Improving the Scandinavian experience by making Denmark more viable - a suggestion

[Wagonlitz]

This is a split off from the discussion in the dev diary from the 10th of March.
As I mentioned there one of the problems with Denmark in game is that she doesn't really have any strategic depth. Plus she is too weak compared to Sweden. Denmark including Skåneland should be stronger than Sweden, whereas when Sweden takes Skåneland Denmark + Norway should be able to draw her. That is how it was in history. I think a way to achieve this is to ad a few provinces to Denmark so that she can't be overrun so easily by e.g. HRE minors and give her some more development. Below is my suggestion post from the dev diary.

I have looked at development. In 1444 both Denmark and Sweden has 102 dev. Denmark's includes Gotland though, which is 10 and shouldn't really be considered, since it didn't really play much role in us being stronger than Sweden initially, but given the way development works I guess it should be considered after all.
Denmark has 10 provinces including Gotland; Sweden has 18, though we know that in 1.16 they will have 21.
Norway has 69 dev and 15 provinces, though 6 dev are on Shetland and Orkney which were lost in the 1470s and hence shouldn't really be considered.
I would think it wrong to not consider Slesvig Holsten part of Denmark when measuring 1444 strength against Sweden. So Denmark is at 124 vs Sweden at 102. That seems reasonable.
The three provinces of Skåneland are 34 dev which seems reasonable and also means that Sweden taking those + Gotland will make her considerably stronger than Denmark, since Sweden will be at 146, whereas Denmark wil be at 80. That seems reasonable too.

Add in Norway. Denmark + Norway will be at 134 after Shetland and Orkney are lost and Sweden has taken Jemtland (3 dev) and Båhuslen (6 dev); Sweden will be at 155. Also that is excluding the Baltic possessions of Sweden which should be considered in a comparison like this, but I will exclude them for now.

Now Denmark and Norway were able to draw Sweden after the loss of Skåneland, so development of those two clusters should be around the same. Sweden is at 155, so if we say they should have equal dev that leaves 21 dev.

That could actually be added as 4 feasible and realistic provinces. As seen on the map you split Fyn into two. The crossing to Sjælland should be on the northern one naturally; the crossing to Slesvig probably should be on the southern one, but that is debatable given all the crossing possibilities.
Add 8 dev to Fyn. It already has 11, so it gets to 19 in total. Now whether the southern one should be 8 and the northern 11 or it should be 9 for the southern and 10 for the northern is debatable.
A good name for the northern one would be Odense and Svendborg for the southern one.

Then we have Jutland. Nordjylland should have its border moved a bit to the north both to make room and for historical reasons. Then you have the west coast for the isolated, poor Vestjylland. That should be 3 dev and produce fish.
Then you have Midtjylland centered around Viborg. It shouldn't touch Slesvig. It probably shouldn't have a port either, since due to Limfjorden closing in the 10th century you didn't really have fleets there anymore. But Limfjorden is part of Helgoland Bight in game so giving a port to Midtjylland can't really be avoided and is a lesser evil.
Then you have the rich Østjylland. The crossing to Odense should go to Østjylland.
Now you are left with Århus. I drew it to only include the shires which it mainly dominated. Though that is a rather small province. You could give it the entirety of Djursland (the nose of Jutland) to make it bigger. It shouldn't really touch Nordjylland.

Now of the 21 dev there is 13 left. I would give 3 to Sjælland to not make it too weak compared to Jutland; Sjælland would then have 24. Midtjylland already has 11 in game, so the four provinces Midtjylland becomes would have 21. 3 goes to Vestjylland leaving 18 for the rest. I would split that as 7 for Østjylland, 6 for Århus, and 5 for Midtjylland.
Now you have Nørrejylland (Nordjylland + the 4 new provinces in Midtjylland) having a total dev of 29. Which actually seems quite reasonable compared to the 24 in Sjælland, 19 in the two provinces on Fyn, and 34 in Skåneland. Skåneland remains the most powerful and rich area as it should be, while Jylland and Fyn gets the power it should have.

Besides making sure that Denmark Norway is comparable to Sweden after the loss of Skåneland, Gotland, Båhuslen, and Jemtland I also think adding those 4 provinces will give Denmark the strategic depth and wealth to not get flattened by HRE minors too easily.
Also historically Sweden would have had Baltic provinces, so she would actually be stronger yet, but that doesn't seem like a problem. I would be really happy with the addition of those 4 provinces and adding that extra 21 dev to Denmark.

It would also mean that in 1444 Denmark would be 145 dev and 16 provinces (including Slesvig and Holsten), whereas Sweden would be 102 dev and 21 provinces. (Perhaps a bit more dev depending on how the new provinces gets their dev.)
Now Sweden taking Skåneland and Gotland from Denmark would make her 146 dev, whereas Denmark would be 101 dev including Slesvig and Holsten. That seems reasonable.

What goods would the provinces have? Fish or grain? Gold?! Spices?! Slaves?!

There actually were considerable iron mining in Midtjylland; it is something called bog iron (myremalm in Danish)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bog_iron

So I would make Midtjylland iron. Vestjylland as mentioned should be fish. Østjylland would be grain, and Århus would be naval supplies. That seems a good distribution. With regard to Svendborg then that could also be naval supplies since there were some great forests in southern Fyn as far as I remember. Alternatively grain. But I really think naval supplies would be appropriate.








Edit: Cleaner province setup proposed further down the thread. Less historical, but perhaps more feasible due to the cleaner borders.
Development and trade goods remains the same of course, since it just is a redrawing of the province borders; not reshuffling of the provinces themselves.

 

[Wagonlitz]

No, meant the south of Jylland, north of Slesvig ;-) just didn´t know what to call it really...

Southern part of Nørrejylland? Otherwise call it from the cities in the area. I know the media calls it Sydjylland these days, but that name is completely horrible to anybody who knows some history---and completely anachronistic in this era.
Also Slesvig is part of Jylland and always has been; just because the name Sønderjylland became really sparsely used from the 1300s until the 1800s doesn't change that.

Actually I would be fine with having Skagen as 3, though 4 is fine depending on where to put it?

I would put it at 4 due to Fladstrand---or Frederikshavn as it has later been renamed. It was an important trading place to Norway and after the loss of Skåneland it became the primary trade line to Norway.

and Ålborg as 5 at least, they have "hærvejen" and the triangle area which also was a significant trading area locally.

Hærvejen goes all the way to Ålborg? I thought it stopped in Viborg. Also what is the triangle area in Ålborg?

so I would perhaps give them 1 or 2 over Østjylland and keep Vestjylland 1-2 under that too, they have some important cities, but at the time (and still is the case) not very populated other than a few stragglers here and there, but the major cities there often had trade with rest of Europe.

