• 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.
Edit:
I know that there were many hanseatic cities in the Rhineland, Saxony and English Channel nodes, too. Yet i guess no one wants to see all of Northern Germany belonging to a single league. So maybe you have to be Saxon, Hanoverian, Rhinelandish, Prussian or Frisian to be able to join. Another prerequisite could be a coastal port or a location at an important river (Rhine, Oder, Maas, Elbe).

Something like this? Different "circles":
hanseatic_league.jpg


http://pages.uoregon.edu/kimball/grd.Hanse.htm
 
  • 3
  • 1
Reactions:
  • 1444 members: Lübeck (leader), Hamburg, Bremen, Riga, Mecklenburg, Pomerania, Stade
  • Join conditions: OPM in the Lübeck, Baltic, North Sea or Novgorod node OR a Merchant Republic with its capital in one those nodes and less than 6 provinces (So Novgorod can't join easily). 50+ relations with most of the members. So a released Danzig, Gotland or a MR Liv. Order could join.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't some of the Dutch states also in the Hanseatic League? That should extend the league to the English Channel as well. Also, Novgorod was a member, so why should they be excluded?
 
Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't some of the Dutch states also in the Hanseatic League? That should extend the league to the English Channel as well. Also, Novgorod was a member, so why should they be excluded?

Yeah but the Dutch members were considered more rivals then allies though in an alliance. They were really really fringe members. Novgorod was the easternmost port of the Hansa, maybe create a lower type of rank within the Hansa, trading associate sort of like the UK within the EU?
 
Hmm, I have an idea. Venice and the Hansa were shipbuilding nations right? And the selling ships mechanic is good. But I think there should be a reverse mechanic so countries can place orders with them. Maybe even extend fleet basing rights to landlocked countries like (hamburg) moldauhafen and stettin to Bohemia so a country has no need to maintain a port if it does not desire although high relationship and charges are required.

P. S. @Johan @Wiz what do you think about the ideas on this thread? Is there time for some stuff to get in the next expansion? Or is some stuff already in progress *snickers. Or maybe it is worthy of a dlc of its own?
 
Last edited:
  • 3
Reactions:
If a "Trade League" system is created, it can be used as a template for a lot of future ideas.

Now (after some development) there are Colonial Nations and Trade Companies.
We need a Grand Unified Model of all these things. Colonial Nations, Protectorates, Trade Companies, and Trade Leagues.

The current mechanics representing CNs, Protectorates and TCs as completely different is neither realistic nor satisfactory. Their differences should be qualitative, and controllable by the player via sliders.
 
Well, one may argue, that some member cities were part of different countries e.g. Danzig. I think Hansa should have some option to "buy" trade power (manpower as well?) of province in exchange for some increased temporary taxes or free development lvl (over time). High LA in province should allow such option without asking overlord of target country. It's not perfect, e.g. we could end up with Hansa buying Trade Power from temporally weakened Netherlands (dominant power in their Home Node). More or less like selling Trade power (Trade Power in exchange for subsides).
Such agreement should be permanent, e.g. Poland annex Danzig, they have still have modifiers on Danzig. Sure if Poland could trash Hansa forces (e.g. Emperor is temporally unavailable on the moment), they could get rid of this modifier and get some nasty unrest in province for some time.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
We need a Grand Unified Model of all these things. Colonial Nations, Protectorates, Trade Companies, and Trade Leagues.

The current mechanics representing CNs, Protectorates and TCs as completely different is neither realistic nor satisfactory. Their differences should be qualitative, and controllable by the player via sliders.

Agreed. And there should be a way to make protectorate in to real vassals with high relations like in the historical case of the straits settlements and Malaya by sending "advisors" (governors) who gave "advice" (orders) to local rulers.

I feel trade companies need to be fleshed out more as in real life they were a lot more proactive in expanding their interests. You could say the British expansion in Asia was virtually driven by the East India Company. I suggest making trade companies a real vassal or give them more mechanics like ability to control their own armies and navies(sorta like rebels) and target, objectives to fulfil (increase trade power)
 
  • 5
Reactions:
I was just thinking that since free imperial cities are gonna be in this expansion, why not introduce it at the same time? But if it doesn't make it into this patch, I see no reason why celestial+Hanseatic mechanics can't be in the next next trade+diplomacy+espionage expansion.

I really hope espionnage will get his proper update in this patch
 
  • 4
Reactions:
More trade ideas,

I think merchants should have more tasks like working out trade deals like securing trade deals with countries instead of just collecting/steering.
Maybe if you have a sufficient amount of trade power and territories in a node, we can have the ability to collect tariffs from countries steering and collecting in the node without a territory.
 
Why not do something similar to CKII. Let the Hansa build trade posts and if the country which owns the province agrees to a deal, say money or monthly support, ... the trade post will become a full part of the Hansa. I would love to play a game with hardly any fighting. If members of the league are attacked they will defend together. And if a nation refuses over a long time the Hansa trade access and maybe even puts an embargo on it, all members can vote for a offensive action to free trade posts and make them full members. Offensive actions should also become possible against non-Christians to expand the Hansa and make it a colonial empire (only a trade empire). Which could have happend if the Hansa survived as a strong power well into the 18th century.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
Also, how about Hansa members having two types of wars, the normal type, but also a special one with the entire Hansa joining in offensivly, if you can get them all to vote for the war.
I disagreed with this, for one reason: why give two different type of wars when you can give a different CB? It would be far more consistent to modify CB:s than wars.
 
I don't know, but would a forced non- embargo agreement(no member can embargo another) between the members of the league or atleast between the leader an the members and kontor-holders be a good idea. Rivals could be an exeption, but if they working together they should maybe not embargo each other.

Also a trade power bonus to all members and also a bigger bonus to the leader based on amount of trade power from provinces in each trade node. If nobody of the members have a province in that trade node nobody will get will get the bonus. This will make the trade group a club where they excluding others more where they have the ownership. This could also be a motivation for outside members to accept Trade league Kontors for bigger nations.

Maybe add trade power from ships to the trade power bonus, but I don't beleive the embargoes work that way and then maybe this bonus shouldn't too
 
I disagreed with this, for one reason: why give two different type of wars when you can give a different CB? It would be far more consistent to modify CB:s than wars.

Obviously the all Hansa war would be triggered via a different CB....But actually getting that CB requires them all to vote in favor of the war.