Slavonic Gods

[unmerged(606777)]

Aight, so we have 11 East Slavic tribes. I'll try to find some flags for them.

This is the most charachteristic archeological finding in the territory of Viatichi, the so called temple rings. I think it would make an awesome flag.

 

[Selenimar]

Aight, so we have 11 East Slavic tribes. I'll try to find some flags for them.

This is the most charachteristic archeological finding in the territory of Viatichi, the so called temple rings. I think it would make an awesome flag.

Kinda looks like a giant octopus head...

 

[unmerged(606777)]

Kinda looks like a giant octopus head...

Orrr...

 

[unmerged(606777)]

Ok, this is West Slavic and pretty accurate:

For Obodrichi, a Wendish tribe, it should be a bull head, what was later to become a coat of arms of Mecklenburg

For Lutichi, their neighbours and all-time rivals it should be a wolf head, 'cause thier alternative name was "Vilcy", i.e. Wolfs. There are mentiones of their totemic animals being wolfs in German church chronicles, so it shoud be something along the lines of this:

 

[unmerged(606777)]

This would be very fitting for East Slavic Dregovichi, since their name means "swamp-dwellers" and their region was always associated with snakes (but maybe make it a snake-triskellon due to undesirable resemblance to swastika):

And this perhaps for the Severiane, who was for the most part Slavicised decendants of Scythians, hence a bit of Iranic influence:

 

[unmerged(606777)]

Slovene were colonists from the Baltic Wends, whose symbol was a Gryffin (f.ex. Modern Pomaranian flag) and as such may have this as a symbol:

Drelviane, as thier name implies, were the "wood dwellers", an hence can have a symbol of a tree akin to the ones Arverni have in EU:Rome, or something like this:

Poliane were the richest tribe of the South and the general old Kievan area is frequently seen depicted with this symbol in Russian mythology:

 

[unmerged(606777)]

For Radimichi I really dunno what to relate to them. Perhaps another variant of temple rings?

 

[unmerged(606777)]

Krivichi should probably have this:

as something related to their chief city of Polotsk later coat of arms:

I dunno, this is entirely arbitrary.

 

[unmerged(606777)]

The territory of Volynians is known for a particular shape of fibulae:

Could be a fun symbol.

 

[DanubianCossak]

South Slavonic:
- Horutane
- Croats
- Serbs
- Bulgarians (or should we make several pre-Bulgar tribes?)
- ?

South Slavic brothers, share your thoughts, as I don't know much about your history yet.

No need, you covered it pretty well. Back in those days some of today's nationalities didnt exist. Just not sure what Horutane is, are those Slovenes? As for Bulgarians, i dont know what should be done about them, they should probably be in this group (for gameplay purposes).

 

[duhsveti]

Krivichi
as something related to their chief city of Polotsk later coat of arms:

I dunno, this is entirely arbitrary.

This reminds me of this old Croatian CoA.

This symbol also seems to appear in a lot of other slavic tribes.

 

[unmerged(606777)]

Just not sure what Horutane is, are those Slovenes?

Horutane - Carantanians.

So, are you saying there no need for specific Serbian/Croatian/Bulgarian tribes like those:

That would be less fun. There can be many tribes with Serb or Croat culture.

This reminds me of this old Croatian CoA.

This symbol also seems to appear in a lot of other slavic tribes.

Cool, so the variations of it probably can be used for other Slavic tribes' banners.

 

[DanubianCossak]

Those tribes (in case of Serbs, dont know much about Croats) were basically like clans, groups of people belonging to same (extended) family. The problem with getting too many tribes as separate countries is that you dont have enough province on Balkan peninsula, they would each be too small and too weak (specially since Croatia is insanely huge compared to Serbia, of which half is Bulgarian for some reason).

So i dunno, as much as id like to see diversity, i dont see how you can do that without heavily reworking the map first.

 

[unmerged(606777)]

...i dont see how you can do that without heavily reworking the map first.

Well, that seems to be a given with Paradox games At least in regards to Russia/Balkans.

 

[duhsveti]

Well, that seems to be a given with Paradox games At least in regards to Russia/Balkans.

Well actually this is the first game that Croatian province borders weren't outright hideous. Not really extremly accurate, but not hideous. I hope they will fix the rest of the balkan one day.

 

[DanubianCossak]

Well, that seems to be a given with Paradox games At least in regards to Russia/Balkans.

Well, honestly, i didnt find Russia that bad at all. Sure some borders were kind of funny, but at least most provinces are placed at worse roughly where they are in real life, and most of the rest of weirdness in Russia comes from bad map projection (as in EU3).

One time i sat down with the intention of reworking Russia, and soon after i figured out that my Russia was not that much different than Paradox (map modding is kind of my thing, and Russia is my favorite place on earth <3). The only place id rework is Belarus.

Balkan on the other hand is simply ridiculous. As duhsveti said, this is, id say, the second Paradox game where Croatia wasnt done that bad (its mostly quite ok, no Zagreb in Istria, huge improvement), but Serbia is just omg. For Christ's sake half of it is Bulgarian XD

Oh and yeah, funny thing is, old Yugoslavia (Serbia+Croatia+etc) has much bigger population than Scotland (even Serbia alone does IIRC), yet Scotland has something like 3 X more provinces than ex Yu combined, and also some crazy number of settlements in comparison. Thats how unbalanced the map is.

edit: it obviously works for vanilla CK2, but i doubt you could fit all the individual tribes on it, at least the south Slavic ones.

 

[Maestro Ugo]

I predict a lot of the people posting on this thread are going to be unhappy when the expansion does come out.

True. But that doesn't mean that these materials and/or ideas might not end up useful for a mod or two once it get's out.

I have a problem with conversions in general. Given that in the time period of the expansion a lot of paganism was running about, and those pagans were for the most part converted and not conquered/defeated by christian realms - some form of conversion mechanic should be in place. In vanilla CK2 for now, there are a few random events (if I remember correctly) that allow a pagan realm to convert, but given that the conversions were much more numerous in this time point, some form of mechanic in terms of decisions should be implemented, otherwise it would be too random.

Croat and Caranthanian elites should be converted by the game start, as well as Bulgarian ones - the provinces themselves might still be predominantly pagan as to allow possible conversions back to paganism.

Also, how will the schism be represented? The differences between western and eastern rites were by this time already well established, but formally it was still one religion, no?

 

[Thure]

I have a problem with conversions in general. Given that in the time period of the expansion a lot of paganism was running about, and those pagans were for the most part converted and not conquered/defeated by christian realms - some form of conversion mechanic should be in place. In vanilla CK2 for now, there are a few random events (if I remember correctly) that allow a pagan realm to convert, but given that the conversions were much more numerous in this time point, some form of mechanic in terms of decisions should be implemented, otherwise it would be too random.

They had already said that we will have missionaries int he game.

Also, how will the schism be represented? The differences between western and eastern rites were by this time already well established, but formally it was still one religion, no?

They will be split I think. This is one good point about the start date. At this date the Patriarch of Constantinople had excommunicated the pope.

 

[unmerged(606777)]

Well, honestly, i didnt find Russia that bad at all. Sure some borders were kind of funny, but at least most provinces are placed at worse roughly where they are in real life, and most of the rest of weirdness in Russia comes from bad map projection (as in EU3).

Wouldn't say so, bro. Tyumen in Europe? Romny in Bjarmia? (this is like placing Amsterdam in Bavaria, and this is not an exxageration) "Bezhetskiy Verkh"(wtf?) instead of Ladoga? Surgut, "Yamalia", "Khantia", "Mansia", "Chelyabi" in Europe? Yugra near Archangel'sk? But of course, this is a huge improvement over CK1, EU2 and EU3, to be sure, to be sure At least they got the European provinces names almost right, although the borders are atrocious. But rivers are mostly correct, which is very noice.

 

[vyshan]

Interesting info here. I am not familar with the slavic tribes at all, so learning is always good. I do know one game I want to play is playing poland and keeping them pagan.