As mentioned I don't see Vestjylland warranting more than 3. Yes there were a couple market towns, but those weren't particularly big or particularly wealthy. Also how much trade did they actually have with the rest of Europe? I don't know for the game period, but at least in the 1800s the westward sea trade went through Tønning in Slesvig (Esbjerg was built to compensate for the loss of Tønning).
Østjylland containg several important market towns. E.g. Kolding, Vejle, Fredericia, Århus, Skanderborg, Randers, and Grenå (possibly also Ebeltoft and Horsens, but not sure how important those were in this time frame), whereas Ålborg only really has Ålborg and possibly Hobro. Østjylland might also have Silkeborg, but I would rather give that to the Viborg centered Midtjylland.
So I don't really see how Ålborg can warrant more development than Østjylland.

 

[Quaade]

Southern part of Nørrejylland? Otherwise call it from the cities in the area. I know the media calls it Sydjylland these days, but that name is completely horrible to anybody who knows some history---and completely anachronistic in this era.
Also Slesvig is part of Jylland and always has been; just because the name Sønderjylland became really sparsely used from the 1300s until the 1800s doesn't change that.

Yeah I know, but since Slesvig has it´s own province, it should be named something appropriate, my father´s from down there and they call it Sønderjylland, but it has a better name... Will look up some of the names through time in a bit... Perhaps some thing will turn up

I would put it at 4 due to Fladstrand---or Frederikshavn as it has later been renamed. It was an important trading place to Norway and after the loss of Skåneland it became the primary trade line to Norway.

You are right, it was primary trading city for Norway 4 is reasonable to show it´s importance while not being overpopulated.

Hærvejen goes all the way to Ålborg? I thought it stopped in Viborg. Also what is the triangle area in Ålborg?

Actually it goes all the way up to Nordjylland, was the main trading road too for goods passing from Europe to Norway, E45 is positioned roughly were it was Made a paper in Gymansium on vikings and how centralized they were, Hærvejen and the castles was one of the subjects I wrote about
http://www.haervej.dk/haervej/haervejen

Also, on the map you drew up, Ålborg is in the same province as "trekantsområdet" who traditionally were bustling cities, so if those goes together in one province I would say they should be worth more than Århus, Grenå and Østjylland... There were more people, trade and artisans...

As mentioned I don't see Vestjylland warranting more than 3. Yes there were a couple market towns, but those weren't particularly big or particularly wealthy. Also how much trade did they actually have with the rest of Europe? I don't know for the game period, but at least in the 1800s the westward sea trade went through Tønning in Slesvig (Esbjerg was built to compensate for the loss of Tønning).
Østjylland containg several important market towns. E.g. Kolding, Vejle, Fredericia, Århus, Skanderborg, Randers, and Grenå (possibly also Ebeltoft and Horsens, but not sure how important those were in this time frame), whereas Ålborg only really has Ålborg and possibly Hobro. Østjylland might also have Silkeborg, but I would rather give that to the Viborg centered Midtjylland.
So I don't really see how Ålborg can warrant more development than Østjylland.

I see you point if getting Norjylland 4 then giving vestjylland 3... It will work... And PDX has a chance to buff them later ;-) I guess you are right about Esbjerg, might have given it too much account on it´s later importance... Silkeborg should probably go to Viborg, I believe it would make sense

 

[Quaade]

Most were named after the capital cities of the counties, so that´s a safe way to go about it

 

[Wagonlitz]

Yeah I know, but since Slesvig has it´s own province, it should be named something appropriate, my father´s from down there and they call it Sønderjylland, but it has a better name... Will look up some of the names through time in a bit... Perhaps some thing will turn up

You area saying that people in the Esbjerg, Bramming, Kolding area claims they live in Sønderjylland? Well that is completely wrong. Sønderjylland and Slesvig are two names for the exact same thing. The area from Ejderen to Kongeåen. Sønderjylland just is the older name, which from the 1300s was disused in favor of Slesvig after the main town of the area; only with the rise of nationalism did people start using Sønderjylland again. Historically and geographically Sønderjylland and Slesvig always have been the same---that the media (and probably many people) don't know this doesn't change that though. It also goes for today; half of Sønderjylland is German just like half of Slesvig is Danish.

And I would think a province going across Jylland down around Kolding Esbjerg to be a really bad province due to being unhistorical.

was the main trading road too for goods passing from Europe to Norway, E45 is positioned roughly were it was

Knew it was the main trading road; just wasn't aware it didn't stop in Viborg. Also E45 deviates wildly from Hærvejen.

Also, on the map you drew up, Ålborg is in the same province as "trekantsområdet" who traditionally were bustling cities, so if those goes together in one province I would say they should be worth more than Århus, Grenå and Østjylland... There were more people, trade and artisans...

I still don't get what you mean by trekantsområdet; the only area with that name I know of is the area around Kolding, Fredericia, and Vejle, but that obviously isn't what you are talking about. Because none of the maps I drew had Vejle and Ålborg in the same province.

Also I think you are mixing the proposals. I made this proposal

which was revised to this in case better borders were needed.

There Nordjylland would keep the 8 development it has in game now. Vestjylland would have 3, Midtjylland 5, Østjylland 7, and Århus 6.

The other proposal was this one.

There you can have a poor Nordjylland which we set to 4 dev; a poor Vestjylland at 3 dev (the southern of the two western provinces). The one called Ringkøbing would serve asa kind of Midtjylland---I would give it 5 dev to account for Viborg, which granted isn't included in the borders drawn, but without Viborg and the area around it making that province in the first place makes no sense. And giving Viborg a province does make quite a bit of sense. It is that province I would have producing iron to represent the bog iron (myremalm). Then there is Ålborg, and Århus. With Århus taking pretty much all of Østjylland and almost all the important market towns (although the way it is drawn it appears Randers just barely goes to Ålborg, which is ridiculous though.
I would then give Århus (Østjylland) 9 dev, and Ålborg 7 dev. Though I might be missing some importance of Ålborg.

I see you point if getting Norjylland 4 then giving vestjylland 3... It will work... And PDX has a chance to buff them later ;-) I guess you are right about Esbjerg, might have given it too much account on it´s later importance... Silkeborg should probably go to Viborg, I believe it would make sense

Esbjerg didn't exist until Estrup had the harbour made in 1868; before that it was a desolate place. In fact on that Christian II map I mentioned earlier there is absolutely nothing in that part of Jutland. And yes Silkeborg to Viborg makes the most sense.

Most were named after the capital cities of the counties, so that´s a safe way to go about it

That's a really bad way to name provinces though, since they aren't following the counties. It would be consistent with Slesvig yes, but it wouldn't be consistent with the rest of Denmark. Fyn isn't called Odense (and never has been), Sjælland isn't called Copenhagen, Skåne isn't called Lund, etc.
So calling Jutlandic provinces by their main city is a bad thing (except for Slesvig for historical reasons). Using things like Vestjylland, Midtjylland, and Østjylland is much better. The only possible exception is in that second proposal, where Ålborg could remain Ålborg due to pretty much corresponding to Ålborghus county---and Ålborg being pretty much the only market town of note in the area. But calling it Himmerland wouldn't be wrong either.

