Powderkeg of Europe - Balkans thread

  • 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.

Shinkuro Yukinari

General
50 Badges
Jul 26, 2016
1.969
1.628
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Age of Wonders III
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Stellaris
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Age of Wonders II
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cradle of Civilization
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rule Britannia
  • Europa Universalis IV: Dharma
  • Shadowrun Returns
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Fury
  • Europa Universalis IV: Golden Century
  • Imperator: Rome Sign Up
  • Europa Universalis 4: Emperor
  • Victoria 3 Sign Up
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Magicka 2
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Pride of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Victoria 2
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Darkest Hour
  • Crusader Kings II: Jade Dragon
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • For The Glory
  • Europa Universalis IV: Third Rome
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
It is arguable that one of the most notable areas of the Vicky timeline were the Balkans, being a source of many crises, from the decaying Ottoman empire struggling to hold its own against the tides of nationalism, to the ambitions of the newly arisen Nation states like Serbia (Yugoslavia) and Greece (Megali Idea), to an assassination which brought forward World War I.

I feel like it would be of benefit to begin the discussion on the complex situation there, and to provide ideas on how to be as faithful as possible to the situation there while providing enjoyable gameplay for a player seeking to fulfill said ambitions.

In particular, I wish to begin with a discussion on Serbia's sovereignty status, which has been a divisive topic for Vic 2 modders, some opting for sphereling like Vanilla, while others made it a full-fledged satellite.

This is partially due to the diplomatic limitations of Vic2, however it does pose an interesting question on implementation of said subject relations, not only for Serbia, but the Romanian principalities as well, not to mention the various Namestniki in Russia.

Officially, Serbia was an autonomous subject of the Ottoman Empire until 1878, where it became independent at the Berlin Congress. However, in practice its policies were for the most part sovereign since 1830 and the Second Hatisherif which gave it near-complete internal autonomy at the expense of an annual tribute and certain degree of control over foreign affairs, with Russia acting as protector of said rights.

In 1826 we see the formation of a proper ministry of foreign affairs, which allowed Serbia to conduct diplomacy officially.

Come 1836. we see the first proper diplomatic ties being opened in Serbia, by Austria which established a Consulate. In the following years, Britain, Russia, France and others establish their own Consulates, with the French one in particular often answering to the Embassy in Vienna rather than Constantinople. While officially these consulates had to answer to their respective Ottoman Embassies, in practice they allowed Serbia to conduct its own diplomacy, giving it a large degree of diplomatic sovereignty as well, for example in the French case.

These in turn provided Serbia with a large degree of de-facto sovereignty, complete de-facto sovereignty being achieved by 1867.

While many questions remain on the intricacies of Vicky 3 diplomacy, I hope that the system allows to model the complex affairs in a proper manner, without resorting to an extremely inaccurate representation which had to be resorted to in Vicky 2.

As well, I would like to propose mechanics which allow the Balkan nations, and possibly others as well, to ferment national uprisings in foreign countries, as well as coordinate efforts with said groups. While the Balkan Wars are rather well-known, long before Serbia was independent we saw the formation of a short-lived alliance between Serbia, Montenegro, Greece and Bulgarian/Albanian liberation movements to liberate the Balkans in 1866, spearheaded by Serbia's foreign minister Ilija Garašanin, not to mention active propaganda to encourage uprisings in the event of war between Serbia and the Ottomans. Provided they were successful, they would also unite into a federation, however that one is a question on its own.

This in turn would provide means for the player to actively engage in ambitious diplomatic endeavours, and fulfill the goals set out by said countries, in particular the unification of the Southern Slavs, and thereby make gameplay in the Balkans more unique, historically accurate and entertaining.

Thank you for reading!
 
