What new tags should we see in vic 3

[LiberiusX]

I think we need a Blorg tag. Blorg WC when?

 

[lascupa0788]

It would be very interesting if they went with a dynamic model instead of a list model. Think Crusader Kings, where every individual county, every duchy, kingdom, and etc all have separate 'tags', and where moreover you can get different aesthetics for those tags, for example with certain ones being named after the ruling dynasty in the right circumstances. In Vicky, it would make sense to make this more free-form. There could still reasonably be county, state, and region-level tags as well as dynastic ones, but other types make sense too; cultural union tags (Germany, China), tags named after their capital (Sokoto, Hamdullahi, etc), tags named after their founder directly ('Tippu Tib's Domain'), and tags named directly after their form of government (Free Territory, Soviet Union). The usual political flavouring on regular tags' names and flags is important too of course.

Of course, all of this would be complex and require a lot of automatic generation- much as per CK and Imperator- and it would be such a big departure from the usual style of Victoria that I don't actually expect it to be like that. It sure would be fun though.

 

[Jia Xu]

I would definitely love to see a distinct tag for Austrian formed Germany

This could cause mechanical strangeness. Pan-nationalist rebels want to form their union tag. Well, for Germans, that's Germany. What happens if there are two Germanys, though? What happens if both Germanys exist at the same time with the same name?

There really needs to only be one Germany. Maybe there could be some dynamic flag changing, in-game, as a result of Austria using a unique From Germany decision or something. CK3 does with with Viking England where if Danelaw wins, England gets a Viking flag for the rest of the game. Something like that would work much better.

 

[Bradley Hutson]

The good news is, genocide and slavery are, economically speaking, bad. Industrial genocide and even just "population transfer" is a huge drain on resources for no real gain, while slavery is in a vacuum a good investment as you get wrokers you don't have to pay, it introduces enough complications that the "savings" you get amount to basically nothing.

A tag for non-monarchist Ottomans that nevertheless keeps its territories intact, perhaps. Obviously "Ottoman Republic" would be strange but "Turkey" doesn't make sense for a multi-ethnic republic either. "Eastern Mediterranean Community"?

A “Turco-Arab Federation” was an actual thing proposed in the 1890s. Alternatively a republic of Anatolia and the Levant might work?

I'm liking the Republic of Anatolia and the Levant - it makes reference to the heartlands.

Asia Minor Republic?
Rum Republic / Republic of Rum?

Or maybe Ottomanist Republic - I think I read somewhere that Ottomanism was an attempt to create a common identity loyal to the idea of belonging to the Ottoman Empire.

Well, quoting Turkish school curriculum during the fall of the Ottoman Empire, there were many ideas among Turkish intelligentsia for how to stop it. The liberal idea was Ottomanism, the idea of creating an Ottoman identity containing peoples of all religions and ethnicities from Bosnia to Basra. The religious idea was Islamism, saying we already lost the Jews and Christians, that Ottoman Empire should be an Islam based empire containing Turks, Kurds and Arabs. The nationalist idea was Turkism/Turkish nationalism, the idea of creating a Turkish ethnostate to replace the Ottomans. (Here I stop quoting the school curriculum) This last idea later got in contact with Russian/Tatar Pan Turanism and developed further into lots of branches. There was pan-Turkism and Anatolianism mainly. Kemalism was Anatolianist French style civic nationalism combined with petty bourgeoisie-democratic policies like hardline laicism and state socialism. After Arabs and Balkan peoples revolted, the other two ideas fell out of fashion and Turkish nationalism's branches emerged as the public opinion. Up until Islamists got back with Erbakan's party and İBDA at least.

To get back to the game and leave the sociopolitics of my country behind, I think a republicanized, liberalized Ottoman Empire can be represented as the republican version of Ottoman tag. And representing Turkey as just republican Ottomans leaves this possibility as well as the chance of a non-Ottoman(it was named after the dynasty after all) monarchy out. Make Ottomans and Turkey a separate tag and the issue is solved. Besides, Turkey coexisted and fought against the Ottoman Empire during our independence war(1919-1922).

To be honest I would think the best thing is just for each region to have its own tag: Anatolia or Asia Minor (I'd say Anatolia, though, in line with Turkish Anadolu; I don't know why a Turkish-dominated state would use 'Asia Minor'), Syria, Iraq... Possibly a formable "Levant"? That's a French word, though. "Mashriq"? Do we have any examples of states that dominated the Mashriq and what they called themselves? This feels a bit like proposing a formable "Maghreb", i.e stupid.

Then if the Ottoman collapse results in an Anatolia-centred polity dominating the Middle East it would just be Anatolia, or if it was dominated by Baghdad it might be called Iraq, or from Damascus Syria. That's a bit odd too, though, isn't it. I particularly dislike "Iraq", it seems like a modern formation. How about Jazira?

Realistically I would think the most likely outcome of some kind of Ottoman reorganisation into a republican structure would just call itself Turkey (bear in mind modern Turkey controls a swathe of Kurdistan and historical Syria, but still calls itself Turkey). "Turkey" referred to the Turks, yes, but it was also a fairly generic regional term. Such a state would still be centred on Istanbul and possibly Ankara, after all.

I really like the idea of an option for the Young Turks' "Ottomanism" project to succeed and ultimately produce an "Ottoman Republic".

I don't know what a good name for the proposed (and much fought-for) Turco-Arab dual state would be. Possibly given that it was modelled after Austria-Hungary, Turkey-Arabia? Does anyone know what the Hashemite Arabian kingdom promised in 1916 was going to be called? The various communications I've read in my studies just refer to the "Arab Kingdom", so I guess "Arabia" (that's what the merger of Nejd and Hejaz ultimately got called as well--perhaps "Arabia" in Vic3 can finally be called <dynastyname> Arabia, in line with Saudi?

Another good place to look is Michael Provence, "Ottoman modernity, colonialism, and insurgency in the interwar Arab East", Int. J. Middle East Stud., 2011, pp. 205-225. He doesn't get deep into the Arabist proposal for a dual state (it's not my immediate area, sorry I can't be more help) but it's a great treatment of how misguided the common narrative of the Arabs being "liberated" from Ottoman rule post-WWI is, and how both Turks and Arabs made efforts to knit the Ottoman realm back together in the '20s and '30s.

What about Republic/Union/Federation of [Capital City]? For example, if the capital were placed in Aleppo (a city close to center of population of 1914 Ottoman Empire), would it be reasonable to call it the Aleppo Federation?

 

[CorneliusBottomly]

Austria-Bohemia
Austria-Slovenia
Austria-Transylvania
Austria-Vojvodina
Austria-Banat
Austria-Lombardia-Venetia
Austria-Croatia-Slavonia-Dalmatia

 

[Blindbohemian]

What about Republic/Union/Federation of [Capital City]? For example, if the capital were placed in Aleppo (a city close to center of population of 1914 Ottoman Empire), would it be reasonable to call it the Aleppo Federation?

Is a problem that Paradox games don’t typically include government forms in tag names? Whatever the country is, they might not end up a federation/republic/union or whatever (particularly in the Islamic east in the early twentieth century). Calling an empire sprawling from Cairo to Istanbul to Basra “Baghdad” would be kind of strange…

I am starting to think that just a regional name—most likely Turkey or Syria, based on population and wealth—would work best. Perhaps a Turco-Syria for some kind Compromise outcome.

 

[WillemDeZwijger]

Very minor but the Netherlands should still be called "United Kingdom of the Netherlands" until the Treaty of London, and then either choose to give up Belgian claims and simply become the "Kingdom of the Netherlands", or pursue reunification.
If they then reunify (diplomatically) at some point either under Belgium or the Kingdom of the Netherlands it should become the United Kingdom again to represent the federal structure. I'm also curious how they'll handle government changes. If the monarchy gets kicked out will it become the Dutch Republic? Or the recently abolished Batavian Republic?