Get your cup of psychoactive substances before reading. It's long.
With 35 flavor events(with wrong dates) and an unique government(and its specific events), Poland-Lithuania could perhaps pass for a fairly fleshed out country; however, given its very turbulent history in the EU4's timespan (or any timespan, really), as well as its peculiar societal and political structure, there is a potential for much much more. While it is already one of the most interesting countries to play, I belive it can evolve to be the single most engaging campaign to be had in EU4, a one that would require superior administrative, planing, and scheming skills, rather than be a yet another map-painting rampage.
As for now, upon Casimir IV's coronation, Poland gets the Elective Monarchy government, which while definitely unique and on the surface interesting, is ultimately dull. Dull for one simple reason: it is actually lacking the very essence of games – interactivity. In the early game the dynastic struggle for Polish-Lithuanian throne can be quite dynamic and result in various alliances, what is generaly desired because it promotes diversity in subsequent campaigns; however, it does not dismiss the charge that it is essentialy little interactive and thus boring for the PLC player. When playing Poland-Lithuania the only governmental interaction the player gets, is the ability to burn his/her prestige to promote a local noble/dynasty, and get yet another random monarch. Whereas the player, the grey eminence behind the country's affairs, may want to play some sort of dynastic game and, for example, opt for a Rurikovich candidate – to reconcile with Muscovy, secure the eastern border, and focus on westward expansion, or stick to one dynasty and try to subdue the rampant nobility. As for now, it is either that local noble(with basically no benefit for being local) or an almost random foreign candidate. Then, you get that new ruler and, at random, he either gets support from the Sejm or not, without player's involvement whatsoever. Your ruler was just crowned, he hasn't yet taken any actions, hasn't yet set any policy, and yet the Sejm can somehow comply, or not, with his policy, which would be largely predifined by pacta conventa anyways. There is no interactivity to it, there is no fun to it, and there is a potential for frustration if the Sejm has a whim to hate you. Naturally games need simplifications to stay fun; however, that far going ones are simply annoying.This situation lasts for some 160 years, then you get the royal struggle events chain, and for the remaining 200 years you are playing with an ordinary government, be that either republic or monarchy.
With the current take on the Royal Elections and Nobles' Democracy, it is not so much that extra mechanic that makes playing Poland-Lithuania stand out, it is more of a tool that you can use when not playing it – a chance to get some extra MP, prestige, and allied cannon fodder.[1] And while it is roughly historically accurate for the XVIII century, it is unsatisfying gameplay-wise. (and in the XVIII century you no longer have this goverment anyways)
Now having stated my general complaint, I can turn to actually being helpful and productive. Suggestions how to enliven PLC gameplay I am going to cover in points III+ , and my overlaying aproach behind said suggestions in points I and II.
[1]Given that the Habsburgs haven't yet monopolized the throne thanks to their diplo bonuses, to be sometimes interluded by a local noble after a senile 80-years-old ruler dies a year after being elected
I Preface
II Sources
III Golden Liberty – the government
IV Parliment
V Royal Elections
VI Winged Hussars
VII Flavor, government, and advisor events.
VIII Polish Ideas
IX Map
I Preface
The purpose of this preface is to explain the reasons behind my take on the representation of Poland-Lithuania, as well as to mitigate in advance certain voices of protest that I expect to be raised in connection to it.
Designing a game tagged as historical, especially one that tries to more or less faithfully represent the social and politcal stituation, is a tricky thing to do. Tricky, because it requires an assessment of historical events and procsesses, in order for them to be translated into game mechanics. This is bound to spark controversy, or at least an ever-returning discussion. I can think of three immediate reasons for it.
The first is ideological/methodological. Different people, under the influence of their believes, attribute different gravity to the same events or circumstances; even professional historians, although they may try, can hardly fully detach themselves from ideological bias which becomes an integral part of our perception as we mature; plus the practice shows that historians are often particulary biased, as they tend to promote their own „school” of looking at history.
Some people will say that history is all about the money.
Some will say that it is all about the class struggle.
Some will say it is all about political geography.
Some will say it is all about „natural selection”, prey or be preyed upon.
Some will say that history is an outcome of clash of cultures.
Some will say that history is an outcome of individuals' actions.
Some will say that history is a set of lies anyways.
And, at last, someone will say that history is a combination of all the above; but, when deciding which circumstances were the most relevant in a particular case, we are back to the issue of organic ideological bias.
Secondly, the assessment is vulnerable to national perspectives and sympathies, and a very human tendency to see „us” as the good guys, and the „others” as the baddies. I suppose this point is pretty self-explanatory.
Another distortion happens for gameplay reasons, and due to the technical restrictions games have, causing groups of people to complain about oversimplification of their favourite „pets”. Self-explanatory again.
I bring up those issues, because they are especially prevalent when Polish-Lithuanian history is analyzed. The history that suffers from 200+ years of defamation, demonization, omittance, neglectance, and marginalization.
Defamation and demonization done primarly by the partitioners of PLC(for obvious reasons), although it can be traced back to the Teuton propaganda, plus already during its existance PLC and its unorthodox government, had as many proponents as opponents.
Omittance and marginalization by the outside world, at first because of Poland's disappearence, and later due to the status of Poland as a yet-another-unfortunate-place-to-be-beyond-the-iron-curtain, and her subsequent inability to fully represent herself.
As the result, Polish-Lithuanian history is little, if at all, known to an average Joe. A typical book on the „common”, popular history encloses 400 years of Polish-Lithuanian union in 2-4 pages, on which it is presented as something-of-a-weirdo-country-that-was-so-busy-making-peasants-feel-miserable-that-it-didn't-notice-it-is-getting-partitioned. Optionaly the country will be mentioned here and there, like in the case of Sobieski's helping a little bit in dealing with the Ottomans. Then, the same book will dedicate 6 pages to discuss, ad exemplum, War of The Roses.
In the worst case, Poland-Lithuania is regarded as a villain, or a do-not example. In the best case, it is reduced to function as a background for other „important”, „history-making” countries and nations. And although this attitude could be said to alleviate in the recent years, as Poland slowly recovers from the soviet-inflicted cancer and makes her place into the consciousness of Western people despite alleged idiocy of our entire political scene , 200 years of prejudice and neglectance cannot be overcome overnight.
Further on, eventual demise(=failure) of PLC, kind of naturally makes one think chiefly negatively of its governmental form, which is typically cited as the main source of PLC's troubles. The situation is not made any better by an information overload one gets when trying to study Polish-Lithuanian history in depth. The overload which promotes simplistic conclusions to make one's life easier. Moreover, a paradoxical nature of many aspects of Golden Liberty, a multitude of inner attitudes towards it, frequently misfiring laws, and an enormous change in power between the early and the late Commonwealth, all lead to a situation in which, with a little bit of creativity and confirmation bias, Polish-Lithuanian history can be used to validate virtually any ideological standpoint. Here come some such purposedly oversimplified „legitimate” claims.
Egalitarianism: serfdom and feudal opression in PLC weakened the country, causing its demise.
Egalitarianism: The emergence of magnates among egalitarian Polish-Lithuanian nobles created a de facto oligarchic government that brought about country's demise.
Authoritarianism: The lack of a strong-fisted government in PLC created anarchy that made the country an easy prey for its more authoritarian neighbours.
Pacifism: The offensive policing of Sigismund III Vasa, which compromized the pacifistic sympathies and fondness of diplomacy exhibited by early Poland-Lithuania, that had led to the union in the first place, antagonized PLC's neighbours what in turn led to devastating wars, weakening of the country, and ultimately her partitioning.
Militarism: Strong army is the very backbone of every state. Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth failed to increase its military expenditures to keep them on par with those of its neighbours; and subsequently was partitioned by those neighbours.
Spiritualism: No material achievements are eternal; but, achievements of culture and tradition can grant immortality. Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth was destroyed, but its culture survived in the Polish people who managed to bring their country back to life.
Et cetera, et cetera. Claims out of context are fun too. For example a polish historian, Paweł Jasienica, when discussing Jagiellons' policy makes the two following claims in the very same chapter: makeshift dynastic policy towards Hungary and Bohemia was an unecessary strain on Polish resources that would be better spend elsewhere; Teutonic Knights were the most imminent danger to Poland as it was a yet another disguised attempt by the HRE to subjugate Poland. Both those claims taken independently, as Mr Jasienica has done, can be argued for. But, if we sum them up with historical context, they form a claim that giving up on Bohemian and Hungarian crowns and consequently leaving them to the Holy Roman Empire, would help Poland to fight back the empire. Isn't it wonderfully f***ing stupid?
Now, with all of that in mind I suggest to take historians' analyses with a healthy dose of scepticism and distance, and instead turn to the data on political, cultural, and socioeconomic structure of Poland-Lithuania, and through the use of common sense, logic, and knowledge of human nature, try to to identify conflicts that were bound to arise in such a country, and then build game mechanics around them. (It's late, and I can't be ar**d to break down this sentence.) It's what I have been trying to do with my design, which I hope you will find appealing.
II Sources
I am not a historian; but, I am also not a complete layman. Aside from my secondary eduction(and actually learning not just passing,) I have also read a number of books on history, especially on the history of my own country of Poland, which is the subject of this suggestion. The tittles that were relevant you can see in the picture below, most of them you will not find in english edition. One that you will find in English, is obviously Norman Davies' God's Playground. I recommend it for you for an introduction to Polish history. It's annoyingly brief about some topics; but, it does one thing amazingly well – it shows the many shades of grey in the history, and as such is probably the most objective account of polish history ever written.
III Golden Liberty
Introduce Golden Liberty in the place of elective monarchy, with the following characteristics:
- -50% total force limit(base+land forcelimit%),
- +1 monarch diplomacy skill #King's role in Commonwealth was pretty much this of a mediator between various factions, plus it takes diplomacy to be elected in the first place.
-has Sejm/Senate(IV)
-has royal elections (V)
-uses solidarity mechanics (below)
-uses royal authority mechanics (below)
-can call Pospolite Ruszenie(levee en masse) (below)
-can form Winged Hussars(VI)
-can establish folwarks(below)
Solidarity and royal authority are two mechanics I propose for representing the political situation in the country.
Solidarity is a measure of citizens support for the country's government. It reflects how firmly they adhere to the country's ideals, and in turn, determines how willing are they to contribute their resources to the common cause.
It has the following scaled effects(max):
-maximum centralisation -50
-army morale +10%
-tolerance of heretics +3
-tolerance of heathens +2
-maximum states +10
-max promoted cultures +2
-influences strength of other interactions
-influences likelihood of government specific events (VII)
It is a compound value comprising an accumulated amount and one derived from other modifiers, the accumulated amount decays by -0,05 per month. It has the following sources:
#derived
-prestige -10 – +10
-stability -6 – +6
-+1 per prosperous state
-0–10 from noble's loyalty
-reforms
- -1 per devastated state
- -1 per corruption
#accumulative
-wining/losing wars +10/-10
- -0.1 per converted development
-flavor and government events
-+0.1 for developing a province, -0.1 for exploiting development
-+25 at the start of the game
Royal authority is a measure of king's actual influence on the country. It is a sum of his skills, actions, dynastic strength, as well as of passed laws and the size of royal domain.
It has the following scaled effects(max):
-total land force limit +0-50%
-yearly legitimacy +0-2,5
-monthly autonomy -0.05
-influences strength of other interactions
-influences likelihood of government specific events (VII)
It has the same compound character as solidarity. And the following sources:
#derived
-+2 per skill point
-0-10 from legitimacy
- -0-10 from noble's influence
-reforms
- -0,1-10 from average autonomy
-+10 if the dynasty is Jagiellon (triggered modifier)
-+10 if protestant
#accumulative
-flavor and government events
-+0.1 per development converted
-+10 for re-electing dynasty
-+0,1 per rebel regiment defeated
- -10 for declaring non-reconquest war
-25 upon forming PLC (unruly Ruthenian knyazie)
In quite a few areas, there's a friction between solidarity and royal authority; and well, in a way they could be said to represent republican vs monarchical sentiments. Hence some people could foolishly argue that they should be put together into a slider, similar to this in dutch republic. And I say it would be a lame design. The player would basically make a choice once, at the start of the campaign, and then stick to it for the rest of the game, perhaps few times flirting with the other side due to event effects. Giving these two separate pools creates more engaging gameplay, since the player can struggle to maximize both of them for extra efficiency. It's also not against logic, a tyrrant who enforces his will onto his subjects is a one thing. A champion of the people whom they would follow even into hell is quite another. With these two mechanics, a whole spectrum of power structures can be dynamically represented: from synergy between the ruler and his people (High solidarity, high royal authority – historically that would match most of Jagiellon times and Stephen Bathory) to de facto anarchy and, in turn, rule of warlords-magnates (low solidarity, low royal authority – historically second half of the 17th century onward)
Regarding the AI, it should prefer solidarity in the two first ages, and royal athority in the latter two. The transition phase would hence make the country more vulnerable due to inner tensions, and allow its neighbours to take advantage of the situation = less or more historical scenario.
Moving on to the Pospolite Ruszenie.
It was a medieval-style practise of mobilizing members of the nobility to fight in a war. During EU4's time frame it started to disappear throughout Europe, replaced by mercenaries and standing armies. However, without going into the reasons, it remained to be used in PLC, and comprised significant part of defensive forces – around 1600 this would theoretically be ~350000 soldiers; however realisticly it numbered ~50000. I say defensive because from 15th century onward nobility could ignore the call, and usually refused to participate in operations they considered offensive – this is the reason behind -50% total land forcelimit. Historically it had several important consequences:
-Due to relatively small standing army, all sorts of rebelions were more serious dangers, and often were negotiated with – since the ruling class was also the class expected to fight, it developed pacifistic tendencies.
-Similarly, with only small portion of army loyal directly to the king, he could not subdue the nobility, causing the system to last.
-It promoted agression against the country since it was unlikely to bite back. Following scenario was frequent in 16th and 17th century: 1. the agressor makes quick advances against PLC uniterrupted by serious battles 2. Commonwealth army gathers and obliterates the enemy 3. forts are taken back and enemy lands lay open for taking 4. the nobility tells the king/hetman to f**k off and returns home. It led Commonwealth's neighbours to think: „Well, if we win a war against them – great; if we lose – whatever, we've got enough peasants.
-It hindered development of military infrastracture, the nobles were expected to arrive with all the necessary supplies. That took time and the army was further slowed by wagons, what was partially turned to advantage by the use of wagenburg tactics.
Now, here's how it would work.
In case of a defensive war, allow Pospolite Ruszenie to be called, with the following effects:
-lose 5-10 army professionalism.
-Receive significant manpower
-Receive significant cash
-Receive defensive levies in capital(regiments spawning at 100 strength, hence the above compensation). Their numbers would be tied to solidarity(75% of total forcelimit at max) and royal authority(-50% of total forcelimit at max – that's already in standing force). It would also need to increase the said land forcelimit for the duration of war. As for the units, they would have movement restricted to own and subject's cored land to reflect their defensive character; else it would also create abuses in multiplayer – you could ask someone to declare fake war on you, and then use the levy for an offensive war.
Next thing – folwarks.
Currently they are reflected in national ideas giving +10% production efficiency, what is a rather so-so interpretation. The establishment of a folwark does not necessarily increase efficiency, in fact it could have negative effect. it simply changes the final destination of produced food. In a folwark the land rather than be rented to the peasants in exchange for tax, stays under direct control of the landowner, and the peasants are expected to work it for their lord, resulting in serfdom. Now, free or tenure peasants were more likely to sell their surplus to the local markets as they couldn't afford shipment(unless grouped in a large commune.) More food in the local market meant that it was more abundant and cheaper and hence population was more likely to grow. Huge surplus created for the landowner in a folwark, was sizable enough to make shipment abroad profitable. This stimulated inflow of cash to the country, while hampering development(lower population growth rate, reduced movement of peasants to cities due to serfdom), plus the peasants weren't exactly happy with this.
