In this particular case, you cant deny that there are far more people interested in this nation than many countries that were published.
As for now people seems to be waiting mostly for Byzantine Empire and central european countries(not for india states).

 

[Red_warning]

Byzantium has already been included in a dev diary long ago.

 

[Duke Von Hannover]

What you say is truth but you miss the point.
Developer diaries are for players and in theory should cover readers needs.
In this particular case, you cant deny that there are far more people interested in this nation than many countries that were published.
As for now people seems to be waiting mostly for Byzantine Empire and central european countries(not for india states).

I also expect that as its a remaining high tied country it's been left out so far because Johan is away on holiday, so when he returns it should get back underway.

 

[DanubianCossak]

Basicaly, i don't say india has unimportant history, but poland was relevant to the history of whole world, not just india. India was relevant to history because it was conquered many times by forgein powers, like mughals and india. Poland was relevant because it saved europe from turkey, and was propably the first democracy, in eastern europe. Nobles were the citizens, and rest were tax payers, but if in ancient athens 10% of people being under athenian rule, were citizens, and it was democracy, we can clearly name poland democratic country(and as in the case of athens, when the morality declined in poland, it failed and was conquered). Also, this game is made from european viewpoint - so i think to history of europe, poland was much more relevant than india - even after it was divided(IE napoleon, and princedom of warsaw).

I hate to burst your bubble, but basically India is one of the longest settled places outside of Africa and Mesopotamia by humans. When we talk about India we are talking literally about THOUSANDS of years of human history and civilization, us Europeans, at most, at best, we are only aware of the tiniest amount of historical data and facts from Indian history, in fact IMO its really hard to comprehend its History due to sheer size and amount of centuries (or dozens of centuries it covers), ill admit that prior to EU3 i have heard only of Bengal (the tigers), Punjab (thanks to Punjabi MC lol) and Tamils (recent civil war), thats just example. Not to mention that you know, us Europeans, we are actually Indians, if you look back long enough, cuz thats where our ancestors originally came from (just as theirs came from Mesopotamia and Africa before that and so on).

Compared to that, not only Poland (im not trolling now, so i dont wanna single out Poland at all) but basically the entire eastern Europe is almost completely irrelevant, hell, if you go just 1000 or 2000 years in past, in eastern Europe youll find nothing resembling today's people's or countries, and its the same thing in most of western Europe, Roman and Greek legacies being the only exception (that i can think of right now). So i would dare to say that to overall history of our kind, eastern Europe is practically negligible (just compare population numbers for example).

Only because this game is made in Europe, and only because there are technology related limitations, do you not see India covered in as much detail as Holy Roman Empire, cuz trust me, theres more than enough viable TAGs and relevant history to fill India up.

Personally i cant wait for EU iteration that will cover the world in same amount of detail, now that would be an amazing and ultimate Paradox game!!!

(edit: i hope andrewt doesnt find this offtopic, i just wanted to comment on India overall)

 

[Blue - 2]

I really want that mousemat.

 

[mejla]

The correct [i.e. Russian] pronounciation is [mos-KVA]. The stress on the second syllable is due to the fact that the initial name was - 'Moskov' [mos-KOV]. Then eventually it was changed, 'cause when people said 'in Moskov' that would be 'v Moskove' in Russian and the "o" was eventually reduced - and it became 'v Moskve'.

and here i was thinking you actually pronounce it (Mas-kva)
what's behind it? why do i seem to hear every first "O" as "A" in a russian word?

 

[calvinhobbeslik]

Byzantium has already been included in a dev diary long ago.

Where?

 

[polskaGOLA]

Basicaly, i don't say india has unimportant history, but poland was relevant to the history of whole world, not just india. India was relevant to history because it was conquered many times by forgein powers, like mughals and india. Poland was relevant because it saved europe from turkey, and was propably the first democracy, in eastern europe. Nobles were the citizens, and rest were tax payers, but if in ancient athens 10% of people being under athenian rule, were citizens, and it was democracy, we can clearly name poland democratic country(and as in the case of athens, when the morality declined in poland, it failed and was conquered). Also, this game is made from european viewpoint - so i think to history of europe, poland was much more relevant than india - even after it was divided(IE napoleon, and princedom of warsaw).

Dude you are starting to sound like a Balkanite. Never stoop to Balkanite level.

Poland was pretty fricken relevant to European history, yes, and it is frustrating when others in their ignorance of Polish history completely ignore it's impact and relevance. But comparing it to an entire subcontinent as diverse and important as India? Heck comparing any European country to a whole subcontinent?

You are doing the exact same thing others are doing in regards to Poland. Only just to India.

 

[nalivayko]

... us Europeans, we are actually Indians, if you look back long enough, cuz thats where our ancestors originally came from (just as theirs came from Mesopotamia and Africa before that and so on)....

Kurgan Hypothesis

It seems that some historians disagree. Btw, from my experience, the only people who talk about the India being origin of Aryans are... well, Indians.

EDIT (ADD): Although I would agree that India is more important to Poland, the argument doesn't stand well here. The order of the DD is very arbitrary, there is no secret formula, devs have the last say. Let's enjoy the diaries.

My two cents, I wish there was more diversity between Indian states - enough to make Rajputs feel different from the Mughals.

 

[Morgothic]

Glad to see non-European nations being given some attention, I often felt they were merely fodder for the West in earlier EU titles.

 

[adijarca]

Looks like the entire world is getting some attention except for E European minors

 

[Sky_walker]

While a Democratic testbed is important to a degree, that makes Corsica as important as Poland as they were the first country to have a Democratic Constitution (which also allowed women the vote I might add in grand old 1755). England/Great Britain's parliament was also coming into it's own since the English Civil War so democracy alone does not make a nation important. (I am not for one second arguing the shortlived corsican republic as important as Poland) I am however saying that just using democracy does not make your nation 'important' after all I believe one of the states in India was democratic or one of the castes could vote or something.

My overall point is Poland only affected eastern europe, most of the nations you would think of as 'Important' affected the world.

As far as I'm aware - before the Great War there was no nation AT ALL that would affect entire world.
So by your definition - if Poland was not important than there was no Important nation anywhere in EU4 setting.

Also keep in mind that Poland affected mostly Central Europe (as well as Western - after all it was the largest state in Europe in the 16th century). Eastern Europe was in majority under influence of Russia.

EDIT (ADD): Although I would agree that India is more important to Poland

Yes, I also agree that India is more important than Poland. So is Asia, Australia, Africa, and both Americas. I hardly can see how a single country could be more important than ENTIRE (SUB)CONTINENT on a span of history.

Can we stop this silly argumentation here? Please?

 

[BoleslavLev]

Looks like the entire world is getting some attention except for E European minors

Well, it depends, what is Eastern Europe. For French, it is everything east of them.

 

[Sky_walker]

Still living in '80s supporting the Cold War effort, aren't we?

 

[InnocentIII]

Great update. Looking forward to playing Vijayanagar again. Need AR Rahman for the soundtrack while I play it.

Vodka is often spelled with a W as well.

"You put your leg on my wife's leg!"

 

[Red_warning]

I hate to burst your bubble, but basically India is one of the longest settled places outside of Africa and Mesopotamia by humans. When we talk about India we are talking literally about THOUSANDS of years of human history and civilization, us Europeans, at most, at best, we are only aware of the tiniest amount of historical data and facts from Indian history, in fact IMO its really hard to comprehend its History due to sheer size and amount of centuries (or dozens of centuries it covers), ill admit that prior to EU3 i have heard only of Bengal (the tigers), Punjab (thanks to Punjabi MC lol) and Tamils (recent civil war), thats just example. Not to mention that you know, us Europeans, we are actually Indians, if you look back long enough, cuz thats where our ancestors originally came from (just as theirs came from Mesopotamia and Africa before that and so on).

Compared to that, not only Poland (im not trolling now, so i dont wanna single out Poland at all) but basically the entire eastern Europe is almost completely irrelevant, hell, if you go just 1000 or 2000 years in past, in eastern Europe youll find nothing resembling today's people's or countries, and its the same thing in most of western Europe, Roman and Greek legacies being the only exception (that i can think of right now). So i would dare to say that to overall history of our kind, eastern Europe is practically negligible (just compare population numbers for example).

Only because this game is made in Europe, and only because there are technology related limitations, do you not see India covered in as much detail as Holy Roman Empire, cuz trust me, theres more than enough viable TAGs and relevant history to fill India up.

I really don't see how you can say that India is more relevant than Europe because it was inhabited for longer and had advanced or semi-advanced cultures for longer, because after the 1500s Europe changed the whole world in ways no other civilisations ever comes close to, in a global and totally fundamental way. Cultural influences before that was at best regional.

 

[turnad]

I really don't see how you can say that India is more relevant than Europe because it was inhabited for longer and had advanced or semi-advanced cultures for longer, because after the 1500s Europe changed the whole world in ways no other civilisations ever comes close to, in a global and totally fundamental way. Cultural influences before that was at best regional.

Hardly.

The Indus River Valley has plenty of examples of trade and cultural exchange that changed places like Europe long before 1500s.

 

[DanubianCossak]

I really don't see how you can say that India is more relevant than Europe because it was inhabited for longer and had advanced or semi-advanced cultures for longer, because after the 1500s Europe changed the whole world in ways no other civilisations ever comes close to, in a global and totally fundamental way. Cultural influences before that was at best regional.

Chinese, for example, were doing exploration on same level of Europeans, before Europeans, and then they chose to stop it. Europe changed most of the world not because it was superior or culturally more worthy, but because it was willing to do what no other civilization (with exceptions here and there) cared about. With that said, if we are talking about history of humanity, even with that, Europe still doesnt come anywhere near China and India when it comes to civilization. Just look at the numbers.

 

[HMatsunaga54]

Eastern European minors? Do we really need a dev diary on Mazovia,Riga the Lvionian Order and maybe Silesia? Although I wonder if there anything special for the Rajputs Timurid successors and maybe other non mulism India states like Ceylon,Assam and Orissia