• 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.
My suggestions for Lebanon from the main thread:

1) Druzes sholdn't exist until 1016, and when they emerge, they should emerge in Cairo, maybe. The strangest thing happens now, in character select screen I can see provinces of Samarra, Axum and Alexandria being Druze, but not in actual game, so that's OK

1 upd) Would also suggest that Druzes can be made in a starts date later than 1020 (they also can have zero convertion rate, due to prohibition of proselythism. Alawites would make better Shia heresy.

2) Maronites should be Catholic after 1182, and before that they may or may not be Monothelites, noone's sure, modern Maronites state that they always were Catholic.

3) not specifically Levantine, but more Islamic thing - Yzidism is no way Islamic heresy, should be different religion and have crazy maluses for relations with Muslims, being seen as devil-worshippers and all that jazz.

4) For Arabia whould I would suggest inclution of Qarmatians as Shia heresy, they should emerge around 899 in Arabia. One can dream, that if they capture Mecca they can have a desicion to desacrate it and ransom Black stone of Qaaba for a lot of gold.
 
Last edited:
My suggestions for Lebanon from the main thread:

1) Druzes sholdn't exist until 1016, and when they emerge, they should emerge in Cairo, maybe. The strangest thing happens now, in character select screen I can see provinces of Samarra, Axum and Alexandria being Druze, but not in actual game, so that's OK

1 upd) Would also suggest that Druzes can be made in a starts date later than 1020 (they also can have zero convertion rate, due to prohibition of proselythism. Alawites would make better Shia heresy.

2) Maronites should be Catholic after 1182, and before that they may or may not be Monothelites, noone's sure, modern Maronites state that they always were Catholic.

3) not specifically Levantine, but more Islamic thing - Yzidism is no way Islamic heresy, should be different religion and have crazy maluses for relations with Muslims, being seen as devil-worshippers and all that jazz.

4) For Arabia whould I would suggest inclution of Qarmatians as Shia heresy, they should emerge around 899 in Arabia. One can dream, that if they capture Mecca they can have a desicion to desacrate it and ransom Black stone of Qaaba for a lot of gold.

1) That's a Project Balance thing. They are not Druze in SWMH. Neither in the character select screen or when you enter the game.

1upd) Changing the conversion rates sounds a bit beyond the scope of SWMH. You would have to get PB or VIET to include such a thing i think.

3) Again, changing the opinion maluses is perhaps a bit beyond the scope of SWMH.
 
Last edited:
In VIET the Alawites and Qarmatians are added as heresies to Shia, and the Yazidi are their own religion in the Muslim religion group (with plans for motor flavor and stuff for them when I recover and "return").



Anyhow, as to suggestions - any plans to add a south Arabian/Yemeni/Omani culture, to represent the cosmopolitan, commercial, urbanite groups there? From what I know there was tension between those city dwellers and the more nomadic folk, such as in Oman for instance.
 
In VIET the Alawites and Qarmatians are added as heresies to Shia, and the Yazidi are their own religion in the Muslim religion group (with plans for motor flavor and stuff for them when I recover and "return").



Anyhow, as to suggestions - any plans to add a south Arabian/Yemeni/Omani culture, to represent the cosmopolitan, commercial, urbanite groups there? From what I know there was tension between those city dwellers and the more nomadic folk, such as in Oman for instance.
1) that's great.
Maybe, for easier VIET+SWMH compatibility I will put a notes to province history files for those which should have these heresies?
btw, it is a Maghreb stuff, but do you plan to add also Salihi shiite heresy? I know it may not be worth it for 2 dynasties in 867 start, but it would greatly improve the religious mess of that religion :)

2) yes, I am considering this. Especially after I introduced the division between nomadic and dwelling cultures it would be very inapropriate to have nomads in Yemen.
 
1. Yes, that would help greatly. I can PM you a list of current religions and heresies in VIET fir the SWMH team's reference. And The Salihists are currently one of the Sunni heresies in VIET I believe.

2. Sounds good.
 
Great!
 
In SWMH? I doubt it. They don't form the majority in any of the provinces and making sure that they are given the same mechanic to make them appear like the Sephardis and the Ashkenazis would be outside of SWMH's scope i think. VIET has them already though, as far as i know :unsure:

ETA: But i might be wrong :p There is a lot of questions today that Aasmul or Elvain should have seen/answered instead of me :D
 
Last edited:
@swmh team:
Speaking of Yemeni Jews and such, I've already added them and othe Jewish groups - along with the events necessary to spawn them in the right places in VIET. I know you guys already have a bunch of Jewish cultures, so it'll just be a matter of tweaking the code a bit on my part if you're interested.
Edit: ninja'd apparently. Anyhow yeah I have Yemeni Jews in VIET.
 
The Hidjaz and major cities should be Mashriqi, and all other provinces in the peninsula should be Bedouin. "Bedouins" are nomads, desert wanderers, who don't live in cities. (well now they do cuz oil) Hidjaz has always been culturally different to the mainland of Arabia, its more aristocratic and less Nomad like. Also Yemen is the same thing, although only major cities like Aden and Sanaa should be Mashriqi. (also first time replying to a post so dont hurt me)

Oh and one more thing, Ghutah should really really be Dimashq. No one ever refers to Damascus or even the region of the city as Ghutah, the Ghutah is the farmland on the outskirts of the city. I feel like one of the most important cities of the Arab and Islamic world shouldn't be called by the farmland around it.
 
The Hidjaz and major cities should be Mashriqi, and all other provinces in the peninsula should be Bedouin. "Bedouins" are nomads, desert wanderers, who don't live in cities. (well now they do cuz oil) Hidjaz has always been culturally different to the mainland of Arabia, its more aristocratic and less Nomad like. Also Yemen is the same thing, although only major cities like Aden and Sanaa should be Mashriqi. (also first time replying to a post so dont hurt me)

Oh and one more thing, Ghutah should really really be Dimashq. No one ever refers to Damascus or even the region of the city as Ghutah, the Ghutah is the farmland on the outskirts of the city. I feel like one of the most important cities of the Arab and Islamic world shouldn't be called by the farmland around it.

Mashriqi is more of a geographical term, which i actually think is a bit too big already.

And as far as i know, Creating such a big Umbrella culture for the Arabs are not being planned. And it would not be all that accurate either. From what i know about Arab medieval history is that Arab culture acted as the veneer at the top that attempted to keep things together, but that even Arab language and to a certain extent also Arab culture had rather big regional variations between "Iraqi Arabs", Egyptians, Syrians and Arabians. So if Elvain decide to include the Arabians in the Mashriqi i think that he should break of at least the Syrians so as to not lose these regional variations.

He is planning on introducing a distinction between urban Arabs and Nomad Bedouins in Arabia though, to get back on topic.
 
Last edited:
The Hidjaz and major cities should be Mashriqi, and all other provinces in the peninsula should be Bedouin. "Bedouins" are nomads, desert wanderers, who don't live in cities. (well now they do cuz oil) Hidjaz has always been culturally different to the mainland of Arabia, its more aristocratic and less Nomad like. Also Yemen is the same thing, although only major cities like Aden and Sanaa should be Mashriqi. (also first time replying to a post so dont hurt me)

Oh and one more thing, Ghutah should really really be Dimashq. No one ever refers to Damascus or even the region of the city as Ghutah, the Ghutah is the farmland on the outskirts of the city. I feel like one of the most important cities of the Arab and Islamic world shouldn't be called by the farmland around it.

Mashriqi is more of a geographical term, which does actually exclude Arabia as far as i can see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mashriq

And as far as i know, Creating such a big Umbrella culture for the Arabs are not being planned. And it would not be all that accurate either. From what i know about Arab medieval history is that Arab culture acted as the veneer at the top that attempted to keep things together, but that even Arab language and to a certain extent also Arab culture had rather big regional variations between "Iraqi Arabs", Egyptians, Syrians and Arabians. So if Elvain decide to include the Arabians in the Mashriqi i think that he should break of at least the Syrians so as to not lose these regional variations.

He is planning on introducing a distinction between urban Arabs and Nomad Bedouins.
Well, there already is Mashriqi culture (IIRC), and while it is rather broad definition, it exactly fits to the scheme I have about "greater Arabia", that means Arabia and Mesopotamia.
The concept is not perfectly clear now, but I'd like to have Levantine in Syria and Palestine, Mashriqi to be Arab dwellers in Iraq and Arabia (Hijaz), Yemeni to represent the highland Yemen people and the rest, the nomadic tribes to fall under Bedouin/Badawi. (TBH I'm not sure if Levantine and Masriqi aren't actually the same and if they are, it shouldn't mind IMO, but I'm open to suggestions).
I really want to make clear distinction between city/dwelling Arabs and Bedouins as their military power as well as many other things differed.

concerning Dimashq vs. Ghouta issue - that's rather valid point.
 
Levantine is just a European term for the Arabs around Lebanon, Antioch, and Palestine. Mashriqi is an Arabic term for the Arabs in the East. In my honest opinion I feel like the "Arab" aspect should really be stressed. Especially at this time Arabs from Qurtubah all the way to Samarqand (not Arab but had Arab family's living there) had a much more unified dialect and were basically the same cultural group. Now the way this can be stressed is by not adding a "Syrian" group or an "Iraqi" group but by using terms us Arabs use to denote people from these areas. What im trying to say is that at that time you could not tell the difference between an Iraqi Sultan, a Shami Sultan, or even an Andalusi Sultan. All of these Arabs came from the peninsula only 2 or 3 generations ago. Also to be clear they did look different ethnically, but linguistically they are far similar than is shown in game.
 
Well, there already is Mashriqi culture (IIRC), and while it is rather broad definition, it exactly fits to the scheme I have about "greater Arabia", that means Arabia and Mesopotamia.
The concept is not perfectly clear now, but I'd like to have Levantine in Syria and Palestine, Mashriqi to be Arab dwellers in Iraq and Arabia (Hijaz), Yemeni to represent the highland Yemen people and the rest, the nomadic tribes to fall under Bedouin/Badawi. (TBH I'm not sure if Levantine and Masriqi aren't actually the same and if they are, it shouldn't mind IMO, but I'm open to suggestions).
I really want to make clear distinction between city/dwelling Arabs and Bedouins as their military power as well as many other things differed.

concerning Dimashq vs. Ghouta issue - that's rather valid point.

That sounds like a great idea for a setup. Perhaps use Syrian instead of Levantine though.

Levantine is just a European term for the Arabs around Lebanon, Antioch, and Palestine. Mashriqi is an Arabic term for the Arabs in the East. In my honest opinion I feel like the "Arab" aspect should really be stressed. Especially at this time Arabs from Qurtubah all the way to Samarqand (not Arab but had Arab family's living there) had a much more unified dialect and were basically the same cultural group. Now the way this can be stressed is by not adding a "Syrian" group or an "Iraqi" group but by using terms us Arabs use to denote people from these areas. What im trying to say is that at that time you could not tell the difference between an Iraqi Sultan, a Shami Sultan, or even an Andalusi Sultan. All of these Arabs came from the peninsula only 2 or 3 generations ago. Also to be clear they did look different ethnically, but linguistically they are far similar than is shown in game.

They will still be in the same cultural group if they are split up of course. But having them all be one Arab monolith culture seems rather anachronistic to me, given the regional variations that existed to Arab culture.
 
Last edited:
Instead of Yemeni Jews add Mizrahi Jews. If we start adding country specific jewish groups youll end up with dozens.
As far as I know Mizrahi is more modern Israeli umbrella term for all Jews from Muslim countries i.e non-Ashkenazi, non-Sephardim, so it would be a bit anochronistic, none of them called themselves Mizrahim, or was known as Mizrahim before creation of Israel. Though I agree that creating every country-specific Jewish culture would be an overkill
 
I'm curently quite busy. Some development have been done, but not much to talk about.