This would be better represented with a state interaction, like pashas and metropolitans, giving:
-+10-20% development cost
-+1-2 unrest
-+10-20% trade goods produced
And the last bit, regarding Dharma and government reforms.
Here are ten I managed to come up with during a walk(in free order):
-Bishop appointment: Royal(+5 royal authority)/Papal(+1 yearly papal influence)/Sejm(+5 solidarity)
-Executive duties: Royal(+5 royal authority)/Sejmiks(-25% state maintenance)/Noble Houses(+5 solidarity)
-Superme law: Secular(+5 solidarity)/Religious(+1% missionary strength)/Local(-2 local unrest)
-Elections: Viritim(-0.05 yearly corruption)/Legates(-1 national unrest)/Senatorial(+1 yearly legitimacy)
-Voivode appointment: Royal(+5 royal authority)/Senatorial(monthly autonomy -0.05)/Sejmiks(+5 solidarity)
-Commerce: Free(Global trade power +10%)/By privilege(+1 merchant)/Restrained(+50% domestic trade power, -50% trade range)
-Nobilitation: Royal(+5 royal authority)/Senatorial(+10% improve relations)/Noble Houses(+15% manpower)
-Landholding: Unrestricted(+5 solidarity)/Nobility(Noble's influence and loyalty +5)/Domestic Nobility(-15% culture conversion cost)
-Office appointment: Merit(+1 advisor pool)/Nepotism(-10% advisor cost)/Magnate(free leader)
-Diplomacy: Royal(+1 diplomatic reputation)/Senate(+1 diplomatic relations)/Isolationist(+5 states)
Some explanations:
-Sejmiks are local parliments.
-Appointment of voivodes and bishops is quite important since they are de iure members of the Senate(upper parliment house.)
-Office appointment refers to „high” offices like Grand Marshal, or Chancellor.
-Election viritim means election in person by all male nobles wishing to participate.
-Restrained commerce here means that burgher merchants are restricted in their ability to run trade abroad, and are efficiently reduced to act as brokers between the locals and foreign merchants who arrive to the country.
-I say „Noble House” from the lack of a better word. Polish nobles apart from their dynastic names, also had the so called Herb. There were few hundreds of them, each grouping several noble families often without any blood connection. During war they formed common military units. During peace, they acted as something of a „support group”, being second instance(after family) help in case of judical or other problems.
-Royal executive is rather obious. Executive via Sejmiks and Noble House refers to the practice of Zajazd - execution of court's ruling by forming a temporary military party, by the local authorities or plaintiff him/herself respectively.
-Land holding by domestic nobility means that undesirables of whatever sort are forbidden from inheriting or purchasing land.
Concluding this section, I am fully aware that the above issues or phenomena were not unique to Poland-Lithuania, yet it was there where they reached the largest importance, sometimes quite extreme, making it the best place to represent them.
IV Parliment
Assessors of Commonwealth's government often seem satisfied with unexhaustive conclusion that weakening of royal prerogatives meant weaking of the government and country's eventual demise. It didn't. It transfered the governance, and thus the responsibility for the country, to a larger group of people. The result was unconventional. Polish nobles themselves called it „a republic under the presidency of the king.” They called it their common wealth, rights and freedoms that shielded them from the tyranny flourishing in the neighbourhood. The fact that they themselves were tyrrants to the peasants obiously reeks of moral ambiguity, but such were the times. Peasants had a bad deal pretty much everywhere. It's also worth mentioning that the American Founding Fathers were unelected slave-owners who betrayed their fatherland, and also decided that their class is the only one allowed to vote. But back to the government itself, aside from the remains of monarchy in the form of „king's presidency,” it could be described as a socratean democracy, where allegedly the finest the most noble of the people, the best educated, and acustomed with ruling, are supposed to run the country. Socrates argued that if we compare a country to a ship on an open sea, you want the ship to be handled by those educated and experienced in seafaring, not by everyone who's onboard. Piotr Skarga argued that the polish nobility are like people stuck on a damaged ship, who look after personal belongings rather than work together to mend the sinking ship (Sidenote: being a jesuit, he identified the „damage” as religious tolerance and lack of tyrannt.)
Theory does not equal practice, but that's already dealt with. Solidarity measures how well is the republican government actually doing. Royal authority measures how much power still lies with the king. But that does not end the topic, there was a third source of power in PLC, perhaps the most prominent – the oligarchy. It was influential de facto through sheer wealth and power, and de iure through the Senate – the upper parliment house evolved from royal council. It was composed of bishops, provincial governors(voivodes and castellans), and ministers, all generally appointed for life. Together with the lower house(Izba Poselska) composed of legates send by various lands, it formed the Sejm.
The Senate:
-decided what is going to be debated during Sejm
-formed final conclusions from the said debates, the actual law
-ran the country on everyday manner
-supervised (read: controlled) the king, making sure he cannot plot a coup or overide constitutions.
-prior to the Union of Lublin, elected the king. Afterwards it had decisive voice on which candidate seems to have the largest support.
It was obviously important, if not crucial, and as such deserves a representation. The whole Sejm thing could be represented simply as parliment as it currently exists in the game; however that's unsatisfying as it isn't unique, nor does model the situation accurately. Here comes one way Senate/Sejm could be represented.
Every 5-years a voting is concluded on one of 8 matters, and stays in power until it is voted again. If the voting is possitive it gives possitve effects scalled with solidarity; if it is negative it gives negative effects scalled down with royal authority. There are 16 fixed voters, named after magnate surnames (16 in reference to the 16 senators-residents). Each voter has a base chance of support equal to current solidarity. Others have to be „persuaded”. Voting is considered possitive if it's unanimous – all voters are in favor. After conclusion, votes are reseted.
The 8 matters are:
-Recruitment: manpower recovery, max -/+ 25%
-Corvee: national unrest, max -/+ 2
-Diplomatic missions: improve relations, max -/+ 25%
-Fort upkeep: fort maintenance cost, max -/+ 25%
-Patronage: advisor cost, max -/+ 25%
-Bureaucracy: state maintenance -/+ 25%
-Ongoing defense: army cost, -/+ 10%
-Naval force: naval maintenance cost, -/+ 20%
The „persuasions” are:
-Lease crown lands: add 25% local autonomy to a random province
-Grant command: lose general, gain general with 25 tradition
-Grant office: „kill” an active advisor
-Convince: -50 diplo points
-Threaten: +10 unrest in a random province
-Bribe: add 0.20 corruption, lose 0.10 years of income
The exact numbers would of course need some balancing. I used my mad Paint skills to prepare visual aid.
V Royal elections
Some changes are needed:
-the domestic heir should be of the ruling dynasty(changeable with "we need a piast" event)
-disallow countries with development <150 from supporting heir(invalidated for dip reputation +5)
-replace candidates older than 60
-make support cost legitimacy instead of prestige
-don't automatically proclaim heir on ruler's death, but instead proceed in accordance to the scheme I post below.
In total it should make the elections much more interesting, utilitarian for the players, and less predictible and thus more historically accurate.
I belive the scheme is clear enough. And sorry, I prefer working with paper whenever I can.
VI Winged Hussars
Gist: introduce Winged Hussars as a special unit avaible for Golden Liberty government. Details at the bottom of point VI.
Winged Hussars are one of those Polish things that paved their way to „wider audience.”
Even people who know nothing about history, have a chance to associate the name with those fabulous horsemen, due to simply their legendary „fluff.”
For EU4 player, they could be better known, if not for their historical achievement, then for that freakin' 33% combat ability, and some could have wondered what do you do to get that. I will try to explain.
First of all, what does a winged hussar consist of?
-A noble man, preferably a rich one.
-A horse, of a selectively breeded species, selling of which abroad earns the seller capital punishment.
-A lance, up to 6m long, able of piercing pikemen before they can pierce the wielder.
-0-6 pistols, one needs variety in combat, else it gets boring.
-Hussar sabre, considered by some the best blade ever created.
-Koncerz, 1.5m long sword used to replace a broken lance.
-Other meele weapons matching user's preference.
-An armor, necessarily white and polished, it helps to shine while massacring enemies.
-A helmet, helps to keep one's head.
-Optionally a shield, good for placing coat of arms.
-0-2 wings, because why the hell not.
-Optionally lynx,bear,lion,wolf,cheetah or wolverine pelts, in just armor one looks rather boring.
-Banners attached here and there to make sure enemies know who slaughters them.
Second of all, what does a winged hussar do?
-Protects his country.
-Protects others' countries. (looking at you, Austria)
-Wins against any nummerical odds e.g: battles of Lubieszów(1577), Kircholm(1605), Klushino(1610), Khotyn(1621,1673), Berestechko(1651) Vienna(1683), to name a few.
-Defends villages, outnumbered 100:1 (Hodów 1694, with their Pancerni buddies)
-Produces human shashliks with unmatched efficiency.
-Looks good during parades.
-Is forbidden of fleeing battles, under punishment of execution at the spot. (The so-called Zajeżdżający, roughly roadblockers, patroled the sides of a banner with pistols ready.)
-Brags that shall even the skies fall down on his country, he can hold it off with his lance.
-Kills first, counts later.
Now, the equipment explains why they were so expensive, activities explain why were they useful. But these don't yet explain how come they were effective at what they were doing. And for that it's best to take a perspective of enemy soldier. Imagine the following:
...A nervous whisper runs through army lines. Here comes the dreaded moment. After long months of exhausting marches and small skirmishes, Army finally meets the bulk of enemy forces. A soldier rises from the ground, stretching sore muscles. His stomach rumbles violently, unsatisfied with a diet of stale bread and watered beer - nearby villages have already been looted, and dried meat is long gone. But perhaps it's for the best – the old veteran from Someplace's banner claims it's better to empty stomach before a battle. The soldier picks up his musket, and on command takes his place behind the kneeling pikemen. Some unidentified sound floods in from the distance. What could that be? And did the ground tremble? Nah.. perhaps he just stood up too swiftly. But the sound intensifies, so do trembles. It becomes clear why. The soldier swallows, suddenly wide-eyed. The enemy forces materialize in the distance.Horsemen. Thousands of them, breaking into charge. In shiny armors with wings they look like some angelic armies floating through clouds of dust send into air by horse hooves. The very clouds that obscure their exact numbers. His eyes turn from wide to wild. Is he supposed to fight THAT? And for what? For the ever-delayed low salary that won't matter for a dead man? For the king who he has seen maybe once in his lifetime? For God? Where is He now, and why would he exile him here?In a matter of seconds the horsemen become distinguishable. They close up their lines, they ride knee next to knee, a wall of horse muscles and steel. Unmoved by pikes and muskets, they look determined, ready to slice, pierce, crush, shoot, and trample. The soldier's hands shake like the ground. The clutter of hooves is deafening, now joined by an uneasy flutter of banners and feathers, like this of an eagle falling down onto its prey. Commands and drums drown in the noise, but some men get ready to fire, so the soldier follows the suit. He tries to aim but his arms are shaking and his musket, that pitiful piece of wood, is slipping off his sweaty hands. He shoots, but the bullet goes off the target. So do most, only few hussars fall and all replaced almost instantly. The armies clash. Can the pikemen hold the charge? They can't. Horrible screams fill the air, and the soldier breaks. He gives into his most primal instincts and tries to flight. Many already do, causing stampede. He runs as fast as he can, but men can't outrun horses. For a split second the man feels terrible pain, and then falls to the ground, never to see his home again.
Winged Hussars were exceptional warriors, some of the best the world have ever seen, but their key to success lied not in military prowess, but in human psyche. Their primarly weapon was the fear they induced on enemy soldiers, fueled by their determination. They fought not for money, or because they were forced. They fought for personal and country's glory. They fought for something greater than their lives. They fought for their own, and owned, Commonwealth that gave them freedoms and privileges they couldn't hope for anywhere else. Winged Hussars were recruited only among the most patriotic nobles, and were expected to live, serve, and if need be die, in accordance with the formation's motto: Amor Patriae Nostra Lex.
I suggest for them to be raised in the capital province, banner like to forbid stacking, and make their numbers depend on the level of solidarity, accounting for 0-10% total land forcelimit. If that's troublesome technically, then make them raisable in every state, 1 per 100 development, with maximum solidarity giving additional 100%, lowering it down to 1 per 50 development.
They would have the following characteristics:
-+100% maintenance cost
-+10% discipline
-+20% morale
-+20% morale damage to enemies
Wow, wow, hold on mate, that's a lot! Yes, that's a lot, and every tiny bit of it deserved. This wouldn't be unreasonable as well, since they would have small numbers(~6-15 regiments onto forming PLC), and PLC would be crippled on the offensive by other Golden Liberty mechanics.
THE Winged Hussars were used in combat between Stephen Bathory's reforms in the late 16th century and the Battle of Kliszów(1702), after which they were reduced to a parade formation. It wasn't even due to that-much-outdated tactics, but simply because there were no enough suitable recruits as Commonwealth was already in depression. Following the suit of other unique units they can easly be avaiable through the entire game, as simply the patriotic crème de la crème of Commonwealth's armed forced.
VII Events
The purpose of any immersion pack, as the name suggests, should be to help the player immerse him/herself in the game's world. Immersion in itself could be described as a detachment from our own reality, in favor of this of a game or other work. The immersed is supposed to think, act, and percive the „reality” in the terms of the universum, through the senses of the characters while they progress through their peripeteia. And in the case of games, the player also expects to stage out those peripeteia. EU4 is ill-suited for immersion for several reasons. Firstly, EU4 is sandboxy. In the ludo-narrative space it gravites strongly towards ludic values. What it means for immersion is that it has little to attach itself to. Immersion primarily enchances narration, to do that it needs a narrative. EU4 gives players space(universum) and toys(gameplay), it hardly has any coherent story. Flavor events are small nudges, and missions are suggestions, but they cannot pass for a decent narrative. Neither can emergent narrative save the day – it is down to the player, it's not within game. A ludic game can be engaging, but it can hardly be immersive. Secondly, EU4 doesn't really have characters and due to that it's difficult to attain emotional resonance which is part of immersion. Characters are the backbone of any non-sci-fi story; on those occasions when we are „chained” to our seats watching a movie or reading a novel, it's because we care for the hereos and we want to know if they can do it. Without them EU4 can hardly have narrative disposition. Lastly, EU4 promotes a certain detachment. It's about numbers and statistics, really. When converting a province we are not supposed to think of persecutions and people being burned. When launching an offensive, we are not supposed to think of people being killed, raped, deprived of homes, food, and dignity. When conquering the world, we are not supposed to think how does the world like it. EU4 promotes cold, machiavellian, realpolitik. And isn't detachment the opposite of immersion?
Now that I have stated my infinite alleged wisdom, and satisfied my need for intellectualizing things rather obvious for thoughtful individuals, I can head to the General Advice Department.