You would also run into paradoxes if you named after cities. For instance Ribe doesn't include Ribe... And shouldn't be made to include Ribe, since that would be highly anachronistic. Ribe county didn't include Ribe until 1864. Just like Copenhagen county never included Copenhagen itself.

 

[Quaade]

You area saying that people in the Esbjerg, Bramming, Kolding area claims they live in Sønderjylland? Well that is completely wrong. Sønderjylland and Slesvig are two names for the exact same thing. The area from Ejderen to Kongeåen. Sønderjylland just is the older name, which from the 1300s was disused in favor of Slesvig after the main town of the area; only with the rise of nationalism did people start using Sønderjylland again. Historically and geographically Sønderjylland and Slesvig always have been the same---that the media (and probably many people) don't know this doesn't change that though. It also goes for today; half of Sønderjylland is German just like half of Slesvig is Danish.

looking at your revised provinces nr. 2, but the number 3 you linked to just now it makes sense to have Århus with 9 and Ålborg at 7 While nationalism was a thing for later, they had up until quite recently many dialects in Denmark and was quite distinct from each other... But that goes for nearly all areas of Denmark ;-)

Knew it was the main trading road; just wasn't aware it didn't stop in Viborg. Also E45 deviates wildly from Hærvejen.

Hmm... odd... remember the talk about E45 and hærvejen... Must have been a mix-up from my memory... But it was the older "highway" It was significant in bringing trade to Norway where Hedeby was significant in bringing trade to baltics...

I still don't get what you mean by trekantsområdet; the only area with that name I know of is the area around Kolding, Fredericia, and Vejle, but that obviously isn't what you are talking about. Because none of the maps I drew had Vejle and Ålborg in the same province.

I was refering to the second revised, not your original picture, since Kolding and Fredericia which is a large part of trekantsområdet was part of Ålbort... As said above, pic nr. 3 makes sense also with your refered development count Ålborg wasn´t significant enough that it would outmatch Århus and the other larger cities...

There you can have a poor Nordjylland which we set to 4 dev; a poor Vestjylland at 3 dev (the southern of the two western provinces). The one called Ringkøbing would serve asa kind of Midtjylland---I would give it 5 dev to account for Viborg, which granted isn't included in the borders drawn, but without Viborg and the area around it making that province in the first place makes no sense. And giving Viborg a province does make quite a bit of sense. It is that province I would have producing iron to represent the bog iron (myremalm). Then there is Ålborg, and Århus. With Århus taking pretty much all of Østjylland and almost all the important market towns (although the way it is drawn it appears Randers just barely goes to Ålborg, which is ridiculous though.
I would then give Århus (Østjylland) 9 dev, and Ålborg 7 dev. Though I might be missing some importance of Ålborg.

Could it produce copper? would that be a better representation?... Perhaps if production was a bit lower like 2-1-2 development with iron, could make sense, but could be it was more important than I make it?... Others look good to me, as of pic nr. 3, Perhaps Ålborg could be a 6 instead and østjylland 8... I´ve lost track of total count at this hour ;-) Just don´t want Denmark to be too powerful... What is Sjælland, Skåne and Fyn currently? perhaps we should weight it to those too?...

Esbjerg didn't exist until Estrup had the harbour made in 1868; before that it was a desolate place. In fact on that Christian II map I mentioned earlier there is absolutely nothing in that part of Jutland. And yes Silkeborg to Viborg makes the most sense.

Hehe... Esbjerg had a short golden era then Remember reading a ruling from supremen court that involved esbjerg with a statement of it being such a great and important city

That's a really bad way to name provinces though, since they aren't following the counties. It would be consistent with Slesvig yes, but it wouldn't be consistent with the rest of Denmark. Fyn isn't called Odense (and never has been), Sjælland isn't called Copenhagen, Skåne isn't called Lund, etc.
So calling Jutlandic provinces by their main city is a bad thing (except for Slesvig for historical reasons). Using things like Vestjylland, Midtjylland, and Østjylland is much better. The only possible exception is in that second proposal, where Ålborg could remain Ålborg due to pretty much corresponding to Ålborghus county---and Ålborg being pretty much the only market town of note in the area. But calling it Himmerland wouldn't be wrong either.

You would also run into paradoxes if you named after cities. For instance Ribe doesn't include Ribe... And shouldn't be made to include Ribe, since that would be highly anachronistic. Ribe county didn't include Ribe until 1864. Just like Copenhagen county never included Copenhagen itself.

Yeah... Was also kinda put off by the names... Had actually hoped the older county names had some better and cooler names... But Østjylland has been the name for Djursland and Århus for a long, long time (if you don´t ask them from Århus) and are still refered to it as such... Will ask my girlfriend tommorow about any better names for Vestjylland and force her to look at this map Also, might bump into my dad this weekend anyway, he might have some knowledge of Sønderjylland and some names that makes more sense...

But I actually think it´s close just need to make sure it´s balanced...

 

[Wagonlitz]

looking at your revised provinces nr. 2, but the number 3 you linked to just now it makes sense to have Århus with 9 and Ålborg at 7 While nationalism was a thing for later, they had up until quite recently many dialects in Denmark and was quite distinct from each other... But that goes for nearly all areas of Denmark ;-)

This is the second pic I made; Ålborg and Fredericia aren't in the same province.

Also as mentioned everywhere had its own dialect. Møn as mentioned had two. Though there was a rather big divide down the middle of Jutland which is one of the reasons splitting Jutland into north south pieces makes sense, whereas splitting it into east west pieces doesn't.

Hmm... odd... remember the talk about E45 and hærvejen... Must have been a mix-up from my memory... But it was the older "highway" It was significant in bringing trade to Norway where Hedeby was significant in bringing trade to baltics...

E45 hugs the coast all the way to around Hobro; only then does it get further in land to get to Ålborg. Might be really close to Hærvejen there, but in Østjylland it is far away. What you are confusing is probably how V for years have wanted a Hærvejsmotorvej to alleviate E45.

I was refering to the second revised, not your original picture, since Kolding and Fredericia which is a large part of trekantsområdet was part of Ålbort... As said above, pic nr. 3 makes sense also with your refered development count Ålborg wasn´t significant enough that it would outmatch Århus and the other larger cities...

The second revision I did it this; again Ålborg and Fredericia aren't in the same province. I think you need to post the pic you are referring to, since I don't think we are talking about the same ones.

Could it produce copper? would that be a better representation?... Perhaps if production was a bit lower like 2-1-2 development with iron, could make sense, but could be it was more important than I make it?...

