how do I handle Norway as Sweden?

[Conrad]

I think it is a very conscious decision.

We have to allow them to be a little biassed. It is their game, and Sweden could need a little help after losing Finland just before the Vicky time span.

We haven't got the same number of great commanders at our disposal as we had in the EUII time span, which is natural as Sweden historically did not experience any wars.

Had Sweden had any wars in the Vicky time span there probably have been a number of great leaders to help Sweden in Vicky.

 

[Galleblære]

Originally posted by Conrad
Well, it depends on whether the Norwegian generals are prepared to break their oaths to the Swedish king, once again, as those traitors did IRL (yes generals who break their oaths to a king are traitors).

Moreover, it is you who decide the shape of the Swedish army before such an event. You seem to talk about having a Sweden without a functional army anticipating that event. I wonder what the Russian AI would do.

Oaths don't mean a thing, it's a wet fart in the wind.

There must sure as hell have been a lot of "traitors" in Norway in 1905, eh, since the country as a whole was ready to go to war for our full independence? But of course, these "oaths" as you call them are good enough proof to make Norway an integral part of Sweden. Of course! :rofl:

 

[Galleblære]

Originally posted by Conrad
It is a game.

A supposedly historic game.

That Sweden can take full use of the population and Norways resources and taxes is a joke! Of course, it is once again part of the evil (TM) Paradox scheme to overpower Sweden! And seeing as they are one of the default countries you can choose in the Grand Campaign, the case is closed!

As you might be able to tell, this case has made me bitter, ever since:

EU1: Vestfold and Narvik
EU2: Fixed Vestfold, but STILL Narvik, despite a dozen people tellng them otherwie, including Norwegian betas!!
HoI: Sweden having the highest infantry technology in the world next to Finland and Germany, the highest Manpower growth compared to provinces in the game
Victoria: Now making Norway an integral part of Sweden!

 

[Conrad]

Must resist ... urge to say anything ... about Norwegians...

Actually, I believe that the Norwegians were rather lucky to be "oppressed" by such a "cruel" and "evil" regime as that of Sweden.

I surely wonder how Sweden earned that hate.

Norway had an independence to be envied by most "oppressed" and "victimised" countries. o

Would Gallbläre or Rafiki care to inform me about the "atrocities" that induced the Norwegians to want this secession so much?



Moreover, if Norway should be a vassal to Sweden, why shouldn't Scotland be a vassal to England? I have heard very few Scots complain about GB being one country.

 

[OriginalRafiki]

Originally posted by Conrad
Must resist ... urge to say anything ... about Norwegians...

Must resist....urge.........to start cracking jokes......about Swedes......

Originally posted by Conrad
Actually, I believe that the Norwegians were rather lucky to be "oppressed" by such a "cruel" and "evil" regime as that of Sweden.

I surely wonder how Sweden earned that hate.

Norway had an independence to be envied by most "oppressed" and "victimised" countries. o

Would Gallbläre or Rafiki care to inform me about the "atrocities" that induced the Norwegians to want this secession so much?

Granted, there are worse "overlords" than Sweden. No-one has so far in this thread called Sweden evil, or cruel or oppressive. And where do you get "atrocities" from?

No-one here hates Sweden (to my knowledge ), it's a question of sibling rivalry, and you are starting to blow this out of proportion, seemingly by trying to put words in our mouths that never have been there.

Point is, Norwegians considered their interests better served as a fully independant state, rather than the semi-independancy they had within the union with Sweden.

Originally posted by Conrad
Moreover, if Norway should be a vassal to Sweden, why shouldn't Scotland be a vassal to England? I have heard very few Scots complain about GB being one country.

Uhm.... in EU2, Scotland is an independant nation. By the time Vicky or HOI starts, Scotland has been extensively integrated into the UK. They didn't have their own constitution, their own parliament, their own military, their taxes went to the treasury in London, civil servants in Scotland were appointed from London, etc, etc. There are more differences between England/Scotland and Sweden/Norway in 1836 than there are similarities, IMHO.

Rafiki

 

[Galleblære]

Originally posted by Conrad
Must resist ... urge to say anything ... about Norwegians...

Actually, I believe that the Norwegians were rather lucky to be "oppressed" by such a "cruel" and "evil" regime as that of Sweden.

I surely wonder how Sweden earned that hate.