  • 33
  • 23Like
  • 7
  • 1
Reactions:
Threads and discussions about the map and mechanics of the Balkans, in the era in which it started the 1st world war.
I wonder what could happen :cool:
 
  • 49Haha
  • 2Like
  • 2
Reactions:
When talking about Serbia (or any other nation in a similar situation at the time) we have to work with the little information that we got so far and establish these things:
  1. We know that there are different types of vassals in Vicky 3 with varying degree of autonomy - how many and what types remains to be seen
  2. Sphereing like in Vicky2 is gone and it uses a more intricate system of market access
If there is a vassal type a la "Autonomous Dependency" where Serbia is mostly independent it can be given this status if however there is no such equivalent it should probably be independent at game start and the Ottoman Empire and Russia should both have a certain amount of market access to Serbia and Russia should guarantee Serbias independence to simulate their respective influence.

Beyond uprisings the game should also allow for somewhat peaceful resolutions for the southern Slavs. The new Diplomatic Play feature for example could be used very well for this and Serbia (other Independence/Unification movements) could be backed by larger powers like Russia. Austria and the Ottoman Empire should also have the option to give their Slavic constituents autonomy or independence out right in return for influence and amicable relations with the new founded state(s).

We yet have to see the map so we cant judge that but I hope it accounts for at least some different border variations :D
 
  • 15Like
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
They should also add more releasable nations, like Macedonia, which was not in the last game, as that was quite a possibility during the time period. Culture as well really, though I doubt Paradox will do that considering their political correctness on the issue.
 
  • 30
  • 6
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
They should also add more releasable nations, like Macedonia, which was not in the last game, as that was quite a possibility during the time period.
I'd disagree with you on Macedonia there, The idea of a separate Macedonian identity from Bulgaria did not emerge until Tito came to power in Yugoslavia, which is well after the the 1936 end date.
 
  • 27
  • 12
  • 3
  • 1Like
Reactions:
I'd disagree with you on Macedonia there, The idea of a separate Macedonian identity from Bulgaria did not emerge until Tito came to power in Yugoslavia, which is well after the the 1936 end date.
I disagree with you on Macedonia there, it did in fact exist. Like the VMRO for example, branches wanted and independent Macedonia, though there were VMRO branches that wanted to join Bulgaria. Like it's true that some Macedonians called themselves Bulgarian, but not all, probably not even most. It was even a decent probability being discussed internationally after WW1, as well as earlier by people such as British PM Gladestone.
 
  • 23
  • 8
  • 2
Reactions:
I disagree with you on Macedonia there, it did in fact exist. Like the VMRO for example, branches wanted and independent Macedonia, though there were VMRO branches that wanted to join Bulgaria. Like it's true that some Macedonians called themselves Bulgarian, but not all, probably not even most. It was even a decent probability being discussed internationally after WW1, as well as earlier by people such as British PM Gladestone.
The VMRO never wanted an independent Macedonia however, they only wanted autonomy for the regions of Macedonia and Adrianople, and they later became an agent serving Bulgarian interests in the Balkans, it just seems ahistorical to include Macedonia around this time frame in my opinion, That's not to say I don't support the idea of Macedonia getting into Victoria 3, it just feels ahistorical, like how Trieste being in Victoria 2 also felt ahistorical, but it's there. A united Slavic or united Greek Macedonia however, is simply something I don't agree that should exist as that feels ahistorical, if anything there should be two nations, a Northern Slavic Macedonia and a Southern Greek Macedonia, as nationalism in the area of Macedonia was between Greeks and Bulgarians primarily. Now I could be completely wrong of the idea of two Macedonian nations, but one simply doesn't work in my opinion.
 
  • 11
  • 5
Reactions:
I disagree with you on Macedonia there, it did in fact exist. Like the VMRO for example, branches wanted and independent Macedonia, though there were VMRO branches that wanted to join Bulgaria. Like it's true that some Macedonians called themselves Bulgarian, but not all, probably not even most. It was even a decent probability being discussed internationally after WW1, as well as earlier by people such as British PM Gladestone.
Not to mention that there were intellectuals who supported a distinct Macedonian identity (and a nation state to uphold it) even pre-WW1 such as Krste Misirkov (plus the Balkan socialists such as Christian Rakovsky).

