Hungary in 1.37

[Kane_hun]

Howdy all!

As another, likely a final update round for Hungary rolls around, it is high time for me to post another round of suggestions. My main contribution shall be the dynamic names (for which I welcome any feedback! - I will happily explain/change these based on good arguments):
Note: unfortunately, ő cannto be displayed in EU4, so I chose to compromise with ö, wherever it came up.

Spoiler

#New		#Suggested name	# Old name
4752​	=	Fiume	Rijeka
4738​	=	Tergeszt	Trieste
4729​	=	Pádua	Padova
4756​	=	Belovár	Bjelovar
4755​	=	Sófölde	Podrinje
4757​	=	Macsó	Kolubara
144​	=	Epirusz	Epirus
148​	=	Makedónia	Macedonia
4702​	=	Széresz	Siroz
1979​	=	Feröer	Färöarna
1993​	=	Marshall-szigetek	Marshall Islands
4815​	=	Szingapúr	Singapura
1248​	=	Maldív-szigetek	Maldives
139​	=	Halomfölde	Hum
4779​	=	Gyelepoly	Gallipoli
4704​	=	Tövisvár	Tirnovo
4705​	=	Komotini	Gumulcine
4702​	=	Szeresz	Siroz
1831​	=	Hercegovina	Herzegovina
1853​	=	Kasztoria	Kastoria
3002​	=	Ráma	Visoko
136​	=	Spalató	Split
4703​	=	Velbuzsd	Kostendil
4699​	=	Aitólia	Arta
4698​	=	Kefalónia	Cephalonia
4700​	=	Leszbosz	Lesbos
2348​	=	Kiosz	Chios
4706​	=	Tulcsa	Tolcu
4701​	=	Korinthosz	Corinth
4750​	=	Kruja	Krujë
4541​	=	Drohobics	Drohobycz
43​	=	Dancka	Danzig
281​	=	Podólia	Podolia
277​	=	Beresztje	Brest
110​	=	Trident	Trentino
2970​	=	Királyvárad	Hradec
4759​	=	Felsö-Korontály	Oberkärnten
128​	=	Alsó-Korontály	Unterkärnten
4762​	=	Bécsi-erdö	Wienerwald
111​	=	Furlán	Friuli
4723​	=	Opoly	Opole
2405​	=	Tigény	Bender
#Update
141​	=	"Szendro"	"Szendrö"
1765​	=	"Szeredoc"	"Szeredöc"
1863​	=	"Grác"	"Geréc"
140​	=	"Ráma"	"Ozora"
265​	=	"Brünn"	"Berén"
1085​	=	"Tasmánia"	#delete, originial province of Tasmania got split into three, so name not applies anymore
1766​	=	"Rigómez"	"Rigómezö"
2424​	=	"Przemysl"	"Peremisl"

I shall attach an excel file with the above suggestions and an honorable mention goes to this old comprehensive suggestion, The Balkans Archpost.

Now, onto another topics!
- The diplomatic situation of Hungary is, dare I say, I a tad unbalanced, as pointed out in this thread, for example The Hungarian question (My old related suggestion: Reduce Polish-Hungarian hostilities)

- Hungarian ideas, in my opinion, also should benefit from a touch-up (e.g. why does Nitra get the Land of Castles, but Hungary does not? (Old related suggestion: Revision of the Végvár system modifier and a Hungarian tradition)

-Culture: This is a contentious topic. In recent years, we have seen the move of Slovak culture to the West Slavic group, to the delight of many, and dismay of others. In my opinion, the ideal solution would be the creation of a "Central European" group, with West Slavic + Carpathian united, and Romanian deliberated whether to put it into this group, or somewhere else (e.g. a renamed South Slavic group to Balkanic). The cultural influence and importance of Bohemia and Poland in Hungary is definitely important, and it is worth to point out how many times these nations provided rulers to each other throughout medieval (and modern!) history. In gameplay terms, this would also make the AI pursue the unification this lands more (although it would feel more appropriate to history if instead of direct conquest, the AI would opt to have subjects in some areas, but that is another topic). What I dont like to see, is inscribing language groups as cultural groups, as in this era, religion and proximity often influenced and connected nations more than only language would suggest.
In another related topic, I would like to reiterate that Hungary should be a formable, as it was the historic ambition of Transylvania (Old related suggestion: Transylvanian culture and reforming tags). It is an interesting question what a released Transylvania would/should represent (should it seek to form Hungary or Romania), but the historical country had Hungarian leadership, thus having Hungarian missions/the ability to reform Hungary feels more appropriate.

