Facelifting France: Map, mechanics and more

[Isildur9526]

Note: This is a work in progress.

Hello all, and welcome!

The purpose of this thread is to compile my own suggestions for how to improve France (a nation currently portrayed anachronistically as being a homogeneous blob) in the hope that some of these ideas may find their way into the game.

To start, I am going to say that this is in no way a buff or a nerf to France, but rather an overhaul. The main challenge I have faced in compiling these suggestions, and the biggest question for whoever at Paradox reads this to consider: How do we make France more interesting, immersive and historically accurate, but also bring plenty of challenges at the same time?

With that question in mind, I’ll go through a comprehensive list of the changes that I am proposing in posts throughout this thread, complete with my reasoning for each change.

NB: Everything I post in this thread may be subject to change when necessary.

Table of contents.
Part I.1: The Map.
Part I.2: Map Miscellanea.
Part II: France's Subjects.
Part III: Introducing the Appanage.

Forthcoming Parts.
Part IV: Royal Authority.
Part V: Occitania.

 

[FleetingRain]

On the topic of Brittany, I don't feel inclined to add more provinces because it would mean breaking up the area/state; 5 provinces is the most we allow per area, and adding more would force us to make arbitrary and ugly areas that would damage Brittany's in-game cohesion.

Huh. Since when? i could swear it was 3-6 provinces, not 3-5, and I'm almost sure I've seen 6-province areas in area.txt.

 

[purplephoton]

Huh. Since when? i could swear it was 3-6 provinces, not 3-5, and I'm almost sure I've seen 6-province areas in area.txt.

There's zero areas in the base game with 6 provinces; you must be thinking of a mod.
Also, there's a few areas with only 2 provinces (Ceram, Greenland, Top End, maybe a couple of others), so it's really 2-5.

 

[FleetingRain]

There's zero areas in the base game with 6 provinces; you must be thinking of a mod.
Also, there's a few areas with only 2 provinces (Ceram, Greenland, Top End, maybe a couple of others), so it's really 2-5.

Yeah, I probably bamboozled myself.

 

[pizzarocket]

I think France could really use some love from PDX. To me it feels like it's lagged behind its neighbors in uniqueness. Playing as France usually feels bland and boring, I'd like France to get a unique government to reflect how it was different to other realms. I've always read that France was more centralized than other realms in Europe at the time, specially thanks to the Hundred Years War. Maybe a mini-game, with risk and reward in a window similar to the HRE's or Papacy, where you can interact with the different nobles/priests/burgers in a card-game mode, as if one was playing poker.

It is also my opinion that France's missions are very plain, simple and small in scope when compared to that of her neighbors. I'd like to see the French missions revamped and made more interesting.

I also agree with the proposed changes to the French map, I think that it's strange that France has such large and few province, given that historically France was the most populated part of Europe by far during the scope of the game.

 

[Abzu]

Hello,

i wrote a new tread, maybe i should use yours ^^.
https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...eview-with-higher-france-implication.1143619/
It treats of the central question of relationship between France and HRE. However, i do not have concret ideas to improve it, but i bring the subject, which is i mean very interesting and important

 

[Entrone]

Hello guys, i would like to show you my ideas about the possible France update. There are some pretty obvious ones, like Toulon, and some completely new to this thread, like Chalons.
https://imgur.com/a/Tn6VbXi

Edit: So i can't see the pic, but there's the link.

The colour of the province is the priority, red the highest, yellow is welcomed addition, and green is flavour, in my oppinion

Oppinion of the new provinces so far:
-If we would add Macon to Burgundy, then Franche-Comté should become a state, which would be too much imo.
-Instead of Vermandois and correcting a minor mistake, i would add the Montfort province.