For a starter, let's consider the characters part. Forget any overhaul(„you don't say”). Forget fleshing out the ruler, advisors, generals.. - they're just cogs in the state machinery. Ah.. The state! In EU4 we play a country, let's personificate it. What constitutes a person? Physical appearance, their past, their views, their „agenda”, their ambitions, their character. What evokes sympathy and thus makes us care for the person? Physical attraction, knowing things about them, common past, pity, relatability, observing their „coming of age,” gratitude, similarity, righteousness, awe, sense of humour. Of course not everything above can apply to the personification, but you get the general idea – bring the country to life. Don't keep it confined to a colour, a coat of arms, and a set of numbers. Show the land we are entrusted. Show the people we lead. Channel their common consciousness and aspirations. Make us care. Part of it can be done through the map. It's the most immediate information to the players, and a one that can stay with them rather than disappear after clicking a button. By having a lot of province modifiers the country can be „shown” to the players, due to genre differences EU4 cannot do it the same degree as let's say (pretty-ludic)Skyrim, but at least it will have something. If it can come with visual aid – a palace with surrounding farms for a latifundium, or a synagogue for a shtetl – great! PDS could learn from the civilization series in this aspect. Moving on, EU4 doesn't have a story, but it's build around history. Narrate it, narrate the country's story, in this case – it's tragedy(or tragicomedy in the damn long run.) Naturally, to stay truthful to the game's spirit, it needs to be done indirectly; it kind of needs to be „smuggled” in. Events, those small touches, are the key to all of that. They can be grouped into six mixing categories/functions:
-Society. These portray various social classes and minorities, to show who we rule. They show who the protagonist is.
-Individuals. These show who the system „produces”, both the good guys and the baddies, and as such can be representative of the various stances society assumed towards the country. These are the NPCs. They can also be used to narrate those parts of Polish-Lithuanian history that if enforced would violate the gameplay too much. For example an event spawning Stefan Czarniecki as a general, can be used to convey the Deluge period without which there is no complete understanding of Polish-Lithuanian history.
-Structures. These show how the tangible country changed. They can also be used to portray the society. For example, you can have an event for the expansion of „Polish Hector,” Kamenets Podolskiy's Fortress, to tell its story and subsequently: a) portray how turbulent the borders were b) show how, at least some, of the szlachta were so honorbound and dutiful that they prefered to literaly blown themselves up, rather than bear the shame of surrender(even if against 100:1 odds). If such event could also spawn a model of the structure, that would be amazing.
-Tensions. These cover: a) the difficulties of building and maintaining liberal multicultural country – the protagonist's inner conflict. b) the outside's attitude towards the country – the antagonist and the central conflict.
-Anecdotal. Small but interesting, well, anecdotes. Micronarratives that help to alleviate the feeling of one-tracked history lecture one might get.
-Functional. Technicalities like election events.
The combined use of the above won't turn EU4 experience into a breathtaking story; but, at least it will give it any embedded story, even if at risk of an occasional ludonarrative dissonance. Needless to say, for it to actually work, the players have to actually read the events' text. So a tempting mellifluous delivery is recommendable. I guess PDS has already figured this sh*t out.
Below are some event suggestions. You will be doing your own research anyways so I will be very brief about them. There has to be some job left for you, right
?
VIII Ideas
IX Map
Before I go to the provinces, I have complaints to make about Vistula Lagoon, and trade routes.
Marienburg/Elbląg and Warmia provinces shouldn't be inland. Vistula forms a delta with 2 major legs: Leniwka flowing to Gdańsk and Nogat also know as Elblągian Wisła. Both were navigable even for seafaring ships, what gave the ports of Vistula Lagoon access to the sea, even before the Strait of Baltiysk emerged in 1497. Until 17th century Elbląg itself was a larger port than Stockholm.
Today it's old town lays inland due to the process known as river accumulation of sediments that have created the aluvial plain of Żuławy Wiślane, and caused Vistula Lagoon to shrink(for comparison in high middle ages it reached 30-40kms further south.) Cutting off those provinces from the sea is ahistorical, and as I understand has been done to make forming Prussia easier, which is really f***ing stupid when you think about it. Because what happens is that you can get the most powerful government in the game with ease. You can start as Pomerania, ally Poland, promise them land, beat them to occupy Gdańsk and Koenigsberg, take them, and then just wait for protestantism protected by the very country you have robbed of ports. Maybe it's just me, but seriously, it shouldn't be that easy to get this government. Period.
The second complaint/request/suggestion.
One would think that if there are two neighbouring trade nodes, with accesible borders, and historical accounts of trade between those lands, then those nodes will interact somehow. Apparently it's not true for everywhere. As Poland you can push all the way into Far East and pull trade from China, but you cannot pull trade from Romania or Bulgaria, ffs. The standards seem a little bit off.
The following routes should be added:
-Kiev->Baltic Sea
-Constantinople->Cracow
-Persia->Crimea
I have had it modded in for a while, it doesn't upset the mythical „balance of power,” it simply creates more natural expansion options. Try it in-house.
Here's a crude map of the region as suggested, without othodox devoutness to exactly historial borders. Provinces details follow. Population table for Poland in 15th century (I couldn't find one for Lithuania) can be found at the very bottom, as well as maps used for trade goods, with translated keys.
I category - large cities, II towns with ~2000 populations, III towns with ~1000 population IV ~400 population
With 35 flavor events(with wrong dates) and an unique government(and its specific events), Poland-Lithuania could perhaps pass for a fairly fleshed out country; however, given its very turbulent history in the EU4's timespan (or any timespan, really), as well as its peculiar societal and political structure, there is a potential for much much more. While it is already one of the most interesting countries to play, I belive it can evolve to be the single most engaging campaign to be had in EU4, a one that would require superior administrative, planing, and scheming skills, rather than be a yet another map-painting rampage.
As for now, upon Casimir IV's coronation, Poland gets the Elective Monarchy government, which while definitely unique and on the surface interesting, is ultimately dull. Dull for one simple reason: it is actually lacking the very essence of games – interactivity. In the early game the dynastic struggle for Polish-Lithuanian throne can be quite dynamic and result in various alliances, what is generaly desired because it promotes diversity in subsequent campaigns; however, it does not dismiss the charge that it is essentialy little interactive and thus boring for the PLC player. When playing Poland-Lithuania the only governmental interaction the player gets, is the ability to burn his/her prestige to promote a local noble/dynasty, and get yet another random monarch. Whereas the player, the grey eminence behind the country's affairs, may want to play some sort of dynastic game and, for example, opt for a Rurikovich candidate – to reconcile with Muscovy, secure the eastern border, and focus on westward expansion, or stick to one dynasty and try to subdue the rampant nobility. As for now, it is either that local noble(with basically no benefit for being local) or an almost random foreign candidate. Then, you get that new ruler and, at random, he either gets support from the Sejm or not, without player's involvement whatsoever. Your ruler was just crowned, he hasn't yet taken any actions, hasn't yet set any policy, and yet the Sejm can somehow comply, or not, with his policy, which would be largely predifined by pacta conventa anyways. There is no interactivity to it, there is no fun to it, and there is a potential for frustration if the Sejm has a whim to hate you. Naturally games need simplifications to stay fun; however, that far going ones are simply annoying.This situation lasts for some 160 years, then you get the royal struggle events chain, and for the remaining 200 years you are playing with an ordinary government, be that either republic or monarchy.
With the current take on the Royal Elections and Nobles' Democracy, it is not so much that extra mechanic that makes playing Poland-Lithuania stand out, it is more of a tool that you can use when not playing it – a chance to get some extra MP, prestige, and allied cannon fodder.[1] And while it is roughly historically accurate for the XVIII century, it is unsatisfying gameplay-wise. (and in the XVIII century you no longer have this goverment anyways)
Now having stated my general complaint, I can turn to actually being helpful and productive. Suggestions how to enliven PLC gameplay I am going to cover in points III+ , and my overlaying aproach behind said suggestions in points I and II.
[1]Given that the Habsburgs haven't yet monopolized the throne thanks to their diplo bonuses, to be sometimes interluded by a local noble after a senile 80-years-old ruler dies a year after being elected
I Preface
II Sources
III Golden Liberty – the government
IV Parliment
V Royal Elections
VI Winged Hussars
VII Flavor, government, and advisor events.
VIII Polish Ideas
IX Map
I Preface
The purpose of this preface is to explain the reasons behind my take on the representation of Poland-Lithuania, as well as to mitigate in advance certain voices of protest that I expect to be raised in connection to it.
Designing a game tagged as historical, especially one that tries to more or less faithfully represent the social and politcal stituation, is a tricky thing to do. Tricky, because it requires an assessment of historical events and procsesses, in order for them to be translated into game mechanics. This is bound to spark controversy, or at least an ever-returning discussion. I can think of three immediate reasons for it.
The first is ideological/methodological. Different people, under the influence of their believes, attribute different gravity to the same events or circumstances; even professional historians, although they may try, can hardly fully detach themselves from ideological bias which becomes an integral part of our perception as we mature; plus the practice shows that historians are often particulary biased, as they tend to promote their own „school” of looking at history.
Some people will say that history is all about the money.
Some will say that it is all about the class struggle.
Some will say it is all about political geography.
Some will say it is all about „natural selection”, prey or be preyed upon.
Some will say that history is an outcome of clash of cultures.
Some will say that history is an outcome of individuals' actions.
Some will say that history is a set of lies anyways.
And, at last, someone will say that history is a combination of all the above; but, when deciding which circumstances were the most relevant in a particular case, we are back to the issue of organic ideological bias.
Secondly, the assessment is vulnerable to national perspectives and sympathies, and a very human tendency to see „us” as the good guys, and the „others” as the baddies. I suppose this point is pretty self-explanatory.
Another distortion happens for gameplay reasons, and due to the technical restrictions games have, causing groups of people to complain about oversimplification of their favourite „pets”. Self-explanatory again.
I bring up those issues, because they are especially prevalent when Polish-Lithuanian history is analyzed. The history that suffers from 200+ years of defamation, demonization, omittance, neglectance, and marginalization.
Defamation and demonization done primarly by the partitioners of PLC(for obvious reasons), although it can be traced back to the Teuton propaganda, plus already during its existance PLC and its unorthodox government, had as many proponents as opponents.
Omittance and marginalization by the outside world, at first because of Poland's disappearence, and later due to the status of Poland as a yet-another-unfortunate-place-to-be-beyond-the-iron-curtain, and her subsequent inability to fully represent herself.
As the result, Polish-Lithuanian history is little, if at all, known to an average Joe. A typical book on the „common”, popular history encloses 400 years of Polish-Lithuanian union in 2-4 pages, on which it is presented as something-of-a-weirdo-country-that-was-so-busy-making-peasants-feel-miserable-that-it-didn't-notice-it-is-getting-partitioned. Optionaly the country will be mentioned here and there, like in the case of Sobieski's helping a little bit in dealing with the Ottomans. Then, the same book will dedicate 6 pages to discuss, ad exemplum, War of The Roses.
In the worst case, Poland-Lithuania is regarded as a villain, or a do-not example. In the best case, it is reduced to function as a background for other „important”, „history-making” countries and nations. And although this attitude could be said to alleviate in the recent years, as Poland slowly recovers from the soviet-inflicted cancer and makes her place into the consciousness of Western people despite alleged idiocy of our entire political scene , 200 years of prejudice and neglectance cannot be overcome overnight.
Further on, eventual demise(=failure) of PLC, kind of naturally makes one think chiefly negatively of its governmental form, which is typically cited as the main source of PLC's troubles. The situation is not made any better by an information overload one gets when trying to study Polish-Lithuanian history in depth. The overload which promotes simplistic conclusions to make one's life easier. Moreover, a paradoxical nature of many aspects of Golden Liberty, a multitude of inner attitudes towards it, frequently misfiring laws, and an enormous change in power between the early and the late Commonwealth, all lead to a situation in which, with a little bit of creativity and confirmation bias, Polish-Lithuanian history can be used to validate virtually any ideological standpoint. Here come some such purposedly oversimplified „legitimate” claims.
Egalitarianism: serfdom and feudal opression in PLC weakened the country, causing its demise.
Egalitarianism: The emergence of magnates among egalitarian Polish-Lithuanian nobles created a de facto oligarchic government that brought about country's demise.
Authoritarianism: The lack of a strong-fisted government in PLC created anarchy that made the country an easy prey for its more authoritarian neighbours.
Pacifism: The offensive policing of Sigismund III Vasa, which compromized the pacifistic sympathies and fondness of diplomacy exhibited by early Poland-Lithuania, that had led to the union in the first place, antagonized PLC's neighbours what in turn led to devastating wars, weakening of the country, and ultimately her partitioning.
Militarism: Strong army is the very backbone of every state. Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth failed to increase its military expenditures to keep them on par with those of its neighbours; and subsequently was partitioned by those neighbours.
Spiritualism: No material achievements are eternal; but, achievements of culture and tradition can grant immortality. Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth was destroyed, but its culture survived in the Polish people who managed to bring their country back to life.
Et cetera, et cetera. Claims out of context are fun too. For example a polish historian, Paweł Jasienica, when discussing Jagiellons' policy makes the two following claims in the very same chapter: makeshift dynastic policy towards Hungary and Bohemia was an unecessary strain on Polish resources that would be better spend elsewhere; Teutonic Knights were the most imminent danger to Poland as it was a yet another disguised attempt by the HRE to subjugate Poland. Both those claims taken independently, as Mr Jasienica has done, can be argued for. But, if we sum them up with historical context, they form a claim that giving up on Bohemian and Hungarian crowns and consequently leaving them to the Holy Roman Empire, would help Poland to fight back the empire. Isn't it wonderfully f***ing stupid?
Now, with all of that in mind I suggest to take historians' analyses with a healthy dose of scepticism and distance, and instead turn to the data on political, cultural, and socioeconomic structure of Poland-Lithuania, and through the use of common sense, logic, and knowledge of human nature, try to to identify conflicts that were bound to arise in such a country, and then build game mechanics around them. (It's late, and I can't be ar**d to break down this sentence.) It's what I have been trying to do with my design, which I hope you will find appealing.
II Sources
I am not a historian; but, I am also not a complete layman. Aside from my secondary eduction(and actually learning not just passing,) I have also read a number of books on history, especially on the history of my own country of Poland, which is the subject of this suggestion. The tittles that were relevant you can see in the picture below, most of them you will not find in english edition. One that you will find in English, is obviously Norman Davies' God's Playground. I recommend it for you for an introduction to Polish history. It's annoyingly brief about some topics; but, it does one thing amazingly well – it shows the many shades of grey in the history, and as such is probably the most objective account of polish history ever written.
III Golden Liberty
Introduce Golden Liberty in the place of elective monarchy, with the following characteristics:
- -50% total force limit(base+land forcelimit%),
- +1 monarch diplomacy skill #King's role in Commonwealth was pretty much this of a mediator between various factions, plus it takes diplomacy to be elected in the first place.
-has Sejm/Senate(IV)
-has royal elections (V)
-uses solidarity mechanics (below)
-uses royal authority mechanics (below)
-can call Pospolite Ruszenie(levee en masse) (below)
-can form Winged Hussars(VI)
-can establish folwarks(below)
Solidarity and royal authority are two mechanics I propose for representing the political situation in the country.
Solidarity is a measure of citizens support for the country's government. It reflects how firmly they adhere to the country's ideals, and in turn, determines how willing are they to contribute their resources to the common cause.
It has the following scaled effects(max):
-maximum centralisation -50
-army morale +10%
-tolerance of heretics +3
-tolerance of heathens +2
-maximum states +10
-max promoted cultures +2
-influences strength of other interactions
-influences likelihood of government specific events (VII)
It is a compound value comprising an accumulated amount and one derived from other modifiers, the accumulated amount decays by -0,05 per month. It has the following sources:
#derived
-prestige -10 – +10
-stability -6 – +6
-+1 per prosperous state
-0–10 from noble's loyalty
-reforms
- -1 per devastated state
- -1 per corruption
#accumulative
-wining/losing wars +10/-10
- -0.1 per converted development
-flavor and government events
-+0.1 for developing a province, -0.1 for exploiting development
-+25 at the start of the game
Royal authority is a measure of king's actual influence on the country. It is a sum of his skills, actions, dynastic strength, as well as of passed laws and the size of royal domain.
