• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Hi, I have access to this forum through my son`s account. We both are fans of Paradox games since EU I. But I am also a historian and lover of historical maps. Paradox maps always drove me crazy. So I corrected those maps (EU and Victoria) as I could, just for fun only. This time I also started my own correction. However, since I`m not the best moder, I would like to point out to the SWMH Team below mentioned historical inaccuracies that I found and IMO should be corrected.

1. Some dynasties are duplicated:
At Vanilla '00_dynasties.txt' among others we can see:
11112 = { name="Jablonowski" culture = polish }
11124 = { name="Sapieha" culture = polish }
100417 = { name="Glinsky" culture = russian }
and in HIP '52_lithuanian dynastiesSWMH.txt' we can see the same families:
1000053445= { name="Jablonovskis" culture = lithuanian }
1000053488 = { name="Sapiega" culture = lithuanian }
1000053425 = { name="Glinskis" culture = lithuanian }
For example dynasties d`Anjou or von Habsburg are only single, no matter where and when they lived or ruled. This rule should be applied to all dynasties.

2. Many dynasties (surnames) did not exist in the time interval of the game (many of them are in Vanilia file). This is one of many examples: dynasty 21002 Czetwertynski, a side branch of Rurikids. In file HIP/history/characters/polish.txt we can see persons 471600, 471603, 471604, 471605 who lived between 1221 and 1337, when the FIRST man using the name Czetwertynski was mentioned in 1338. - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Czetwertyński_family

3. HIP/history/titles/c_lublin.txt - this PROV in 1066 scenario belongs to Volhynia. Why?

4. Morover Lublin land did not exist as an independent territorial unit until 1474, when the king Casimir IV Jagiellon created Lublin Voivodeship out of three eastern counties of Sandomierz Voivodeship. The game ends in 1453, so there is no historical justification for the existence of Lublin province. - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lublin_Voivodeship_(1474-1795)

5. Lesser Poland (d_lesser_poland) until 1474 consisted only of two lands: Krakow (c_krakowskie) and Sandomierz (c_sandomierskie). Never existed province or duchy Sacz or Stary Sącz. So IMO both Lublin and Sacz should be deleted and free space should be used, for example at Kujawy (c_kujawy).

6. It would be very reasonable to divide Kujawy in 3 parts, because present SWMH province c_kujawy - 428 presents at least three provinces: Kujawy-Inowroclaw, Kujawy-Brzesc & Dobrzyn Land. http://herbypolskie.strefa.pl/HIST_pages/kujawy.htm

Kujawy was the area of fierce fighting among Prussians, Poles, Pomeranians and the Teutonic Knights. The boundaries were constantly changed. Single province can not represent those changes in game. To make mod more SWMH, IMO Lublin and Stary Sącz should be deleted, Kujawy divided into three parts. - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kujawy - Kujawy IS NOT a part of the bigger region – Greater Poland. And "c_chelminskie" was not a part of Kujawy, it was a part of Mazovia.

7. Province Cieszyn (c_cieszyn) should be named "Raciborz". After 1138 Silesia was inherited by Wladyslaw II the Exile. In 1172 Silesia was divided: Duchy of Opole and Duchy of Raciborz were seperated. As a result of further division of the Duchy of Raciborz, about 1280 Duchy of Cieszyn was established - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duchy_of_Teschen

8. HIP/history/titles/c_gnieznienskie: since 999.1.1 contains holders of this province, it means bishops of Gniezno. IMO this list of holders may eventually concern "b_gniezno", but not "c_gnieznienskie", which was owned and inherited by the Piasts.

9. k_poland/d_mazovia/c_pultusk (also file history/provinces/1055 - Pultusk.txt) There is no historical reason to call this province Pultusk. Pultusk was only one of many cities in Mazovia. The first mention of Pultusk was in 1231 only! Pultusk was not even the capital of the district or land. PROV Pultusk-1055 corresponds to the north-east part of Masovia. It was never independent and always was a part of another masovian duchy: Duchy of Plock (c_plock) or Duchy of Rawa (c_rawamazovia) or Duchy of Czersk (c_czersk). This north-east part of Masovia contain lands: Ciechanow land, Zakroczym land, Rozan land, Lomza land and Wizna land. Lomza land was biggest, so IMO province 1055 could be named eventually "c_lomza" or "c_lomzynskie".
...
c_lomzynskie = { # Lomza (1055)
color={ 130 121 2 }
color2={ 255 255 255 }
b_lomzapoland = {} # about 1000, tribal
b_ciechanow = {} # first mention 1065, castle
b_wizna = {} # about 1050, castle
b_zakroczym = {} # mentioned 1065, castle
b_swieck = {} # about 1075, castle
b_czerwinsk = {} # monastery mentioned 1155 # bulla of pope Hadrian IV # temple
}
...
All my above objections can be verified on publicly available information at Wikipedia.
vapi13 at gmail.com
 
Last edited:
  • 4
Reactions:
I'm not sure where to post this but I've found two small glitches related to the map so far.

