Hm, that's quite interesting idea, but Union of Kalmar is not vikings anymore. Union is close to RL Sweden and Denmark.
-
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.
?Incompetent said:
Your capital can't be seceded by an event if that's your only province.
Try it with Holstien, it won't work.
Aberration could use a new map..Incompetent said:One problem we do have, though, is that Schleswig and Holstein together only get 1 province on the standard map. By the sounds of it Kalmar inherits Schleswig, while Hanseatic interests are further south in Holstein (which is in the HRE, while Schleswig isn't). We could finesse this by saying the Duke (?) of Schleswig has also inherited Holstein, or if Kalmar and the Hansa come to an agreement we could describe a codominion, as happened to the region several times in its history. It would make sense for instance for Kalmar to take over, but respect the freedom of any Hansestädte in the area (represented maybe by transferring some taxvalue from Holstein to the Hanseatic capital). Borders were a lot more vague in the 15th century, and overlapping sovereignty like this was common, though of course it could lead to further problems if one side failed to respect their agreements. Second Schleswig-Holstein crisis anyone?
An even that converts it to Scandinavian and if UoK loses Holstien after it the province shoudl go back to german.Incompetent said:
Similair to Hinterpommern, Silesia and Küstrin for Poland in AGCEEP.
I don't think the UoK would've supported piracy in that area. the UoK had a decent navy (the royal Danish one). But the Hansa and Brittany would never allow it.Calipah said:
They aren't Vikings, they are faithful catholics subjected to the Papacy
Freiksenet1987 said:
Well, that changes a lot.
Sleepyhead is correct. If we want to simulate elements such as this, we need a more complex map, except ....
Where doe that end? Individual properties?
We don't have the resources at present. I s=maintain that we are better off completing the first round of re-aberrating Europe, North Africa, New World and Levant. Releasing the mod as non-beta. Then debating conversion to a new map. Then doing that work (or not) then moving on to Asia.
So, for this issue, why don't we just accpt that Jutland represents Schleswig in the scale of EU2 and drop them whole issue?
I agree. Margareth could kept Slesvig under her rule, rather than giving it to Holstein. I would rather script more internal politics events in the start of the game.
So, of the material you have sent, I basicacally scrap the Schleswig question, for now, but do I still include the new .inc files for KAL and HSA? Are we still having Holstein as a separate nation?
I think there is no point of having SHL as separate nation, if Slesvig crisis never raises. But you still should include KAL inc, because it was made not for Slesvig question, but to make Kalmar attack Norway less, and add some storyline for Baltic and Finnish events of Kalmar.
Wow, this is a LOT of discussion for a single province. SO I will compound the problem by adding my 2 cents worth.
I had always understood that Schleswig-Holstein was to be simulated by Holstein, regardless of the historical inaccuracies.
It starts as a Vassal of Hansa, but becomes the focal point for continued Union and League unrest, and indeed, since the Sund event can be avoided by a UoK player, we need somethig to give an edge to Hansa/Kalmar relations.
Due to it's proximity to Hansa, and the Sund, I doubt whether Kalmar owndership of Holstein would be accepted by the League. It is part of their mercantile advantage.
Can we reowrk the events, deleting the automatic "war" cammand" and removing some of the complexity of choices suggested by MattyG? Love his work, but 6 choices for a single province event seem gilding the lily.
I had always understood that Schleswig-Holstein was to be simulated by Holstein, regardless of the historical inaccuracies.
It starts as a Vassal of Hansa, but becomes the focal point for continued Union and League unrest, and indeed, since the Sund event can be avoided by a UoK player, we need somethig to give an edge to Hansa/Kalmar relations.
Due to it's proximity to Hansa, and the Sund, I doubt whether Kalmar owndership of Holstein would be accepted by the League. It is part of their mercantile advantage.
Can we reowrk the events, deleting the automatic "war" cammand" and removing some of the complexity of choices suggested by MattyG? Love his work, but 6 choices for a single province event seem gilding the lily.
The simpliest choice is to give Kalmar claims on Holstein, make Holstein part of Hansa, and sometime make relationships worse.
Web could make a background story that burgers from Hamburg occupied Holstein after kalmar inherited Shlesvig, Hamburg as a member of the league quickly got league support for the occupation to halt Kalmar growth, of course Kalmar never accepted the Hanseatic occupation of Holstein.
Look guys, I thought this was very simple when we started.
IRL in late 14th century, Holstein owned most of Denmark. By 1419 it didn't, but was independent. But the emnity is there. Then IRL, Fuckknuckle IV dies without an heir.
In our NewWorldOrder/Interregnum the Hanseatic Traders step in and offer protection in return for trading rights, which we interpret in-game as Vassalage.
So both Hansa and Kalmar have a core on Holstein, providing a constant source of friction between the two states - unlike the Sund event which can be resolved.
Rather than a finite, single set of events for the Schleswig/Holstein Crisis, just a long running series of events which continue to worsen the relationship between the two states.
HSA
IF NOT own Holstein
THEN "Protest at Scandinavian bastards in our rightful prooerty"
action_a "Boycott Tuborg Beer"
REL KAL -100
Trade -1000
Triggers a KAL event for -1 province_tax in Holstein
action_b "It's ok provided they build an Ikea"
REL KAL 50
Rinse, and repeat every 40 years until - say 1600.
Let's keep it simple. They will eventually go to war if they are AI states, and the worsening tax situation in Holstein will motivate Players to DOW.
Hansa are more likely to instigate a Verhansung (boycott/embargo) than go to war. War is expensive.
IRL in late 14th century, Holstein owned most of Denmark. By 1419 it didn't, but was independent. But the emnity is there. Then IRL, Fuckknuckle IV dies without an heir.
In our NewWorldOrder/Interregnum the Hanseatic Traders step in and offer protection in return for trading rights, which we interpret in-game as Vassalage.
So both Hansa and Kalmar have a core on Holstein, providing a constant source of friction between the two states - unlike the Sund event which can be resolved.
Rather than a finite, single set of events for the Schleswig/Holstein Crisis, just a long running series of events which continue to worsen the relationship between the two states.
HSA
IF NOT own Holstein
THEN "Protest at Scandinavian bastards in our rightful prooerty"
action_a "Boycott Tuborg Beer"
REL KAL -100
Trade -1000
Triggers a KAL event for -1 province_tax in Holstein
action_b "It's ok provided they build an Ikea"
REL KAL 50
Rinse, and repeat every 40 years until - say 1600.
Let's keep it simple. They will eventually go to war if they are AI states, and the worsening tax situation in Holstein will motivate Players to DOW.
Hansa are more likely to instigate a Verhansung (boycott/embargo) than go to war. War is expensive.
Last edited:
Agreed. I think even without events, cores provokes AI well enough. But events would be even greater.
This all happens if KAL does not choose pro-HSA monarch.
This all happens if KAL does not choose pro-HSA monarch.
I finally got around to do something... The first thing I'll do is to edit old events, then I'll start on new ones...
Code:
event = {
id = 201503
trigger = {
owned = { province = 307 data = -1 }
owned = { province = 309 data = -1 }
owned = { province = 251 data = -1 }
}
random = no
country = KAL
name = "The Sund Dues"
[COLOR=YELLOW]desc = "The Sound Due ('Øresundstolden') was introduced by King Erik in 1421. All ships passing through the Sound were forced to anchor off Helsingør and pay dues to the Union of Kalmar. Ships that refused to pay was sunken by cannons in both Helsingør and Helsingborg, where large fortresses were built. To avoid attempts to come through without paying, tolls were collected in the Great Belt ('Storebælt') and the Little Belt ('Lillebælt') as well. The due was enourmous, providing a steady stream of income to the Union, and it's impact on politics were just as large as on economy. The Union king often decided different levels of tariffs for the various nationalities of the ships passing through. Hanseatic mercants were often particularly targeted, which was an important contributing factor to the bitter rivalry between the Hansa and the Union."[/COLOR]
style = 1
date = { day = 3 month = january year = 1421 }
offset = 360
action_a ={ # Impose the Sund Dues
name = "We control the sounds, let us have our due"
command = { type = domestic which = MERCANTILISM value = 1 }
command = { type = domestic which = LAND value = -1 }
command = { type = provincetax which = 307 value = 4 }
command = { type = provincetax which = 251 value = 2 }
command = { type = provincetax which = 309 value = 2 }
command = { type = fortress which = 307 value = 1 }
[COLOR=YELLOW]command = { type = fortress which = 251 value = 1 }[/COLOR]
command = { type = treasury value = -100 }
command = { type = trade value = -500 }
command = { type = relation which = HSA value = -50 }
command = { type = relation which = POM value = -50 }
command = { type = relation which = FIN value = -50 }
command = { type = relation which = LAT value = -50 }
command = { type = relation which = BUR value = -50 }
command = { type = relation which = SCO value = -25 }
}
action_b ={ # Let trade flow freely
name = "Try to keep Skanör competitive without resorting to overt coercion"
command = { type = stability value = -1 }
command = { type = domestic which = MERCANTILISM value = -1 }
command = { type = cash value = -100 }
command = { type = trade value = 200 }
command = { type = infra value = 200 }
command = { type = provincetax which = 307 value = 1 } #improved harbours for Skane
command = { type = relation which = HSA value = 20 }
command = { type = relation which = POM value = 20 }
command = { type = relation which = FIN value = 20 }
command = { type = relation which = LAT value = 20 }
command = { type = relation which = BUR value = 20 }
command = { type = relation which = SCO value = 10 }
command = { type = sleepevent which = 442202 }
command = { type = sleepevent which = 442203 }
command = { type = sleepevent which = 442210 }
command = { type = sleepevent which = 442207 }
}
}
event = {
id = 201582
trigger = { event = 442203 }
random = no
country = KAL
name = "The Sund Crisis "
desc = "Eldermann Einhafen of the Hanseatic League threatens military action if we do not reduce the essential tolls we charge at the SundSund."
date = { day = 1 month = march year = 1434 }
offset = 60
deathdate = { day = 1 month = march year = 1441 }
action_a ={ #Leads to HSA event 442205
name = "We are incensed at the arrogant Hanseatic threats, and refuse to back down."
command = { type = relation which = HSA value = -50 }
command = { type = relation which = FIN value = -10 }
command = { type = relation which = LAT value = -10 }
command = { type = sleepevent which = 442204 }
}
action_b ={ #Leads to HSA event 442204
name = "Offer to reduce the tolls, and share the spoils of trade."
[COLOR=YELLOW]command = { type = vp value = -25 }[/COLOR]
command = { type = sleepevent which = 442205 }
}
}
event = {
id = 201584
trigger = {
OR = {
event = 442204
event = 442205
}
NOT = { war = { country = HSA country = KAL }}
owned = { province = 307 data = HSA }
}
random = no
country = KAL
name = "The end of the Sund Crisis "
desc = "We have been defeated by the Hanseatic League and the king has been forced into an embarrasing agreement to acknowledge Hanseatic rights to the Sund."
date = { day = 1 month = january year = 1442 }
offset = 120
deathdate = { day = 1 month = january year = 1460 }
action_a = {
name = "We have lost control of the Sund"
command = { type = vp value = -200 }
command = { type = DIP which = -2 value = 120 }
[COLOR=YELLOW]command = { type = MIL which = -4 value = 120 }
command = { type = provincetax which = 251 value = -2 }
command = { type = provincetax which = 309 value = -2 }[/COLOR]
[COLOR=RED]command = { type = removecore which = 307 }[/COLOR]
}
}
[COLOR=YELLOW]# An Uprising in Bergslagen
event = {
id = 502000
trigger = {
atwar = yes
owned = { province = 257 data = KAL }
}
random = yes
country = KAL
name = "The Bergslagen uprisings"
desc = "The miners of Bergslagen became very rebellious as soon as their trade with metals were disturbed. M'lord, it looks like we might face a new rebellion."
style = 1
date = { day = 1 month = january year = 1434 }
offset = 300
deathdate = { day = 1 month = january year = 1435 }
action_a ={
name = "Crush every last of them!"
command = { type = stability value = -2 }
command = { type = domestic which = CENTRALIZATION value = 1 }
command = { type = province_revoltrisk which = 257 value = 4 }
command = { type = revolt which = 257 }
command = { type = revolt which = 257 }
command = { type = revolt which = 257 }
}
action_b ={ # Crush them - totally.
name = "Repay their losses."
command = { type = treasury value = -150 }
command = { type = stability value = -2 }
command = { type = domestic which = CENTRALIZATION value = -1 }
}
}[/COLOR]
Last edited:
As you might have guessed, I won't keep working on this.
A while ago, I completely lost my interest in EUII (after a long delay anyway). Now with EUIII coming I probably continue with the re-discovered EUII for long.
So... I just wanted to check in and tell you and also apologize for this. If there's still interest in an EUIII version I might be able to help if it's desired, but I won't promise anything.
A while ago, I completely lost my interest in EUII (after a long delay anyway). Now with EUIII coming I probably continue with the re-discovered EUII for long.
So... I just wanted to check in and tell you and also apologize for this. If there's still interest in an EUIII version I might be able to help if it's desired, but I won't promise anything.
SunZyl said:
I have been working on Kalmar myself, and it has ben fun.
Go without guilt. Enjoy your gaming.
Kalmar has never sat well in Interregnum. There have been a lot of calls for it to be revised, either because it was too big or it's options were too limited or the storyline in the early years was to unidirectional. With the expanded map we have more possibilities, including the cool idea for the Vitalian/Swedish state.
In the real history of the Kalmar Union, Norway was not only involved but insome reagrds was the initiating state, although margaret was as much a Danish monarch as a Norweigian one. However, in Interregnum Norway is not part of the Union. In the real history, the Norweigian "delegation" was not even present at th signing of the treaty. Let us assume that this was still the case, and that the Norweigian Council instead reject Vartislav of Pomerania as the monarch and refuse to ackowledge the Treaty. hence, bu 1419, kalmar is not only having strained realtions with the hanseatic League, but also with Norway, over which is believes it has authority through the Treaty signed by Margaret. (And, of course, with the Vitalian/Swedish state of 'Gotland'). Relations with Finland are also less than peachy. Seriously, for Kalmar, 1419 is a troubling period and the breakup of the Union (officially or in-name) seems likely to many observers. Too many foes and too little unity.
So in 1419 Kalmar will be facing a number of difficult decisions. If it confronts Norway and demands it ackowledge the supremecy of the King of Kalmar, it risks war or a politically damaging rebuff. With the Hansa having been made moe secure through the Peace of Hanover, its control of the Sund will inevitably be challenged. The Hansa will pounce on a weakened Kalmar. The Vitalian pirates continue to harangue Kalmar merchants above all others, but with unofficial backing from the Hansa fleet, kalmar is in no position to attack their key ports in Visby and (the province of) Finland, where the pretender to the crown of Sweden awaits an opportunity to return.
Now, the ai is unlikely to be able to deal with all of these problems very effectively, so the ganme needs some mechanism to assist the AI or we will see kalmar collapse more often than not. It needs to find an ally in all of this, or to make peace with Norway. The potential allies are the Teutonic Order and Finland. The Order has its own early game problems, however, and without a significant navy would be of limited benefit (but we can tweak that with a special ai-only event, of course) except in terms of attacking the Hansa in the north-east. Finland could also strike at the Hansa there, and the Danish-dominated Kalmar might offer to concede claims on the province of Finland in exchange for Finnish aid against the Hansa. Even better would be if Kalmar could unite the Order and Finland into an alliance to deal with the Pirates: Gotland to kalmar, Osel to the Order and Finland (province) to Finland (state). This has the most grace and offers the most fun in an MP setting. This might require Kalmar to forgo Norway, but would help weaken the Hansa in the Baltic enough to impose the Sund due only, say, on Hanseatic shipping ...
So, that could be option 1 for the ai, to drop Norway and pursue the Hansa by forging an anti=piracy alliance with the Order and Finland. Option 2 could be to press Norway in the hopes that gaining the western side of the Sund and Scandinavia might allow for trade to rely less on the Baltic, rendering the pirates less of an imposition, and forcing the Hansa to accept that Kalmar is just too large to challenge militarily. Finally, option 3 would be to mend the rift with the League. The League would get tax free shipping through the Sund in exchange for fighting against the Vitalians.
In the real history of the Kalmar Union, Norway was not only involved but insome reagrds was the initiating state, although margaret was as much a Danish monarch as a Norweigian one. However, in Interregnum Norway is not part of the Union. In the real history, the Norweigian "delegation" was not even present at th signing of the treaty. Let us assume that this was still the case, and that the Norweigian Council instead reject Vartislav of Pomerania as the monarch and refuse to ackowledge the Treaty. hence, bu 1419, kalmar is not only having strained realtions with the hanseatic League, but also with Norway, over which is believes it has authority through the Treaty signed by Margaret. (And, of course, with the Vitalian/Swedish state of 'Gotland'). Relations with Finland are also less than peachy. Seriously, for Kalmar, 1419 is a troubling period and the breakup of the Union (officially or in-name) seems likely to many observers. Too many foes and too little unity.
So in 1419 Kalmar will be facing a number of difficult decisions. If it confronts Norway and demands it ackowledge the supremecy of the King of Kalmar, it risks war or a politically damaging rebuff. With the Hansa having been made moe secure through the Peace of Hanover, its control of the Sund will inevitably be challenged. The Hansa will pounce on a weakened Kalmar. The Vitalian pirates continue to harangue Kalmar merchants above all others, but with unofficial backing from the Hansa fleet, kalmar is in no position to attack their key ports in Visby and (the province of) Finland, where the pretender to the crown of Sweden awaits an opportunity to return.
Now, the ai is unlikely to be able to deal with all of these problems very effectively, so the ganme needs some mechanism to assist the AI or we will see kalmar collapse more often than not. It needs to find an ally in all of this, or to make peace with Norway. The potential allies are the Teutonic Order and Finland. The Order has its own early game problems, however, and without a significant navy would be of limited benefit (but we can tweak that with a special ai-only event, of course) except in terms of attacking the Hansa in the north-east. Finland could also strike at the Hansa there, and the Danish-dominated Kalmar might offer to concede claims on the province of Finland in exchange for Finnish aid against the Hansa. Even better would be if Kalmar could unite the Order and Finland into an alliance to deal with the Pirates: Gotland to kalmar, Osel to the Order and Finland (province) to Finland (state). This has the most grace and offers the most fun in an MP setting. This might require Kalmar to forgo Norway, but would help weaken the Hansa in the Baltic enough to impose the Sund due only, say, on Hanseatic shipping ...
So, that could be option 1 for the ai, to drop Norway and pursue the Hansa by forging an anti=piracy alliance with the Order and Finland. Option 2 could be to press Norway in the hopes that gaining the western side of the Sund and Scandinavia might allow for trade to rely less on the Baltic, rendering the pirates less of an imposition, and forcing the Hansa to accept that Kalmar is just too large to challenge militarily. Finally, option 3 would be to mend the rift with the League. The League would get tax free shipping through the Sund in exchange for fighting against the Vitalians.