Copper would be ahistorical. And there actually was a large iron production in Midtjylland until around the 1700s. So giving it iron is completely justified. It is estimated that there still are 10000+ slag blocks lying around in fields despite farmers for centuries having removed them as soon as they find them. Yes there was still some iron imports from Norway (and from Sweden during the union), but if a country only can get iron provinces if they were 100% self supplying with iron then many provinces should have their iron stripped away.

Opposite Norway and Sweden the myremalm in Midtjylland isn't powder, but solid benches of it. They are around half a meter thick and often just lies a shovel punch into the ground. It can especially be found around streams and bogs. Heck it is so solid that they even used it to build churches and houses; besides using it to make iron.
So I don't think making production being the weakest would be right.

Had actually hoped the older county names had some better and cooler names...

Counties always have been named after the main town---or the main manor. Just like how fiefs were before counties were made in 1660. Just look at Slesvig, which had its old name changed to a name after the main town.
Heck even places like Himmerland to some extent are named in the same way, given that Himmerland refers back to the old legend about the Cimbrians coming from Himmer land. Though in other places the main town was named for the area---like Thisted which is named after Thy (Thisted used to be Thysted). Heck I wouldn't be surpriced is all the old syssel names in some way refer back to people's or towns/manors. And you would need to go back to the syssel's to get non boring names.

he might have some knowledge of Sønderjylland and some names that makes more sense...

Calling Slesvig anything, but Slesvig in this time frame is highly anachronistic. Until nationalism nobody cared about it being named after the main town (or that Danes slowly were replaced by Germans), so while Sønderjylland is older it would be really wrong to use. And anyway Slesvig is just as Danish a name as Sønderjylland; just because Germans have replaced Danes in that area doesn't mean that the name Slesvig is a Danish name and that Danes founded the town of Slesvig.

 

[Wagonlitz]

Forgot to mention what the tradegoods of the current Danish provinces are, as you asked for.

Nordjylland: grain
Midtjylland: grain
Fyn: fish
Sjælland: fish
Lolland: fish
Skåne: grain
Halland: grain
Blekinge: fish
Bornholm: fish


So with so much fish and otherwise only grain I don't think adding that iron would upset things too much; and as mentioned it is completely historical, since there was large scale iron production in Midtjylland from the iron age (~500 BC) and until something like the early 1700s when using myremalm for iron production disappeared.
As mentioned I would also add a naval supplies or two given all the forests we cut down to maintain our fleet and all the great wharves we used to have.

 

[Quaade]

Also as mentioned everywhere had its own dialect. Møn as mentioned had two. Though there was a rather big divide down the middle of Jutland which is one of the reasons splitting Jutland into north south pieces makes sense, whereas splitting it into east west pieces doesn't.

There is a big different mentally from Østjylland and Vestjylland though ;-) But it´s not as big as south and north, so I get it also makes more sense really as you put down the borders, as you said... It should be faster to travel through Denmark by one province than taking the west-road and placement makes more sense than vanilla

E45 hugs the coast all the way to around Hobro; only then does it get further in land to get to Ålborg. Might be really close to Hærvejen there, but in Østjylland it is far away. What you are confusing is probably how V for years have wanted a Hærvejsmotorvej to alleviate E45.

You are probably right about that one, I do remember them discussing it now... Though I´d rather see a bridge over Samsø...

The second revision I did it this; again Ålborg and Fredericia aren't in the same province. I think you need to post the pic you are referring to, since I don't think we are talking about the same ones.

Nope... Stared myself blind... Realized this morning I had placed Ålborg at Gudenåen and not further north... My bad

Copper would be ahistorical. And there actually was a large iron production in Midtjylland until around the 1700s. So giving it iron is completely justified. It is estimated that there still are 10000+ slag blocks lying around in fields despite farmers for centuries having removed them as soon as they find them. Yes there was still some iron imports from Norway (and from Sweden during the union), but if a country only can get iron provinces if they were 100% self supplying with iron then many provinces should have their iron stripped away.

Opposite Norway and Sweden the myremalm in Midtjylland isn't powder, but solid benches of it. They are around half a meter thick and often just lies a shovel punch into the ground. It can especially be found around streams and bogs. Heck it is so solid that they even used it to build churches and houses; besides using it to make iron.
So I don't think making production being the weakest would be right.

Well, it was only out of a gameplay-perspective since I believe iron is more pricey, but that´s only in the later eras? And given you checked the provinces for goods, it does makes sense to have at least one with iron, else it all fish and grain... Didn´t know they used it for churches, well... Still stuff to learn I guess

Counties always have been named after the main town---or the main manor. Just like how fiefs were before counties were made in 1660. Just look at Slesvig, which had its old name changed to a name after the main town.
Heck even places like Himmerland to some extent are named in the same way, given that Himmerland refers back to the old legend about the Cimbrians coming from Himmer land. Though in other places the main town was named for the area---like Thisted which is named after Thy (Thisted used to be Thysted). Heck I wouldn't be surpriced is all the old syssel names in some way refer back to people's or towns/manors. And you would need to go back to the syssel's to get non boring names.

Well... I know Østjylland has been refered to for ages as such, and Djursland which both makes "great" names... But not sure if any other places have such names... Might be... Would rather call it Østjylland, since it also makes sense for others too

Calling Slesvig anything, but Slesvig in this time frame is highly anachronistic. Until nationalism nobody cared about it being named after the main town (or that Danes slowly were replaced by Germans), so while Sønderjylland is older it would be really wrong to use. And anyway Slesvig is just as Danish a name as Sønderjylland; just because Germans have replaced Danes in that area doesn't mean that the name Slesvig is a Danish name and that Danes founded the town of Slesvig.

True... Makes more sense that way

Copper would be ahistorical. And there actually was a large iron production in Midtjylland until around the 1700s. So giving it iron is completely justified. It is estimated that there still are 10000+ slag blocks lying around in fields despite farmers for centuries having removed them as soon as they find them. Yes there was still some iron imports from Norway (and from Sweden during the union), but if a country only can get iron provinces if they were 100% self supplying with iron then many provinces should have their iron stripped away.

Opposite Norway and Sweden the myremalm in Midtjylland isn't powder, but solid benches of it. They are around half a meter thick and often just lies a shovel punch into the ground. It can especially be found around streams and bogs. Heck it is so solid that they even used it to build churches and houses; besides using it to make iron.
So I don't think making production being the weakest would be right.

So with so much fish and otherwise only grain I don't think adding that iron would upset things too much; and as mentioned it is completely historical, since there was large scale iron production in Midtjylland from the iron age (~500 BC) and until something like the early 1700s when using myremalm for iron production disappeared.
As mentioned I would also add a naval supplies or two given all the forests we cut down to maintain our fleet and all the great wharves we used to have.

Well, it was only out of a gameplay-perspective since I believe iron is more pricey, but that´s only in the later eras? And given you checked the provinces for goods, it does makes sense to have at least one with iron, else it all fish and grain... Didn´t know they used it for churches, well... Still stuff to learn I guess But yes, there should be at least one province that produce naval supplies, it was only quite "late" that forests began to become depleted as far as I recall, our forests is young I remember at least, but not how young... Have got it told several times though... So it would probably be a southern province or Østjylland which still has a lot of forests, but not sure which places had most forest in the period... So my guess would be Østjylland or Midtjylland, but the last one should have Iron or was that the province to the left?

 

[MAHak]

What Denmark really need is a decision to integrate Norway, just like Castille gets a decision to integrate Aragon and England get one to integrate Scotland. If Paradox can justify these 2 unique integrate decisions, then I'd really like to hear some counter arguments for not giving Denmark a similar decision to integrate Norway!!!

 

[Quaade]

What Denmark really need is a decision to integrate Norway, just like Castille gets a decision to integrate Aragon and England get one to integrate Scotland. If Paradox can justify these 2 unique integrate decisions, then I'd really like to hear some counter arguments for not giving Denmark a similar decision to integrate Norway!!!

Since it happened more like integrating a PU anyway?... You can inherit it and you can integrate it, it´s not like it´s that many dip you are spending, nor did Denmark suddenly change name or appearance, since it was still Denmark, unlike Spain and Great Britain

 

[MAHak]

Since it happened more like integrating a PU anyway?... You can inherit it and you can integrate it, it´s not like it´s that many dip you are spending, nor did Denmark suddenly change name or appearance, since it was still Denmark, unlike Spain and Great Britain

The problem is that Denmark can't integrate Norway before it has more provinces, and the AI is too stupid to pull that off and the player is too smart and ambitious so they'll eat Sweden as well. How many times has anyone seen a Scandinavia where Sweden breaks free but Norway is integrated into Denmark, leading to the horrible horrible scenario where Sweden and Denmark-Norway is sort of evenly matched, and no one eats each other whole? (Shivers at the thought of such a historical railroad nightmare)
That's why Denmark needs a decision to inherit/integrate (whatever you call it) Norway!!!!
Just put in some requirements like:
Sweden is independent (Denmark can still pull of a normal integration if they get enough province while still subjugating those rebel scum in Sweden, but Denmark gets Norway as an runners up prize if Sweden breaks free of the legally binding treaty of Kalmar, (yep don't think we have forgotten about that one).

Denmark has to be Protestant, iirc it was Norway becoming Protestant that Denmark used as an excuse to annex Norway in real life.
Needs admin. Tech. 8 or 10 or 11.5 or whatever.

 

[Quaade]

The problem is that Denmark can't integrate Norway before it has more provinces, and the AI is too stupid to pull that off and the player is too smart and ambitious so they'll eat Sweden as well. How many times has anyone seen a Scandinavia where Sweden breaks free but Norway is integrated into Denmark, leading to the horrible horrible scenario where Sweden and Denmark-Norway is sort of evenly matched, and no one eats each other whole? (Shivers at the thought of such a historical railroad nightmare)
That's why Denmark needs a decision to inherit/integrate (whatever you call it) Norway!!!!
Just put in some requirements like:
Sweden is independent (Denmark can still pull of a normal integration if they get enough province while still subjugating those rebel scum in Sweden, but Denmark gets Norway as an runners up prize if Sweden breaks free of the legally binding treaty of Kalmar, (yep don't think we have forgotten about that one).

You can integrate just fine now no matter the size? just have to wait 50 years to do it, and since there is no reason for it to change tags, nor did so historical unless Sweden still was in the union (change to Kalmar or Scandinavia), I see little point to give it a buff for free integration... But that´s just me... You could argue that Norway was integrated "freely", current mechanics where you can integrate it after 50 years or inherit it (which is free) works well for the case... You can gain more provinces and you can up diplomatic reputation to increase the chance... I´ve actually seen Denmark inherit Norway, even saw a Denmark form Scandinavia through strengt of arms another time...

The legality of Sweden breaking free of Kalmar union is there... They only signed to allow the kings sons to inherit Sweden, through elective monarchy... Denmark didn´t have any direct descendants since there were no sons, and Sweden couldn´t agree (again) with Denmark-Norway on the next king... But since the Kalmar Treaty only bound them to the direct descendant, it wouldn´t be legally binding anymore... Besides, it had more to do with heavy taxing and cost to Sweden for not being allowed to make trade in iron with Hansa

 

[MAHak]

You can integrate just fine now no matter the size? just have to wait 50 years to do it, and since there is no reason for it to change tags, nor did so historical unless Sweden still was in the union (change to Kalmar or Scandinavia), I see little point to give it a buff for free integration... But that´s just me... You could argue that Norway was integrated "freely", current mechanics where you can integrate it after 50 years or inherit it (which is free) works well for the case... You can gain more provinces and you can up diplomatic reputation to increase the chance... I´ve actually seen Denmark inherit Norway, even saw a Denmark form Scandinavia through strengt of arms another time...

As I mentioned before, the AI is too stupid to acquire more provinces, for the integration process. But he has a tough time getting them anyway so who is to blame him, expanding into the HRE is almost a certain no go, and usually ends up back-firing.

The other option is to conquer Ösel and some other Livonian provinces, but he never makes the move, and usually is stuck with the conquer Ösel mission stubbornly clinging onto it even when he is being cut up by HRE countries and Sweden. Like Hitler playing a EU4 game as Brandenburg, down to 1 province, Berlin, that is being sieged by Russia, France, GB and USA, but still refuses to give up his current mission to utterly conquer all of Russia.

Anyway the 3rd option for AI Denmark to get provinces enough for a Norwegian integration, is to take some from Sweden if he spoils their independence war, but this means that Sweden almost certainly will never bounce back as the next independence will be even harder, thus Denmark will achieve hegemony over Scandinavia, but if you want Sweden and Denmark (-Norway) to be evenly matched, then this option is not desirable.

It seems that Norway is getting more provinces in next the patch, so that's an extra mountain for Denmark to climb. The whole quantitative approach to comparing provinces when trying to start a integration process looks like an archaic leftover that hasn't been updated since province development was introduced. As it is now a 9 province overlord with a total development of 950, would not be able to integrate a 10 province, 30 total development, subject.

I know that you can inherit Norway as Denmark when a Danish ruler is crowned, I can't remember the chance but IIRC it's about 8-12 % chance of succes, so on average 10 rulers would have to come and go before Norway is inherited, again I don't know the exact numbers here.

I know many people hates railroading, but when the historical result (Sweden gains independence, Denmark gets Norway, then they wrestle for centuries with Sweden gaining some provinces but Denmark is always a threat) is almost implausible then I think a little historical railroading, is for the better. Instead of the almost certain scenario of the winner takes it all. Wouldn't it be weird if 99 % of the time France would eat England whole or Austria would eat the Ottomans?

 

[Quaade]

As I mentioned before, the AI is too stupid to acquire more provinces, for the integration process. But he has a tough time getting them anyway so who is to blame him, expanding into the HRE is almost a certain no go, and usually ends up back-firing.

