Portugal, Netherlands and Venice all were great powers for a time, in different times. Judging the power of a country by the number of armies it can field is stupid.
- 4
- 1
Will Sevilla steer to Genoa? Isn't unhistorical?
- Thread starter saegoto
- Start date
-
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.
Portugal, Netherlands and Venice all were great powers for a time, in different times. Judging the power of a country by the number of armies it can field is stupid.
Or - and this seems to be some kind of pariah proposal, for the devs - actually represent what happens inside a country, and then use that to make Castile a basketcase country.
That reminds me of a post i saw somewhere in a Paradox forum (either this or Victoria 2), that said Great Britain (around the late game EU4 period/Napoleonic Wars) never fielded more than 75k soldiers, at the same time. If this is true, would anyone say that it was debatable if they were a great power?
Sure, Portugal was a great power for a short period of time (guess what idiotic kings do to a country? Hint: no good. After John II, we never had a king fit for leading the empire we built over the time, IMO)
Going back to the content "tiers" Johan used in 2013, before EU4's release, i think that Portugal, during that time period, was floating between lower tier 1/upper tier 2. I know the tiers were used to describe content/flavour priorities, but i think in this case it fits well.
To give a comparison, Portugal's impact on Europe was, at the very least, the same as Sweden during EU4's time period. (Obviously, in different shapes and formats, but still...)
- 1
The key word here is debatable. Britain being a great power is not debatable, it was. Bosnia being a great power is not debatable, it was not. Portugal? I think most people would say it was, but it's open for debate and not something concrete. Much like Venice, which is also open for debate, or you mention Sweden, which one could probably argue due to their short time in the sun and implosion early into the 18th century even if I disagree. Portugal was not a Russia or France; their status as a great power would depend on the definition of one, and it could be "debated" that they never were. Nothing really against Portugal, and in fact I'd argue the impact they had and legacy of them and the Netherlands in spite of their size should be a point of pride, not a contentious way to leave a thread that you'd spammed pages before.
But that's neither here nor there really. I think Portugal was a great power, and I think Portugal is fine in the game... and I think the end node change won't change their AI failures because those failures are not really about trade wealth at all but rather the inability of the AI to handle land-based over-water warfare, the absurdity of current naval combat, and the foolish willingness for AI to join wars where a more powerful and friendly neighbor is on the enemy side. Some traded ducats flowing east won't change this.
But that's neither here nor there really. I think Portugal was a great power, and I think Portugal is fine in the game... and I think the end node change won't change their AI failures because those failures are not really about trade wealth at all but rather the inability of the AI to handle land-based over-water warfare, the absurdity of current naval combat, and the foolish willingness for AI to join wars where a more powerful and friendly neighbor is on the enemy side. Some traded ducats flowing east won't change this.
- 2
Aye, I'm watching 'Isabel' right now and learning quite a bit about Iberian history and am astonished at how badly its represented in EU4
Like how Isabel had to fight a civil war against Marquis Juan Pacheco and his puppet King Henry (the terrible heir Castile has), and how after Henry died his young daughter Juana was used by Archbishop Carillo and Alfonso (king of Portugal) to try and claim the throne of Castile. And like how Aragon was an impoverished and highly feudal realm, with catalan nobles doing whatever they wanted to their peasants and ignoring the crown. And how the Reconquista of Granada was actually instigated by Granada themselves, who then succumbed to civil war.
Amazing how terrible Iberia is represented in EU4. Castile should have it's own war of the roses type disaster to get rid of Henry, at least, and Portugal should not be historical friends with Castile.
You mean like the Castilian Civil War disaster we're adding in 1.12?
- 18
- 4
I'm guessing it's going to be some kind of civil war. In Castille.
- 11
- 2
Espionage ideas -> Infiltrate Adminstration. Perhaps this will convince you to rework spies in the next expansion, before I do it again!
- 6
Wouldn't it be better to have one disaster civil war for every monarchy with loads of events, foreign support possible, which is then localized for the most important countries, with the appropriate name/dynasties etc...?
- 1
Funnily enough, there already exists a disaster, triggered by low Legitimacy, called "Civil War", which can fire for any monarchy.
(It's horrible. Bizarrely, though, it may actually be better, if you're a long way below 50, to go out of your way to trigger it rather than trying to avoid it.)
- 1
About the topic, trade system in EU4 is abstract, so it is impossible to be realistic or historical.
and, how about POORtugal....
I am assuming that Spain is supposed to expand into Italy instead of France.
and, how about POORtugal....
- 2
Good, hopefully we can get a reliable way of having Isabel take the throne now.