It has the following scaled effects(max):
-total land force limit +0-50%
-yearly legitimacy +0-2,5
-monthly autonomy -0.05
-influences strength of other interactions
-influences likelihood of government specific events (VII)
It has the same compound character as solidarity. And the following sources:
#derived
-+2 per skill point
-0-10 from legitimacy
- -0-10 from noble's influence
-reforms
- -0,1-10 from average autonomy
-+10 if the dynasty is Jagiellon (triggered modifier)
-+10 if protestant
#accumulative
-flavor and government events
-+0.1 per development converted
-+10 for re-electing dynasty
-+0,1 per rebel regiment defeated
- -10 for declaring non-reconquest war
-25 upon forming PLC (unruly Ruthenian knyazie)
In quite a few areas, there's a friction between solidarity and royal authority; and well, in a way they could be said to represent republican vs monarchical sentiments. Hence some people could foolishly argue that they should be put together into a slider, similar to this in dutch republic. And I say it would be a lame design. The player would basically make a choice once, at the start of the campaign, and then stick to it for the rest of the game, perhaps few times flirting with the other side due to event effects. Giving these two separate pools creates more engaging gameplay, since the player can struggle to maximize both of them for extra efficiency. It's also not against logic, a tyrrant who enforces his will onto his subjects is a one thing. A champion of the people whom they would follow even into hell is quite another. With these two mechanics, a whole spectrum of power structures can be dynamically represented: from synergy between the ruler and his people (High solidarity, high royal authority – historically that would match most of Jagiellon times and Stephen Bathory) to de facto anarchy and, in turn, rule of warlords-magnates (low solidarity, low royal authority – historically second half of the 17th century onward)
Regarding the AI, it should prefer solidarity in the two first ages, and royal athority in the latter two. The transition phase would hence make the country more vulnerable due to inner tensions, and allow its neighbours to take advantage of the situation = less or more historical scenario.
Moving on to the Pospolite Ruszenie.
It was a medieval-style practise of mobilizing members of the nobility to fight in a war. During EU4's time frame it started to disappear throughout Europe, replaced by mercenaries and standing armies. However, without going into the reasons, it remained to be used in PLC, and comprised significant part of defensive forces – around 1600 this would theoretically be ~350000 soldiers; however realisticly it numbered ~50000. I say defensive because from 15th century onward nobility could ignore the call, and usually refused to participate in operations they considered offensive – this is the reason behind -50% total land forcelimit. Historically it had several important consequences:
-Due to relatively small standing army, all sorts of rebelions were more serious dangers, and often were negotiated with – since the ruling class was also the class expected to fight, it developed pacifistic tendencies.
-Similarly, with only small portion of army loyal directly to the king, he could not subdue the nobility, causing the system to last.
-It promoted agression against the country since it was unlikely to bite back. Following scenario was frequent in 16th and 17th century: 1. the agressor makes quick advances against PLC uniterrupted by serious battles 2. Commonwealth army gathers and obliterates the enemy 3. forts are taken back and enemy lands lay open for taking 4. the nobility tells the king/hetman to f**k off and returns home. It led Commonwealth's neighbours to think: „Well, if we win a war against them – great; if we lose – whatever, we've got enough peasants.
-It hindered development of military infrastracture, the nobles were expected to arrive with all the necessary supplies. That took time and the army was further slowed by wagons, what was partially turned to advantage by the use of wagenburg tactics.
Now, here's how it would work.
In case of a defensive war, allow Pospolite Ruszenie to be called, with the following effects:
-lose 5-10 army professionalism.
-Receive significant manpower
-Receive significant cash
-Receive defensive levies in capital(regiments spawning at 100 strength, hence the above compensation). Their numbers would be tied to solidarity(75% of total forcelimit at max) and royal authority(-50% of total forcelimit at max – that's already in standing force). It would also need to increase the said land forcelimit for the duration of war. As for the units, they would have movement restricted to own and subject's cored land to reflect their defensive character; else it would also create abuses in multiplayer – you could ask someone to declare fake war on you, and then use the levy for an offensive war.
Next thing – folwarks.
Currently they are reflected in national ideas giving +10% production efficiency, what is a rather so-so interpretation. The establishment of a folwark does not necessarily increase efficiency, in fact it could have negative effect. it simply changes the final destination of produced food. In a folwark the land rather than be rented to the peasants in exchange for tax, stays under direct control of the landowner, and the peasants are expected to work it for their lord, resulting in serfdom. Now, free or tenure peasants were more likely to sell their surplus to the local markets as they couldn't afford shipment(unless grouped in a large commune.) More food in the local market meant that it was more abundant and cheaper and hence population was more likely to grow. Huge surplus created for the landowner in a folwark, was sizable enough to make shipment abroad profitable. This stimulated inflow of cash to the country, while hampering development(lower population growth rate, reduced movement of peasants to cities due to serfdom), plus the peasants weren't exactly happy with this.
This would be better represented with a state interaction, like pashas and metropolitans, giving:
-+10-20% development cost
-+1-2 unrest
-+10-20% trade goods produced
And the last bit, regarding Dharma and government reforms.
Here are ten I managed to come up with during a walk(in free order):
-Bishop appointment: Royal(+5 royal authority)/Papal(+1 yearly papal influence)/Sejm(+5 solidarity)
-Executive duties: Royal(+5 royal authority)/Sejmiks(-25% state maintenance)/Noble Houses(+5 solidarity)
-Superme law: Secular(+5 solidarity)/Religious(+1% missionary strength)/Local(-2 local unrest)
-Elections: Viritim(-0.05 yearly corruption)/Legates(-1 national unrest)/Senatorial(+1 yearly legitimacy)
-Voivode appointment: Royal(+5 royal authority)/Senatorial(monthly autonomy -0.05)/Sejmiks(+5 solidarity)
-Commerce: Free(Global trade power +10%)/By privilege(+1 merchant)/Restrained(+50% domestic trade power, -50% trade range)
-Nobilitation: Royal(+5 royal authority)/Senatorial(+10% improve relations)/Noble Houses(+15% manpower)
-Landholding: Unrestricted(+5 solidarity)/Nobility(Noble's influence and loyalty +5)/Domestic Nobility(-15% culture conversion cost)
-Office appointment: Merit(+1 advisor pool)/Nepotism(-10% advisor cost)/Magnate(free leader)
-Diplomacy: Royal(+1 diplomatic reputation)/Senate(+1 diplomatic relations)/Isolationist(+5 states)
Some explanations:
-Sejmiks are local parliments.
-Appointment of voivodes and bishops is quite important since they are de iure members of the Senate(upper parliment house.)
-Office appointment refers to „high” offices like Grand Marshal, or Chancellor.
-Election viritim means election in person by all male nobles wishing to participate.
-Restrained commerce here means that burgher merchants are restricted in their ability to run trade abroad, and are efficiently reduced to act as brokers between the locals and foreign merchants who arrive to the country.
-I say „Noble House” from the lack of a better word. Polish nobles apart from their dynastic names, also had the so called Herb. There were few hundreds of them, each grouping several noble families often without any blood connection. During war they formed common military units. During peace, they acted as something of a „support group”, being second instance(after family) help in case of judical or other problems.
-Royal executive is rather obious. Executive via Sejmiks and Noble House refers to the practice of Zajazd - execution of court's ruling by forming a temporary military party, by the local authorities or plaintiff him/herself respectively.
-Land holding by domestic nobility means that undesirables of whatever sort are forbidden from inheriting or purchasing land.
Concluding this section, I am fully aware that the above issues or phenomena were not unique to Poland-Lithuania, yet it was there where they reached the largest importance, sometimes quite extreme, making it the best place to represent them.
IV Parliment
Assessors of Commonwealth's government often seem satisfied with unexhaustive conclusion that weakening of royal prerogatives meant weaking of the government and country's eventual demise. It didn't. It transfered the governance, and thus the responsibility for the country, to a larger group of people. The result was unconventional. Polish nobles themselves called it „a republic under the presidency of the king.” They called it their common wealth, rights and freedoms that shielded them from the tyranny flourishing in the neighbourhood. The fact that they themselves were tyrrants to the peasants obiously reeks of moral ambiguity, but such were the times. Peasants had a bad deal pretty much everywhere. It's also worth mentioning that the American Founding Fathers were unelected slave-owners who betrayed their fatherland, and also decided that their class is the only one allowed to vote. But back to the government itself, aside from the remains of monarchy in the form of „king's presidency,” it could be described as a socratean democracy, where allegedly the finest the most noble of the people, the best educated, and acustomed with ruling, are supposed to run the country. Socrates argued that if we compare a country to a ship on an open sea, you want the ship to be handled by those educated and experienced in seafaring, not by everyone who's onboard. Piotr Skarga argued that the polish nobility are like people stuck on a damaged ship, who look after personal belongings rather than work together to mend the sinking ship (Sidenote: being a jesuit, he identified the „damage” as religious tolerance and lack of tyrannt.)
Theory does not equal practice, but that's already dealt with. Solidarity measures how well is the republican government actually doing. Royal authority measures how much power still lies with the king. But that does not end the topic, there was a third source of power in PLC, perhaps the most prominent – the oligarchy. It was influential de facto through sheer wealth and power, and de iure through the Senate – the upper parliment house evolved from royal council. It was composed of bishops, provincial governors(voivodes and castellans), and ministers, all generally appointed for life. Together with the lower house(Izba Poselska) composed of legates send by various lands, it formed the Sejm.
The Senate:
-decided what is going to be debated during Sejm
-formed final conclusions from the said debates, the actual law
-ran the country on everyday manner
-supervised (read: controlled) the king, making sure he cannot plot a coup or overide constitutions.
-prior to the Union of Lublin, elected the king. Afterwards it had decisive voice on which candidate seems to have the largest support.
It was obviously important, if not crucial, and as such deserves a representation. The whole Sejm thing could be represented simply as parliment as it currently exists in the game; however that's unsatisfying as it isn't unique, nor does model the situation accurately. Here comes one way Senate/Sejm could be represented.
Every 5-years a voting is concluded on one of 8 matters, and stays in power until it is voted again. If the voting is possitive it gives possitve effects scalled with solidarity; if it is negative it gives negative effects scalled down with royal authority. There are 16 fixed voters, named after magnate surnames (16 in reference to the 16 senators-residents). Each voter has a base chance of support equal to current solidarity. Others have to be „persuaded”. Voting is considered possitive if it's unanimous – all voters are in favor. After conclusion, votes are reseted.
The 8 matters are:
-Recruitment: manpower recovery, max -/+ 25%
-Corvee: national unrest, max -/+ 2
-Diplomatic missions: improve relations, max -/+ 25%
-Fort upkeep: fort maintenance cost, max -/+ 25%
-Patronage: advisor cost, max -/+ 25%
-Bureaucracy: state maintenance -/+ 25%
-Ongoing defense: army cost, -/+ 10%
-Naval force: naval maintenance cost, -/+ 20%
The „persuasions” are:
-Lease crown lands: add 25% local autonomy to a random province
-Grant command: lose general, gain general with 25 tradition
-Grant office: „kill” an active advisor
-Convince: -50 diplo points
-Threaten: +10 unrest in a random province
-Bribe: add 0.20 corruption, lose 0.10 years of income
The exact numbers would of course need some balancing. I used my mad Paint skills to prepare visual aid.
V Royal elections
Some changes are needed:
-the domestic heir should be of the ruling dynasty(changeable with "we need a piast" event)
-disallow countries with development <150 from supporting heir(invalidated for dip reputation +5)
-replace candidates older than 60
-make support cost legitimacy instead of prestige
-don't automatically proclaim heir on ruler's death, but instead proceed in accordance to the scheme I post below.
In total it should make the elections much more interesting, utilitarian for the players, and less predictible and thus more historically accurate.
I belive the scheme is clear enough. And sorry, I prefer working with paper whenever I can.
VI Winged Hussars
Gist: introduce Winged Hussars as a special unit avaible for Golden Liberty government. Details at the bottom of point VI.
Winged Hussars are one of those Polish things that paved their way to „wider audience.”
Even people who know nothing about history, have a chance to associate the name with those fabulous horsemen, due to simply their legendary „fluff.”
For EU4 player, they could be better known, if not for their historical achievement, then for that freakin' 33% combat ability, and some could have wondered what do you do to get that. I will try to explain.
First of all, what does a winged hussar consist of?
-A noble man, preferably a rich one.
-A horse, of a selectively breeded species, selling of which abroad earns the seller capital punishment.
-A lance, up to 6m long, able of piercing pikemen before they can pierce the wielder.
-0-6 pistols, one needs variety in combat, else it gets boring.
-Hussar sabre, considered by some the best blade ever created.
-Koncerz, 1.5m long sword used to replace a broken lance.
-Other meele weapons matching user's preference.
-An armor, necessarily white and polished, it helps to shine while massacring enemies.
-A helmet, helps to keep one's head.
-Optionally a shield, good for placing coat of arms.
-0-2 wings, because why the hell not.
-Optionally lynx,bear,lion,wolf,cheetah or wolverine pelts, in just armor one looks rather boring.
-Banners attached here and there to make sure enemies know who slaughters them.
Second of all, what does a winged hussar do?
-Protects his country.
-Protects others' countries. (looking at you, Austria)
-Wins against any nummerical odds e.g: battles of Lubieszów(1577), Kircholm(1605), Klushino(1610), Khotyn(1621,1673), Berestechko(1651) Vienna(1683), to name a few.
-Defends villages, outnumbered 100:1 (Hodów 1694, with their Pancerni buddies)
-Produces human shashliks with unmatched efficiency.
-Looks good during parades.
-Is forbidden of fleeing battles, under punishment of execution at the spot. (The so-called Zajeżdżający, roughly roadblockers, patroled the sides of a banner with pistols ready.)
-Brags that shall even the skies fall down on his country, he can hold it off with his lance.
-Kills first, counts later.
Now, the equipment explains why they were so expensive, activities explain why were they useful. But these don't yet explain how come they were effective at what they were doing. And for that it's best to take a perspective of enemy soldier. Imagine the following:
...A nervous whisper runs through army lines. Here comes the dreaded moment. After long months of exhausting marches and small skirmishes, Army finally meets the bulk of enemy forces. A soldier rises from the ground, stretching sore muscles. His stomach rumbles violently, unsatisfied with a diet of stale bread and watered beer - nearby villages have already been looted, and dried meat is long gone. But perhaps it's for the best – the old veteran from Someplace's banner claims it's better to empty stomach before a battle. The soldier picks up his musket, and on command takes his place behind the kneeling pikemen. Some unidentified sound floods in from the distance. What could that be? And did the ground tremble? Nah.. perhaps he just stood up too swiftly. But the sound intensifies, so do trembles. It becomes clear why. The soldier swallows, suddenly wide-eyed. The enemy forces materialize in the distance.Horsemen. Thousands of them, breaking into charge. In shiny armors with wings they look like some angelic armies floating through clouds of dust send into air by horse hooves. The very clouds that obscure their exact numbers. His eyes turn from wide to wild. Is he supposed to fight THAT? And for what? For the ever-delayed low salary that won't matter for a dead man? For the king who he has seen maybe once in his lifetime? For God? Where is He now, and why would he exile him here?In a matter of seconds the horsemen become distinguishable. They close up their lines, they ride knee next to knee, a wall of horse muscles and steel. Unmoved by pikes and muskets, they look determined, ready to slice, pierce, crush, shoot, and trample. The soldier's hands shake like the ground. The clutter of hooves is deafening, now joined by an uneasy flutter of banners and feathers, like this of an eagle falling down onto its prey. Commands and drums drown in the noise, but some men get ready to fire, so the soldier follows the suit. He tries to aim but his arms are shaking and his musket, that pitiful piece of wood, is slipping off his sweaty hands. He shoots, but the bullet goes off the target. So do most, only few hussars fall and all replaced almost instantly. The armies clash. Can the pikemen hold the charge? They can't. Horrible screams fill the air, and the soldier breaks. He gives into his most primal instincts and tries to flight. Many already do, causing stampede. He runs as fast as he can, but men can't outrun horses. For a split second the man feels terrible pain, and then falls to the ground, never to see his home again.
