... this must happen. Someone must do this.
(Not me, sadly. I have no stomach for the intensity of diplomatic chicanery involved in prospering as either of those states.)
Quick poll regarding Wallachia/Moldavia
- Thread starter Thrac
- 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.
(Not me, sadly. I have no stomach for the intensity of diplomatic chicanery involved in prospering as either of those states.)
This is great! Development wise. But it still dosent put them on par with other Balkanic neibors on number of provinces.....(not compering with countrys from the Western part of Europe) Most countrys from what i v seen in the Balkans get on avrage 6 provinces / 100.000 square km(not counting Greece cause it was far more rich and populated back then and they deserv more provinces) both of them get only 3.... and the Farmland is great but most of the battels won against aggresors wher in marshes/mountain passes and forests. And 6 provinces offers you space to manuver your armys and maybe w8 for outside help.
And as a fact Both Wallachia and Moldovia had ther capitals in mountain regions (Targoviste/Suceava) before the ottomans subjugated them and made them move ther capitals neer rivers and in to plains close to the ottoman border.
Not need to melt the ice, break the dikes and bye bye Half of the Netherlands. Looking at the map it seems that 95% will be submerged
the epic LO ddrjake stream revealed that ship building time has increased substantially.
To many for my taste.... a 5 province Wallachia and 6 for Moldavia would be sufficient and respect the Balkan province/territory/population proportion.You want just 6 provinces?
Moldavia has and will still have a ratio of 1 province per 33.000 sqare km .... the average for Bulgaria/Serbia/Croatia/Bosnia is 1 for 16.000 sqare km or less and for England is 1 province per 8.500 sq km( but its understandebal somehow cuz of the pop density ther)
Last edited:
- 1
Wallachia and Moldavia were at times able to raise hugely disproportionately sized armies compared to their states' resources, but that's not a problem with the representation of them in particular, but with the representation of militaries worldwide.
Stephen the Great was reported to have raised an army of 200,000. While that number is obviously inflated to an extreme degree, it doesn't really give the sense of Moldavia having trouble raising large armies.
If the number is completely wrong then it doesn't give any sense of anything. Contemporary claims for army sizes are frequently dismissed by historians. Courtiers would lie about the size of their own army and that of their rivals routinely, either exaggerating the size of their own to frighten neighbors and impress subjects, or exaggerating the size of enemies they had beaten.
- 1
Well, the region is all farmlands in reality. I saw on Reddit a map depicting water levels if all the world's ice would melt and Wallachia would look like the Netherlands, half submerged:
Anyway, cool news.
Are there any plans/ideas for guerilla warfare or is it not feasible to expect them with the current Clausewitz engine?
I want a mod with that map.
- 8
On the other hand, it's equally wrong to dismiss the statements of contemporaries offhand merely on the basis of the stated number not being reliable. Now I don't have the primary source that says this (got it from a book on Romanian history) but to give another example of Moldavian strength the author cites from a Florentine report of the late fifteenth century the relative size of the coalition forces put into the field against the Ottomans, "14,000 soldiers of Hungary, 28,000 people of Transylvania, 32,000 soldiers of Wallachia and 38,000 of Moldavia." Again, the numbers themselves aren't important, but the sense that the numbers can give about contemporary reality is. As a result of the Ottoman threat both Wallachia and Moldavia were highly militarized countries whose rulers were able to produce powerful armies, particularly during times of political stability and good leadership in the center. That's not something to be dismissed just because the figures are unreliable.
Last edited:
- 6
It seems to me that the Ottoman rule over Wallachia and Moldavia definitely reduced the level of development. I'm wondering if being a vassal somehow models reduced development in the new patch. In this case, being a 5 or 6 province minor as proposed but with the Ottomans likely to vassalize them quickly could result in relatively historical outcomes -- especially if different religion/culture would also increase liberty sentiment and result in armed revolts. Additionally, national ideas could make it very difficult to annex Wallachian/Moldavian cores and thus nudge the Ottomans towards maintaining them as vassals.
Last edited:
The main problem in Wallachia/Moldavia was reprezented by the boyars ( nobility) that was divided or currupted from the exterior... the rulers that managed to subdue them in 1 way or a other ( Vlad the Impaler loved them v much) managed to opose exterior aggresions.
I think the only country that managed to subdue the boyars for good was Russia durning Peter the Great and turned Russia in a superpower.
But we can only dream of a Boyar sistem similar to Parliament or merchent republic faction mechanics.
I think the only country that managed to subdue the boyars for good was Russia durning Peter the Great and turned Russia in a superpower.
But we can only dream of a Boyar sistem similar to Parliament or merchent republic faction mechanics.
- 3
Keep in mind that the power of the Boyars was also a major contributing factor to why the Eastern countries fell behind technologically; the Boyars successfully kept the serfs enslaved much, much longer than the western nobility did, and general oppression lasted so long that it inspired the communist revolution.
Wallachias 6th national idea - Boyar regime + 1 legitimacy, and 7th - Abolition of serfdom + 20% manpower
- 1
Serbia has a Gold mine.
Wallachia/Moldova has nothing.
Perhaps Wallachia should start with a guruantee from Hungary.
Wallachia/Moldova has nothing.
Perhaps Wallachia should start with a guruantee from Hungary.
Well, it's not like they did have a lot of gold. The Romanian gold/silver mines were/are mostly in Transylvania. Wallachia/Moldavia had/have fertile lands, that's where the local wealth came from (industry started booming only around 1900).
Both ar examples of missreprezentation .... the boyars would never fully suport a ruler to become strong cuz that would meen loosing ther rights/power.... and most of the serfdom abolition happend after the euiv timeframe
- 1
The descriptions ingame-
Boyar Regime - The treaty of Alba Iulia cemented the power of the Wallachian nobility. A counsil of 12 boyars was to take part alongside the voivode in the executive rule of the country.
Aparantly that has no negative downsides and only ligitimizes the king?
Abolition of Serfdom - Wallachia abolished Serfdom in 1746.
Very early even for West european standards, definately worthy then of being part of the wallachian national Identity.
Romania, the real land of the free! =)
Edit: I also just saw Moldavias second Idea-
Razesi Peasants - Unlike in the western feudal states, in Moldavia Serfdom is less common and there remains a large group of free Peasants, the Razesi.
And they have an Idea that increases legitimazy because the moldavian king had a very large controll over the boyars in the country.
Last edited:
