Question to devs about Eastern European provinces in post-AoW

[Scimittar]

What a storm I started, when I mentioned about tribute to Golden Horde

I play most of my games as Eastern Europe nations like: Poland, Muscovy, Teutons etc. And I like historical contest in EU4. For me, it will be very nice when playing as Muscovy you stop paying tribute to Golden Horde (as it was historicaly) - then GH gets something like casus belli - when they lost war or don't start in some period of time, you get pop up that Muscovy finished Tatar dominance.

And once more about Lithuania, Poland, Crimea, Ottos and co. I live in Poland and like history, especially Russia, Poland, Lithuania/Ukraine. This region was very complex. Officially Poland/Lithania has peace with Crimea but Tatars and from other side Cossacks made constant rides on each other - plundering and grabbing. Cossacks even few time get to Istanbul on its boats. This of course made constant diplomatic tensions between Poland/Lithuania and Ottomans (due to Crimea was its vasal). During XVII century Poland has its own plundering units like: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lisowczycy . Lisowczycy had bad fame during campaings in Russia and Hungury.

And 1st war with Ottomans from losing at Varna in 1444, Poland had in 1620 - 1621. It was "peace" during all this time from 1444 to 1620 between Poland and Ottomans.

 

[cleef]

Veritas et Fortitudo has a tribute event-based system towards the GH (game starts in 1310) for Muscovy (and perhaps other countries as well...)

 

[nicechinos]

Veritas et Fortitudo has a tribute event-based system towards the GH (game starts in 1310) for Muscovy (and perhaps other countries as well...)

1310 is reasonable date for tribute based system for Muscovy. 1444 is another story, however.

 

[Tvrtko I]

All i want to see is little less forrest provinces south and east of Kiev. Right now there are too many. Wasn't the area there mostly steppe?

 

[nicechinos]

What a storm I started, when I mentioned about tribute to Golden Horde

I play most of my games as Eastern Europe nations like: Poland, Muscovy, Teutons etc. And I like historical contest in EU4. For me, it will be very nice when playing as Muscovy you stop paying tribute to Golden Horde (as it was historicaly) - then GH gets something like casus belli - when they lost war or don't start in some period of time, you get pop up that Muscovy finished Tatar dominance.

And once more about Lithuania, Poland, Crimea, Ottos and co. I live in Poland and like history, especially Russia, Poland, Lithuania/Ukraine. This region was very complex. Officially Poland/Lithania has peace with Crimea but Tatars and from other side Cossacks made constant rides on each other - plundering and grabbing. Cossacks even few time get to Istanbul on its boats. This of course made constant diplomatic tensions between Poland/Lithuania and Ottomans (due to Crimea was its vasal). During XVII century Poland has its own plundering units like: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lisowczycy . Lisowczycy had bad fame during campaings in Russia and Hungury.

And 1st war with Ottomans from losing at Varna in 1444, Poland had in 1620 - 1621. It was "peace" during all this time from 1444 to 1620 between Poland and Ottomans.

I generally do not oppose new game mechanics if it is historically accurate and adds flavor to the game.
However, the problem is that you or your supporters (who already back down ridiculous vassal suggestions) didn't present evidence to state that tribute was significant, regular and relevant to be incorporated into Muscovite finances. I do not oppose war between GH and Muscovy in the beginning of the game, GH should be defeatable anyway. Stating that Crimean khanate was Ottoman vassal at 1444 is somewhat misleading at best. Crimeans were Muscovy's key allies vs Lithuania and GH well until 1480 (however, the sources suggest that Crimea became "state under protection" in 1478.)
I understand that you might have not especially warm feelings towards Russians but it doesn't entitle you to make ridiculous suggestions without any backing by historical evidence. If you are looking for a way to nerf Muscovy GH is not a way to go. I'd make a suggestion but I'll leave benefits of intellectual adventure to you. But one needs to go beyond wikipedia for that.
BTW GH has already permanent CB vs Muscovy.

 

[Big Blue Blob]

By 1444 the tribute was very occasional, but it seems to have still existed until about 1480.