-Cornouaille would be a very welcomed addition to Britanny, but then it's 6 province, which is too much for a state right now (maybe increase? *wink*)
-Rouen would be better instead of Evreaux, it was one of the most important cities at the time.
-Blois, one of the most painful absence.
-La Marche (/Guéret, named after the capital), to split the enormous Limousin.
-Forez is to represent it as a land of the Bourbons
-Aosta not really France, but it should have Occitan (or Arpitan if it gets representation once) culture
-Toulon, the other most painful absence. It was maybe the most important port of France at the mediterranean at the time.
-Carcassone is obvious: quite important and looks good on the map.
-Foix would be good, so the Foix tag can have a more accurate capital
-Albret, i would like it soo much, there have to be a province between the border and Bordeaux

You should consider adding these provinces:
-Bugey to split Savoie, and this part was annexed 200 years earlier by France
-Aunis, I would like to see this lil province implemented, La Rochelle was an important port and could have a role at the French Wars of Religion.
-Montfort is to split the too big Chartres, and it could be renamed to Versailles and get development, once the event fires.
-Chalons is to split Reims, thus giving more weight to Champagne.
-Verdun at the start of the game is in the HRE, and is one of the so called Trois Eveches, with Metz and Toul (which could be an other welcomed addition, maybe in the HRE xpac).
-Gévaudan, to split Vivarais, maybe a new state with them, Lyon and Forez?

Looking forward your response

 

[De Guise]

It is also my opinion that France's missions are very plain, simple and small in scope when compared to that of her neighbors. I'd like to see the French missions revamped and made more interesting.

Just came here to propose that !

The French mission tree is very poor in comparison to its english rival. It stops with the conquest of Naples, which was the main goal of the italian wars, which took place during the first half of the 16th century ! The mission tree should reflect the rich history of the french kingdom afterwards.

• Maybe the wars of religion could be included in the mission tree, instead of a simple disaster which never fires ?
  
• What about the Monarchie Absolue built under Louis XIII and XIV (some mission which give extra bonus in absolutism ?) ? What about the rivalry between the Habsburg and Bourbon dynasty (I don't know, something like a new line of quests which grants you permanent claims over Austria ? A missions line which gives you the PU casus belli with spain to reflect the spain succession war ?)
  
• What about the French Revolution and Napoleon ? Even if the French Revolution doesn't fire, some missions should be added to reflect the imperialist strategy developped since Louis XIV (granting claim over all land on the eastern bank of the Rhine river for exemple). Maybe claims in North Africa, to reflect the conquest of Maghreb ? yes, this was later in the 19th century, but why not anticipate history ?
  
• Finally, why does GB have special missions in India, and France doesn't ? Yes, GB won the Indian race during th 7 years war, but France had imperialistic views there too.

=> The "monarchie absolue" thing makes me think about another idea, which is not particularly linked to France, but inspired by "Versailles" and "Schonbrunn" in Austria: do you guys think it would be a good idea to create a "Palace" buiding ? I could be unlocked with a given admin tech level (18 ? 20 ?), can only be built in your capital region and increases the max absolutism threshold ?

 

[fr-rein]

Finally, why does GB have special missions in India, and France doesn't ? Yes, GB won the Indian race during th 7 years war, but France had imperialistic views there too.

I know it may sound odd, but what if chunks of missions about being HRE emperor/colonizing/taking India/one faith/etc were accessible to nations meeting some conditions (HRE emperor, colony in a area, etc), including having some idea groups (colonization/religious/trade)?
So, well, if Portugal gets Spain it will be able to access not native missions, but also these ones? This way you do not repeat, do not make them too limited and still can make specific to some empires.
Not to mention that this way all nations get covered with missions way sooner, allowing more fun and possibly missions like "eliminate presence in India", where you could demand in peace from France as GB to give up on India missions, give up on allies and such, except for a port or so. Or bully Portugal to give up on it.

This way you do not need dozens of unique missions, can separate priorities and if needed only add more flavour to the nations that go after it. Like GB becoming HRE emperor.

EDIT: Actually made separate thread to discuss it separately from France.

