Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

New map: Poland and Lithuania

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • 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.
Show only dev responses
zdlugasz said:
But Navagradak or Navahradak
Podlasia or Podlachia
Troki or Trakai
Click to expand...
Navahradak defiantly (it is in no way “g” in this case). Podlasia is more Latinized variant (I prefer this one). Troki is historical name (Baltic languages never was used on official level during this era); well and the town itself was Slavic in the 15th-18th centruies (or better say “Slavinized”).
 
Herr Doctor said:
Navahradak defiantly (it is in no way “g” in this case).
Click to expand...
It depends on one's pronounciation and transcription. It is "г" = "g", which (AFAIK) is usualy pronounced as latin "g" and in Polish this city is also pronounced with "g" not "h".
(IIRC Ukraininas pronounce G as H)

Podlasia is more Latinized variant (I prefer this one).
Click to expand...
I prefer them too, Cuiavia instead of Kuyavia etc.
 
yarovit said:
Take a look at MyMap. There you have four Silesian princedoms including Opole.

I have made some events, monarchs and leaders for them, they will be probably included in the next version. Including Polish Vasas ruling in Opole.
Click to expand...

The question is whether AGCEEP will have free tag. We have to lobby for it :)
 
Last edited:
Another question:

province name is Pereyaslavl but should not it be Pereiaslav?
Anyway there is no "l" at the end.

Herr Doctor ?
 
zdlugasz said:
It depends on one's pronounciation and transcription. It is "г" = "g", which (AFAIK) is usualy pronounced as latin "g" and in Polish this city is also pronounced with "g" not "h".
(IIRC Ukraininas pronounce G as H)
Click to expand...
Well, Belarusians pronounce ‘h’ as ‘g’ ;) And the Northern Ruthenian sound ‘г’ is ‘h’ both in traditional Belarusian Latin alphabet and the English transcription. Only in cases of the loan (foreign) word the sound ‘ґ’ (‘g’) is used.

zdlugasz said:
province name is Pereyaslavl but should not it be Pereiaslav?
Anyway there is no "l" at the end.
Click to expand...
Переяслав (Pereyaslav) is modern Ukrainian name. Pereyaslavl (as well as Mstislavl) is the historical name mentioned in the chronicles since the 10th century onwards.
 
zdlugasz said:
I have updated old-new province split (there was bug with province numbering). I have also added list of countries which should own provinces in 1419.

Two questions remain: will duchy of Opole get TAG?
it was ruled by Piast dynasty till 1532, later Ansbach branch of Hohenzollerns. In 1552 Emperor exchanged Opole for another duchy with Duke of Opole (margrave of Ansbach and supervisor of Ducal Prussia).
At the beginning of XVIIth century Gabor Bethlen was duke of Opole (duke of Transylvania). This duchy Wladyslaw Waza, king of Poland wanted to make hereditary possesion of Polish Vasas (but failed and got it for 50 ears only) in exchange for money lend to Emperor and nt paid by Emperor dowries of Wladyslaw's wife and two wives of Zygmunt Waza.

Let me say: I officially request TAG for Opole :)

And question already asked: is it possible to have vertical instead of horizontal split of old Masovia (into Masovia and Warsaw)? It would allow for more historical development.
Click to expand...
What I understand from Wikipedia it was under Bohemian soverignity until 1521 and then under Austria. Might be that it had similar free status as some French minors we have included. Generally I think a tag should have its own foregin policy, but that can hardly be said of the French minors, so I don't think it should be applied here either.
 
Norrefeldt said:
What I understand from Wikipedia it was under Bohemian soverignity until 1521 and then under Austria. Might be that it had similar free status as some French minors we have included. Generally I think a tag should have its own foregin policy, but that can hardly be said of the French minors, so I don't think it should be applied here either.
Click to expand...


Silesian princedoms were independent countries. The only thing that bound their feedom was succesion laws in which the crown of Bohemia was the sole and only succesor to each princedom.

In AGCEEP we have plenty un-logical, elusive or even fantasy states. My favourite pearl is Wales.
 
yarovit said:
Silesian princedoms were independent countries. The only thing that bound their feedom was succesion laws in which the crown of Bohemia was the sole and only succesor to each princedom.

In AGCEEP we have plenty un-logical, elusive or even fantasy states. My favourite pearl is Wales.
Click to expand...
So these princedoms could wage wars and form alliances independently? Even fight against Bohemia or Austria? (I don't think your pearl will be here for much longer.)
 
Norrefeldt said:
So these princedoms could wage wars and form alliances independently? Even fight against Bohemia or Austria? (I don't think your pearl will be here for much longer.)
Click to expand...

So what Bolko Woloszek, prince of Opole did during the Hussite Wars? He allied himself with the Hussites.

Or have you heard, how the Silesian behaved during wars of Matyas Corvinus? They supported Mathyas, betraying rightful king of Bohemia, Jiri.
 
yarovit said:
So what Bolko Woloszek, prince of Opole did during the Hussite Wars? He allied himself with the Hussites.

Or have you heard, how the Silesian behaved during wars of Matyas Corvinus? They supported Mathyas, betraying rightful king of Bohemia, Jiri.
Click to expand...
I didn't know that. I admit I know little of them, but that tags have been requested before. Not that every noble faction that don't follow their king get a tag, but just some events for it. Tags to all would mean tens of tags in Europe. Some do get it, still, and these might be just as worthy of it as French minors, and the civil war tags for War of the Roses.
yarovit said:
Imagine yourself at the position of Silesian prince. You rule a tiny country. You can not allow yourself to annoy Bohemia or Habsburgs. That's why there was not much hostilities between Silesia and Bohemia.
Click to expand...
No, that's understandable. Likely Bohemia or any other big neighbour will attack and annex them rather quick though.
 
Herr Doctor said:
Well, Belarusians pronounce ‘h’ as ‘g’ ;) And the Northern Ruthenian sound ‘г’ is ‘h’ both in traditional Belarusian Latin alphabet and the English transcription. Only in cases of the loan (foreign) word the sound ‘ґ’ (‘g’) is used.


Переяслав (Pereyaslav) is modern Ukrainian name. Pereyaslavl (as well as Mstislavl) is the historical name mentioned in the chronicles since the 10th century onwards.
Click to expand...

Ok for "l" I have found it :), but I am not convinced about "y". It might be Belarusian transcription or transliteration, but according to this Ukrainian transcription does not have "y"
 
zdlugasz said:
Ok for "l" I have found it :), but I am not convinced about "y". It might be Belarusian transcription or transliteration, but according to this Ukrainian transcription does not have "y"
Click to expand...
It is English. You can use “i” but “y” in this case is more friendly for the Anglophones. In Belarusian Latin alphabet and language it would be “Perajasłaŭ” (Pereyaslavl) and “Amścisłaŭ” (Mstislavl).
 
yarovit said:
In AGCEEP we have plenty un-logical, elusive or even fantasy states. My favourite pearl is Wales.
Click to expand...

Poor logic, you don't justify the addition of a state by pointing out states that shouldn't exist. That just makes the reader question why you aren't trying to get the WLS freed.
 
yarovit said:
In other words: Abandon all hope!

:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Well rudely rolling one's eyes and making arguments based on states that one doesn't think should be included, have rarely been seen as adequate reasons to add new nations.
 
Garbon said:
Well rudely rolling one's eyes and making arguments based on states that one doesn't think should be included, have rarely been seen as adequate reasons to add new nations.
Click to expand...


Frankly speaking Opole has better reasons to exist than Masovia. Masovia (in fact a hanfull of smaller duches) COMPLETELY stopped to have separate history after 1526 (and half of them already in XVth century becuase they were incorporated into Poland).

Opole on the other hand had interesting history at least till mid od XVIIth century.
(some of tidbits of Opole history were mentioned above).

So my controversial proposal: give Masovian tag to Opole :eek:o :looking around and fretting replies of pro-Masovian lobbysts: :eek:
But seriously, Opole had richer history than Masovia.
 
Garbon said:
Well rudely rolling one's eyes and making arguments based on states that one doesn't think should be included, have rarely been seen as adequate reasons to add new nations.
Click to expand...

there is another point
bohemia gets province that it didnt own, it gives bohemia additional money and manpower, so if you plan not to give tag for Oppeln, what was the reason for making province, which you dont want to represent historiacally????
if you dont give tag for oppeln it is better that you merge it with breslau into one silesia province, since you are supposed to represent population of city (so one has breslau population instead of breslau + oppeln)

and i played mymap and in my games, bohamia does not annex any of 4 silesian duchies that ar on the map before 1500, i slighltly modified mymap though, by not giving bohemia cores on silesian duchies, which is resonable since, bohemia DIDNT own any of them (besides breslau that is) before it was annexed by Austria
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back