Winged Hussars were exceptional warriors, some of the best the world have ever seen, but their key to success lied not in military prowess, but in human psyche. Their primarly weapon was the fear they induced on enemy soldiers, fueled by their determination. They fought not for money, or because they were forced. They fought for personal and country's glory. They fought for something greater than their lives. They fought for their own, and owned, Commonwealth that gave them freedoms and privileges they couldn't hope for anywhere else. Winged Hussars were recruited only among the most patriotic nobles, and were expected to live, serve, and if need be die, in accordance with the formation's motto: Amor Patriae Nostra Lex.
I suggest for them to be raised in the capital province, banner like to forbid stacking, and make their numbers depend on the level of solidarity, accounting for 0-10% total land forcelimit. If that's troublesome technically, then make them raisable in every state, 1 per 100 development, with maximum solidarity giving additional 100%, lowering it down to 1 per 50 development.
They would have the following characteristics:
-+100% maintenance cost
-+10% discipline
-+20% morale
-+20% morale damage to enemies
Wow, wow, hold on mate, that's a lot! Yes, that's a lot, and every tiny bit of it deserved. This wouldn't be unreasonable as well, since they would have small numbers(~6-15 regiments onto forming PLC), and PLC would be crippled on the offensive by other Golden Liberty mechanics.
THE Winged Hussars were used in combat between Stephen Bathory's reforms in the late 16th century and the Battle of Kliszów(1702), after which they were reduced to a parade formation. It wasn't even due to that-much-outdated tactics, but simply because there were no enough suitable recruits as Commonwealth was already in depression. Following the suit of other unique units they can easly be avaiable through the entire game, as simply the patriotic crème de la crème of Commonwealth's armed forced.
VII Events
The purpose of any immersion pack, as the name suggests, should be to help the player immerse him/herself in the game's world. Immersion in itself could be described as a detachment from our own reality, in favor of this of a game or other work. The immersed is supposed to think, act, and percive the „reality” in the terms of the universum, through the senses of the characters while they progress through their peripeteia. And in the case of games, the player also expects to stage out those peripeteia. EU4 is ill-suited for immersion for several reasons. Firstly, EU4 is sandboxy. In the ludo-narrative space it gravites strongly towards ludic values. What it means for immersion is that it has little to attach itself to. Immersion primarily enchances narration, to do that it needs a narrative. EU4 gives players space(universum) and toys(gameplay), it hardly has any coherent story. Flavor events are small nudges, and missions are suggestions, but they cannot pass for a decent narrative. Neither can emergent narrative save the day – it is down to the player, it's not within game. A ludic game can be engaging, but it can hardly be immersive. Secondly, EU4 doesn't really have characters and due to that it's difficult to attain emotional resonance which is part of immersion. Characters are the backbone of any non-sci-fi story; on those occasions when we are „chained” to our seats watching a movie or reading a novel, it's because we care for the hereos and we want to know if they can do it. Without them EU4 can hardly have narrative disposition. Lastly, EU4 promotes a certain detachment. It's about numbers and statistics, really. When converting a province we are not supposed to think of persecutions and people being burned. When launching an offensive, we are not supposed to think of people being killed, raped, deprived of homes, food, and dignity. When conquering the world, we are not supposed to think how does the world like it. EU4 promotes cold, machiavellian, realpolitik. And isn't detachment the opposite of immersion?
Now that I have stated my infinite alleged wisdom, and satisfied my need for intellectualizing things rather obvious for thoughtful individuals, I can head to the General Advice Department.
For a starter, let's consider the characters part. Forget any overhaul(„you don't say”). Forget fleshing out the ruler, advisors, generals.. - they're just cogs in the state machinery. Ah.. The state! In EU4 we play a country, let's personificate it. What constitutes a person? Physical appearance, their past, their views, their „agenda”, their ambitions, their character. What evokes sympathy and thus makes us care for the person? Physical attraction, knowing things about them, common past, pity, relatability, observing their „coming of age,” gratitude, similarity, righteousness, awe, sense of humour. Of course not everything above can apply to the personification, but you get the general idea – bring the country to life. Don't keep it confined to a colour, a coat of arms, and a set of numbers. Show the land we are entrusted. Show the people we lead. Channel their common consciousness and aspirations. Make us care. Part of it can be done through the map. It's the most immediate information to the players, and a one that can stay with them rather than disappear after clicking a button. By having a lot of province modifiers the country can be „shown” to the players, due to genre differences EU4 cannot do it the same degree as let's say (pretty-ludic)Skyrim, but at least it will have something. If it can come with visual aid – a palace with surrounding farms for a latifundium, or a synagogue for a shtetl – great! PDS could learn from the civilization series in this aspect. Moving on, EU4 doesn't have a story, but it's build around history. Narrate it, narrate the country's story, in this case – it's tragedy(or tragicomedy in the damn long run.) Naturally, to stay truthful to the game's spirit, it needs to be done indirectly; it kind of needs to be „smuggled” in. Events, those small touches, are the key to all of that. They can be grouped into six mixing categories/functions:
-Society. These portray various social classes and minorities, to show who we rule. They show who the protagonist is.
-Individuals. These show who the system „produces”, both the good guys and the baddies, and as such can be representative of the various stances society assumed towards the country. These are the NPCs. They can also be used to narrate those parts of Polish-Lithuanian history that if enforced would violate the gameplay too much. For example an event spawning Stefan Czarniecki as a general, can be used to convey the Deluge period without which there is no complete understanding of Polish-Lithuanian history.
-Structures. These show how the tangible country changed. They can also be used to portray the society. For example, you can have an event for the expansion of „Polish Hector,” Kamenets Podolskiy's Fortress, to tell its story and subsequently: a) portray how turbulent the borders were b) show how, at least some, of the szlachta were so honorbound and dutiful that they prefered to literaly blown themselves up, rather than bear the shame of surrender(even if against 100:1 odds). If such event could also spawn a model of the structure, that would be amazing.
-Tensions. These cover: a) the difficulties of building and maintaining liberal multicultural country – the protagonist's inner conflict. b) the outside's attitude towards the country – the antagonist and the central conflict.
-Anecdotal. Small but interesting, well, anecdotes. Micronarratives that help to alleviate the feeling of one-tracked history lecture one might get.
-Functional. Technicalities like election events.
The combined use of the above won't turn EU4 experience into a breathtaking story; but, at least it will give it any embedded story, even if at risk of an occasional ludonarrative dissonance. Needless to say, for it to actually work, the players have to actually read the events' text. So a tempting mellifluous delivery is recommendable. I guess PDS has already figured this sh*t out.
Below are some event suggestions. You will be doing your own research anyways so I will be very brief about them. There has to be some job left for you, right
?#People
-Jan Długosz
Chronicler, „father of polish historiography”, geographer, diplomat, and educator of Casimir IV's sons(4 kings, a saint, a prelate).
Trigger: year 1455
Effect: +10 prestige, +10 legitimacy
-Jan Kochanowski
He's considered the best polish, and sometimes also slavic, poet/writer until the 19th century. He is known to every Pole as one of the fathers of polish literature.
Trigger: year 1579(nomination to court poet)
Effect: +10 prestige
-Jan Heweliusz
A significant astronomer, and inventor. His polemoscopium, introduced to Sobieski's army, was an early prototype of a periscope,
Trigger: owns Gdańsk, year 1647(first work finished)
Option #1: Hire him, spawn level 3 cheaper natural scientist
Option#2: Sponsor him, -0.25 years of income, +50 each MP
-Jan Łaski the younger
A significant figure of reformation in Europe, at first in Frisia and England, later in Poland.
Trigger: year 1556(return to Poland)
Option #1 hire him, cheaper protestant level 3 theologian
Option #2 support him, anger clergy if catholic, 4 provinces become protestant.
-Jan Łaski the elder
A diplomat and statesman, enemy of reformation and magnatery, author of „Łaski's Statute” - codification of laws in various Polish lands.
Trigger: year 1501(royal secretary)
Option#1 Let him serve as diplomat, spawn level 2 cheaper diplomat
Option#2 Let him combat heresy, spawn level 2 cheaper inquisitor
Option#3 Let him combat magnatery, +5 royal authority
-Jan Boner
An imigrant from HRE, settled in Cracow in 1483, he made and mainteined contacts with royal court, as a tenant of royal mines in Małopolska he greatly increased their productivity, he reformed the Polish treasury by making Royal and State treasuries a separate ones.
Trigger: year 1483
Option: spawn level 2 cheaper treasurer
-Jan Zamoyski
Co-author of the Union of Lublin, right-hand of Stephen Bathory, the wealthiest of contemporary magnates contributing his resources to the country's cause. Successful military commander. Opponent of the policy of the imbecile known as King Sigismund III Vasa(Sweden's worst ever export product, no wonder why they dethroned him there). From other worthwhile mentions, in the Battle of Byczyna he dennied Habsburgs the Polish Crown, knowing perfectly well they won't want to the get their ass off the throne once they sit on it.
Trigger: 1565 (royal secretary)
Option: spawn level 3 cheaper statesman, +100 each MP
Ok, enough Jans.
-Janusz Radziwiłł
A magnate, traitor to the country, co-author of Deluge – an event that devastated Poland more than World War II and was a preludium to the partitions.
Trigger: year 1655
Option: Spawn level-2 lithuanian separatist in Samogita.
-Kazimierz Siemienowicz
Artillery commander, pioneer of rocketry, he also wrote about pyrotechnics, and biological and chemical warfare.
Trigger: year 1650 (Artis Magnae Artilleriae)
Option#1 sponsor him, +100 mil points, -0.20 years of income
Option#2 ignore him
-Tadeusz Kościuszko
Military engineer, general, hero of the American Revolution, polish national hero as the organizator of Kościuszko's Uprising – Commonwealth's last dying act.
Trigger: year 1784(return to Poland)
Option#1 Let him serve as a general, spawn 4/4/4/3 general
Option#2 Let him take care of our engineer corps, spawn level 3 cheaper military advisor
-Queen Bona Sforza
Queen-consort, and later Queen-mother of Poland, she accelerated Renaissance in Poland, introduced new crops from Italy, active in internal politics from her arrival she managed to force the only vivente rege in polish history, and reformed taxation. She also founded several cities and developed a lot of royal towns, amassing great wealth for herself and the court.
Trigger: Year 1518 (marriage with Sigismund the Old)
Option#1 gain level 3 cheaper female treasurer
(Women in History style) Option#2 crown her, gain 6/3/3 monarch
-Andrzej Frycz Modrzewski
A political writer. He argued for: denial of papal authority and establishment of national church as the only solution for religious co-existence, strong king limited by constitution, protectionism, rule of law, subsides for the poor, public education, and full equality of all people. In 16th century, and wasn't burned for that.
Trigger: year 1551(magnum opus)
Option#1 Promote national church, 4 provinces converted to protestant faith, -0.2 years of income
Option#2 Promote strong royalty, +5 royal authority, -0.2 YoI
Option#3 Promote equality, +5 solidarity, -0.2 YoI
Option#4 Promote protectionism, +3 mercantilism, -0.2 YoI
Option#5 Promote public institutions, +100 ADM, -0.2 YoI
Option#6 Leave him be, spawn level 3 cheaper philosopher
Option#7 Stop this madness, +50 relations with papacy, increased narrowmindness modifier for 10 years.
-Piotr Skarga
A jesuit. He argued for strong-fisted monarchy, denial of reformation, and fair treatment of peasants.
Trigger: catholic, year 1597(„Sejm Sermons”)
Option#1 Make him heard, +5 royal authority, -0.2 YoI
Option#2 Hire him, spawn level 2 cheaper inquisitor
-Mikołaj Rej
Great advocate of writing in national language rather than latin, as such he contributed significantly to the development of polish culture. He also promoted simple, „good” life, deprived of insincerity, greed, and cruelty.
Trigger: year ~1550
Option#1: make him heard, +100 DIP, -0.2 YoI
Option#2 ignore him
-Wit Stwosz
Nürnberger woodsculptor working in Kraków in the years 1477-1496. He's best known for altarpiece in Kraków's St Mary's Church, a masterpiece of late gothic art.
Trigger: 1477
Option#1 sponsor him, +15 prestige, -0.2 years of income
Option#2 hire him, spawn level 2 cheaper artist
-Stefan Czarniecki
Polish national hero. Starting as a Lisowczycy companion, he gradually rose to prominence in the Commonwealth's army, becoming Crown's Grand Hetman. He spend a lifetime in the saddle fighting for Commonwealth's freedom, always among his soldiers despite being seriously wounded several times. His guerilla warfare during the deluge period, organized together with peasantry, is considered the key factor to Commonwealth's survival at the time.
Trigger: year 1655
Option#1 spawn 3/4/6/1 general
-Fryderyk Jagiellon
The youngest of Casimir IV's sons, he bacame archbishop of Gniezno and prelate of Poland.
To fund his brother's wars he auctioned several clergical possesions, and confiscated the year 1500 special papal tax.
Trigger: year 1500
Option#1 Great, +1 years of income, -50 relations with papacy
Option#2 Let's not anger the pope, +10 papal influence
-Zbigniew Oleśnicki
Regent of Poland in years 1434-1444, although his influence was already enormous in Jagiełło's senile years, he notably lead to the end of polish support to the hussites(at least partially). He was also co-responsible for the stupid adventurous Crusade of Varna. During EU4 timespan itself, he opposed Casimir's election, and was the main opposition figure during his reign, notably criticizing him for fighting the teutonic scum, luckily he died in 1455. In short: he was one of the many clergical m*****f****** who tried to turn Poland into Papacy and HRE's wardog, for his asslickery he became the first „polish” cardinal.
Trigger: 1444, ruler is Jagiellon
Option#1 banish him, -10 clergy loyalty, -50 relations with Papacy
Option#2 leave him be, grant cardinal seat, +20 clergy influence for 10 years.
#Landscape/country/society
-Emergence of the Sich
The name says it all.
Trigger: year 1550(approximate), any neighbour is a steppe horde, at least one province with steppes.
Option #1 Accept status quo, cede all steppe provinces to ZAZ, ZAZ becomes march.
Option #2 Subdue this mob, +10 unrest in steppe provinces
-Armenian Traders of Lwów
In the early modern era the city was a hub for the trade between PLC and the Orient, operated primarily by Armenians and Jews.
Trigger: owns Lviv, year 1525(approximate „normalization” of Polish-Ottoman relations)
Option #1 Lviv gains modifier „Oriental Trade Hub”: +5 trade power, -10% development cost.
-Foundation of Zamość.
+1 each development in Chełm(look map section), change trade good to paper.
-Cracow Barbican
trigger: year 1498
Since it was quite significant it's worth a mention.
Option#1 Construct it, Cracow gets „Barbican” modifier, +25% defensiveness, -0.25 YoI
Option#2 Not from my treasury, -5 prestige
-Mohyla Academy
4th institution of higher education in PLC, and the first in the orthodox part.
Trigger: 1658, owns Kiev.