 

[De Guise]

I know it may sound odd, but what if chunks of missions about being HRE emperor/colonizing/taking India/one faith/etc were accessible to nations meeting some conditions (HRE emperor, colony in a area, etc), including having some idea groups (colonization/religious/trade)?
So, well, if Portugal gets Spain it will be able to access not native missions, but also these ones? This way you do not repeat, do not make them too limited and still can make specific to some empires.
Not to mention that this way all nations get covered with missions way sooner, allowing more fun and possibly missions like "eliminate presence in India", where you could demand in peace from France as GB to give up on India missions, give up on allies and such, except for a port or so. Or bully Portugal to give up on it.

This way you do not need dozens of unique missions, can separate priorities and if needed only add more flavour to the nations that go after it. Like GB becoming HRE emperor.

I have absolutely no problem with that. Great Idea to generalize some missions to specific kingdoms / areas / conditions.

 

[MiniaAr]

Things like this can (and likely will be) revised.

On the topic of Brittany, I don't feel inclined to add more provinces because it would mean breaking up the area/state; 5 provinces is the most we allow per area, and adding more would force us to make arbitrary and ugly areas that would damage Brittany's in-game cohesion.

I don't know if that has already been mentionned, but Britanny could be a 2 areas country quite easily.
Lower and Upper Britanny are existing and historical concepts (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lower_Brittany, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Upper_Brittany).
They are used to show the linguistic boundary in Britanny, between Gallo speakers (Romance language) and Breton speakers (Celtic language), which is probably not going to be included in the game. But dividing Britanny in two areas in an Upper Britanny and Lower Britanny is a much smaller change in scale.

edit: nevermind, it was mentionned already

 

[BalticM]

-Montfort is to split the too big Chartres, and it could be renamed to Versailles and get development, once the event fires.

First of all Chartres is not even part of historical Ile-de-France, and should be removed from that state.
Personally I would make Ile-de-France 4-province state as follow:

• Paris (including Versailles)
• Beauvais
• Nemours
• Valois-Soissons

Map of historical Ile-de-France:


Valois-Soissons to include southern half of modern Aisne department and eastern parts of modern Oise department.
Beauvais to be what is most of modern Oise department and Val d'Oise.
Nemours as Seine-et-Marne department mostly.
And Paris to be what are Paris, Yvelines and Essonne departments.
Again map to understand how it would look like:

It is really very straightforward option.


Then Chartres is what was historical Orleans province. 3 main pieces of historical Orleans province:

• Orleans
• Blois
• Chartres

 

[Sanguine Caesar]

I know this thread has not been added to in a while, but I would just like to say that you have done a fantastic job here @Isildur the Mag as well as everyone else who's contributed.

Now my knowledge of 15th-Century France is rather limited, however I thought I would also make my own small contribution to this thread. As it stands, the flag of Foix is too similar to those of both Aragon and Catalonia, which means they are very easy to confuse with one another. Therefore, my suggestion would be to replace the current flag of Foix with one based on the arms of the House of Foix-Béarn, which ruled the county, and whose armorial bearings are distinct from their neighbours, while still not being radically different.

Spoiler: Arms of the House of Foix-Béarn

Source: WappenWiki

Again, great work here! I can't wait to see where it goes

 

[MiniaAr]

The thread was mentionned in today's DD.

Province shapes, densities, ownerships, etc are in a very good place for the northern part of the region. Southern France however could use some love. I’ve been keeping an eye on this thread which has some interesting ideas on how it could be improved:

View attachment 454921

As I’ve said in the thread, I’m particularly eager to add the major French naval dockyard of Toulon, splitting it from the Provence province which would likely have to be renamed. Foix and Carcassonne would also be worthy additions, and La Marche nicely splits up the relatively large Limousin province. Albret I find much less convincing; while Gascony potentially has room for a new province I’m not sure that there’s a good candidate with any real significance that also fits the space between Aquitaine and Labourd. I rather like this suggestion overall. It definitely hits the mark for the province density we’re aiming for in the region.