-Missions: Having already suggested the bulk of Hungary's missions shipped with Emperor, I am mostly content with them (although some feel a tad weak, but then again - we dont want to powercreep everyone). Perhaps a slight touch up would be welcome, but I will reserve my further suggestion until the Hungary DD, as 1.37 will likely feature mostly missions, thus an update on this front.

-Events: I dont have many event suggestions, but as a token, I will mention that Zrínyi Miklós/Nikola Zrinski could appear via the usual general/discounted advisor/etc event for Hungary or Croatia (2 nations get flavour for the price of 1 event!) or another interesting event could be about Benyovszky Móric, which could give subjugation/colonialism/claims on Madagascar, if Hungary has discovered it and its a) after 1700 / b) has Exploration/Expansion ideas enabled, if his expedition is sponsored as a price.

What do you guys think? If anyone has any intersting suggestions, or would like to argue with me about something, I welcome any comments below.

 

[nyetflix2]

In my opinion, the ideal solution would be the creation of a "Central European" group, with West Slavic + Carpathian united, and Romanian deliberated whether to put it into this group, or somewhere else (e.g. a renamed South Slavic group to Balkanic). The cultural influence and importance of Bohemia and Poland in Hungary is definitely important, and it is worth to point out how many times these nations provided rulers to each other throughout medieval (and modern!) history. In gameplay terms, this would also make the AI pursue the unification this lands more (although it would feel more appropriate to history if instead of direct conquest, the AI would opt to have subjects in some areas, but that is another topic). What I dont like to see, is inscribing language groups as cultural groups, as in this era, religion and proximity often influenced and connected nations more than only language would suggest.

Agree 100%, this fanbase advocates for language-based groupings much more than appropriate IMO (such as the whole Turkish in the Levantine group discussion). As far as I understand Romanians were rather disenfranchised in the kingdom of Hungary and later Transylvania. However if we remove Romanian from the group, it's left without any presence in Transylvania when they were like 50% or more of the population. We could make most of the provinces Romanian culture, but then Transylvania will eventually lose its cores on those provinces, preventing it from being released with proper borders. Maybe the cores could be extended through event.

 

[sparta105]

As another, likely a final update round for Hungary rolls around, it is high time for me to post another round of suggestions. My main contribution shall be the dynamic names (for which I welcome any feedback! - I will happily explain/change these based on good arguments):
Note: unfortunately, ő cannto be displayed in EU4, so I chose to compromise with ö, wherever it came up.

Spoiler

undefined

Are you using contemporary language examples for these? Because I'm pretty sure Trieste is Trieszt and Padua is Padova

- Hungarian ideas, in my opinion, also should benefit from a touch-up (e.g. why does Nitra get the Land of Castles, but Hungary does not? (Old related suggestion: Revision of the Végvár system modifier and a Hungarian tradition)

Agreed, I don't exactly understand where some ideas are coming from. Why is "Bulwark of Christianity" +20% manpower? Fort defence is a lot more thematic in this case.
What I don't understand the most, however, is the +10% morale recovery tradition and the -20% gold depletion ambition. I'd say the morale recovery should be swapped to yearly prestige, as the Crown of St. Stephen was viewed with envy in the HRE, Poland, and even Italy. Gold depletion chance makes very little sense when the game covers the time period when most gold mines started running dry. I have no ideas what to replace it with, though.