Option#1 aye, +100 ADM, -0.25 YoI
Option#2 nay, -5 prestige
-Foundation of Nesvizh
trigger: 1586
+1 each development in Slutsk(look map section), change tradegood to cloth
-City of palaces
In reference to Warsaw. Once it became the place of Sejm, and later de facto capital, every single well-off noble family wanted their own palace in the vicinity, to have a place for informal scheming, lobbing, and partying. Few of them were rebuilt after WW2.
Trigger: owns Warsaw, Warsaw is the capital, is PLC
Option#1 let the king's top them all, +25 prestige, -1 YoI.
Option#2 posers, +10 prestige
-Załuski Library
At the time one of the largest public libraries in the world. Plundered by the Russians during the partitions to form the Imperial one in Petersburg.
Trigger: year 1747(opened to the public)
Option #1 Great, +50 each MP
-Krzyżtopór
Afaik at the time of construction the largest and most modern palace in Europe, and at the same time an impressive fortress.
Trigger: year 1644(finished)
Option#1 Impressive, +15 prestige.
-Babin republic
A literary group focused on mockery and satire, it was important for the development of critical thought in Poland.
Trigger: year ~1600
Option#1: +50 DIP
#reiterable for the government, preferably bi-yearly.
While the Jewry and the magnates would be valid for seprate estates, I think it's desirable to have them present on the map as well, as this would make them noticable also from the outside.
-De non tolerandis Judaeis
trigger: owned by burghers, solidarity <40
option#1 grant privilege, gain „De non tolerandis Judaeis” modifier: +10% development cost, -2 local unrest, + 0.2 YoI, +10 burghers loyalty
option#2 refuse, +2.5 solidarity, -10 burghers loyalty
-Yeshiva
trigger: solidarity above 70
option#1 allow, gain „yeshiva” modifier: -15% local development cost, -25% tax
option#2 demand „donation”, gain „yeshiva modifier”, +0.2 YoI, -2,5 solidarity
option#3 forbid, -5 solidarity
-Qahal
trigger: solidarity above 60
option#1 allow, gain „qahal” modifier: +2 local tax income, +10 minimum authonomy
option#2 demand „donation”, gain „qahal modifier”, +0.2 YoI, -2,5 solidarity
option#3 forbid, -5 solidarity
-Shtetl
trigger: solidarity above 50, development below 10
option#1 gain „Shtetl” modifier: +0.2 local goods produced
-Oppidum Judaeorum
trigger: solidarity <40, the province has „de non tolerandis Judaeis” modifier, owned by burghers
option#1 seems legit, gain „Jewish co-town” modifier: +2.5 local trade power, burghers -10 loyalty
option#2 crack down on creative law interpretations, -2.5 solidarity, +10 burghers loyalty
-Free city of X?
Trigger: trade power at least 20, controlled by burghers
Option#1 bene, gain „Free City” modifier: -15% development cost, +25 local autonomy, +5 trade power
Option#2 It's mine, -10 burghers loyalty, +5 unrest
-Zaścianek (area with landless nobility)
trigger: development <10,
option#1 gain modifier „Zaścianek”: +500 manpower, +2 local unrest
option#2 rent royal lands, +50% autonomy, +10 nobles loyalty
-Lipka Tatars
Tatars setlled within PLC, they served as cheap light cavalry.
Trigger: solidarity >50, development <10, and neighbour is a steppe horde.
Option#1 settle them, gain modifier „Lipka Tatars”: +1 land forcelimit,+10% local autonomy
Option#2 not in my backyard, -2.5 solidarity
The following three are supposed to represent formation of magnate „countries” within PLC. With the final result in a new type of „ducal” vassal, one that doesn't cost diplomatic relations, and has almost the same map colour as their overlord to prevent bordergore (these would find use elsewhere to.)
-Ordynacja
Ordynacja was an unsplitable and non-sellable land exempted from the country-wide law of equal inheritence(measure of preventing magnatization). Within one, the oldest son inherited everything, and was obliged to pay for the education or dowry for the other children.
Trigger: solidarity >75, owned by nobility
Option#1 Form it, gain „Ordynacja” modifier: +25 local autonomy, +1 land forcelimit, -1 solidarity
Option#2 Forget it, +2.5 solidarity, +5 local unrest.
-Latifundium
A huge land unit held by one family, often bought from the money made by Ordynacja.
Trigger: has „Ordynacja” modifier
Option#1 Money well used, remove „Ordynacja” modifer, add „Latifundium” modifier: +50 local autonomy, +2 land forcelimit, -2 solidarity. Gain +1/1/1 each development.
Option#2 Defraudation, „Ordynacja” modifier is removed, +5 local unrest, +2.5 solidarity.
-Magnate country?
Trigger: Has „Latifundium” modifier,
Option#1 Allow it, spawn ducal vassal, remove „Latifundium” modifier, -2.5 royal authority
Option#2 Forcibly split the property, remove „Latifundium” modifier, -1 stability.
-Arians/Polish Brethren
A religious denomination that aside from theological beliefs promoted several social reforms, including secularization, something of a proto-communism, pacifism, and denial of „duties” towards country.
Trigger: solidarity >50
Option#1 live and let live, gain „Arian Commune” modifier: +10% local autonomy, +1 local unrest, -1% country idea cost.
Option#2 stop this madness, spawn heretic rebels, -2.5 solidarity.
-Free Peasantry
Not numerous, but there were free peasants in PLC. Sometimes freed by arian nobles, sometimes bestowed with land in their overlord's last will.
Option#1 seize and auction the land, +10 local unrest, -2,5 solidarity, +0.1 YoI.
Option#2 accept the situation, gain „free peasants” modifier: +10% local production efficiency, -5% development cost. -10 noble's loyalty.
-Jesuit college
trigger: protestantism is enabled, catholic
option#1 open it, gain „Jesuit college” modifier: +0.25 papal influence, local missionary strength +2%. -2.5 solidarity, +10 local unrest
option#2 begone, -10 clergy loyalty, loose 10 papal influence
-Protestant academia
trigger: protestantism is enabled, solidarity >50, is catholic
option#1 allow it, province turns protestant, +2.5 solidarity
option#2 close it, -2.5 solidarity, +10 clergy loyalty, +5 local unrest
-Propination
A peculiar law that set up a land owner as the only one allowed to brew and distribute alcoholic beverages, and sometimes enforced his peasants to buy it regardless of their wishes. It could earn enormous sums, but also pissed off the peasants.
Trigger: nobility's influence >60
Option#1 allow it, gain „Propination” modifier: +2 local tax income, +2 local unrest. -2.5 solidarity.
Option#2 prevent the practice, -10 nobility's loyalty, +2.5 solidarity.
Other:
-Fleeing king
In reference to Henry III de Valois.
trigger: royal authority <30, not Polish
Option #1 that's for the better, „kill” the monarch, -5 royal authority
Option#2 chase down our puppet, -1 stability
-Royal sulks
In reference to Sigismund Vasa. After one of Sejm session, insulted by Zamoyski, he locked himself up in his bedchambers and refused to come out until Zamoyski apologizes.
Trigger: royal authority <40
Option#1 Why have we elected him anyways? -25 each monarch point
Option#2 Pay the offender to apologize, -0.25 YoI, -2.5 royal authority
-Enforce Incompatibilitas
Rule of incompatibilitas stated that not more than one office could be held by the same person, it was one of the ways of preventing „magnatization”.
Option#1 Enforce, +5 solidarity, 4 votes in the senate turn negative
Option#2 Ignore, -5 solidarity, 2 votes turns possitive
-Magnate investment
trigger: solidarity >70
option#1 +1 base tax in random province held by nobility.
-Cruel overlords
trigger: solidarity <50
option#1 random province +50 devastation, +10 unrest
option#2 intervene, 50% chance of magnate rebels.
-Tatar raid
trigger: any neighbour is a steppe horde.
Option#1 random state gains +50 devastation
Option#2 pay them off, -0.25 YoI
Option#3 chase them down, -2 years worth of manpower, 50% chance of 25 devastation in a state
-Crown land seized
trigger: royal authority <50
option#1 sigh, +50 autonomy in random province, -2.5 royal authority
option#2 hands off! Spawn magnate rebels
-Questioned command
Polish army had two problems: lack of funds, and whimsy noble soldiers who, equal in rights, found army structure a strange concept. In the results some soldiers, or entire banners, refused to take orders from their superiors if they found them inappropriate.
Trigger: at war
Option#1 give in, a general „dies”, gain general with 20 tradition
Option#2 get lost, -2.5 years worth of manpower, +1 army professionalism.
-Rokosz
An armed party, with an aim of impeaching a king who have broken the law.
Trigger: solidarity <50, royal authority >70, nobles loyalty is negative.
Option#1 quell the rebels, level 3 noble rebels, -20 legitimacy
Option#2 negotiate, -10 royal authority, -10 legitimacy
-Veto casted
trigger: has „Liberum veto” modifier, solidarity <50
Option#1 curse him, all votes in Senate turn negative.
#Enlightment
-May 3rd Constitution
The second modern constitution in the world, a fruit of radical reforms undertaken in late 18th century in an attempt to save the country.
Trigger: solidarity <30, royal authority <30, age of revolutions
Option#1 Wolność! Równość! Braterstwo! Change government to constitutional monarchy, or equivalent in Dharma. -100 relations with non-allied neighbours. If PLC change tag to Poland.
Option#2 We're doing just fine, spawn 2 stacks of level 3 revolutionary rebels.
-Kościuszko Uprising
Usually considered the first polish national uprising, reactionary to the 2nd partition reactionary to the constitution.
Trigger: is constitutional monarchy, total development <400
Option#1 Poland shall rise! +100k manpower, gain „Liberty or death” modifier: +100 land forcelimit, -10% army cost, -0.10 monthly war exhaustion. -100 relations with nations that hold Polish cores.
Option#2 Stay quiet. +1 stability, +100 relations with neighbours.
-Commision of National Education
The first ministry of education in Europe.
Trigger: year 1750(slightly earlier than historicly, to make it actually impactful)
Option#1 Form it, gain „National education system” modifier: -10% technology cost, -10% idea cost, -25% tax efficiency.
Option#2 What a nonsense, +20 clergy loyalty. Add increased narrowmindness modifer for 25 years.
-School of Chivalry (pol. Szkoła Rycerska)
The first Cadet Corps in Poland.
Trigger: year 1750(analogically)
Option#1 Form it, add „School of Chivalry” modifier: +1.0 yearly army tradition, -20% tax efficiency. +2.5 army professionalism.
Option#2 Stay true to tradition, +1 stability, -2.5 army professionalism.
-Thursday Dinners
Weekly meetings of intellectuals held by the last polish king. A central „institution” of enlightment thought in Poland.
Trigger: year 1750
Option#1 Great, gain „Thursday dinners” modifier: -10% idea cost, +government reform progress
#Other
-Executionist movement
It was a political movement in XVI century with a number of aims, amongs which were: respecting of the actual law, strengthening the king on the cost of magnates, and denial of church authority.
Trigger: year 1550(mid-century)
Option#1 Curtail the magnates, +10 royal authority
Option#2 Execute constitutions, +10 solidarity
-Union of Brest
PLC's Orthodox Church accepted the pope as it's head, while retaining own rite. Naturally it caused quite a ferment among the population.
Trigger: catholic, year 1596, Muscovy went with Moscow Patriarchate.
Option#1 Te Deum, +100 relations with Papacy, gain „Union of Brest” modifier: +2% missionary strength vs heretics, +1 yearly papal influence. +10 unrest in all orthodox provinces.
Option#2 Prevent the union, -50 relations with papacy, stability +1. Muscovy/Russia gets a claim on all orthodox provinces within PLC borders.
Option#3 Organize own patriarchate, -2 YoI, +5 solidarity.
-Plight of Kaffa
Since 1462 Kaffa cut loyalty to Genoa, and instead vowed loyalty to Casimir IV becoming part of his kingdom. When in 1475 Turks besieged the town, Poland-Lithuania started to organize relief; however, since sunni defectors opened the city's gates, and the christian population was killed/enslaved/relocated, Casimir simply came to conclusion there's no one left to protect, and subsequently there was no war.
Trigger: Kaffa has „lack of support from Genoa” modifier
Option#1 Welcome, seize Kaffa, -100 relations with Genoa
Option#2 A liability, +50 relations with Genoa.
-Khmelnytsky's Uprising
Trigger: year 1648, active cossack estate
Option#1 Answer with fire and sword, spawn 2 level 3 cossack rebels, if Zaporozhia is a subject it gains +50% liberty desire
Option#2 Give concesions, all provinces held by cossacks, and in ruthenia region of ruthenian culture +25% autonomy
-Prussian Confederation
In short: script the eruption of Thirteen Years' War. Mitigating in advance the „OMFG GOD NO! Y U NERF PRUSSIA CHANCES?! PREUSSENS GLORIA INTENSIFIES”
The Prussia was a product of Brandenburg and von Hohenzolerns, not of Teutonic remains in Ducal Prussia. And it's formation has to be considered an outstanding achievement, not a certain or even likely outcome. You can ask yourself what was the likelihood in the XV century, that one of Germany's youngest and poorest regions will grow to such prominence and unite the empire, defying the might of Commonwealth and the Habsburgs in the process.
Now here's how it goes:
1 Trigger: not in regency, Teutonic Order is not a player.
Option#1 Aid the confederation, „Prussian Confederation” event happens in TEU.
Option#2 We cannot risk conflict, clear historical rivals with TEU.
2 „Prussian Confederation” happens in TEU
Option#1 Yield, Ducal Prussia is released under Danzig tag, „Teutons yield” happens in POL.
Option#2 We won't back down, Ducal Prussia is released under Danzig tag, „Teutons call for war” happens in POL.
3 If Teutons yielded, vassalize Danzig
3 If Teutons refused, vassalize Danzig, declare „subjugation” war on TEU, -100 relations with papacy and the emperor
4 „Seek imperial aid” happens in TEU, „Teutons ask for help” happens in all nations with germanic culture that asks them to provide gold and/or manpower(25% chances for each option)
5 Teutons get the spoils
-Conflicts over Volhynia and Podolia
In accordance with deals made between Poland and Lithuania during Jagiełlo's reign , Volhynia and Podolia were to become a part of the Polish Crown. However when the conditions were met, Lithuanian princlings refused to yield, and the diplomatic conflict over these lands was the reason why Lithuania didn't participate in Thirteen Years' War.
Trigger: year 1452, Lithuania is junior partner.
Option#1 Seize it, +50% liberty desire in Lithuania, seize Volhynia and Podolia areas
Option#2 Seize Volhynia, +25% liberty desire in Lithuania, seize Volhynia area.
Option#3 Seize Podolia, +25% liberty desire in Lithuania, seize Podolia area.
Option#4 Give up, nobles loyalty -10, +1 stability.
-Poland and the hussite cause
trigger: Bohemia has hussites in power, is not rivals with Poland, is not a player.
Option#1 Brotherly blood unites, +100 relations with BOH, a noble of polish royal dynasty becomes the heir in Bohemia, -50 relations with the papacy, emperor, and Hungary.
Option#2 Heretics cannot be trusted, -100 relations with BOH, gain „holy war” casus belli on BOH, +50 relations with the papacy, emperor, and Hungary.
-(alternative history) Relocation of Teutonic Order
One of the proposals for settling Polish-Teuton conflicts was resettling them to Podolia region, where they could perform they actual duty. It didn't happen due to lack of enthusiasm from both the knights and Lithuania, however some historians speculate that John Albert's Moldavian Campaign
secret purpose was exactly the relocation.