Another notable difference between Ye Olde France and our current iteration is the presence of the French vassals. Ultimately removed for balance reasons, we’d like to return them to their former glory. The story of France in our period is one of consolidation, and to that end we feel that the return of the vassals would make playing as France feel more like you are slowly building a centralized nation out of a fragmented feudal realm. We also think it’s a shame that we so rarely see many of the wonderful models for the French minors that are part of the Hundred Years’ War Unit Pack.

I think this is pretty good news, isn't it? (reasonable and welcomed map changes, and the return of the vassals).

 

[Isildur9526]

The thread was mentionned in today's DD.


I think this is pretty good news, isn't it? (reasonable and welcomed map changes, and the return of the vassals).

That's actually pretty impressive. I didn't think a lot of what I was suggesting would make it into the game at all, so I put this thread on a hiatus for a while, but if Paradox is showing an interest I might soon add more to this thread.

 

[Isildur9526]

Part III. Introducing the Appanage.

So this part was a long time coming; I actually have part 4 in progress, but I haven’t had the time or motivation to post more until now. Thanks to @neondt for including this thread in this week’s dev diary! Anyways, here's Part 3.

Edit: Also note that "Appanage" is merely a potential name for the subject type. Some users (@JSparks101 etc.) have pointed out that other names for it such as "Fief" are more accurate, so that's something to keep in mind.

So as I mentioned before, it’s entirely possible to create a new subject type to represent France’s subjects, and it should not be ruled out as a solution to the problems that plagued the pre-Common Sense setup. I have identified some of the main issues of the old system, which the new subject type would aim to fix:

1. They took up all of France’s diplomatic relation slots, incapacitating them diplomatically and making the vassals an annoyance for a France player.
   
   
2. The vassals’ armies made France much more annoying to fight against, having to constantly chase down small stacks. Not to mention they wouldn’t peace out until you beat France itself.
   
   
3. They were too easy to just annex and forget about early on using diplomatic mana.
   
   
4. There weren’t many options as a vassal. You had to either stick with France and hold out until you got annexed or hope to exploit their weakness in the early game by getting rivals of France to support you.

Here’s how these issues could be tackled:

1. Appanages shouldn’t take up a diplomatic relation slot. This solves the problem entirely, allowing France to be as decentralised as it wants to without being penalised for it.
   
   
2. Appanages would have different diplomatic relationships to their overlord than a regular vassal, such as not being able to join the overlord’s offensive wars. I go into more detail about this below.
   
   
3. Appanages can’t be annexed directly using diplomatic points. Instead, a separate system of annexing them would be used (see Part IV).
   
   
4. Appanages would have more options available to them making them a worthwhile pick for a challenging campaign.

How Appanages would function.

Appanages would function as a mix of vassal, tributary and ally. They:

• Would not be called into France’s offensive wars
  
  
• Would not take up a diplomatic relation slot
  
  
• Can’t have war declared on them by France
  
  
• Can call in France as a co-belligerent if they are attacked by a foreign power
  
  
• Can’t call France into their offensive wars
  
  
• Are called into France’s defensive wars (but they can refuse similar to an ally - if they do they suffer the same penalties as an ally not joining)
  
  
• Would have relative power calculated by their own strength plus those supporting their independence vs France and not the strength of all appanages - prevents AI appanages all being rebellious at the start of the game
  
  
• Would be able to form alliances with other appanages
  
  
• Would be able to declare war on other appanages (but France through an event would be able to step in, and demand an end to the war or to let them keep fighting)

The Appanage subject type would have a max government rank of 1 (duchy).

They also would pay tribute to France in the same way as tributaries. This partially represents the taille, the national tax that was made permanent in 1439 to fund the first standing army. Before this, the French monarchs had been expected to survive on the revenues of the royal domain, but after it was made permanent the taille became a huge source of income for the kingdom, totaling roughly half its income in the 1570s and was a huge boon to France’s wars across the continent.

There’s also another key aspect of the Appanage subject type that would be different from regular vassals: they would be able to enter into Royal Marriages with other nations. This is not just historically accurate but also ties in nicely to the system of annexing said appanages (see Part IV).