-Culture: This is a contentious topic. In recent years, we have seen the move of Slovak culture to the West Slavic group, to the delight of many, and dismay of others. In my opinion, the ideal solution would be the creation of a "Central European" group, with West Slavic + Carpathian united, and Romanian deliberated whether to put it into this group, or somewhere else (e.g. a renamed South Slavic group to Balkanic). The cultural influence and importance of Bohemia and Poland in Hungary is definitely important, and it is worth to point out how many times these nations provided rulers to each other throughout medieval (and modern!) history. In gameplay terms, this would also make the AI pursue the unification this lands more (although it would feel more appropriate to history if instead of direct conquest, the AI would opt to have subjects in some areas, but that is another topic). What I dont like to see, is inscribing language groups as cultural groups, as in this era, religion and proximity often influenced and connected nations more than only language would suggest.

While I agree with the principle, the issue is that EU4 doesn't represent minorities. Transylvania was populated by roughly 1/3 Romanians before the Ottomans captured Buda, and after that, their numbers steadily increased until they became the majority in the latter half of the 17th century. And we haven't even mentioned the Transylvanian Saxons. But the game has no systems in place to simulate this, hence the stopgap measure of Transylvaninan culture. This, however, forces Hungarian to be in the same culture group as Transylvanian, and Transylvanian has to be in the same group as Romanian. It logaically follows that Hungarian and Romaninan must also be in the same culture group.

As far as I understand Romanians were rather disenfranchised in the kingdom of Hungary and later Transylvania.

It was more or less down to the fact in Hungary, political power was held by the nobility, hence no ethnicity (other than Croatians) had a say in how the country was being run because it was expected of the nobles to carry themselves as Hungarians. Excluding Croatia, almost all non-Hungarian ethnicities in Hungary had no nobility. The Saxons held collective nobility, which is why their cities could send 1 representative to the Diet. Everyone else was mostly a serf.

 

[Kane_hun]

Are you using contemporary language examples for these? Because I'm pretty sure Trieste is Trieszt and Padua is Padova

Yup, I tried to get a tad archaic terms, which ideally fit the time period better and feel plausible.
Tergeszt came from a 18th century poem (glossary), while Pádua I found to be the hungarian version of the town's name, as noted for example in the hungarian name of the Anthony of Padua, although the Padova version can be encountered as well. Seems like both versions are common, akin to Mantua-Mantova etc. I feel like Pádua sounds more natural in Hungarian, but I am open to discussion if you feel the other is better.

While I agree with the principle, the issue is that EU4 doesn't represent minorities. Transylvania was populated by roughly 1/3 Romanians before the Ottomans captured Buda, and after that, their numbers steadily increased until they became the majority in the latter half of the 17th century. And we haven't even mentioned the Transylvanian Saxons. But the game has no systems in place to simulate this, hence the stopgap measure of Transylvaninan culture. This, however, forces Hungarian to be in the same culture group as Transylvanian, and Transylvanian has to be in the same group as Romanian. It logaically follows that Hungarian and Romaninan must also be in the same culture group.

Personally I wouldnt mind having Romanian in this proposed big culture group. The only setback are gameplay implication: how much dev/how big would this group be then? Considering the French, German or Levantine groups nearby, perhaps it wouldnt be imbalanced that much.

 

[Just a player]

I also have a post on this one. I would like an overhaul too. This region is soo out of touch and i dont understand the relatoins with other nations. Transylvanian culture is just wierd for me, just remove it pls. I think pozsony was more like hungarian at this date(cut it in two?).
For the love of God add more, better missions, ideas. Some dont make sense. If lucky I can finish all the missions by 1485 rougly. And the economy, ahh just pls- Matthias had more income than the french king at the time(mainly tax and lesser trade i believe). Most runs have little variance, I guess this is why many dont like it. This region needs some serious love. The ottoman threat was really searious for chritianity but it gets little attention. For ex Vienna was almost taken 2 times. The HRE ambitons are not well represented

 

[nyetflix2]

The ottoman threat was really searious for chritianity but it gets little attention

Dude every other post on this forum is "NERF OTTOMANS" "OTTOMANS ARE WAY TOO OP" so I think they're at a decent level on this point haha

 

[Just a player]

Dude every other post on this forum is "NERF OTTOMANS" "OTTOMANS ARE WAY TOO OP" so I think they're at a decent level on this point haha

Nah man, trust me ottos are "weak"