 

[ekorovin]

By 1444 the tribute was very occasional, but it seems to have still existed until about 1480.

It was paid till 1480, the problem is what did it mean exactly. Basically, there's three stages of "Mongol yoke" in Northeastern Rus: the most direct, before 1380, when GH directly gathered taxes from Russian lands, via its own tax administration stationed in Russian cities and Russian princes ruled, because they were issued special mandate from khan, "yarlyk". That's best portrayed as vassalage of course.

But after 1380s, despite burning of Moscow by Tochtamysh, something changed: from now-on it was Russian princes, who gathered taxes, and then sent it to Saray (or don't, if they felt lucky). Russian princes ruled not because of khan's mandate, but due to inheritance, khans stopped sending "yarlyks" to Moscow, and "baskaks", Tatar tax officials, were gone.

Since GH entered system crisis around same time, payments of annual tributes stopped: from now on, if and when GH was more or less united under someone capable, it would launch military campaigns against Moscow, using "tax evasion" as their CB. If they managed to win - they would get paid, if not - no. This can be actually portrayed via military reparations.

With Moscow growing stronger, and GH disintegrating, GH's victories became rarer and rarer, so the payment effectively stopped, so while Moscow theoretically admitted that it has to pay, its position was more like: "you want our tribute - come and get it".

And finally in 1480 Ivan III proclaimed that even theoretical obligations of Moscow towards GH is null and void. Ahmat tried to do something about it, but was repelled at Ugra. "Tatar-Mongol yoke" officially ended, and well, GH (known as Big Horde by then) didn't survived it: Crimeans crushed their remnants.

 

[nicechinos]

It was paid till 1480, the problem is what did it mean exactly. Basically, there's three stages of "Mongol yoke" in Northeastern Rus: the most direct, before 1380, when GH directly gathered taxes from Russian lands, via its own tax administration stationed in Russian cities and Russian princes ruled, because they were issued special mandate from khan, "yarlyk". That's best portrayed as vassalage of course.

But after 1380s, despite burning of Moscow by Tochtamysh, something changed: from now-on it was Russian princes, who gathered taxes, and then sent it to Saray (or don't, if they felt lucky). Russian princes ruled not because of khan's mandate, but due to inheritance, khans stopped sending "yarlyks" to Moscow, and "baskaks", Tatar tax officials, were gone.

Since GH entered system crisis around same time, payments of annual tributes stopped: from now on, if and when GH was more or less united under someone capable, it would launch military campaigns against Moscow, using "tax evasion" as their CB. If they managed to win - they would get paid, if not - no. This can be actually portrayed via military reparations.

With Moscow growing stronger, and GH disintegrating, GH's victories became rarer and rarer, so the payment effectively stopped, so while Moscow theoretically admitted that it has to pay, its position was more like: "you want our tribute - come and get it".

And finally in 1480 Ivan III proclaimed that even theoretical obligations of Moscow towards GH is null and void. Ahmat tried to do something about it, but was repelled at Ugra. "Tatar-Mongol yoke" officially ended, and well, GH (known as Big Horde by then) didn't survived it: Crimeans crushed their remnants.

I agree with that. Not only that is already modeled by war reparations but with looting mechanics. Ivan Velikiy knew how to proclaim these null and void: by beheading Big Horde diplomats that came to Moscow asking for tribute.

 

[ekorovin]

Looting's other things, raiding for loot never stopped, until khanate of Khiva was made Russian protectorate in 1873. Of course it weren't great Tatar campaigns, more like kidnapping lonely merchant or fisherman who sailed to far in Caspian.

By the way, why the hell Vasiliy II is Tiomny in 1444? His nickname, meaning "dark" was given to him because he was blinded, and that happened in 1446.

 

[giant_sloth]

All i want to see is little less forrest provinces south and east of Kiev. Right now there are too many. Wasn't the area there mostly steppe?

This area is called lisostep (forest steppe), a mixture of forest and steppe landscape. Don't know how this can be represented in game.

 

[saegoto]

Now, Europe lags behind the rest of the world and has ugly provinces.

Add new provinces expecialy in germany and italy. More provices = more players in Europe in multiplayer games. Give provinces a historical shape keeping their visibility and 'easyclick' feature. Is it really so difficult to combine this two things?


Polish Prussian border looks awful on the game map. It was so specific and lasted for 316 years, almost whole time period of the game (1466-1772). Please fix this ugly Warmia and Ostprussien, add Masuria.

 

[Scimittar]

It was paid till 1480, the problem is what did it mean exactly. Basically, there's three stages of "Mongol yoke" in Northeastern Rus: the most direct, before 1380, when GH directly gathered taxes from Russian lands, via its own tax administration stationed in Russian cities and Russian princes ruled, because they were issued special mandate from khan, "yarlyk". That's best portrayed as vassalage of course.

But after 1380s, despite burning of Moscow by Tochtamysh, something changed: from now-on it was Russian princes, who gathered taxes, and then sent it to Saray (or don't, if they felt lucky). Russian princes ruled not because of khan's mandate, but due to inheritance, khans stopped sending "yarlyks" to Moscow, and "baskaks", Tatar tax officials, were gone.

Since GH entered system crisis around same time, payments of annual tributes stopped: from now on, if and when GH was more or less united under someone capable, it would launch military campaigns against Moscow, using "tax evasion" as their CB. If they managed to win - they would get paid, if not - no. This can be actually portrayed via military reparations.

With Moscow growing stronger, and GH disintegrating, GH's victories became rarer and rarer, so the payment effectively stopped, so while Moscow theoretically admitted that it has to pay, its position was more like: "you want our tribute - come and get it".

And finally in 1480 Ivan III proclaimed that even theoretical obligations of Moscow towards GH is null and void. Ahmat tried to do something about it, but was repelled at Ugra. "Tatar-Mongol yoke" officially ended, and well, GH (known as Big Horde by then) didn't survived it: Crimeans crushed their remnants.

+1

@nicechinos
I don't have intention to make Muscovy weaker, because it would be ahistorical. Muscovy in 1444 is far stronger than in 1399 start from EU3. It is correct. I am just talking about adding additional flavour to the game. I don't know how it should look like according to game mechanics. Game mechanics are simple and don't show complex situation. Few examples:

-> Moldavia as Polish vasal/march. In game, if you are at war, vasal's forces join it automatically. Historically Moldavia wasn't reliable vassal and friend of Poland.
-> Prussia after 1525. Same - vassal of Poland, but mostly in 17th century acted independent and unloyal to Poland.

I also wish, that Paradox add some chain events or mechanics conected with Commonwealth like:
-> Chmielnicky's uprising in 1648
-> Swedish Delunge in 1655

This events had great impact on Commonwealth, its fall and force ballance in Eastern Europe.

 

[GeneralJhon]

There are new provinces in Easter Balkans (Bulgaria got two more provinces), but yeah Western Balkans need a little more love (But since Serbia got a Gold mine as resource iam not so sure now). Perhaps a new dlc trying to develop the conflict between Russia and the Ottomans.

 

[nalfz]

Polish Prussian border looks awful. It was so specific and lasted for 316 years, almost whole time period of the game (1466-1772). Please fix this ugly Warmia and Ostprussien, add Masuria.

Don't forget the fact that east prussia (esp. memel) is just totally in the wrong place

Spoiler

And while we're at it how about that strange peninsula in dalmatia that doesn't exist in real life

Spoiler

And while it's technically not exactly addressing the topic of the thread, who could forget about jamtland?

Spoiler

(come to think of it, the lake above it in lappland is in the wrong place too)

 

[ekorovin]

I'm sorry, but we're speaking of game that has Rybinsk reservoir, artificial lake built in 1940s, on the map. I think malazan is a bit too demanding.

 

[Zak Preston]

If we are talking about Muscovy in 1444, it's not strange that in most of my games they take Novgorod so easy. The strange thing is that if I play Lithuania, Poland or Sweden and try to save Novgorod and let them form Russia instead of Muscovy, I always fail. Novgorod seems to be extremely passive: rarely DoWs for expansion, and even after it consumes Muscovy, even a mid-fed horde (Kazan mostly) crushes them completely.
So even if I babysit Novgorod and feed them like tards, they are still doomed.