The nations that would have the Appanage subject type in 1444 are as follows:

-Orleans
-Armagnac
-Auvergne
-Bourbon
-Albret
-Foix

But why not Provence and Burgundy?

For one, Burgundy was practically independent of France in all but name. The duke of Burgundy, Philippe III in 1435 styled himself ‘Grand Duke of the West’, and furthermore Burgundy’s influence was such that it was fighting wars of its own and going against the French monarchs. And it wouldn’t make sense to have France being called into Burgundy’s defensive wars, because the French monarchs were actively trying to undermine Burgundy.

And Provence had a very different history to that of the other French fiefs; although it was within the French sphere of influence throughout history it had belonged to the Catalan house of Barcelona, and then the house of Anjou under its Neapolitan rulers, and finally the house of Valois-Anjou, which was a cadet branch of the house of Valois but nevertheless, I decided to keep Provence independent.

The Appanage government type.

Alongside a unique subject type, there would also be the unique Appanage government type. It would provide the following modifiers (subject to change):

+25% Improve Relations (puts emphasis on conducting diplomacy - I’ll talk about why it will be so important for them in the next part)
-25% National Manpower Modifier
-25% Land Force Limit Modifier (the concept of a standing army was just developing, meaning monarchs often relied on armies from the nobility, including the rulers of appanages - forcelimit and manpower reduction would represent that. It also helps prevent vassal swarm which was a big issue previously due to OPMs base forcelimit)

I also thought about including -25% Mercenary Maintenance Modifier as another bonus, though there is not much historical basis for that.

This was a shorter part this time around, just an introduction to the Appanage. I haven’t discussed some aspects like the subject interactions yet, however I will in the future. In the next part, I will go over a whole new mechanic for France that would re-define the gameplay in the region. Stay tuned!

 

[Metroidkirby]

As much as EUIV is a game, it should have a starting setting as historical as possible. Armagnac, Albret and Foix weren't appanages.
On Burgundy, it was an appanage, it could be one in-game, but with a Burgundian Inheritence rework.
On Provence, I really don't see why you put it aside, it was an appanage, and was inherited like one in EUIV timeframe.

I think the hardest part here, is to find a good way to implant a new mechanism (let's call it "appanage") which represent the peculiar situation between France and some duchies. If we're just putting back the old vassal swarm without taking the historical situation in count, we won't have something coherent.

 

[JSparks101]

Urm, none of them were Appanages?

Appanage
Dictionary result for appanage
/ˈap(ə)nɪdʒ/
noun

1. HISTORICAL
   a provision made for the maintenance of the younger children of kings and princes, consisting of a gift of land, an official position, or money.

Examples I can think of; Wales, divisions Bavaria, Pomerania, Mecklenburg etc, Dunois (from Orleans), Naples at one point, the division of Austria (Styria)

I think the better term to use would be "Fief"

Fief
Dictionary result for fief
/fiːf/
noun
plural noun: fiefs

1. HISTORICAL•LAW
   an estate of land, especially one held on condition of feudal service; a fee.

A Fief is basically a subject that is tied very closely to its parent nation. Historically, when a fief of France died with no legitimate heir, the fief would be reincorporated into the Crown. This is also partially how France's Crown Lands expanded out of Ile-de-France. This is because, compared to a vassal, these Lords, Viscounts, Counts and Dukes held their titles because the French King said it so, and so when their dynasty died it was reincorporated.

The annexation of western Burgundy is a key example of this in action. The line died out and so the lands within the Kingdom of France returned to the Crown.

Mechanically, I think you have it down to a t, but the name is not really correct.

Also, Burgundy and Provence were kinda fiefs? But they had much more independent diplomacy and openly disobeyed the King of France. I'd agree with your decision to exclude these two from a French Fiefdom, though just confirm Provence has an alliance with France.

Brittany is also a very odd one. Again, independent diplomacy, but when the line died out another dynasty took the throne, and so would be closer to a regular vassal than a fief, but by 1444 its independent nature makes total sense.