Might be worth a read regardless if you agree with the author's stance or not:

Likewise, you have the historical precedent of the Krushevo Republic in which there were clear tensions between a Bulgarophile nationalist direction and a progressive civic one reuniting the varying ethnic communities of the region:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • 7
  • 2Like
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
All I can safely hope for is that the system is flexible enough to model everything from a complete Ottoman collapse early on to a wildly successful Tanzimat era that sees an Ottoman resurgence. I'd like to be able to play any angle of the conflicts of interest in the Balkans and have each of them feel sufficiently distinct and rewarding.
 
  • 21
  • 3Like
  • 1Love
  • 1
Reactions:
The VMRO never wanted an independent Macedonia however, they only wanted autonomy for the regions of Macedonia and Adrianople, and they later became an agent serving Bulgarian interests in the Balkans, it just seems ahistorical to include Macedonia around this time frame in my opinion, That's not to say I don't support the idea of Macedonia getting into Victoria 3, it just feels ahistorical, like how Trieste being in Victoria 2 also felt ahistorical, but it's there. A united Slavic or united Greek Macedonia however, is simply something I don't agree that should exist as that feels ahistorical, if anything there should be two nations, a Northern Slavic Macedonia and a Southern Greek Macedonia, as nationalism in the area of Macedonia was between Greeks and Bulgarians primarily. Now I could be completely wrong of the idea of two Macedonian nations, but one simply doesn't work in my opinion.
Again, some VMRO did support Bulgaria, but not all. For example, in 1901 VMRO member Sarafov has this quote about Macedonian independence from 1901.
"It is a grievous error to suppose that we seek to acquire Macedonia on behalf of Bulgaria. We Macedonians consider ourselves to be an entirely separate national element, and we are not in the least disposed to allow our country to be seized by Bulgaria, Servia, or Greece. We will, in fact, oppose any such incorporation with all our might. Macedonia must belong to the Macedonians. The misunderstanding has arisen through our residing in Bulgaria. The circumstance of our having prepared a Macedonian insurrection while living in this country led to the conclusion that we were aiming at a union between the two Slav provinces."
and
"The Macedonian movement is not a Bulgarian movement; the Macedonians constitute a unique nationality who do not want to be incorporated in Bulgaria, Serbia, or Greece"
There are plenty more quotes like this.

Further, Gladstone's quote I stated before.
"Why not Macedonia for Macedonians, as well as Bulgaria for Bulgarians and Servia for Servians?"

And the thing about a "a Northern Slavic Macedonia and a Southern Greek Macedonia" is pretty silly, seeing many VMRO members were born in the modern Greek region, including the most famous Goce Delchev. The area was majority Macedonian, speaking the Slavic Macedonian language.

It's ahistorical yeah because it didn't happen, but it's not an unlikely alt-history, if anything it was pretty likely, considered even by the international community after WW1.
 
  • 10
  • 4
  • 1Like
  • 1Haha
  • 1
Reactions:
One of the things I had hoped would have worked better in Vic 2 were the Crises. I often saw for example Greece being one, and then it all went sideways when the Ottomans invaded the regained territory a few years afterwards, rinse and repeat.

The independence movements (both peaceful and belligerent) should hopefully receive some loving attention this time, as they were an important feature of this period. And the Balkans were certainly a hotspot for these movements!

I am sure the initial release will already have some mechanics to support this, but it might be a more detailed, region specific and intricate mechanics will come later in a specific expansion? But in the end, I hope that playing a subject nation that is looking to get independent will prove rewarding (as a Finn I also have my own provincial interests in this :D )
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Thank you for a nice and civil thread so far! Let’s keep it this way, I’m keeping an eye on this one.
 
  • 29Haha
  • 19Like
  • 1
Reactions:
i think it's going to be a personal challenge of some people to try and eviscerate the Ottomans as every possible Balkan revolter. a defining David vs Goliath for V3.

just uhhh, keep your military tech (however that works) on par... and stay the hell away from Plevna if you don't own it.
 
