Norway in Vicky2

[HMAS-Nameless]

i think we can make a compromise. Paradox could create internal kind of countries similar to the county system of crusader kings 2 for nations like sweden and austria-hungary. they could be called personal unions, similar to monarchy unions in Eu3 and their could be a leading nation.

 

[OHgamer]

i think we can make a compromise. Paradox could create internal kind of countries similar to the county system of crusader kings 2 for nations like sweden and austria-hungary. they could be called personal unions, similar to monarchy unions in Eu3 and their could be a leading nation.

The satellite and dominion system in V1 works pretty much the exact same way. The master is the "leading nation" but the internal affairs of the satellite or dominion are under local control. It does not have an independent foreign policy, can not declare wars on its own, but is expected to support the master nation should it be attacked.

 

[Galleblære]

sweden was in an odd union with norway which makes it hard because people will always disagree. Norway had a government like a satelitte. BUT at the time the country was called the United Kingdoms of Sweden and Norway and acted in a similar way to the UK whilst the different regions had governments of their own they were still classified as one country. It was also similar to Austria-Hungary (also a common name for the nation at the time was sweden-norway) and acted similar to that as well so if Norway is gonna be a sattelite of sweden, Hungary, Croatia, Galizien and other parts of the Austro-Hungarian Empire would have to sattelites of austria as they acted the same way.

Well some research would have to go into each nation to see if they warrant being a satellite or nothing more than an integral part. For Norway, considering they had their own army, navy, parliament and merchant marine (using swedish flags for the first part of the union), i think that certainly is enough to warrant a satellite status, and not an integral part of Sweden.

 

[Sebastian Jarl]

Well some research would have to go into each nation to see if they warrant being a satellite or nothing more than an integral part. For Norway, considering they had their own army, navy, parliament and merchant marine (using swedish flags for the first part of the union), i think that certainly is enough to warrant a satellite status, and not an integral part of Sweden.

According to wikipedia: A satellite state (sometimes referred to as a client state) is a political term that refers to a country which is formally independent, but under heavy influence or control by another country.

By that definition, Norway should definitely be a dominion, not a satellite. There needs to be a difference between a state that is internationally accepted and formally a part of, or in union with, the dominant part, and those that are not.

I realize that dominion is a very specific concept, meant to represent Britain's white colonies. Name-wise it might not represent Norway-Sweden particularly well. Yet, unless they can find a better name for satellites, or add another category of dominions/satellites, it's the better representation.

 

[Galleblære]

According to wikipedia: A satellite state (sometimes referred to as a client state) is a political term that refers to a country which is formally independent, but under heavy influence or control by another country.

By that definition, Norway should definitely be a dominion, not a satellite. There needs to be a difference between a state that is internationally accepted and formally a part of, or in union with, the dominant part, and those that are not.

I realize that dominion is a very specific concept, meant to represent Britain's white colonies. Name-wise it might not represent Norway-Sweden particularly well. Yet, unless they can find a better name for satellites, or add another category of dominions/satellites, it's the better representation.

Maybe if your earlier suggestion about check boxes to define the union can be implemented, the name can change according to how limited the junior partner is. It would be called a Satellite if it is very limited, a Dominion if it has a lot of freedom etc.

 

[unmerged(148774)]

I think Korea would have qualified as a satellite state to China by some of the definitions being used here.

Japan actually fought a war to free Korea from China in 1895.

 

[Carewolf2]

sweden was in an odd union with norway which makes it hard because people will always disagree. Norway had a government like a satelitte. BUT at the time the country was called the United Kingdoms of Sweden and Norway and acted in a similar way to the UK whilst the different regions had governments of their own they were still classified as one country. It was also similar to Austria-Hungary (also a common name for the nation at the time was sweden-norway) and acted similar to that as well so if Norway is gonna be a sattelite of sweden, Hungary, Croatia, Galizien and other parts of the Austro-Hungarian Empire would have to sattelites of austria as they acted the same way.

It was odd because of the settlement after the Napoleon wars. Sweden had been promised Norway as an integral part of the country (to replace Finland), this would be annexation in EU/Vicky terms. This means Allies all had to pretend Norway was annexed by Sweden, or be forced to help Sweden conquer Norway. This meant they had to pretend it wasn't a personal union and pretend the Norwegian parliament did not exist. Norway also had to not make to much of a fuss over their de-facto independence or they would be invaded by the Allies.

In reality Sweden had no control over Norway, the Swedish army had been kicked out, and Norway only stayed with Sweden instead of electing the Danish Crown-prince as regent because the UK forced them to. Then followed 100 years of pretending to be a union when in reality all Sweden had control over was the Norwegian foreign policy, and that only because the Allies politely ignored Norways de-facto independence. Norway had direct foreign relations to some non-Ally countries.

 

[Andrelvis]

:rofl:

Lets hope for Paradox that not all nationalist thinks that way, if not they will have a hard time trying to sell the game in Poland, Belarus, the Baltic countries and so on. + all the former European colonies.

There is the Republic of Krakow for them

 

[Kaiserschmarrn]

Oughtn't this be in the ahistorical nations megathread, by the way?

 

[Galleblære]

Oughtn't this be in the ahistorical nations megathread, by the way?

Lets not start trolling. You already had one silly post in this thread, this is your second, I can see where you are heading with this.

 

[Kaiserschmarrn]

Lets not start trolling. You already had one silly post in this thread, this is your second, I can see where you are heading with this.

Heh, I had actually forgot about my other post. How about that?

 

[unmerged(148761)]

Japan actually fought a war to free Korea from China in 1895.

:rofl:
The freedom of Korea was certainly the first thing on the minds of Japanese policy makers during that war

 

[unmerged(48056)]

:rofl:
The freedom of Korea was certainly the first thing on the minds of Japanese policy makers during that war

Blasphemy! The Empire of Japan was working in the interests of civilized nations. Those Koreans were preparing weapons of mass destruction (see gatling guns) and had to be put down.
I have papers from the Emperor of Japan himself of his peaceful intentions. Peace in our time. Peace in our time, fellow comrades!

 

[Fredgard]

Maybe the building of "Bergensbana" (railway from Bergen to Oslo) should be a event or a decision? The prise tag var over a state budget.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bergen_Line

 

[unmerged(109898)]

Maybe the building of "Bergensbana" (railway from Bergen to Oslo) should be a event or a decision? The prise tag var over a state budget.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bergen_Line

Unneccesary, choosing to build a railroad from Oslo to Bergen is possible in Vicky 1 and will be in Vicky 2, having it as a decision is completely unneccessary.

 

[Oerdin]

I like how Norway was handled in Vicky 1. To add another state would only make it harder for me to form Scandinavia.

 

[Yuri_Kenobi]

The Norwegian question

Judging from this screenshot: http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=22857&d=1269429765 ,
you are again going to create this great swedish empire of the north, just as in Victoria 1. And again I ask: how do you justify this?
Obviously, Norway wasn't an independent nation, but nor was it outright annexed by Sweden as Victoria suggests. It had its own national government which gradually grew more powerful, and towards the final decades of the union, the largely symbolic subjugation to the Swedish throne, and the lack of an independent norwegian foreign policy and was the only issues standing in the way of complete norwegian independence. Surely there is a better way to poject the historical realities of this situation into the game than removing the entity called Norway all together.

I'm not going to write a scholarly article on the subject (unless that's what you require to get my point). But it seems to me that doing good historical research has been one of Paradox' great strenghts in previous games; more than anything that is why the way Norway is portrayed in Victoria surprises me. I saw some mentions that it's designed this way for balance-purposes, which doesn't seem like a good explaination to me. You are designing a brand new game, surely you can find other ways to balance the game rather than throwing historical accuracy out the window.

Thank you for your time.

 

[Nikolai]

We were not quite that independent until much later than 1836. While I wouldn't mind an independent Norway myself, it's not that important. And it could open a whole can of worms. Semi-independent Hungary anyone?

 

[Tommy4ever]

. Semi-independent Hungary anyone?

:Shrieks:

 

[Snaake]

And Finland, which point I brought up... sometime earlier this year. I forget.

The main conclusion earlier was that in 1836, they (Norway, Finland, etc...) couldn't really be considered independent, or not even vassals. They actually were (in the PI view too I guess) parts of the parent nation, even though they had some degree of theoretical and/or practical autonomy (which isn't modelled in the game, except by flavour events maybe).

There could and hopefully will be flavour events for these minorities within the parent states, which may in some or most cases lead (eventually, through nationalist militancy) to rebellions wherein they become vassals. Maybe even some relatively major stuff like "Release Norway as a vassal or all Norwegian POPs get +5 MIL" could be in, or added in. Or rebellions could be left to occur with the dynamic system (perhaps the increased effects of nationalism later in the era, like in Vicky).

If you want to play Norway right from the start, it's as simple as starting the game, releasing it as a satellite, then saving and loading said save. You could even theoretically declare war and then white peace if you want to be rid of the vassal status too, but that'd hurt Sweden, and you might want to go through the fun of trying to end the vassalage as Norway instead.

P.S. Sooner or later, I'll probably get around to starting as Sweden or Denmark, and uniting all the Nordic countries (Sweden, Norway, Finland, Denmark, and Iceland, if that last one counts) under one flag and crown!