When moving over, or sieging Blankenburg (in Saxony) the army is standing on top of Anhalt instead.
More or less the same thing happens with Schwartzburg, where the army is standing over the border with Bamberg instead.

I hope reporting this here will help improving future versions.
I'm using the latest version of HIP (Horse Lords) with SWMH for CK2 2.4.4.
 
b_bayda_shiraz (located in Shiraz, Persia) has no localization.

edit: also b_lawan in Irahistan
Thanks for the report. As best as I can tell, all the unlocalised baronies, including these two, have recently been fixed for the next release.
 
Novgorod province seems to have both Novgorod tribe and Novgorod city at the game start. Also some russian provinces also have both tribal and feudal/city holdings. Not sure if this is intentional.
 
Novgorod province seems to have both Novgorod tribe and Novgorod city at the game start. Also some russian provinces also have both tribal and feudal/city holdings. Not sure if this is intentional.
Ignatich!!!! Is that you???? :D
 
Baron
Baronessa
Baron
Baronessa
Comte
Comtessa
Comte
Comtessa
Duc
Duquessa
Duc
Duquessa
Rei
Reina
Rei
Reina
Emperaire
Emperairitz
Emperairitz
Prince
Princessa
Baron
Baronessa
Baron
Baronessa
Comte
Comtessa
Comte
Comtessa
Duc
Duquessa
Duc
Duquessa
Rei
Reina
Rei
Reina
Emperaire
Emperairitz
Emperairitz
Prince
Princessa
Baronia de
Comtat de
Ducat de
Reialme de

Currently the localisation of Occitan culture titles are in French. In occitan I think is how I write in the spoiler. if you could add I should appreciate it.

;)

PD: count_female_catalan is wrong, it should be "Comtessa"

And this i think is better localisation for aragonese culture

Sinyor
Sinyora
Sinyor
Sinyora
Conte
Contesa
Conte
Contesa
Duque
Duquesa
Duque
Duquesa
Rei
Reina
Rei
Reina
Emperador
Emperadriz
Emperadriz
Infante
Infanta
Sinyoría de
Condato de
Ducato de
Reino de
Imperio de
Sinyoría
Condato
Ducato
Reino
Imperio
 
Last edited:
  • 6
Reactions:
Hi, I have access to this forum through my son`s account. We both are fans of Paradox games since EU I. But I am also a historian and lover of historical maps. Paradox maps always drove me crazy. So I corrected those maps (EU and Victoria) as I could, just for fun only. This time I also started my own correction. However, since I`m not the best moder, I would like to point out to the SWMH Team below mentioned historical inaccuracies that I found and IMO should be corrected.

1. Some dynasties are duplicated:
At Vanilla '00_dynasties.txt' among others we can see:
11112 = { name="Jablonowski" culture = polish }
11124 = { name="Sapieha" culture = polish }
100417 = { name="Glinsky" culture = russian }
and in HIP '52_lithuanian dynastiesSWMH.txt' we can see the same families:
1000053445= { name="Jablonovskis" culture = lithuanian }
1000053488 = { name="Sapiega" culture = lithuanian }
1000053425 = { name="Glinskis" culture = lithuanian }
For example dynasties d`Anjou or von Habsburg are only single, no matter where and when they lived or ruled. This rule should be applied to all dynasties.

2. Many dynasties (surnames) did not exist in the time interval of the game (many of them are in Vanilia file). This is one of many examples: dynasty 21002 Czetwertynski, a side branch of Rurikids. In file HIP/history/characters/polish.txt we can see persons 471600, 471603, 471604, 471605 who lived between 1221 and 1337, when the FIRST man using the name Czetwertynski was mentioned in 1338. - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Czetwertyński_family

3. HIP/history/titles/c_lublin.txt - this PROV in 1066 scenario belongs to Volhynia. Why?

4. Morover Lublin land did not exist as an independent territorial unit until 1474, when the king Casimir IV Jagiellon created Lublin Voivodeship out of three eastern counties of Sandomierz Voivodeship. The game ends in 1453, so there is no historical justification for the existence of Lublin province. - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lublin_Voivodeship_(1474-1795)

5. Lesser Poland (d_lesser_poland) until 1474 consisted only of two lands: Krakow (c_krakowskie) and Sandomierz (c_sandomierskie). Never existed province or duchy Sacz or Stary Sącz. So IMO both Lublin and Sacz should be deleted and free space should be used, for example at Kujawy (c_kujawy).

