Language Mapmode

[Rjalowe44]

This seems to be a hot topic in the forums: Culture vs Language. What if there was a Language group mapmode as well as a culture mapmode? Example: Basque would fall under the Iberian culture group, but would have its own Language group.

 

[Romanix90]

Hey that is not bad idea. But again it's only me.

 

[Vaximillian]

What if there was a Language group mapmode as well as a culture mapmode?

What would this add in gameplay?

 

[Matihood1]

What would this add in gameplay?

I think it's pretty simple. It would solve the well-known issue of "these 2 cultures are in differents culture groups despite being close linguistically", like Finnish and Karelian, Polish and Slovakian, Occitan and Aragonese etc. while maintaining the current shape of culture groups (which is like it is for a variety of reasons, mostly AI-related).

 

[AirikrStrife]

Is OP actually proposing creating a two culture group system? As it's been done many times before, including by myself, in my proposal I just suggested it without separate criteria's but osme people have suggested having culture group and language group as two different "systems". Linguistic groups are sitll not, a valid category outside of academia and post 18th century nationalism. And wouldn't work anyway outside of europe and part of asia. Only with some of the european families, turkic, sinitic and arabic and a few other smaller ones to we actually have valid families of "these languages are close enough to be valid in some remote sense". So if it's kept realistic we'll end up with broken families like germanic, slavic, romance, arabic, towering over all else.

Hwever OP only suggests a map mode, but doesn't consider the linguistic ocmplexity of the world, how would caucasus be represented? burma? africa?

 

[JaxElite]

This would be very problematic if you consider that many languages only evolved the way they did due to the political circumstances. For example the original "german" in northern germany, platt is more closely related to dutch and in some cases even english than modern day "hanoveranian" german. Similar examples can be found in every european country and probably anywhere else. At game start basically each area would have their own language with very fluid groups (since actually there are very few language families making up most of the languages). So a very complex system with no gameplay effects to what? Fix a forum argument? Honestly cultures should just take the drift concept from ck2 and drift between groups over the course of the game.

 

[Vaximillian]

I think it's pretty simple. It would solve the well-known issue of "these 2 cultures are in differents culture groups despite being close linguistically", like Finnish and Karelian, Polish and Slovakian, Occitan and Aragonese etc. while maintaining the current shape of culture groups (which is like it is for a variety of reasons, mostly AI-related).

So this won’t add anything to gameplay, got it.

 

[KleinerMoses]

Having the same language, but not the same culture could make culture conversion cheaper (maybe 20%).
You could also add something like language unity. If you have above 80% language unity it gives you for each 5% 2,5% production efficiency, i.e. 85% unity gives +2,5% production efficiency, 100% unity +10% production efficiency. (lower than 80% doesn't give any deductions though)

However, thats just an idea. As mentioned before by some other users, I am also not 100% sure how the complexity of languages should be represented.

 

[Eruth]

Having the same language, but not the same culture could make culture conversion cheaper (maybe 20%).
You could also add something like language unity. If you have above 80% language unity it gives you for each 5% 2,5% production efficiency, i.e. 85% unity gives +2,5% production efficiency, 100% unity +10% production efficiency. (lower than 80% doesn't give any deductions though)

However, thats just an idea. As mentioned before by some other users, I am also not 100% sure how the complexity of languages should be represented.

English, German, and swedish are all the same language group but I don't think it's any easier to turn a German city into an English city than it is to turn an Italian city into a German city.
Representing linguistics outside of culture adds an unnecessary layer of complexity without adding any real fun or depth.

 

[KleinerMoses]

English, German, and swedish are all the same language group but I don't think it's any easier to turn a German city into an English city than it is to turn an Italian city into a German city.
Representing linguistics outside of culture adds an unnecessary layer of complexity without adding any real fun or depth.

Well I am not talking about linguistic groups, but languages itself. However, it was just an idea as I mentioned. It is also quite political since there are many countries in the world which do speak more or less the same language, but consider their official language as a own language.

 

[Ixqus]

I do believe this is a good idea and I understand this would be super hard to implement, but language is a boundary between people so if you and I spoke different languages we couldn't communicate so you could make it harder to core provinces have a harder time changing religion and culture and even those changes alone could make a difference while other features could be added

and 2 ideas I came up with that would give more changes
1. make some formable nations related to language(could work with culture) like Italy or germany. just an idea to make a different game each time.
2. some languages don't have writing like many languages in the new world so you could make it harder for them to do certain things making the new world more realistic

 

[AirikrStrife]

I do believe this is a good idea and I understand this would be super hard to implement, but language is a boundary between people so if you and I spoke different languages we couldn't communicate so you could make it harder to core provinces have a harder time changing religion and culture and even those changes alone could make a difference while other features could be added

and 2 ideas I came up with that would give more changes
1. make some formable nations related to language(could work with culture) like Italy or germany. just an idea to make a different game each time.
2. some languages don't have writing like many languages in the new world so you could make it harder for them to do certain things making the new world more realistic

Most language group do not contain sets of mutualy intelligible languages, and while some culture groups essentially represent a language continuum (germanic, west slavic) there are cultures thar are linguistical isolates (most of africa, albania,greece caucasus and parts of asia). It's an idea which applies in too limited cases and honestly has a lot of historical issues. even many of the fan favourite proposals are not valid as one language groups, estonian and finnish are not mutually intelligible, sami is not mutually intelligible within the sami culture.

Trying to base a system on language just have too many uneven variables to make for an effective system.

Besides, bilingualism was widespread in areas were people were living together, like modern uzbekistan, balkans etc. and also osmetimes it was easier in history to assimilate foreign people. So the culture system is not even realistic to begin with, sweden for example had more problem annexing and pacifying scania which had a danish speaking population thanthey had with territories conquered across the sea in estonia, latvia and germany