 

[ekorovin]

If we are talking about Muscovy in 1444, it's not strange that in most of my games they take Novgorod so easy. The strange thing is that if I play Lithuania, Poland or Sweden and try to save Novgorod and let them form Russia instead of Muscovy, I always fail. Novgorod seems to be extremely passive: rarely DoWs for expansion, and even after it consumes Muscovy, even a mid-fed horde (Kazan mostly) crushes them completely.
So even if I babysit Novgorod and feed them like tards, they are still doomed.

Well, not that the game had to portray it, but from OTL perspective Novgorod was doomed by 1444. Even Novgorodians themselves understood that, the questions were "Moscow or Lithuania?" and "Submit now, or wait for a miracle?". Their main problem was, ironically, their own success: their population far exceed the number that could be fed by their lands, so they heavily depended on food supply from Moscow and Lithuania. By 1444 Moscow already acquired foothold on Beloe lake, so it could even cut the Novgorod's trade with its colonies at will, and unsurprisingly, most of them became a sort of Moscow-Novgorodian condominiums. Add to that the collapse of GH, that resulted in chaos in the Volga region that made Volga trade impossible (and Novgorod greatly profited when GH was strong, because it meant that Volga trade is safe and active), and you can see that republic was on the verge of collapse.

So yeah, Novgorod can become a power in player's hands, but AI usually loses, which is pretty much correct. But then again, I like historical rail-roading, I know most people hate it

 

[nicechinos]

If we are talking about Muscovy in 1444, it's not strange that in most of my games they take Novgorod so easy. The strange thing is that if I play Lithuania, Poland or Sweden and try to save Novgorod and let them form Russia instead of Muscovy, I always fail. Novgorod seems to be extremely passive: rarely DoWs for expansion, and even after it consumes Muscovy, even a mid-fed horde (Kazan mostly) crushes them completely.
So even if I babysit Novgorod and feed them like tards, they are still doomed.

Which is pretty historical. Only a puny human player can change the fate of Novgorod. However, it is really easy to play as Novgorod in 1.8 and utterly crush Muscovy as game came to sense in terms of rivalry system (GH always comes to your help, Lithuania doesn't always rival you as new southern borders give more intention to rival Ottomans). Ekorovin makes a good case about food supply which is adequately reflected in the game by low tax base and FL. But I am glad that Novgorod is as playable as any top tier European nation.

 

[nicechinos]

Looting's other things, raiding for loot never stopped, until khanate of Khiva was made Russian protectorate in 1873. Of course it weren't great Tatar campaigns, more like kidnapping lonely merchant or fisherman who sailed to far in Caspian.

By the way, why the hell Vasiliy II is Tiomny in 1444? His nickname, meaning "dark" was given to him because he was blinded, and that happened in 1446.

Was it Shemiaka who did this?

 

[Zak Preston]

Well, not that the game had to portray it, but from OTL perspective Novgorod was doomed by 1444. Even Novgorodians themselves understood that, the questions were "Moscow or Lithuania?" and "Submit now, or wait for a miracle?". Their main problem was, ironically, their own success: their population far exceed the number that could be fed by their lands, so they heavily depended on food supply from Moscow and Lithuania. By 1444 Moscow already acquired foothold on Beloe lake, so it could even cut the Novgorod's trade with its colonies at will, and unsurprisingly, most of them became a sort of Moscow-Novgorodian condominiums. Add to that the collapse of GH, that resulted in chaos in the Volga region that made Volga trade impossible (and Novgorod greatly profited when GH was strong, because it meant that Volga trade is safe and active), and you can see that republic was on the verge of collapse.

So yeah, Novgorod can become a power in player's hands, but AI usually loses, which is pretty much correct. But then again, I like historical rail-roading, I know most people hate it

There is nothing bad in AI vs AI situation, but when you spend a lot of efforts (as a third party nation) to make Novgorod strong and it still fails hard every single war that seems to be very strange.