6. It would be very reasonable to divide Kujawy in 3 parts, because present SWMH province c_kujawy - 428 presents at least three provinces: Kujawy-Inowroclaw, Kujawy-Brzesc & Dobrzyn Land. http://herbypolskie.strefa.pl/HIST_pages/kujawy.htm

Kujawy was the area of fierce fighting among Prussians, Poles, Pomeranians and the Teutonic Knights. The boundaries were constantly changed. Single province can not represent those changes in game. To make mod more SWMH, IMO Lublin and Stary Sącz should be deleted, Kujawy divided into three parts. - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kujawy - Kujawy IS NOT a part of the bigger region – Greater Poland. And "c_chelminskie" was not a part of Kujawy, it was a part of Mazovia.

7. Province Cieszyn (c_cieszyn) should be named "Raciborz". After 1138 Silesia was inherited by Wladyslaw II the Exile. In 1172 Silesia was divided: Duchy of Opole and Duchy of Raciborz were seperated. As a result of further division of the Duchy of Raciborz, about 1280 Duchy of Cieszyn was established - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duchy_of_Teschen

8. HIP/history/titles/c_gnieznienskie: since 999.1.1 contains holders of this province, it means bishops of Gniezno. IMO this list of holders may eventually concern "b_gniezno", but not "c_gnieznienskie", which was owned and inherited by the Piasts.

9. k_poland/d_mazovia/c_pultusk (also file history/provinces/1055 - Pultusk.txt) There is no historical reason to call this province Pultusk. Pultusk was only one of many cities in Mazovia. The first mention of Pultusk was in 1231 only! Pultusk was not even the capital of the district or land. PROV Pultusk-1055 corresponds to the north-east part of Masovia. It was never independent and always was a part of another masovian duchy: Duchy of Plock (c_plock) or Duchy of Rawa (c_rawamazovia) or Duchy of Czersk (c_czersk). This north-east part of Masovia contain lands: Ciechanow land, Zakroczym land, Rozan land, Lomza land and Wizna land. Lomza land was biggest, so IMO province 1055 could be named eventually "c_lomza" or "c_lomzynskie".
...
c_lomzynskie = { # Lomza (1055)
color={ 130 121 2 }
color2={ 255 255 255 }
b_lomzapoland = {} # about 1000, tribal
b_ciechanow = {} # first mention 1065, castle
b_wizna = {} # about 1050, castle
b_zakroczym = {} # mentioned 1065, castle
b_swieck = {} # about 1075, castle
b_czerwinsk = {} # monastery mentioned 1155 # bulla of pope Hadrian IV # temple
}
...
All my above objections can be verified on publicly available information at Wikipedia.
vapi13 at gmail.com

Thanks that's very useful :) I will look into reorganizing Poland a bit when we do the next release that brake saves. I will probably make a new thread about it in the subfo when we get to it, that way the setups can be discussed while its being developed. I have learned that there are a lot of strong Polish opinions on the forum ;)

I'm not sure where to post this but I've found two small glitches related to the map so far.

When moving over, or sieging Blankenburg (in Saxony) the army is standing on top of Anhalt instead.
More or less the same thing happens with Schwartzburg, where the army is standing over the border with Bamberg instead.

I hope reporting this here will help improving future versions.
I'm using the latest version of HIP (Horse Lords) with SWMH for CK2 2.4.4.
Thanks, it is fixed in the upcoming version.
Baron
Baronessa
Baron
Baronessa
Comte
Comtessa
Comte
Comtessa
Duc
Duquessa
Duc
Duquessa
Rei
Reina
Rei
Reina
Emperaire
Emperairitz
Emperairitz
Prince
Princessa
Baron
Baronessa
Baron
Baronessa
Comte
Comtessa
Comte
Comtessa
Duc
Duquessa
Duc
Duquessa
Rei
Reina
Rei
Reina
Emperaire
Emperairitz
Emperairitz
Prince
Princessa
Baronia de
Comtat de
Ducat de
Reialme de

Currently the localisation of Occitan culture titles are in French. In occitan I think is how I write in the spoiler. if you could add I should appreciate it.