Macedonian case is interesting.

It was definitely ethnic group with Bulgaria, closely tied in basically all matters. Even VMRO was a pan-Bulgarian movement, it is a fact.

However, it is certain that the split of Macedonians into a separate nation started in XIX century. It was cemented later of course, with Yugoslavia taking drastic measures to ensure it, but it was a thing even before that.

I had wondered if the best way to represent it would splitting Bulgarians into Macedonians (tentative name) and "West Bulgarians" (tentative name) in terms of Victoria 2 mechanics, mainly following Eastern Bulgarian (Macedonian) dialect and Eastern Bulgarian dialects. Then, naturally, Bulgaria would be the pan-Bulgarian state (as is Germany to North Germans and South Germans) and have a natural desire to claim Macedonia. It also can explain VMRO well - being Macedonian-centered movement to restore Bulgaria and pan-Bulgarian nationalists mainly at the time. And then the failure of Macedonians in, erm, Northern Macedonia to join rest of Bulgaria could explain why they opted for local identity and part of VMRO people were play with it. Similar to Austria and split between, say, North Germans and South Germans in Victoria 2.

I wonder if people find such solution acceptable (recognizing roughly two distinct identities and the pan-Bulgarian nationalism) or if it is too flawed?
 
  • 5
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Macedonian case is interesting.

It was definitely ethnic group with Bulgaria, closely tied in basically all matters. Even VMRO was a pan-Bulgarian movement, it is a fact.

However, it is certain that the split of Macedonians into a separate nation started in XIX century. It was cemented later of course, with Yugoslavia taking drastic measures to ensure it, but it was a thing even before that.

I had wondered if the best way to represent it would splitting Bulgarians into Macedonians (tentative name) and "West Bulgarians" (tentative name) in terms of Victoria 2 mechanics, mainly following Eastern Bulgarian (Macedonian) dialect and Eastern Bulgarian dialects. Then, naturally, Bulgaria would be the pan-Bulgarian state (as is Germany to North Germans and South Germans) and have a natural desire to claim Macedonia. It also can explain VMRO well - being Macedonian-centered movement to restore Bulgaria and pan-Bulgarian nationalists mainly at the time. And then the failure of Macedonians in, erm, Northern Macedonia to join rest of Bulgaria could explain why they opted for local identity and part of VMRO people were play with it. Similar to Austria and split between, say, North Germans and South Germans in Victoria 2.

I wonder if people find such solution acceptable (recognizing roughly two distinct identities and the pan-Bulgarian nationalism) or if it is too flawed?
Not all VMRO was a pan-Bulgarian movement, there were some but there were also those who desired an independent Macedonia.

I mean also you could just have Macedonians and Bulgarians as two seperate things from the start, but have Bulgaria desire Macedonia. Then within Macedonia you could have pro-Bulgarian populations, or even straight out Bulgarians alongside Macedonians, desiring a pan-Bulgaria, which is kinda what you said anyway.
 
  • 7
  • 1
Reactions:
It would be cool if the struggle for hegemony over the Southern Slavs would be modeled somehow. The Serbo-Bulgarian pattern of fighting the Ottomans together but then immediately turning on each other was pretty interesting. I also hope Russia is going to be as interested in Tsargrad and Balkan hegemony as they historically were. The fate of the straits should be a major topic for "diplomatic plays" (free access for all vs. access for none vs. Turkish/Bulgarian/Russian/Greek control).
 
  • 3Like
Reactions:
On a different note, reposting my suggestion from another thread for a Balkan-related formable tag:

Balkan Federation.

For an in-depth overview of the pan-Balkanic federalist project in its different historical iterations (starting as early as the late 18th century with Rigas Feraios), the devs can read L. S. Stavrianos' Balkan Federation: A History of the Movement Toward Balkan Unity in Modern Times (1944), freely accessible on Internet Archive:
 
  • 2
Reactions: