VIP - Scandinavia

[Herr Doctor]

Have anyone considered turning Iceland from Danish colony into the dominion in 1918 as it happened historically with the Royal Act of Union (creation of the Icelandic kingdom in personal union with Denmark)? I think it will be really nice as soon as now the game supposed to go to 1930s with Revolutions… Just got this in mind while playing Denmark last time.

Btw, why Icelandic culture was really removed from the game? I know it is insignificant issue perhaps, but still…

 

[OHgamer]

Have anyone considered turning Iceland from Danish colony into the dominion in 1918 as it happened historically with the Royal Act of Union (creation of the Icelandic kingdom in personal union with Denmark)? I think it will be really nice as soon as now the game supposed to go to 1930s with Revolutions… Just got this in mind while playing Denmark last time.

Btw, why Icelandic culture was really removed from the game? I know it is insignificant issue perhaps, but still…

I believe it was removed back in 0.2 because of problems with AI DAN causing depopulation of the island with its tax/tariff policies, resulting in all the Icelanders emigrating and leaving the island empty. And with so few Uxx tags, Iceland as a separate nation was not seen as a good use of a scarce free tag.

Things have changes in Victoria since then (over 2 years ago!) - AI behaviors have changed, the timeframe is much longer, and we still have a good number of free Uxx tags for modding new nations. At this point the issue has not really come up, but I could see both bringing back Icelandic culture and creating Iceland with one of the new Uxx tags that are still free being possible for VIP:R 0.2

However, that will need to await finishing the release of VIP:R 0.1, sometime in May '07. After that the process of suggesting new events, nations, cultures etc can begin again.

 

[Herr Doctor]

And what do you think about including my Icelandic stuff I offered long time ago into the game?
http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/showthread.php?t=318212

 

[Gottskalk]

And what do you think about including my Icelandic stuff I offered long time ago into the game?
http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum...ad.php?t=318212

As a Icelander i second that motion!

 

[Ericus1]

In the Scandanavian file, there is an event for fighting for Finish freedom, that causes Finland to DoW Russian and ally with Scandanavia, thus breaking the satelliteship and eventually leading to a Finish union with Scandanavia if they win.

However, the event has four conditions: Russia be at war but not with SCA, FIN be RUS satellite, and for the FIN_SWE flag to be set to 1. I have looked everywhere in the nearly every majors' event files, and I cannot find ANYWHERE where that flag is set. I've found a couple of events that have it as a trigger, but it seems the original event that turns the flag on is missing.

If someone could show me where it is, or at least how to get the flag triggered short of editing the save, I'd appreciate it.

 

[algernon]

I have looked everywhere in the nearly every majors' event files, and I cannot find ANYWHERE where that flag is set. I've found a couple of events that have it as a trigger, but it seems the original event that turns the flag on is missing.

If someone could show me where it is, or at least how to get the flag triggered short of editing the save, I'd appreciate it.

flg_SWE_FIN is set by Sweden joining the Crimean war, via either the B choice of event 6605 or the A choice of event 6606. These events can be found in the 'Sweden.txt' file in the 'vanilla' sub-directory.

 

[Ericus1]

flg_SWE_FIN is set by Sweden joining the Crimean war, via either the B choice of event 6605 or the A choice of event 6606. These events can be found in the 'Sweden.txt' file in the 'vanilla' sub-directory.

Ah, I only looked at the VIP events.

I have to say, I really don't like having the event be dependent on England's actions, as I never got invited to join in the Crimean war through either event, so I never even got the choice to set the flag. Basically, that breaks the whole event chain. A human player should have the ability to do so no matter what.

 

[OHgamer]

Ah, I only looked at the VIP events.

I have to say, I really don't like having the event be dependent on England's actions, as I never got invited to join in the Crimean war through either event, so I never even got the choice to set the flag. Basically, that breaks the whole event chain. A human player should have the ability to do so no matter what.

VIP is based first and foremost on the historical paths. Sweden's leaders would not have even considered entering the Crimean War had not England been involved, out of the belief that without the most powerful naval power, the Russians would use their huge land power advantage to not just crush the Ottomans, but also the Swedes if they entered the conflict.

That is why Sweden's entry via event is based on ENG being in the fray.

Of course nothing to stop a Sweden player from entering the war itself, but the event chains will not be affected and you'll have to make whatever peace, successful or not, with the Russians you can get.

And as for the Finns rebelling, there's just so much alternative history we have added at this point, and the consensus was that FIN would not have rebelled unless the Swedes showed some hostile intent towards RUS, hence the flag requirement. Hopefully in a future edition the alternative history elements can be developed further, but for now the mod pretty much stays historical until such time as contributors develop alternative paths for the alternative history you hope to recreate.

 

[Ericus1]

VIP is based first and foremost on the historical paths. Sweden's leaders would not have even considered entering the Crimean War had not England been involved, out of the belief that without the most powerful naval power, the Russians would use their huge land power advantage to not just crush the Ottomans, but also the Swedes if they entered the conflict.

That is why Sweden's entry via event is based on ENG being in the fray.

Of course nothing to stop a Sweden player from entering the war itself, but the event chains will not be affected and you'll have to make whatever peace, successful or not, with the Russians you can get.

And as for the Finns rebelling, there's just so much alternative history we have added at this point, and the consensus was that FIN would not have rebelled unless the Swedes showed some hostile intent towards RUS, hence the flag requirement. Hopefully in a future edition the alternative history elements can be developed further, but for now the mod pretty much stays historical until such time as contributors develop alternative paths for the alternative history you hope to recreate.

You're missing the point. First off, England was the one who made the ahistorical choice and backed down. Second, I would have been more than willing to DoW Russia myself (and in fact did), but that wouldn't (and didn't) do anything to set the flag. The two combined mean that I as Sweden have no way to override an AI ahistorical decision, and have no way to indicate 'hostile intent towards Russia'.

I could DoW Russia fifty times and take everything from Poland to Siberia but the event chain would stay inactive. Just saying that that should be corrected, so there is some secondary way to set that flag that a human player can use, or change the trigger from the flag to something a bit more concrete, like holding Aland, which is the end result of a succesful Crimean war anyways.

 

[OHgamer]

You're missing the point. First off, England was the one who made the ahistorical choice and backed down. Second, I would have been more than willing to DoW Russia myself (and in fact did), but that wouldn't (and didn't) do anything to set the flag. The two combined mean that I as Sweden have no way to override an AI ahistorical decision, and have no way to indicate 'hostile intent towards Russia'.

I could DoW Russia fifty times and take everything from Poland to Siberia but the event chain would stay inactive. Just saying that that should be corrected, so there is some secondary way to set that flag that a human player can use, or change the trigger from the flag to something a bit more concrete, like holding Aland, which is the end result of a succesful Crimean war anyways.

Right, that is what i mean by the ahistorial element in VIP is not very well developed. We have the historical potential (ENG DoW encourages Sweden in) but there has not been the development of alternative chains that does what you want. There are so many hours in the day, and so many other elements to work on in the mod.

However, if others want to post some event chains to do what you would like, they would definitely be considered for inclusion. But for the developers, the focus at this point is on completing historical chains, and focusing later on the ahistorical lines of development once the main historical chains are completed and the broader gameplay elements such as the economc balance are finally settled.

 

[clamp2004]

I believe that the provinces of Ribe and Flensburg should belong to the state of Slesvig which should be a sattelite of Denmark, rather than to be controlled by Denmark directly.

That was the whole cause of the Slesvigiske Krige on the Danish side as the Ejder-policy was to integrate Slesvig into Denmark but to give up Holsten and Lauenberg.

Holstein can remain a satellite of Denmark but should start with an alliance with the rest of the other German states as well + Slesvig. Slesvig on the other hand should only have an alliance with Denmark (as sat) and Holsten.
I believe that this much more closely model the historical problematics around the Slesvig-question.

(also maybe an increased event-chain for the 1st and 2nd Slesvig war).

 

[Carewolf2]

I believe that the provinces of Ribe and Flensburg should belong to the state of Slesvig which should be a sattelite of Denmark, rather than to be controlled by Denmark directly.

That was the whole cause of the Slesvigiske Krige on the Danish side as the Ejder-policy was to integrate Slesvig into Denmark but to give up Holsten and Lauenberg.

Holstein can remain a satellite of Denmark but should start with an alliance with the rest of the other German states as well + Slesvig. Slesvig on the other hand should only have an alliance with Denmark (as sat) and Holsten.
I believe that this much more closely model the historical problematics around the Slesvig-question.

(also maybe an increased event-chain for the 1st and 2nd Slesvig war).

Slesvig was only theoretically independt. In practise it was governed as a part of Denmark and had been forever. The official integration of Slesvig was a deliberate counteraction on the German unification movement; you can have Holstein but not Slesvig.

So in a game point of view it makes perfect sense for Slesvig to be part of Denmark, and then conquerored by Preusia.

 

[Panzerschreck]

I believe that the provinces of Ribe and Flensburg should belong to the state of Slesvig which should be a sattelite of Denmark, rather than to be controlled by Denmark directly.

That was the whole cause of the Slesvigiske Krige on the Danish side as the Ejder-policy was to integrate Slesvig into Denmark but to give up Holsten and Lauenberg.

Holstein can remain a satellite of Denmark but should start with an alliance with the rest of the other German states as well + Slesvig. Slesvig on the other hand should only have an alliance with Denmark (as sat) and Holsten.
I believe that this much more closely model the historical problematics around the Slesvig-question.

(also maybe an increased event-chain for the 1st and 2nd Slesvig war).

I actually prepared changes like you sugguest even pre Revolutions, they may be included in VIP:Rev 0.2

 

[Arilou]

A few thoughts on Sweden:

A) Currently the starting reform is "State Press" it probably should not be. ("Censored Press" would probably be better) while the sate did exert considerable influence on the press (partially by using the power to ban a newspaper, but more often by outright bribing the editors) but the press wasn't entirely in the hands of the state.

Another option is to have the Aftonbladet event switch the press reforms, to model the effect the case had on the government's practical abiliy to interfere.

B) The swedish parties. Generally I think the minority policies are a bit too generous (is there a particular reason for them?) The criteria for the various people seems vague at best, and I'm kind of wondering to what degree we should strive for historical accuracy or ease of gameplay? Because in swedish history there are TONS of shiort-lived party-groups with nebulous programmes for most of the period, some of whom seem to switch names about every other year.

I'm also unsure to what degree of detail you want, there are a lot of short-lived and minor parties with very similar platforms (in the cases where platforms exist at all) for instance, there was a difference between the parliamentary parties of the late 19th-early 20th century and their political organizations that were active "in the field". Allmänna Valmansförbundet t.ex. represented several different conservative parties.

Incidentally a minor naming issue (and I'm always annoyed by that) Socialdemokraterna should probably be Sveriges Socialdemokratiska Arbetarparti (or SAP) which was the official name.

That said, Landtmannapartiet and all of its various scions should probably be conservative and not liberal (arguably with the exception of the free-trade Gamla Landtmannapartiet as a result of the split over tariffs) especially as farmers was a big support-group for the party.

I think this is important because the liberal party-groups had a similar split over the question of defence a few years later. But generally speaking the "parties" of the time were very much short-lived and temporary institutions.

But for the political structure I'd probably do something like this:

1836 to the representational reform of 1866 Sweden is still using the (decidedly odd) estate's riksdag. Getting any kind of hold on the parties of the time would probably be futile. (at least unless you go back o the Caps and Hats of the 18th century)

I'd probably do something like this for the 1836-1866 era:

SWE;6600;Jukerpartiet;1830;1866;conservative;interventionism;protectionism;moralism;residence;jingoism;all;all;x

"The junker party", representing the conservative elements of the old order. It's actually the name of a minor grouping among younger members of the Estates of nobility, but It is as good a name as any.

SWE;6601;Reformgrupen;1830;1866;liberal;laissez_faire;free_trade;pluralism;limited_citizenship;pro_military;all;all;x

"The Reform group", representing the reformist elements of the old Riksdag working for its abolition.

And

SWE;6602;Kungavännerna;1834;1866;reactionary;interventionism;free_trade;moralism;residence;jingoism;all;all;x

"friends of the king", representing eventual reactionary elements.

SWE;6603;Revolutionära gruppen;1830;1866;anarcho-liberal;laissez_faire;free_trade;pluralism;full_citizenship;jingoism;all;all;x

Representing eventual people fed up with the current system and not willing to work within it.