;)

PD: count_female_catalan is wrong, it should be "Comtessa"

And this i think is better localisation for aragonese culture

Sinyor
Sinyora
Sinyor
Sinyora
Conte
Contesa
Conte
Contesa
Duque
Duquesa
Duque
Duquesa
Rei
Reina
Rei
Reina
Emperador
Emperadriz
Emperadriz
Infante
Infanta
Sinyoría de
Condato de
Ducato de
Reino de
Imperio de
Sinyoría
Condato
Ducato
Reino
Imperio
Thanks!! will be added for upcoming release^^
 
  • 2
Reactions:
About an hour ago I logged on account of my son as Shar, but in the meantime I regained my old account before nine years :)
If this process of reorganization of Poland will take place, I offer my help, not only as a historian.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
About an hour ago I logged on account of my son as Shar, but in the meantime I regained my old account before nine years :)
If this process of reorganization of Poland will take place, I offer my help, not only as a historian.

We love your enthusiasm, and we appreciate the offer of help. But nothing will happen for a while on the Poland front when it comes to the province setup. We can't break savegame compatibility every other week, we need to allow for people to be able to finish games. So it will be a while before we get around to looking at Poland.

If you come up with more ideas for Poland, do let us know and we will discuss them amongst our little team.
 
Hello SWMH team. I remember some time ago there was a thread asking about people's suggestions for a new starting date between 867-1066; So I was curious if you have made any decisions/progress regarding the new bookmark, or is that project buried for now?
 
Hello SWMH team. I remember some time ago there was a thread asking about people's suggestions for a new starting date between 867-1066; So I was curious if you have made any decisions/progress regarding the new bookmark, or is that project buried for now?

The project isn't buried, but it is certainly put on Stand-by.
 
More localisation, now for bretons:

Code:
king_breton                                          Roue
king_female_breton                               Rouanez
kingdom_breton                                    Rouantelezh
kingdom_of_breton                                Rouantelezh
duchy_breton                                        Dugelezh
duke_breton                                          Dug
duke_female_breton                               Dugez
count_breton                                          Kont
count_female_breton                              Kontez
duchy_of_breton                                    Dugelezh
county_breton                                        Kontelezh
county_of_breton                                   Kontelezh
count_title_ruler_consort_breton               Kont
count_title_ruler_consort_female_breton    Kontez
duke_title_ruler_consort_breton                Dug
duke_title_ruler_consort_female_breton    Dugez
king_title_ruler_consort_breton                 Roue
king_title_ruler_consort_female_breton    Rouanez

If you could add I should appreciate it. I think that is correct, but I'm not breton.
 
Last edited:
More localisation, now for bretons:

Code:
king_breton                                          Roue
king_female_breton                               Rouanez
kingdom_breton                                    Rouantelezh
kingdom_of_breton                                Rouantelezh
duchy_breton                                        Dugelezh
duke_breton                                          Dug
duke_female_breton                               Dugez
count_breton                                          Kont
count_female_breton                              Kontez
duchy_of_breton                                    Dugelezh
county_breton                                        Kontelezh
county_of_breton                                   Kontelezh
count_title_ruler_consort_breton               Kont
count_title_ruler_consort_female_breton    Kontez
duke_title_ruler_consort_breton                Dug
duke_title_ruler_consort_female_breton    Dugez
king_title_ruler_consort_breton                 Roue
king_title_ruler_consort_female_breton    Rouanez

If you could add I should appreciate it. I think that is correct, but I'm not breton.


You can add Autrou and Itron as male and female barons, respectively, and Autrouniez as barony.
 
The project isn't buried, but it is certainly put on Stand-by.
While I understand you guys know your priorities better than us, I'll wager I'm not alone in having a 10th century start date at the top of my wishlist, so you've definitely got my enthusiasm for whenever you can get around to it.

It's a crying shame not to be able to experience the Ottonians and I'm rather surprised PDX hasn't gotten around to it in vanilla. Would've been better than Charlemagne.
 
  • 4
Reactions:
I have a question about Schwertbrüderorden. According to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Livonian_Brothers_of_the_Sword and http://www.imperialteutonicorder.com/id62.html, this order was not created until the 13th century, but in the mod is available from the beginning, is this a mistake?

The reason for my question is that one time I tried to create the orders of Alcantara and Montesa and the event I created did not work and the order also appeared at the beginning. And my question was whether you had the same problem or you have not tried to create the event.
 
Last edited:
  • 1
Reactions: