-
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.
I know, but since it appeared and actually had something to do with the thread I took the liberty of trying to bring it into the general discussion of France's starting position.
Do you mean aren't? In EU 1 they started as Spanish, and in the IGC you had like 3? choices as to who should own the Netherlands. Historically it should be owned by Burgundy (yes, BURGUNDY
), and then inherited by Spain once Charles accends the throne, but in terms of vanilla EU2 it should be owned by Spain from 1492.
Yes, obviouslyOriginally posted by Fate
Do you mean aren't? In EU 1 they started as Spanish, and in the IGC you had like 3? choices as to who should own the Netherlands. Historically it should be owned by Burgundy (yes, BURGUNDY
Who inherited who then? I was never really into that dynastic stuff, but how it hapenned? Isabelle of Castille and Fernando of Aragon, but how Habsburgs got into that?
Hmm, making Lowlands and FC Spanish, along with perhaps dutch culture (well, since you say it was *in fact* Burgundy), until 1550 or something, could be interesting.
That would certainly nerf French expansion
well its a confusing story but i think it goes something like: Maximilian marries Mary of Burgundy and receives the duchy of burgundy minus the parts the french took.
then maximilians son Phillip marries Isabel and Ferdinands daughter(?) but he dies very young, and his son is Charles V/Karl V/Carlos I.
So when Carlos divided it all up, thats how Espana got it.
then maximilians son Phillip marries Isabel and Ferdinands daughter(?) but he dies very young, and his son is Charles V/Karl V/Carlos I.
So when Carlos divided it all up, thats how Espana got it.
So, Burgundy was first ruled by Maximilian, then Phillip (shortly), then Carlos? And when he dies, Burgundy is disbanded and incorporated into Spain?
EDIT/ Btw-what about Milano? Was it Spanish or Austrian inheritance (yeah, i guess it was just Habsburg one
)
Last edited:
To make it short and sweet I'll copy a few entries from the EEP 1.4's monarch list of Burgundy
Charles I le Teméraire 1467 - 1477
Marie 1477 - 1482
Philippe III le Beau (he is the child of Mary and Max) 1482 - 1506
Charles II (Karl/Carlos... grandchild of Max) 1506 - 1556
Philippe was king of Spain for like 2 years after Isabella died, Philippe died, then Ferdinand of Aragon took over for a while until his death, and finally Charles inherits the thorne. Erm... really Burgundy inherited Spain
, but practically Spain absorbed Burgundy.
*points to edit in above post*
What about Milano?
======
I assume Fernando and Isabel were purely Spanish for all purposes.
Maximilian was Austrian, he married Marie, but where did they live? Where was Phillip born and where he lived? What about Carlos?
EDIT/ Hmm, but Maximilian ruled Austria for longer? Why isn't Phillip Spanish monarch at all?
What about Milano?
======
I assume Fernando and Isabel were purely Spanish for all purposes.
Maximilian was Austrian, he married Marie, but where did they live? Where was Phillip born and where he lived? What about Carlos?
EDIT/ Hmm, but Maximilian ruled Austria for longer? Why isn't Phillip Spanish monarch at all?
Phillip died of sickness at a very young age before he could really become king
I'm not 100% but i THINK he was raised in the low countries.
I'm not 100% but i THINK he was raised in the low countries.
Carlos lived in Brussels, and I assume Philippe lived there as well (he lived somewhere in the Netherlands at least ).
Maximilian resided in Augsburg, but mostly in Innsbruck. (EU2 terms Tyrol: Austrian capital should really be there in my opinion, and then moved to Vienna come Ferdinand)
Marie died in Bruges and was born in Brussels, and spent most of her time in the Netherlands.
Charles V conquered Milan in 1522... the EU2 event where Austrian inherits it is rather weird. If anyone should inherit it, it is Spain. Charles ruled over the Netherlands / Franche Comte / Milan / Spain / New World while his brother Ferdinand ruled over Austria as his subordinate.
).Maximilian resided in Augsburg, but mostly in Innsbruck. (EU2 terms Tyrol: Austrian capital should really be there in my opinion, and then moved to Vienna come Ferdinand)
Marie died in Bruges and was born in Brussels, and spent most of her time in the Netherlands.
Charles V conquered Milan in 1522... the EU2 event where Austrian inherits it is rather weird. If anyone should inherit it, it is Spain. Charles ruled over the Netherlands / Franche Comte / Milan / Spain / New World while his brother Ferdinand ruled over Austria as his subordinate.
Ok, i give up. I said i wasn't into that dynastical stuff and i meant that
Does anyone has nice link to this? Or is in a mood for long post?
I am curious, because i wonder how changing it to IGC-esque setup would work.... (Lowlands and Milano)
EDIT/Well, after your posts it seems that there is certain historical basis for it (not really surprising given the fact IGC was really well though out most of the time)
And it could have some SP-incentive, as we usually see uberAustria all the time...
EDIT2/When did Ferdinand rule Austria?He's the one that outlives Karl V, right?Did he rule all the time from 1519 to 1564?That would make him pretty long-lived....
Does anyone has nice link to this? Or is in a mood for long post?
I am curious, because i wonder how changing it to IGC-esque setup would work.... (Lowlands and Milano)
EDIT/Well, after your posts it seems that there is certain historical basis for it (not really surprising given the fact IGC was really well though out most of the time)
And it could have some SP-incentive, as we usually see uberAustria all the time...
EDIT2/When did Ferdinand rule Austria?He's the one that outlives Karl V, right?Did he rule all the time from 1519 to 1564?That would make him pretty long-lived....
Most people will tell you Charles/Karl/Carlos ruled over Austria from 1519 - 1566, but it really was his brother Ferdinand. In the agreements of Worms and Brussels Ferdinand was handed over the Austrian lands in 1521/22 and established the Austrian line of the Habsburgs. He became King of Bohemia and Hungary in 1526, Roman King in 1531, and Emperor 1558.
Edit:
http://www.aeiou.at/aeiou.encyclop.m/m365605.htm
Here's a good place for Austrian history. From that link you can jump around to various monarchs, or just use the search function.
Edit:
http://www.aeiou.at/aeiou.encyclop.m/m365605.htm
Here's a good place for Austrian history. From that link you can jump around to various monarchs, or just use the search function.
Also Charles V. left him quite alone against the Turks 1529.
In historical terms I disagree with the proposed changes. Spain already has the new world to manage and Austria sort of gives Spain the oppurtunity to have Burgundy watched by his cousins in Austria.
Read the link that was provided. Max united the Habsburg lands and Burgundy belongs to that.
All gets more difficult as Charles V. was Emperor so Spain got the crown shortly...
If we scrap Holland from Austria, Austria definetly needs some strengthening or they will easily be destroyed early on..
I'm not sure-if we change ownership of Lowlands, Austria stops to have France as a threat, and only has Ottomans.
Granted, Spain has New World to manage, but hey, wasn't it that world-spanning empire management difficulty which overhelmed Carlos I?
I actually like Austria beign forced to find frantically searching for allies against Ottomans, monetary or military help or whatever.
Too bad Spain doesn't have much incentive to go to war against Ottomans... IIRC, in boardgame it got a lot of VPs for that (then again, in boardgame, player controlled both Habsburg branches)
Lowlands, since Austrai don't have dutch culture, i don't think they contribute that much manpwer, btw, but i am not sure. Money is another matter, of course. It would definitly need some roleplaying from Habsburg perspective (even that you say Ferdinand was left alone). Dunno how much would it be unbalanced... (Ottoman vs. Austria). Perhaps removing Persian handicaps could work?
Austria has lots of other threats. VEN, POL, BRA, SWE, DEN, GEN, FRA (Italy) and the OTT. There is more than enough to keep him busy.
I strongly agree. Lets simulate the hapsberg bid for mastery not the continual French bid for mastery (Make wars of religion much tougher *again*)Originally posted by DarthMaur
Granted, Spain has New World to manage, but hey, wasn't it that world-spanning empire management difficulty which overhelmed Carlos I?
Agreed, this is the way it ought to be.
This is a real shame. Its a feature decidely lacking in the paradox version. Can anyone think of a way that this could be implemented?
The Ottomans were powerful, however, add Persia, Venetian and Mameluk players and they have issues. In Tsunami lots of people screamed that it wasnt fair on the Ottomans
I think it was, they have some great stuff but they do need the competition.
The Mamelucks however are not needed anymore with the 1510 annex event. I kind of think Austria, Poland, Persia and Russia lateron are enough for OE.
Especially since I am redoing the Persian situation completely for 1.05. Version 1.00 was done in a hurry, and Persia was basically constructed out of the Persian cultured provinces, which is a very strange shape for Persia to be.Originally posted by Mowers
The Ottomans were powerful, however, add Persia, Venetian and Mameluk players and they have issues. In Tsunami lots of people screamed that it wasnt fair on the Ottomans
This leads to interesting situations, such as a remnant Ak Koyunlu that is almost certain to be swallowed by the Ottomans - in other words, Persia will likely never control Azerbaijan (where Ismaîls conquests started, and which remained an important Persian province for a long, long time) or Daghestan, Armenia &etc which were some of the earliest conquests and which they held on to for a subtantial length of time. So now I am changing the situation radically and starting them with the initial conquests (basically absorbing Ak Koyunlu), and letting them lose some of the eastern territory which they conquered later to the Uzbeks, Timurids, and Baluchistan. Their halfway trade investment is wiped, it being no longer so necessary, what with their somewhat greater income and the change of techgroup modifiers. Arabic culture is a gone as well, but they get the cultures that were easily tolerated in the Persian empire instead: Kurdish and Baluchi.