Trigger: Teutonic Order is Poland's subject and has a liberty desire below 50
Option#1 Resettle them, grant TEU Podolia area, seize their prussian possesions, -100 relations with Lithuania, Teutonic Order, and the Emperor.
Option#2 Let them stay in Prussia, -10 liberty desire in TEU.
-Lisowczycy
In short: „Riders of the apocalypse”.
Trigger: year 1604
Option#1 Release the hounds, gain „Lisowczycy” modifier for 30 years: -15% cavalry cost, +200% looting speed, +1.5 national unrest.
Option#2 Armed criminals? No thanks.
-Bathory's army reform
More important ones than those made by Sobieski. Most notably he introduced Winged Hussars, and Piechota Wybraniecka.
Trigger: year 1578
Option#1 for the glory, +150 MIL, +2.5 army professionalism.
Option#2 focus on the government instead, +100 ADM, +5 solidarity.
-Nihil Novi
Nihil novi sine communi consensu was a political slogan of polish nobility that translates into „nothing new without common consent” or in other words „nothing about us without us” or „no taxation without representation.” It was officialy formalized in 1505, establishing de iure noble's democracy. I say formalized because it was already present de facto. After all, no king opens a garage sale with prerogatives, and gives them away to his subjects. If a king accepts limitations of his power, it means he is not in the position to negotiate or subdue the opposition.
Trigger: year 1505, Royal Authority <50
Option#1 sign the constitution, gain „Nihil Novi” modifier: +10 nobles loyalty and influence, -10 royal authority, -20% increasing stability cost”
Option#2 Deny the nobility, spawn 3 level 2 noble rebels, -30 nobles loyalty
-Liberum Veto
Liberum Veto. The infamous Liberum Veto. It was a customary law that allowed each single legate to the Sejm to nullify all decisions taken, what effectively established unanimity voting. While it could be striking as a radical or absurdly stupid idea, it had its justification. Poland-Lithuania was basically a decentralized federation of lands, with limited central executive organs. It functioned on the principle of voluntary involvement, if one of the lands disagreed with some law, it would simply ignore it and could be hardly punished for it. In these circumstances if the law was to be executed, people had to have a conviction that the law is a good law, as they themselves were the executors of this law. The liberum veto rule created a strong social and political pressure to look for compromises and thus reduce deunifying tendencies. And for a long time it worked. The first veto was casted in 1669. 1468 is often considered the start of parlimentary supremacy in Poland. What we are looking at are 200 years during which few hundred people could gather in one place, and come to unanimous conclusions. This is truly astonishing. It could have slowed the reforms, but it didn't kill the country. Confederated Sejms proceeded without liberum veto rule, and as such could be a source of reforms if need be, if only there was the will for them.
Trigger: has the modifier „Nihil Novi”
Option#1 accept the practice, gain „Liberum Veto” modifier: +10 solidarity, slower reform points gain(or whatever it's called), #Veto casted event is enabled.
Option#2 veto the practice, -100 legitimacy, -3 stability
-Statutes of Nieszawa(reworked)
trigger: nobles' influence at least 60, at war(meant to fire during the war with teutons)
option#1 sign the statutes, gain „Statutes of Nieszawa” modifier: +10% administrative technology cost, +10% development cost, -5 royal authority. Gain 5 years worth of manpower
Option#2 refuse to sign it, -30 nobles loyalty, lose 5 years worth of manpower, gain 10 royal authority.
-Statutes of Piotrków(reworked)
trigger: nobles influence at least 60, 1496, at war
option#1 sign it, gain „Statutes of Piotrków” modifier: -20 burghers influence, +10 nobles influence. Gain 5 years worth of manpower
option#2 refuse to sign it, -30 nobles loyalty, lose 5 years worth of manpower, gain 10 royal authority
-Henrican Articles and Warsaw Confederation
trigger: solidarity >75, age of reformation.
Option#1 No stakes burning, +25 prestige, +500 splendor.
Pacta conventa and struggle for royal power events to be scrapped, as these would be actual mechanics.
Ending stagnation events replaced with a new now one:
-Drastic measures
Trigger: solidarity <50, at least one is true: ruler: ADM 5, DIP 5, MIL 5. At least one is true: has Nihil Novi, Liberum Veto, Statutes of Nieszawa, Statutes of Piotrków. Does not have „Stagnation” modifier.
Stage 1
Applicable options:
Option#1 Revoke Nihil Novi, „Ending the stagnation” event happens
Option#2 Revoke Liberum Veto, same
Option#3 Revoke Statutes of Nieszawa, same
Option#4 Revoke Statutes, same
Stage 2 Ending the stagnation:
If ADM 5 or Righteous Option#1 through pouch to heart, -3 YoI, gain 2.5 corruption, revoked.
If DIP 5 or Charismatic Negotiator Option#2 flatter, threaten, befuddle, refute. -500 DIP, revoked.
If MIL 5 or Bold Fighter. Option#3 With fire and sword, -25 nobles loyalty, spawn 4 level 3 noble rebels, revoked.
Option#4 chicken out, -5 royal authority, for 25 gain „Stagnation” modifier: -reform points.
-Jan Długosz
Chronicler, „father of polish historiography”, geographer, diplomat, and educator of Casimir IV's sons(4 kings, a saint, a prelate).
Trigger: year 1455
Effect: +10 prestige, +10 legitimacy
-Jan Kochanowski
He's considered the best polish, and sometimes also slavic, poet/writer until the 19th century. He is known to every Pole as one of the fathers of polish literature.
Trigger: year 1579(nomination to court poet)
Effect: +10 prestige
-Jan Heweliusz
A significant astronomer, and inventor. His polemoscopium, introduced to Sobieski's army, was an early prototype of a periscope,
Trigger: owns Gdańsk, year 1647(first work finished)
Option #1: Hire him, spawn level 3 cheaper natural scientist
Option#2: Sponsor him, -0.25 years of income, +50 each MP
-Jan Łaski the younger
A significant figure of reformation in Europe, at first in Frisia and England, later in Poland.
Trigger: year 1556(return to Poland)
Option #1 hire him, cheaper protestant level 3 theologian
Option #2 support him, anger clergy if catholic, 4 provinces become protestant.
-Jan Łaski the elder
A diplomat and statesman, enemy of reformation and magnatery, author of „Łaski's Statute” - codification of laws in various Polish lands.
Trigger: year 1501(royal secretary)
Option#1 Let him serve as diplomat, spawn level 2 cheaper diplomat
Option#2 Let him combat heresy, spawn level 2 cheaper inquisitor
Option#3 Let him combat magnatery, +5 royal authority
-Jan Boner
An imigrant from HRE, settled in Cracow in 1483, he made and mainteined contacts with royal court, as a tenant of royal mines in Małopolska he greatly increased their productivity, he reformed the Polish treasury by making Royal and State treasuries a separate ones.
Trigger: year 1483
Option: spawn level 2 cheaper treasurer
-Jan Zamoyski
Co-author of the Union of Lublin, right-hand of Stephen Bathory, the wealthiest of contemporary magnates contributing his resources to the country's cause. Successful military commander. Opponent of the policy of the imbecile known as King Sigismund III Vasa(Sweden's worst ever export product, no wonder why they dethroned him there). From other worthwhile mentions, in the Battle of Byczyna he dennied Habsburgs the Polish Crown, knowing perfectly well they won't want to the get their ass off the throne once they sit on it.
Trigger: 1565 (royal secretary)
Option: spawn level 3 cheaper statesman, +100 each MP
Ok, enough Jans.
-Janusz Radziwiłł
A magnate, traitor to the country, co-author of Deluge – an event that devastated Poland more than World War II and was a preludium to the partitions.
Trigger: year 1655
Option: Spawn level-2 lithuanian separatist in Samogita.
-Kazimierz Siemienowicz
Artillery commander, pioneer of rocketry, he also wrote about pyrotechnics, and biological and chemical warfare.
Trigger: year 1650 (Artis Magnae Artilleriae)
Option#1 sponsor him, +100 mil points, -0.20 years of income
Option#2 ignore him
-Tadeusz Kościuszko
Military engineer, general, hero of the American Revolution, polish national hero as the organizator of Kościuszko's Uprising – Commonwealth's last dying act.
Trigger: year 1784(return to Poland)
Option#1 Let him serve as a general, spawn 4/4/4/3 general
Option#2 Let him take care of our engineer corps, spawn level 3 cheaper military advisor
-Queen Bona Sforza
Queen-consort, and later Queen-mother of Poland, she accelerated Renaissance in Poland, introduced new crops from Italy, active in internal politics from her arrival she managed to force the only vivente rege in polish history, and reformed taxation. She also founded several cities and developed a lot of royal towns, amassing great wealth for herself and the court.
Trigger: Year 1518 (marriage with Sigismund the Old)
Option#1 gain level 3 cheaper female treasurer
(Women in History style) Option#2 crown her, gain 6/3/3 monarch
-Andrzej Frycz Modrzewski
A political writer. He argued for: denial of papal authority and establishment of national church as the only solution for religious co-existence, strong king limited by constitution, protectionism, rule of law, subsides for the poor, public education, and full equality of all people. In 16th century, and wasn't burned for that.
Trigger: year 1551(magnum opus)
Option#1 Promote national church, 4 provinces converted to protestant faith, -0.2 years of income
Option#2 Promote strong royalty, +5 royal authority, -0.2 YoI
Option#3 Promote equality, +5 solidarity, -0.2 YoI
Option#4 Promote protectionism, +3 mercantilism, -0.2 YoI
Option#5 Promote public institutions, +100 ADM, -0.2 YoI
Option#6 Leave him be, spawn level 3 cheaper philosopher
Option#7 Stop this madness, +50 relations with papacy, increased narrowmindness modifier for 10 years.
-Piotr Skarga
A jesuit. He argued for strong-fisted monarchy, denial of reformation, and fair treatment of peasants.
Trigger: catholic, year 1597(„Sejm Sermons”)
Option#1 Make him heard, +5 royal authority, -0.2 YoI
Option#2 Hire him, spawn level 2 cheaper inquisitor
-Mikołaj Rej
Great advocate of writing in national language rather than latin, as such he contributed significantly to the development of polish culture. He also promoted simple, „good” life, deprived of insincerity, greed, and cruelty.
Trigger: year ~1550
Option#1: make him heard, +100 DIP, -0.2 YoI
Option#2 ignore him
-Wit Stwosz
Nürnberger woodsculptor working in Kraków in the years 1477-1496. He's best known for altarpiece in Kraków's St Mary's Church, a masterpiece of late gothic art.
Trigger: 1477
Option#1 sponsor him, +15 prestige, -0.2 years of income
Option#2 hire him, spawn level 2 cheaper artist
-Stefan Czarniecki
Polish national hero. Starting as a Lisowczycy companion, he gradually rose to prominence in the Commonwealth's army, becoming Crown's Grand Hetman. He spend a lifetime in the saddle fighting for Commonwealth's freedom, always among his soldiers despite being seriously wounded several times. His guerilla warfare during the deluge period, organized together with peasantry, is considered the key factor to Commonwealth's survival at the time.
Trigger: year 1655
Option#1 spawn 3/4/6/1 general
-Fryderyk Jagiellon
The youngest of Casimir IV's sons, he bacame archbishop of Gniezno and prelate of Poland.
To fund his brother's wars he auctioned several clergical possesions, and confiscated the year 1500 special papal tax.
Trigger: year 1500
Option#1 Great, +1 years of income, -50 relations with papacy
Option#2 Let's not anger the pope, +10 papal influence
-Zbigniew Oleśnicki
Regent of Poland in years 1434-1444, although his influence was already enormous in Jagiełło's senile years, he notably lead to the end of polish support to the hussites(at least partially). He was also co-responsible for the stupid adventurous Crusade of Varna. During EU4 timespan itself, he opposed Casimir's election, and was the main opposition figure during his reign, notably criticizing him for fighting the teutonic scum, luckily he died in 1455. In short: he was one of the many clergical m*****f****** who tried to turn Poland into Papacy and HRE's wardog, for his asslickery he became the first „polish” cardinal.
Trigger: 1444, ruler is Jagiellon
Option#1 banish him, -10 clergy loyalty, -50 relations with Papacy
Option#2 leave him be, grant cardinal seat, +20 clergy influence for 10 years.
#Landscape/country/society
-Emergence of the Sich
The name says it all.
Trigger: year 1550(approximate), any neighbour is a steppe horde, at least one province with steppes.
Option #1 Accept status quo, cede all steppe provinces to ZAZ, ZAZ becomes march.
Option #2 Subdue this mob, +10 unrest in steppe provinces
-Armenian Traders of Lwów
In the early modern era the city was a hub for the trade between PLC and the Orient, operated primarily by Armenians and Jews.
Trigger: owns Lviv, year 1525(approximate „normalization” of Polish-Ottoman relations)
Option #1 Lviv gains modifier „Oriental Trade Hub”: +5 trade power, -10% development cost.
-Foundation of Zamość.
+1 each development in Chełm(look map section), change trade good to paper.
-Cracow Barbican
trigger: year 1498
Since it was quite significant it's worth a mention.
Option#1 Construct it, Cracow gets „Barbican” modifier, +25% defensiveness, -0.25 YoI
Option#2 Not from my treasury, -5 prestige
-Mohyla Academy
4th institution of higher education in PLC, and the first in the orthodox part.
Trigger: 1658, owns Kiev.
Option#1 aye, +100 ADM, -0.25 YoI
Option#2 nay, -5 prestige
-Foundation of Nesvizh
trigger: 1586
+1 each development in Slutsk(look map section), change tradegood to cloth
-City of palaces
In reference to Warsaw. Once it became the place of Sejm, and later de facto capital, every single well-off noble family wanted their own palace in the vicinity, to have a place for informal scheming, lobbing, and partying. Few of them were rebuilt after WW2.
Trigger: owns Warsaw, Warsaw is the capital, is PLC
Option#1 let the king's top them all, +25 prestige, -1 YoI.
Option#2 posers, +10 prestige
-Załuski Library
At the time one of the largest public libraries in the world. Plundered by the Russians during the partitions to form the Imperial one in Petersburg.
Trigger: year 1747(opened to the public)
Option #1 Great, +50 each MP
-Krzyżtopór
Afaik at the time of construction the largest and most modern palace in Europe, and at the same time an impressive fortress.
Trigger: year 1644(finished)
Option#1 Impressive, +15 prestige.
-Babin republic
A literary group focused on mockery and satire, it was important for the development of critical thought in Poland.
Trigger: year ~1600
Option#1: +50 DIP
#reiterable for the government, preferably bi-yearly.
While the Jewry and the magnates would be valid for seprate estates, I think it's desirable to have them present on the map as well, as this would make them noticable also from the outside.
-De non tolerandis Judaeis
trigger: owned by burghers, solidarity <40
option#1 grant privilege, gain „De non tolerandis Judaeis” modifier: +10% development cost, -2 local unrest, + 0.2 YoI, +10 burghers loyalty
option#2 refuse, +2.5 solidarity, -10 burghers loyalty
-Yeshiva
trigger: solidarity above 70
option#1 allow, gain „yeshiva” modifier: -15% local development cost, -25% tax
option#2 demand „donation”, gain „yeshiva modifier”, +0.2 YoI, -2,5 solidarity
option#3 forbid, -5 solidarity
-Qahal
trigger: solidarity above 60
option#1 allow, gain „qahal” modifier: +2 local tax income, +10 minimum authonomy
option#2 demand „donation”, gain „qahal modifier”, +0.2 YoI, -2,5 solidarity
option#3 forbid, -5 solidarity
-Shtetl
trigger: solidarity above 50, development below 10
option#1 gain „Shtetl” modifier: +0.2 local goods produced
-Oppidum Judaeorum
trigger: solidarity <40, the province has „de non tolerandis Judaeis” modifier, owned by burghers
option#1 seems legit, gain „Jewish co-town” modifier: +2.5 local trade power, burghers -10 loyalty
option#2 crack down on creative law interpretations, -2.5 solidarity, +10 burghers loyalty
-Free city of X?