The other option is to conquer Ösel and some other Livonian provinces, but he never makes the move, and usually is stuck with the conquer Ösel mission stubbornly clinging onto it even when he is being cut up by HRE countries and Sweden. Like Hitler playing a EU4 game as Brandenburg, down to 1 province, Berlin, that is being sieged by Russia, France, GB and USA, but still refuses to give up his current mission to utterly conquer all of Russia.

Anyway the 3rd option for AI Denmark to get provinces enough for a Norwegian integration, is to take some from Sweden if he spoils their independence war, but this means that Sweden almost certainly will never bounce back as the next independence will be even harder, thus Denmark will achieve hegemony over Scandinavia, but if you want Sweden and Denmark (-Norway) to be evenly matched, then this option is not desirable.

Well in this case, Denmark would be getting some more development and provinces anyway, also... Didn´t notice Norway getting more provinces, but I´ll take your words for it... And Denmark often advances into HRE in my games if they have not been weakened too much by Sweden or Hansa at least

It seems that Norway is getting more provinces in next the patch, so that's an extra mountain for Denmark to climb. The whole quantitative approach to comparing provinces when trying to start a integration process looks like an archaic leftover that hasn't been updated since province development was introduced. As it is now a 9 province overlord with a total development of 950, would not be able to integrate a 10 province, 30 total development, subject.

I´m not sure that´s true?... Integrating would then be impossible for Aragon and Naples, Poland and Lithuania... And i´ve seen both being made by the AI, and had the option of integrating a humongous Austria I gained PU over... So unless they dramaticically changed that since last patch, I think you are refering to inherit which is quite difficult to do with a larger nation unless you have a high diplomatic reputation... Inherit is instant on monarch death, whereas integrating is more like annexation, where you pay dip for each month until filled... Had a laugh at Poland trying to integrat Lithuania that had became a bit larger...

I know that you can inherit Norway as Denmark when a Danish ruler is crowned, I can't remember the chance but IIRC it's about 8-12 % chance of succes, so on average 10 rulers would have to come and go before Norway is inherited, again I don't know the exact numbers here.

It varies, getting diplomatic reputation and increasing size helps...

I know many people hates railroading, but when the historical result (Sweden gains independence, Denmark gets Norway, then they wrestle for centuries with Sweden gaining some provinces but Denmark is always a threat) is almost implausible then I think a little historical railroading, is for the better. Instead of the almost certain scenario of the winner takes it all. Wouldn't it be weird if 99 % of the time France would eat England whole or Austria would eat the Ottomans?

The wrestle still happens, in my games they seems much more capable and usually keeps Norway for a long time... Most of the times Denmark starts loosing is when they have had too many wars in succesion...

 

[MAHak]

I´m not sure that´s true?... Integrating would then be impossible for Aragon and Naples, Poland and Lithuania... And i´ve seen both being made by the AI, and had the option of integrating a humongous Austria I gained PU over... So unless they dramaticically changed that since last patch, I think you are refering to inherit which is quite difficult to do with a larger nation unless you have a high diplomatic reputation... Inherit is instant on monarch death, whereas integrating is more like annexation, where you pay dip for each month until filled... Had a laugh at Poland trying to integrat Lithuania that had became a bit larger...

Well I'm afraid I'm gonna have to ask you to start a Danish game then try to integrate Norway, notice the tooltip saying that you can't integrate partially because that you lack provinces 15 - 10 it doesn't say anything about lack of Danish development. In fact Denmark is more developed than Norway, 102 against Norway's 69.

Then start a game in 1453 as Poland, at that point they have a PU with Lithuania, notice that they can't integrate also because of province disparity (31-14, Lithuania has more then double the amount of provinces than Poland, where as Norway only had 50% more provinces), Lithuania (346) also has almost double the amount of development compare to Poland (183). There is also 0% chance of inherence. Then how does Poland integrate/inherits Lithuania almost every game they both exists in??? Because they also have a special decision to integrate/inherit Lithuania, just as Castille and England do. The only pattern here seems to be that they change name, well then just have Denmark change name to Denmark-Norway as the combined realms of Denmark and Norway was often referred to, then they fulfills the criteria for having an integrate PU decision.

 

[Quaade]

Well I'm afraid I'm gonna have to ask you to start a Danish game then try to integrate Norway, notice the tooltip saying that you can't integrate partially because that you lack provinces 15 - 10 it doesn't say anything about lack of Danish development. In fact Denmark is more developed than Norway, 102 against Norway's 69.

You are correct, it does say that... Should be in development instead, since basically everything is measured in development.

Then start a game in 1453 as Poland, at that point they have a PU with Lithuania, notice that they can't integrate also because of province disparity (31-14, Lithuania has more then double the amount of provinces than Poland, where as Norway only had 50% more provinces), Lithuania (346) also has almost double the amount of development compare to Poland (183). There is also 0% chance of inherence. Then how does Poland integrate/inherits Lithuania almost every game they both exists in??? Because they also have a special decision to integrate/inherit Lithuania, just as Castille and England do. The only pattern here seems to be that they change name, well then just have Denmark change name to Denmark-Norway as the combined realms of Denmark and Norway was often referred to, then they fulfills the criteria for having an integrate PU decision.

For Denmarks case, it doesn´t really matter as much.. If they survive they always annex Slesvig-Holstein which makes it ahve 12 provinces, only require 3 more which could be even if Norway had lost a couple of provinces anyway. But really, for Denmark this could be done with change it from province count to development count instead of making an ahistoric decision that makes more sense using the game mechanics.

Have it been posted in bug forum or as a WAD post?

 

[Wagonlitz]

There is a big different mentally from Østjylland and Vestjylland though ;-) But it´s not as big as south and north, so I get it also makes more sense really as you put down the borders, as you said... It should be faster to travel through Denmark by one province than taking the west-road and placement makes more sense than vanilla

I don't get what you say initially. You agree that the big divide is east west, but then you say that it isn't as big as the north south divide...

Also with regard to going up west then there is the question of crossing to Thy/Vendsyssel. Doing it from Vestjylland is completely out of the picture. While Agger Tange wasn't breached until a storm in something like the 1820s you still wouldn't want to walk your army that way. There isn't really any options to forage and get your horses food, you will have a good chance of getting trapped there, can be attacked easily from the sea from both sides, and if a storm comes there is the constant possibility of it breaching and your army get divided in two/flushed away. And as we know storms can come pretty much without warning. Crossing from Midtjylland by help of Mors could potentially happen, but I have a hard time imagining who would do it instead of marching on Aalborg, since you could risk getting trapped on Mors and without Aalborg you can't control he waters about Mors. I did draw a crossing there for some of the maps though. But I am really ambivalent on whether or not it is appropriate; what do you think?

Though I´d rather see a bridge over Samsø...

