Client States in, so lots of new Tags.
http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum...ent-States-Allied-Transports-and-Central-Asia
http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum...ent-States-Allied-Transports-and-Central-Asia
More formable nations in AOW
- Thread starter Atilla 'The Hun'
- Start date
-
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.
Mongolia already exist. I don't see what a "Mongol Empire" would add.
Yuan dynasty could be a new possible restauration though.
Yuan dynasty could be a new possible restauration though.
I'd like to see:
Siam - Late game formable for Thai countries, should require not only province ownership but high ADM tech. Could change government to Absolute Monarchy.
Burma - Same thing for the Burmese
Srivijaya - For Malay countries that dominate Indonesia and/or Indochina. Must have the Srivijaya dynasty in power (only Malacca still has this in 1444). Prevents forming Malaya.
Shan - Might as well use the vanilla Shan state as a formable country.
Australia - There are currently no formables for colonial nations in this region.
Siam - Late game formable for Thai countries, should require not only province ownership but high ADM tech. Could change government to Absolute Monarchy.
Burma - Same thing for the Burmese
Srivijaya - For Malay countries that dominate Indonesia and/or Indochina. Must have the Srivijaya dynasty in power (only Malacca still has this in 1444). Prevents forming Malaya.
Shan - Might as well use the vanilla Shan state as a formable country.
Australia - There are currently no formables for colonial nations in this region.
I should tell you.. if the tag and colour changes when you form China, it will add A LOT of flavor to the game...
I could be wrong about this, but didn't Gajah Mada (of Majapahit) intend to unite the entire archipelago? Either way, if a formable nation was added (or 'Malaya' was given a new name) wouldn't 'Nusantara' be a more appropriate (non-western) name for it?
As a tag it already exists at the start, though I suppose Persia does too. Who would you give the decision to though? The Rajputs? Kashmir?
I really like formable nations, gives countries a goal to strive for. What about something for Serbia/Bosnia? The Hordes? Preferably the decision either gives new ideas or some decisions/events.
I would love to see Carthage. However, I don't think that they should be formable by Tunis.
If a decision to form Carthage is added, perhaps we could also see the culture change to Phoenician when forming Carthage.
If a decision to form Carthage is added, perhaps we could also see the culture change to Phoenician when forming Carthage.
Seriously I'd love for everyone to get unique ideas, but I can settle for just Navarra in the next update.
Well of course the Austrians didn't wan't to form it.. But did France want to be Rev.France?
I am very much against of A-H being a formable country in a sense you get the teritory and you can form it.. But in a revolutionary way, with losing Austrias NI's and diplomacy bonuses and gaining some more production bonuses and accepted cultures, it would be fun to play sometimes...
Austria kept its monarchy strong because of the threat of the Ottos. Had the threat stopped sooner, it could have happened sooner. So even though it is well outside of timeline, I don't see it as an impossible option somewhere in the later part of the game..
Just keep it "realistic" and don't make a decision to form it, but only via rebels..
It should be formable for Multan or any of the other small states with Panjabi culture that have been introduced in AoW. Much like how France is formable for countries with French culture.
Historically Panjab was unified in the very early 19th century from the various Sikh republics by Ranjit Singh.
Ah of course. I haven't memorized the new map yet, so I had forgotten there were nations besides Multan who actually had the culture as their primary. It's not a bad idea, they have good ideas too and it would be nice to be able to use them without jumping through hoops.
This!
This adds a lot of flavor too!
I would like to see many more national unique idea's to many nations in AOW!
Well Belgium makes sense as a client state the AI would form, artificial buffer state with no ethnic nor language unity
That doesn't make sense, Cusco conquered the surroundings groups and organized them into a legit empire that Europeans called the Incas. Incas not being formable is ridiculous.
That doesn't make sense, Cusco conquered the surroundings groups and organized them into a legit empire that Europeans called the Incas. Incas not being formable is ridiculous.
How so? It does not makes sense in a historical way and is completely pointless for the gameplay. Of course it existed, and it already exists at start as the Kingdom of Naples. Why add a new tag for a country that already exists? Should we also have the Archduchy of Austria become the Habsburg Monarchy for the sake of it? I am sure that is a name change that would make more sense than changing Sicily/Naples to Two Sicilies.
If it was a simple name and perhaps flag change, I could see the point, but adding a new tag for the sake of adding it seems pointless, especially when there is little reason to do so. It is not a Duchy becoming a Kingdom, it is an already existing Kingdom changing its name for little reason other than maybe the new constitution that the King was forced to accept.
Tags like Lotharingia or the Kingdom of Arles (Burgundy) could make a lot more sense in that they were States that had existed, but could still be recreated for various reasons. Heck, Lotharingia would probably make a lot of sense for Burgundy, given that the Duke historically desired to become a King. Although Burgundy itself could become a Kingdom through a decision should Paradox at least create some difference between those titles, making a tag change unecessary, as cool as Lotharingia is. (I still don't understand the decision behind Burgundy being able to form Netherlands, but the K of Lotharingia not being in the game as a formable country)
I'll break it down for you again.
Gameplay wise, it most certainly does not exist at game start, Naples is in a union under Aragon and Sicily itself is in their hands. Breaking free from them and retaking the island is just as challenging as any other nation formation, enough to not justify it's exclusion. Also arguing that a name/flag change is fine whilst a tag is too far is absurd, do you think they're running out of 3 letter/number combinations?
Historically, there is enough (little) difference from the Naples of 1444 to the Two Sicilies of 1816 to justify their inclusion. Being 100% historically accurate is, as I said before, irrelevant. If that wasn't the case, there'd be no option for Italy, Germany, Scandinavia etc.
Hell no it isn't. I can have it done by 1460, probably 1450 with a little good luck.
Of course there were differences between the Kingdom of Naples of 1444 and the Two Sicilies of 1816. They were almost 400 years apart. We don't have a tag change for early and late game Portugal, though. Why should Naples be so special?
Essentially the problem is that:
- It would be ahistorical, and;
- It would be ludicrously easy, therefore;
- We'd have the Great Britain problem of seeing Two Sicilies popping up in 1500 in every game.