Now, once we get past 1866 we start getting things that seem to approach real parties. (which doesen't mean they don't merge, split, and generally act up a the drop of a hat) It will take until the late 19th century and the early 20th century before we get anything that even approaches modern political parties.

Now, from 1866 onwards we get:

SWE;6604;Landtmannapartiet;1867;1888;conservative;laissez_faire;free_trade;pluralism;limited_citizenship;pro_military;all;all;x

Which split over tariffs in 1888 to these two parties:

SWE;6605;Nya Landtmannapartiet;1888;1895;conservative;interventionism;protectionism;pluralism;limited_citizenship;anti_military;all;all;x
SWE;6606;Gamla Landtmannapartiet;1888;1895;liberal;laissez_faire;free_trade;pluralism;limited_citizenship;pro_military;all;all;x

I am not certain how the free-trade wing should be characterized. On he one hand, it was decidedly free trade and laissez-faire on the other hand, it was still a part of the "right", vaguely speakng.

Their opponents would be:

SWE;6606;Centern;1866;1883;liberal;laissez_faire;free_trade;secularism;limited_citizenship;pro_military;all;all;x

(before 1873 it was known as "Ministeriella partiet", but it seems to have been the same group, more or less) Not to be confused with the modern party of the same name.

As well as:

SWE;6607;Nyliberala Partiet Partiet;1868;1871;liberal;laissez_faire;free_trade;secularism;full_citizenship;anti_military;all;all;third_party

Which split over defense issues and was absorbed by the other parties.

The two groups of the Landtmannapartiet were reunited again in 1895:

SWE;6608;Landtmannapartiet;1895;1904;conservative;interventionism;protectionism;pluralism;limited_citizenship;pacifism;all;all;x

That became:

SWE;6609;Almänna Valmansförbundet;1904;1934;conservative;laissez_faire;protectionism;moralism;limited_citizenship;pro_military;all;all;x

They switched names 1934, but that's a bit late to create an entirely new pary, right? If it is too annoying just make them keep their name until game's end

But just in case:

SWE;6609;Högerns Riksorganisation;1934;2000;conservative;laissez_faire;protectionism;moralism;limited_citizenship;pro_military;all;all;x

Note that Allmänna Valmansförbundet was technically an umbrella organisation for a bunch of different parties on the right. But we can ignore that, I suppose.

Now, here it gets troublesome, as between 1888 and 1900 the liberals seem to be decidedly split. 1897 I have the names of two "discussion clubs" that would merge to form a new liberal party in 1900. I'm therefore going to make the free-trade wing of the Landtmannapartiet liberal, then have a stopgap liberal party from 1895-1900...

SWE;6610;Liberala Diskussionsklubbar;1895;1900;liberal;laissez_faire;free_trade;secularism;full_citizenship;anti_military;all;all;x

Which became:

SWE;6611;Liberala Samlingspartiet;1900;1924;liberal;laissez_faire;free_trade;pluralism;full_citizenship;anti_military;all;all;x

Which split over prohibition in 1924 into:

SWE;6612;Frisinnade Folkpartiet;1924;1934;liberal;laissez_faire;free_trade;moralism;full_citizenship;anti_military;all;all;x
SWE;6613;Sveriges Liberala Parti;1924;1934;liberal;laissez_faire;free_trade;pluralism;full_citizenship;anti_military;all;all;x

and reunited in 1934 as:

SWE;6613;Folkpartiet Liberalerna;1934;2000;liberal;laissez_faire;free_trade;pluralism;full_citizenship;anti_military;all;all;x

For the agrarian parties we have:

SWE;6614;Sveriges Agrarförbund;1895;1903;conservative;interventionism;protectionism;moralism;limited_citizenship;pacifism;all;all;x
SWE;6615;Sveriges Agrarförbund;1915;1911;conservative;interventionism;protectionism;moralism;limited_citizenship;pacifism;all;all;x

which merged into:

SWE;6616;Bondeförbundet;1911;2000;conservative;interventionism;protectionism;moralism;residence;anti_military;all;all;x

Now, the socialist parties:

SWE;6617;Socialdemokratiska Arbetarpartiet;1889;1909;socialist;state_capitalism;protectionism;secularized;full_citizenship;pacifism;all;all;x

I am unsure why the choice was made to make the change in social-democratic politics 1905. I think the failed general strike of 1909 would make a better watershed.

SWE;6618;Socialdemokratiska Arbetarpartiet;1905;2000;socialist;interventionism;protectionism;secularized;full_citizenship;pacifism;all;all;x

(if the names are too long just use "SAP")

Which expelled the youth organization in 1917:

SWE;6619;Socialdem. Vänsterpartiet;1917;1929;communist;planned_economy;protectionism;atheism;full_citizenship;pacifism;all;all;x

Which split into:

SWE;6629;Sveriges Kommunistiska Parti (Sillén);1929;2000;communist;planned_economy;protectionism;atheism;full_citizenship;pacifism;all;all;x

[/CODE]

And:

SWE;6620;Sveriges Kommunistiska Parti (Kilbom);1929;2000;communist;planned_economy;protectionism;atheism;full_citizenship;pacifism;all;all;third party

Which one year after the game ends acually ended up becoming fascist.... But that's a different story.

Now, as to the fascist organisations.... They are even more numerous and small than the communist ones! It is also hard to discern the more generally anti-democratic/reactionary elements and the genuinely fascist ones. So I'll just keep them as they were:

SWE;6621;Nationalsocialistiska Arbetarpartiet;1905;2000;fascist;state_capitalism;protectionism;moralism;residence;jingoism;all;all;third_party

Questions? Thoughts? Comments?

 

[OHgamer]

keep in mind that the way elections work in Victoria is that unless your POPs have issue voting, the first active liberal/conservative etc party will get the majority of that ideology's voting. So when dealing with all these breakaway groups, you need to be careful in how you order them.

Also, party names need to be kept somewhat short if possible for display purposes, thus Socialdemokratierna rather than the full (and very long) name of the party which, if included in full, would end up not being displayed in full IIRC, or bleeding over into the game map.

the degree to which parties should be reflected really is hard to say, basically unless the party gained power or the party split an ideological grouping so that their ideological opponents could gain power (a new liberal group splitting the liberal vote allowing the conservatives to get in, for ex) there isn't really much point in having an overly detailed party file, because in most cases the smaller factions will not get much/any of the vote if vote is based on ideology (and even if based on issues, they tend to do less well than perhaps they historically did).

 

[Arilou]

Also, party names need to be kept somewhat short if possible for display purposes, thus Socialdemokratierna rather than the full (and very long) name of the party which, if included in full, would end up not being displayed in full IIRC, or bleeding over into the game map.

Yeah, I figured something like that. In that case simply use SAP.

keep in mind that the way elections work in Victoria is that unless your POPs have issue voting, the first active liberal/conservative etc party will get the majority of that ideology's voting. So when dealing with all these breakaway groups, you need to be careful in how you order them.

Good point.

You know, I'm starting to think it might actually be better to have the DEFAULT be issue-voting, and have S&G allow you to switch to ideology-voting? Most of the parties i the early 19th century seem to be able to split and fracture relatively easy over single issues. (Basically the "ideology voting" would be more suited for the mass parties of the late 19th/early 20th century than the "parliamentary parties" of the early period.

Another possibility would be to set the voting patterns differently depending on countries (possibly in the startup event?) and then having S&G enable you to pick it later.

 

[OHgamer]

Another possibility would be to set the voting patterns differently depending on countries (possibly in the startup event?) and then having S&G enable you to pick it later.

not sure, might be able to set that in the .inc files for each nation, would have to test.

 

[Sleepyhead]

One thing I think needs to be done is to change Danish, Norwegian and Swedish culture into one Scandinavian if Scandinavia is formed. The three other cultures would serve no purpose if the three states did not exist.

 

[Arilou]

One thing I think needs to be done is to change Danish, Norwegian and Swedish culture into one Scandinavian if Scandinavia is formed. The three other cultures would serve no purpose if the three states did not exist.

Actually they would. Notice all those minority parties?

Besides, why waste a tag?

 

[Sleepyhead]

Actually they would. Notice all those minority parties?

So existing minority parties in the game is a valid argument for a hypothetical Scandinavian state? In the 1860s Swedish hadn't become a spoken language, the Norwegian language fight had not occurred etc. The only reason the culture is divided is because of the three states, with them gone the setup is rather nonsensical.

Besides, why waste a tag?

Well if one decides to go after Finland, Estonia and Latvia the national cultures won't fit on the screen.