Same. Hærvejsmotorvejen won't really alleviate the problems E45 face and will just manage to destroy beautiful nature.

Well... I know Østjylland has been refered to for ages as such, and Djursland which both makes "great" names... But not sure if any other places have such names... Might be... Would rather call it Østjylland, since it also makes sense for others too

That they have been used for long doesn't change my point that they might well originately be referring to a settlement/manor or a people. Jylland as mentioned doesn't have a fully known etymology, but as far as I remember some of the possibilities indeed are reffering to places/people. And e.g. Thy does refer to the people living there. Don't know about Djursland.
So just using the logical names would be what I would do. I.e. Vestjylland, Midtjylland, Østjylland. And then Aalborghus if you did the version with a province covering Alborghus county or find an appropriate name if you did the one with a province covering Århus, Randers, Djursland.

Well, it was only out of a gameplay-perspective since I believe iron is more pricey, but that´s only in the later eras? And given you checked the provinces for goods, it does makes sense to have at least one with iron, else it all fish and grain... Didn´t know they used it for churches, well... Still stuff to learn I guess But yes, there should be at least one province that produce naval supplies, it was only quite "late" that forests began to become depleted as far as I recall, our forests is young I remember at least, but not how young... Have got it told several times though... So it would probably be a southern province or Østjylland which still has a lot of forests, but not sure which places had most forest in the period... So my guess would be Østjylland or Midtjylland, but the last one should have Iron or was that the province to the left?

Iron is more expensive than grain and fish. But having it in is completely historically correct. And Jutland is too poor with its trade goods at the moment; there was a really large trade of bulls to the large bull markets in Hamborg. And other trade with Hamborg, but the bull trade was one of the biggest and one of the longest lasting. That trade by the way was one of the reasons Sønderjylland/Slesvig gradually shifted from being 100% Danish to the present 50% German 50% Danish.

With regard to forests then I am not sure. But I agree that Østjylland seems an good bet. As mentioned I also seem to remember there being large forests left in the southern half of Fyn, so making that south Fyn province naval is a possibility.

It seems that Norway is getting more provinces in next the patch

Source? Because I haven't seen any.

but when the historical result (Sweden gains independence, Denmark gets Norway, then they wrestle for centuries with Sweden gaining some provinces but Denmark is always a threat) is almost implausible then I think a little historical railroading, is for the better.

The historical happenings are completely implausible and frankly a fluke. It should pretty much be impossible to replicate. Except for the 1650s Denmark could perfectly well hold her own against Sweden and there was no risk of losing provinces. And after that period there we could still hold Sweden---at least as long as we had Norway---and there was no risk of loss of province.

And the loss of Skåneland really was implausible and a fluke as mentioned. Among other things it requires Sweden to get a string of God kings, a decades long league war happening at the same time which has drained much of Europe of strength, Denmark to have been completely trashed by the catholic side shortly before meaning that Denmark is already lying down, the great belt to freeze completely shut, and having the courage to try and cross it. Which easily could have led to the loss of the Swedish army.
I.e. it is pretty much impossible to replicate and if you went back in time and did it again it might well not happen; and the Swedish army could breach the ice and die. Walking on sea ice is really dangerous.
Furthermore for the 20 km of sea that were frozen back then to be frozen (so that you can cross to Sjælland) you pretty much need to be in the middle of the little ice age---i.e. around 1658 where it happened historically. And even then you are not guaranteed that the ice will hold. So you can't really replicate the loss of Skåneland in game; and neither should you given how utterly implausible it was.
If it hadn't happened then people would say that it was really poor writing to have a story where an army crossed 20 km of frozen sea with the constant danger of the ice breaking, the enemy army immediately enters negotiations once the ice has been crossed, the crossing army gets news about reinforcements coming which could crush the crossing army, and makes a peace before the enemy learns about the reinforcements.

The only pattern here seems to be that they change name, well then just have Denmark change name to Denmark-Norway as the combined realms of Denmark and Norway was often referred to

Pretty sure it wasn't normally referred to as Denmark Norway; either just Denmark or as two separate areas---the kingdom of Denmark and the kingdom of Norway.

 

[Quaade]

I don't get what you say initially. You agree that the big divide is east west, but then you say that it isn't as big as the north south divide...

Yeah... Was a bit unclear about that one... What I really meant was, it doesn´t really matter if it´s east-west, north-south... While Denmark is quite small it managed quite well to feel different than the other region (language differences helped to that too).

Also with regard to going up west then there is the question of crossing to Thy/Vendsyssel. Doing it from Vestjylland is completely out of the picture. While Agger Tange wasn't breached until a storm in something like the 1820s you still wouldn't want to walk your army that way. There isn't really any options to forage and get your horses food, you will have a good chance of getting trapped there, can be attacked easily from the sea from both sides, and if a storm comes there is the constant possibility of it breaching and your army get divided in two/flushed away. And as we know storms can come pretty much without warning. Crossing from Midtjylland by help of Mors could potentially happen, but I have a hard time imagining who would do it instead of marching on Aalborg, since you could risk getting trapped on Mors and without Aalborg you can't control he waters about Mors. I did draw a crossing there for some of the maps though. But I am really ambivalent on whether or not it is appropriate; what do you think?

Would make more sense to me unless special circumstances where present and I needed a special route... So all in all, for gameplay-reasons too, it makes more sense to make them cross at Ålborg... If you really need to cross differently, you could use transports anyway, so I see no reason to do just because you could cross on a smaller scale.

And what are you talking about... Storms in Denmark, meeh...

Same. Hærvejsmotorvejen won't really alleviate the problems E45 face and will just manage to destroy beautiful nature.

The argument that Samsø-forbindelsen would be too costly, at the same time they will spent 2 billion DKK on contractors on hold for Femern (they even signed it!) until Germany gets it approved which would likely be in about 2 years if nothing major happens... Can´t see it... That Bridge would nearly make Denmark shrink to half it´s size in transportation... Femern bridge might help a little, but not as much as Samsø... It´s a pretty long route from Ålborg down to Fyn and then Kbh, not as long from Femern around Fyn... Yet... I do support Femern, just think it´s stupid not to have another bridge, which I also think would improve infrastructure more than another highway down the country...

That they have been used for long doesn't change my point that they might well originately be referring to a settlement/manor or a people. Jylland as mentioned doesn't have a fully known etymology, but as far as I remember some of the possibilities indeed are reffering to places/people. And e.g. Thy does refer to the people living there. Don't know about Djursland.
So just using the logical names would be what I would do. I.e. Vestjylland, Midtjylland, Østjylland. And then Aalborghus if you did the version with a province covering Alborghus county or find an appropriate name if you did the one with a province covering Århus, Randers, Djursland.

Djursland has been refered to as such for years, don´t know the background from it though... But it makes more sense to name it after regions, as your suggested names

With regard to forests then I am not sure. But I agree that Østjylland seems an good bet. As mentioned I also seem to remember there being large forests left in the southern half of Fyn, so making that south Fyn province naval is a possibility.

So it could essentially have two naval provinces and one iron, the rest would be fish and grain that sounds like the Denmark I know

Pretty sure it wasn't normally referred to as Denmark Norway; either just Denmark or as two separate areas---the kingdom of Denmark and the kingdom of Norway.

It has been refered to as Denmark-Norway a couple of times, but that was more to refer to the fact that they were both under the same king, not as one kingdom... They had their own laws and "rigsråd" to elect the king and represent themselves along with Denmark

 

[Wagonlitz]

While Denmark is quite small it managed quite well to feel different than the other region (language differences helped to that too).

So much this. I will mention Møn again (might be my favorite example). Really small island and yet you manage to get two quite distinct dialects and mentalities. One half goes self owning in the late 1700s whereas the other half remains under the ownership of the nobility. The self owning peasants talked more modernly and thought that the other half was a bunch of old fashioned people; whereas the people staying under the nobility didn't like those new fangled self owning peasants and their way too modern language.

Anyway the differences between east and west were bigger than the north south ones.

And what are you talking about... Storms in Denmark, meeh...

I assume you are joking. But for the sake of foreigners I will note that we actually do get quite violent storms from time to time and that they often have come without any warning---especially in the days before the weather prediction office.

The argument that Samsø-forbindelsen would be too costly, at the same time they will spent 2 billion DKK on contractors on hold for Femern (they even signed it!) until Germany gets it approved which would likely be in about 2 years if nothing major happens... Can´t see it... That Bridge would nearly make Denmark shrink to half it´s size in transportation... Femern bridge might help a little, but not as much as Samsø... It´s a pretty long route from Ålborg down to Fyn and then Kbh, not as long from Femern around Fyn... Yet... I do support Femern, just think it´s stupid not to have another bridge, which I also think would improve infrastructure more than another highway down the country...

Too costly my arse. It is one of the most economically sensible infrastructure investments you can do---which is why it will never happen since as we know politicians like pissing away money.
With regard to Femern then it is stupid and idiotic. It is a Cold War project---and that is the only reason it goes the way it does. Having it connect towards Hamborg made perfect sense in the 80s when it was envisioned; these days is doesn't. You are driving a huge detour when going to Berlin or eastwards---and opening up those areas is part of the reason behind it. Instead you should have made a connection at Gedser Rostock. That is the sensible, and historical!, option. Already in the late 1800s did international connections between Denmark/Scandinavia and the rest of Europe go through Gedser. You even had a Russian sleeping car as part of the connection. That is the original international connection of Denmark. The only reason it fell somewhat from grace is due to WWII and the Iron Curtain. But you know what? When do you think DSB stopped having trains cross from Gedser to Germany? No it wasn't during the Cold War when one would expect---it was in the mid 90s when traffic to Eastern Europe started picking up again and it made no sense to cull that connection...

It has been refered to as Denmark-Norway a couple of times, but that was more to refer to the fact that they were both under the same king, not as one kingdom... They had their own laws and "rigsråd" to elect the king and represent themselves along with Denmark

I meant in contemporary sources. I am aware that after 1814 it has been called Denmark--Norway. But as far as I am aware it wasn't called so before 1814.
As an example I will use Geographie til Ungdommens Brug 5th edition by Christian Sommerfelt from 1797.
It treats Denmark, Norway, and the German possessions under the name:
Kongerigerne Danmark og Norge.
§. 1
Kongerigerne Danmark og Norge med tilhørende Øer, Hertugdømmet Holsteen, samt nogle Lande og Stæder, uden for Europa, ere samlede under en monarkisk arvelig Regiering.

 

[Quaade]

So much this. I will mention Møn again (might be my favorite example). Really small island and yet you manage to get two quite distinct dialects and mentalities. One half goes self owning in the late 1700s whereas the other half remains under the ownership of the nobility. The self owning peasants talked more modernly and thought that the other half was a bunch of old fashioned people; whereas the people staying under the nobility didn't like those new fangled self owning peasants and their way too modern language.

Anyway the differences between east and west were bigger than the north south ones.

It´s not the size that matters, it´s what we do with it I think it´s neat that we had such divergencies on such a small place, instead of just being... Singular

I assume you are joking. But for the sake of foreigners I will note that we actually do get quite violent storms from time to time and that they often have come without any warning---especially in the days before the weather prediction office.

Well... it´s no hurricanes, but with water rising some meters and the wind blowing at speeds of a hurricane in such a flat land... Well, it´s something And yes, they do often come suddenly... There were times that Limfjorden and even Øresund froze over even, the latter you refered to earlier... Winter storms can be brutal and can leave you snowed in for days... Well at least if you didn´t like to walk through it and lived outside the city.

Too costly my arse. It is one of the most economically sensible infrastructure investments you can do---which is why it will never happen since as we know politicians like pissing away money.
With regard to Femern then it is stupid and idiotic. It is a Cold War project---and that is the only reason it goes the way it does. Having it connect towards Hamborg made perfect sense in the 80s when it was envisioned; these days is doesn't. You are driving a huge detour when going to Berlin or eastwards---and opening up those areas is part of the reason behind it. Instead you should have made a connection at Gedser Rostock. That is the sensible, and historical!, option. Already in the late 1800s did international connections between Denmark/Scandinavia and the rest of Europe go through Gedser. You even had a Russian sleeping car as part of the connection. That is the original international connection of Denmark. The only reason it fell somewhat from grace is due to WWII and the Iron Curtain. But you know what? When do you think DSB stopped having trains cross from Gedser to Germany? No it wasn't during the Cold War when one would expect---it was in the mid 90s when traffic to Eastern Europe started picking up again and it made no sense to cull that connection...

It´s a fine connection, meaning something could/should have been done before... Just look at some of the great cities of the world, how close they put bridges and still manage to have them... It would bring so much more... Honestly I would even consider applying for a job in Kbh if a connection over Samsø were made, and it would stop the endless money-sink and complaints from Samsø and their ferry connection... So those few millions saved every year, should also help finance the bridge...

I meant in contemporary sources. I am aware that after 1814 it has been called Denmark--Norway. But as far as I am aware it wasn't called so before 1814.
As an example I will use Geographie til Ungdommens Brug 5th edition by Christian Sommerfelt from 1797.
It treats Denmark, Norway, and the German possessions under the name:
Kongerigerne Danmark og Norge.
§. 1
Kongerigerne Danmark og Norge med tilhørende Øer, Hertugdømmet Holsteen, samt nogle Lande og Stæder, uden for Europa, ere samlede under en monarkisk arvelig Regiering.

I´m not sure when they refered to it that way, but it was quite late... Also why I refered to it as not really a reasonable argument for using integration, it didn´t really change "tag", it just rearranged how it handled it´s affairs