 

[dayalu]

Would the Appanages be exclusive to France or could say The Despotate of Morea be one as well?

 

[Grandur]

I'm sorry if I'm a little too late, but for the map changes, I could add this one (I already post it in the Developpment diary, but i don't know if it's the right place, I don't master the forum for now x).
The map is indeed good, but if you they change the south area, they should split again the big Bearn which was not so large in real life. It should resemble at this

The County of Bigorre was as important as the county of Béarn, with the city of Tarbes (capital of Bigorre) being nearly as big as Pau (Capital of Béarn). In addition, splitting the province like this can be only good : The main title of the leader of the vassal of France was Count of Bigorre, and not Count of Béarn, and you can even use the province for an event, because one of the leader of the County of Bigorre technycally sold his property to the King of Navarre, so maybe a possibility for the OPM to double his seize, furthermore, Navarre will have an access to France again.

Good idea or not ? (And again, sorry if I make a mistake by posting here)

And for the question of the Appanages, Burgundy and Provence were Appanages, but not anymore in 1444, so, fief seems a better idea. And the idea of Appanage sound, and is very french, but it could work in other country or continent, but under another name probably ?

 

[ivygreengots]

Well I like where you´re going... but the 'appanages' or 'fiefs' lack something. It seems loke you´re creating a new form of vassals just to justifiy this new tags. For me, it would be better if the fiefs were only nominally loyal to their overlord, in this case France, but conserving their local autonomy, as to include both Provence and Burgundy as fiefs.

1. They need to be able to make alliances and royal marriages with any other nation, as to show the autonomy they had. If liberty desire grows too high, their allies could be called to an independence war, as with any other vassal.
2. They pay their overlord both in economic income and/or with manpower, but they can refuse to pay if liberty desire is too high.
3. If France declares an agressive war, the fiefs need to be treated as allies; they can choose to be called or not. If France is attacked they will have to defend their overlord unless it's one of their allies and they choose to align with the outside force.
4. In the vassal tab, fiefs would have an autonomy level, which if France increases it liberty desire and vassal income drops and vice versa.

Appanages would function as a mix of vassal, tributary and ally. They:

• Would not take up a diplomatic relation slot
  
  
• Can’t have war declared on them by France
  
  
• Can call in France as a co-belligerent if they are attacked by a foreign power
  
  
• Can’t call France into their offensive wars
• Would have relative power calculated by their own strength plus those supporting their independence vs France and not the strength of all appanages - prevents AI appanages all being rebellious at the start of the game

The Appanage subject type would have a max government rank of 1 (duchy).

This seems alright for me.

Would be able to declare war on other appanages (but France through an event would be able to step in, and demand an end to the war or to let them keep fighting)

But in here I make to you a suggestion: I play in spanish, so I don't know very well how it's called in english, but in Influence (Influencia) there is the option to Impose Peace (Imponer Paz) that can make two nations make peace like you're saying. Wouldn't it be better if the overlord has a special modificator that gives +50 to the Imposed Peace with a fief? It could be eather in a war with another fief or in a war with an outsider.
And nations like Burgundy, that would start with a high liberty desire and autonomy could for instance reject the Imposed Peace while nations like Bourbon would accept France's demands.
Lastly, only way to inherit fiefs from France would be if the subject's ruler dies without heir. If this happens and the fief has a PU or a vassal, the minors would be released from the PU and France would inherit the fief. But if the fief's ruler dies without an heir and they have a royal marriage with an outside force that could claim the fief in a PU, then a Succesion War could be declared where the overlord would be the defendant and the aggresor would be the outside nation.
If a player playing as France doesn't want to wait to inherit a fief, they could be released with a truce, but it would damage the opinion of all other fiefs, so it could make the fiefs rebellious as to align with enemies of their overlord.
Well that's my suggestion to this new vassal form (I wouldn't make it a new government form). Hope you liked it and I expect some criticism .