They really ought to get Turkish for Azerbaijan and (to a lesser degree) Daghestan as well, and it would certainly make rivalry with the Ottomans more interesting, but would that be overdoing it? It would probably be easier to change Azerbaijan to Persian culture, but that feels very wrong, for some reason
Do whatever is historically correct and use various levers to simulate the relative power of the Persian Empire. As we know, its more than just getting the territory correct.
Sorry not to be more use, I am currently soaking up as much about NA colonisation as I can.
Sorry not to be more use, I am currently soaking up as much about NA colonisation as I can.
Good to have somebody completely sharing my verdicts on how the Hapsburgs should be handled now , so I just wanted to point out that I agree 101 percent with Fate.
Maximilian formally NEVER united the Hapsburg lands in one hand. He had to cede the Duchy of Burgundy to his son Philipp already in 1482 while he became Emperor in 1492. Factually of course he remained regent of Burgundy until Philipp's real ascension in 1494. These two years however don't justify letting Austria inherit Burgundy in 1492 and release it again in 1494.
Archduke, I know you love Austria, but you have to face that it was no real major power until the 17th century and highly dependent on the support of Spain and the Empire (still in the Thirty Years War the most powerful militarily strongest German catholic state was Bavaria, the leader of the League, not Austria) and the goodwill of the Ottomans. If Suleyman had wanted to, he could have easily conquered Vienna and destroyed Austria. On the other hand, I'm not sure if taking away the Lowlands doesn't effectively strengthen Austria since it won't have to care about provinces it will eventually give away anyway (or use that ridiculous possibility to ahistorically keep them).
Btw, I'm fairly convinced that Max uniting the Hapsburg lands is NOT referring to him ruling Burgundy and Austria at once for two years, but to him getting Tyrol from the old childless Count Sigismund der Münzreiche, ending the partition of the Hapsburg hereditary lands.
Charles getting elected Emperor as Spanish monarch is fairly possible with Spain getting just the same Hapsburg bonus as Austria. Maybe to further encourage it they should have positive relations to the German electors?
, so I just wanted to point out that I agree 101 percent with Fate. Maximilian formally NEVER united the Hapsburg lands in one hand. He had to cede the Duchy of Burgundy to his son Philipp already in 1482 while he became Emperor in 1492. Factually of course he remained regent of Burgundy until Philipp's real ascension in 1494. These two years however don't justify letting Austria inherit Burgundy in 1492 and release it again in 1494.
Archduke, I know you love Austria, but you have to face that it was no real major power until the 17th century and highly dependent on the support of Spain and the Empire (still in the Thirty Years War the most powerful militarily strongest German catholic state was Bavaria, the leader of the League, not Austria) and the goodwill of the Ottomans. If Suleyman had wanted to, he could have easily conquered Vienna and destroyed Austria. On the other hand, I'm not sure if taking away the Lowlands doesn't effectively strengthen Austria since it won't have to care about provinces it will eventually give away anyway (or use that ridiculous possibility to ahistorically keep them).
Btw, I'm fairly convinced that Max uniting the Hapsburg lands is NOT referring to him ruling Burgundy and Austria at once for two years, but to him getting Tyrol from the old childless Count Sigismund der Münzreiche, ending the partition of the Hapsburg hereditary lands.
Charles getting elected Emperor as Spanish monarch is fairly possible with Spain getting just the same Hapsburg bonus as Austria. Maybe to further encourage it they should have positive relations to the German electors?
Yes, but only Ottomans are *the* threat-Poland has nothing to gain by alienating Austria, neither has Venice, and since its Spain which should inherit Milano, too, there will be no French threat, basically.Originally posted by Mowers
Austria has lots of other threats. VEN, POL, BRA, SWE, DEN, GEN, FRA (Italy) and the OTT. There is more than enough to keep him busy.
I strongly agree. Lets simulate the hapsberg bid for mastery not the continual French bid for mastery (Make wars of religion much tougher *again*)
Agreed, this is the way it ought to be.
This is a real shame. Its a feature decidely lacking in the paradox version. Can anyone think of a way that this could be implemented?
The Ottomans were powerful, however, add Persia, Venetian and Mameluk players and they have issues. In Tsunami lots of people screamed that it wasnt fair on the Ottomans
I like Spanish Lowlands setup quite much now. The real question is, should they have Dutch culture until death of Carlos I? There is certainly enough historical arguments in favor, but i am not sure if it would not strenghten Spain too much.
Its real pity there is no Ottoman-Spanish tension at all, not even real incentive... also, the fact Spain has no reason not to fight Dutch is also sad (didn't Spain lose a lot of VP for early Dutch appearance in boardgame?)
Can't think of anyhing yet, sadly. Some CB overlap could be nice (like, on southern Italy), and giving Ottomans semi-permanent CB on Spain (like the one they have on Venice and Austria)... but thats not enough, and its not good either.
Well, i was among those who though Ottomans had it too hard
But with those changes, coupled with Peter changes to setup, i'm not sure if its not swinged other way...