Norway had an independence to be envied by most "oppressed" and "victimised" countries. o

Would Gallbläre or Rafiki care to inform me about the "atrocities" that induced the Norwegians to want this secession so much?



Moreover, if Norway should be a vassal to Sweden, why shouldn't Scotland be a vassal to England? I have heard very few Scots complain about GB being one country.

This isn't about the "evil Swedes", this is about presenting things as historic as possible. As is, Sweden will gain a lot of resources, income and mapower from Norway, not to mention their insane merchant fleet. This will UNHISTORICALLY effectivly give Sweden one of the biggest merchant marines in the world, and wast resources that, historically, wasn't their to begin with. The idea that Norwegian income and resources can be spend exclusivly in Sweden is crazy.

So, all we are asking, in our classical Norwegian quasi-humble way , is a better way to represent the union, IE, having Norway as a satellitte state.

 

[unmerged(16835)]

Originally posted by Jagdmaus
They should be a 'puppet' (HoI style), maybe?

Best idea so far

 

[Henning]

if you have played eu2 much i think you maybe have played england and the american independence pops. Its a good solution to the CW i think. That the provinces are rebelling.

(Im Swedish and i DONT CARE about if the swedes owned norway or not)

 

[unmerged(2695)]

Making Norway an intergral part of Sweden in 1835 is tantamount to making the German Bund into a single state. Shame on you.

 

[Conrad]

It depends.

Will South Africa, Australia, New Zealand and Canada be "satellite states", "vassals" or "independent countries"?

I as far as I know they were just (or almost) as independent as Norway.

The real world did not come as neatly arranged into categories as the countries in Vicky.

Paradox made a choice that might be criticized (but so we all do).

We also all know that the present state of affairs should be easily modded for anyone who doesn't like it.

 

[Arilou]

They start out as provinces in the UK, later on they gain sattelite status (same thing happens with Norway BTW.)

The best solution IMHO would be one where Norway runs it's own economy and internal politics but foreign policy+army control is left to Sweden.

 

[Conrad]

Yes it might be the most historical solution.

If Norway gets satellite status in the game, it should give some satisfaction to those who oppose that Norway starts out as fused with Sweden, though.

 

[unmerged(2567)]

Originally posted by Arilou
They start out as provinces in the UK, later on they gain sattelite status (same thing happens with Norway BTW.)

The best solution IMHO would be one where Norway runs it's own economy and internal politics but foreign policy+army control is left to Sweden.

I'm not entirely sure, but I think that this is how satellite status works. I think I saw somewhere that their diplomacy is limited to colonial wars.

 

[Arilou]

Originally posted by Napoleon_VI
I'm not entirely sure, but I think that this is how satellite status works. I think I saw somewhere that their diplomacy is limited to colonial wars.

Yes, but it lacks the most important element: MILITARY CONTROL.

 

[unmerged(2567)]

Originally posted by Arilou
Yes, but it lacks the most important element: MILITARY CONTROL.

Mm. For clarification since I don't know, is it that satellite status causes the puppeted country to have no military control, or that the satellite retains it?

And then what was the case in 1835?

Even with these, I think that it would be more realistic to have Norway as a satellite, if the only difference is military control, since as an integral part of Norway one loses the whole matter of domestic sovereignty. Regardless of which direction military control takes, Norway will join the wars which means that their troops will fight anyway.

 

[Galleblære]

Originally posted by Arilou
Yes, but it lacks the most important element: MILITARY CONTROL.

But Sweden never had military control over Norway. We ran out own Army.

 

[unmerged(16835)]

Originally posted by Conrad
Yes it might be the most historical solution.

If Norway gets satellite status in the game, it should give some satisfaction to those who oppose that Norway starts out as fused with Sweden, though.

Making them a satellite from the start should be an easy modding job, right?

 

[Conrad]

Originally posted by Happy Tom
Making them a satellite from the start should be an easy modding job, right?

It should be easy, judging by what has been done with EUII by various modders. I am pretty sure that some Norwegians on this board will give it a try.

 

[OriginalRafiki]

Originally posted by Conrad
It should be easy, judging by what has been done with EUII by various modders. I am pretty sure that some Norwegians on this board will give it a try.

Never leave it up to Swedes to finish a Norwegian's job

Rafiki

 

[Conrad]

Originally posted by rafiki
Never leave it up to Swedes to finish a Norwegian's job

Rafiki

*Trying very hard not to write what kind of jobs Swedes leave for Norwegians.*