Trigger: trade power at least 20, controlled by burghers
Option#1 bene, gain „Free City” modifier: -15% development cost, +25 local autonomy, +5 trade power
Option#2 It's mine, -10 burghers loyalty, +5 unrest
-Zaścianek (area with landless nobility)
trigger: development <10,
option#1 gain modifier „Zaścianek”: +500 manpower, +2 local unrest
option#2 rent royal lands, +50% autonomy, +10 nobles loyalty
-Lipka Tatars
Tatars setlled within PLC, they served as cheap light cavalry.
Trigger: solidarity >50, development <10, and neighbour is a steppe horde.
Option#1 settle them, gain modifier „Lipka Tatars”: +1 land forcelimit,+10% local autonomy
Option#2 not in my backyard, -2.5 solidarity
The following three are supposed to represent formation of magnate „countries” within PLC. With the final result in a new type of „ducal” vassal, one that doesn't cost diplomatic relations, and has almost the same map colour as their overlord to prevent bordergore (these would find use elsewhere to.)
-Ordynacja
Ordynacja was an unsplitable and non-sellable land exempted from the country-wide law of equal inheritence(measure of preventing magnatization). Within one, the oldest son inherited everything, and was obliged to pay for the education or dowry for the other children.
Trigger: solidarity >75, owned by nobility
Option#1 Form it, gain „Ordynacja” modifier: +25 local autonomy, +1 land forcelimit, -1 solidarity
Option#2 Forget it, +2.5 solidarity, +5 local unrest.
-Latifundium
A huge land unit held by one family, often bought from the money made by Ordynacja.
Trigger: has „Ordynacja” modifier
Option#1 Money well used, remove „Ordynacja” modifer, add „Latifundium” modifier: +50 local autonomy, +2 land forcelimit, -2 solidarity. Gain +1/1/1 each development.
Option#2 Defraudation, „Ordynacja” modifier is removed, +5 local unrest, +2.5 solidarity.
-Magnate country?
Trigger: Has „Latifundium” modifier,
Option#1 Allow it, spawn ducal vassal, remove „Latifundium” modifier, -2.5 royal authority
Option#2 Forcibly split the property, remove „Latifundium” modifier, -1 stability.
-Arians/Polish Brethren
A religious denomination that aside from theological beliefs promoted several social reforms, including secularization, something of a proto-communism, pacifism, and denial of „duties” towards country.
Trigger: solidarity >50
Option#1 live and let live, gain „Arian Commune” modifier: +10% local autonomy, +1 local unrest, -1% country idea cost.
Option#2 stop this madness, spawn heretic rebels, -2.5 solidarity.
-Free Peasantry
Not numerous, but there were free peasants in PLC. Sometimes freed by arian nobles, sometimes bestowed with land in their overlord's last will.
Option#1 seize and auction the land, +10 local unrest, -2,5 solidarity, +0.1 YoI.
Option#2 accept the situation, gain „free peasants” modifier: +10% local production efficiency, -5% development cost. -10 noble's loyalty.
-Jesuit college
trigger: protestantism is enabled, catholic
option#1 open it, gain „Jesuit college” modifier: +0.25 papal influence, local missionary strength +2%. -2.5 solidarity, +10 local unrest
option#2 begone, -10 clergy loyalty, loose 10 papal influence
-Protestant academia
trigger: protestantism is enabled, solidarity >50, is catholic
option#1 allow it, province turns protestant, +2.5 solidarity
option#2 close it, -2.5 solidarity, +10 clergy loyalty, +5 local unrest
-Propination
A peculiar law that set up a land owner as the only one allowed to brew and distribute alcoholic beverages, and sometimes enforced his peasants to buy it regardless of their wishes. It could earn enormous sums, but also pissed off the peasants.
Trigger: nobility's influence >60
Option#1 allow it, gain „Propination” modifier: +2 local tax income, +2 local unrest. -2.5 solidarity.
Option#2 prevent the practice, -10 nobility's loyalty, +2.5 solidarity.
Other:
-Fleeing king
In reference to Henry III de Valois.
trigger: royal authority <30, not Polish
Option #1 that's for the better, „kill” the monarch, -5 royal authority
Option#2 chase down our puppet, -1 stability
-Royal sulks
In reference to Sigismund Vasa. After one of Sejm session, insulted by Zamoyski, he locked himself up in his bedchambers and refused to come out until Zamoyski apologizes.
Trigger: royal authority <40
Option#1 Why have we elected him anyways? -25 each monarch point
Option#2 Pay the offender to apologize, -0.25 YoI, -2.5 royal authority
-Enforce Incompatibilitas
Rule of incompatibilitas stated that not more than one office could be held by the same person, it was one of the ways of preventing „magnatization”.
Option#1 Enforce, +5 solidarity, 4 votes in the senate turn negative
Option#2 Ignore, -5 solidarity, 2 votes turns possitive
-Magnate investment
trigger: solidarity >70
option#1 +1 base tax in random province held by nobility.
-Cruel overlords
trigger: solidarity <50
option#1 random province +50 devastation, +10 unrest
option#2 intervene, 50% chance of magnate rebels.
-Tatar raid
trigger: any neighbour is a steppe horde.
Option#1 random state gains +50 devastation
Option#2 pay them off, -0.25 YoI
Option#3 chase them down, -2 years worth of manpower, 50% chance of 25 devastation in a state
-Crown land seized
trigger: royal authority <50
option#1 sigh, +50 autonomy in random province, -2.5 royal authority
option#2 hands off! Spawn magnate rebels
-Questioned command
Polish army had two problems: lack of funds, and whimsy noble soldiers who, equal in rights, found army structure a strange concept. In the results some soldiers, or entire banners, refused to take orders from their superiors if they found them inappropriate.
Trigger: at war
Option#1 give in, a general „dies”, gain general with 20 tradition
Option#2 get lost, -2.5 years worth of manpower, +1 army professionalism.
-Rokosz
An armed party, with an aim of impeaching a king who have broken the law.
Trigger: solidarity <50, royal authority >70, nobles loyalty is negative.
Option#1 quell the rebels, level 3 noble rebels, -20 legitimacy
Option#2 negotiate, -10 royal authority, -10 legitimacy
-Veto casted
trigger: has „Liberum veto” modifier, solidarity <50
Option#1 curse him, all votes in Senate turn negative.
#Enlightment
-May 3rd Constitution
The second modern constitution in the world, a fruit of radical reforms undertaken in late 18th century in an attempt to save the country.
Trigger: solidarity <30, royal authority <30, age of revolutions
Option#1 Wolność! Równość! Braterstwo! Change government to constitutional monarchy, or equivalent in Dharma. -100 relations with non-allied neighbours. If PLC change tag to Poland.
Option#2 We're doing just fine, spawn 2 stacks of level 3 revolutionary rebels.
-Kościuszko Uprising
Usually considered the first polish national uprising, reactionary to the 2nd partition reactionary to the constitution.
Trigger: is constitutional monarchy, total development <400
Option#1 Poland shall rise! +100k manpower, gain „Liberty or death” modifier: +100 land forcelimit, -10% army cost, -0.10 monthly war exhaustion. -100 relations with nations that hold Polish cores.
Option#2 Stay quiet. +1 stability, +100 relations with neighbours.
-Commision of National Education
The first ministry of education in Europe.
Trigger: year 1750(slightly earlier than historicly, to make it actually impactful)
Option#1 Form it, gain „National education system” modifier: -10% technology cost, -10% idea cost, -25% tax efficiency.
Option#2 What a nonsense, +20 clergy loyalty. Add increased narrowmindness modifer for 25 years.
-School of Chivalry (pol. Szkoła Rycerska)
The first Cadet Corps in Poland.
Trigger: year 1750(analogically)
Option#1 Form it, add „School of Chivalry” modifier: +1.0 yearly army tradition, -20% tax efficiency. +2.5 army professionalism.
Option#2 Stay true to tradition, +1 stability, -2.5 army professionalism.
-Thursday Dinners
Weekly meetings of intellectuals held by the last polish king. A central „institution” of enlightment thought in Poland.
Trigger: year 1750
Option#1 Great, gain „Thursday dinners” modifier: -10% idea cost, +government reform progress
#Other
-Executionist movement
It was a political movement in XVI century with a number of aims, amongs which were: respecting of the actual law, strengthening the king on the cost of magnates, and denial of church authority.
Trigger: year 1550(mid-century)
Option#1 Curtail the magnates, +10 royal authority
Option#2 Execute constitutions, +10 solidarity
-Union of Brest
PLC's Orthodox Church accepted the pope as it's head, while retaining own rite. Naturally it caused quite a ferment among the population.
Trigger: catholic, year 1596, Muscovy went with Moscow Patriarchate.
Option#1 Te Deum, +100 relations with Papacy, gain „Union of Brest” modifier: +2% missionary strength vs heretics, +1 yearly papal influence. +10 unrest in all orthodox provinces.
Option#2 Prevent the union, -50 relations with papacy, stability +1. Muscovy/Russia gets a claim on all orthodox provinces within PLC borders.
Option#3 Organize own patriarchate, -2 YoI, +5 solidarity.
-Plight of Kaffa
Since 1462 Kaffa cut loyalty to Genoa, and instead vowed loyalty to Casimir IV becoming part of his kingdom. When in 1475 Turks besieged the town, Poland-Lithuania started to organize relief; however, since sunni defectors opened the city's gates, and the christian population was killed/enslaved/relocated, Casimir simply came to conclusion there's no one left to protect, and subsequently there was no war.
Trigger: Kaffa has „lack of support from Genoa” modifier
Option#1 Welcome, seize Kaffa, -100 relations with Genoa
Option#2 A liability, +50 relations with Genoa.
-Khmelnytsky's Uprising
Trigger: year 1648, active cossack estate
Option#1 Answer with fire and sword, spawn 2 level 3 cossack rebels, if Zaporozhia is a subject it gains +50% liberty desire
Option#2 Give concesions, all provinces held by cossacks, and in ruthenia region of ruthenian culture +25% autonomy
-Prussian Confederation
In short: script the eruption of Thirteen Years' War. Mitigating in advance the „OMFG GOD NO! Y U NERF PRUSSIA CHANCES?! PREUSSENS GLORIA INTENSIFIES”
The Prussia was a product of Brandenburg and von Hohenzolerns, not of Teutonic remains in Ducal Prussia. And it's formation has to be considered an outstanding achievement, not a certain or even likely outcome. You can ask yourself what was the likelihood in the XV century, that one of Germany's youngest and poorest regions will grow to such prominence and unite the empire, defying the might of Commonwealth and the Habsburgs in the process.
Now here's how it goes:
1 Trigger: not in regency, Teutonic Order is not a player.
Option#1 Aid the confederation, „Prussian Confederation” event happens in TEU.
Option#2 We cannot risk conflict, clear historical rivals with TEU.
2 „Prussian Confederation” happens in TEU
Option#1 Yield, Ducal Prussia is released under Danzig tag, „Teutons yield” happens in POL.
Option#2 We won't back down, Ducal Prussia is released under Danzig tag, „Teutons call for war” happens in POL.
3 If Teutons yielded, vassalize Danzig
3 If Teutons refused, vassalize Danzig, declare „subjugation” war on TEU, -100 relations with papacy and the emperor
4 „Seek imperial aid” happens in TEU, „Teutons ask for help” happens in all nations with germanic culture that asks them to provide gold and/or manpower(25% chances for each option)
5 Teutons get the spoils
-Conflicts over Volhynia and Podolia
In accordance with deals made between Poland and Lithuania during Jagiełlo's reign , Volhynia and Podolia were to become a part of the Polish Crown. However when the conditions were met, Lithuanian princlings refused to yield, and the diplomatic conflict over these lands was the reason why Lithuania didn't participate in Thirteen Years' War.
Trigger: year 1452, Lithuania is junior partner.
Option#1 Seize it, +50% liberty desire in Lithuania, seize Volhynia and Podolia areas
Option#2 Seize Volhynia, +25% liberty desire in Lithuania, seize Volhynia area.
Option#3 Seize Podolia, +25% liberty desire in Lithuania, seize Podolia area.
Option#4 Give up, nobles loyalty -10, +1 stability.
-Poland and the hussite cause
trigger: Bohemia has hussites in power, is not rivals with Poland, is not a player.
Option#1 Brotherly blood unites, +100 relations with BOH, a noble of polish royal dynasty becomes the heir in Bohemia, -50 relations with the papacy, emperor, and Hungary.
Option#2 Heretics cannot be trusted, -100 relations with BOH, gain „holy war” casus belli on BOH, +50 relations with the papacy, emperor, and Hungary.
-(alternative history) Relocation of Teutonic Order
One of the proposals for settling Polish-Teuton conflicts was resettling them to Podolia region, where they could perform they actual duty. It didn't happen due to lack of enthusiasm from both the knights and Lithuania, however some historians speculate that John Albert's Moldavian Campaign
secret purpose was exactly the relocation.
Trigger: Teutonic Order is Poland's subject and has a liberty desire below 50
Option#1 Resettle them, grant TEU Podolia area, seize their prussian possesions, -100 relations with Lithuania, Teutonic Order, and the Emperor.
Option#2 Let them stay in Prussia, -10 liberty desire in TEU.
-Lisowczycy
In short: „Riders of the apocalypse”.
Trigger: year 1604
Option#1 Release the hounds, gain „Lisowczycy” modifier for 30 years: -15% cavalry cost, +200% looting speed, +1.5 national unrest.
Option#2 Armed criminals? No thanks.
-Bathory's army reform
More important ones than those made by Sobieski. Most notably he introduced Winged Hussars, and Piechota Wybraniecka.
Trigger: year 1578
Option#1 for the glory, +150 MIL, +2.5 army professionalism.
Option#2 focus on the government instead, +100 ADM, +5 solidarity.
-Nihil Novi
Nihil novi sine communi consensu was a political slogan of polish nobility that translates into „nothing new without common consent” or in other words „nothing about us without us” or „no taxation without representation.” It was officialy formalized in 1505, establishing de iure noble's democracy. I say formalized because it was already present de facto. After all, no king opens a garage sale with prerogatives, and gives them away to his subjects. If a king accepts limitations of his power, it means he is not in the position to negotiate or subdue the opposition.
Trigger: year 1505, Royal Authority <50
Option#1 sign the constitution, gain „Nihil Novi” modifier: +10 nobles loyalty and influence, -10 royal authority, -20% increasing stability cost”
Option#2 Deny the nobility, spawn 3 level 2 noble rebels, -30 nobles loyalty
-Liberum Veto
Liberum Veto. The infamous Liberum Veto. It was a customary law that allowed each single legate to the Sejm to nullify all decisions taken, what effectively established unanimity voting. While it could be striking as a radical or absurdly stupid idea, it had its justification. Poland-Lithuania was basically a decentralized federation of lands, with limited central executive organs. It functioned on the principle of voluntary involvement, if one of the lands disagreed with some law, it would simply ignore it and could be hardly punished for it. In these circumstances if the law was to be executed, people had to have a conviction that the law is a good law, as they themselves were the executors of this law. The liberum veto rule created a strong social and political pressure to look for compromises and thus reduce deunifying tendencies. And for a long time it worked. The first veto was casted in 1669. 1468 is often considered the start of parlimentary supremacy in Poland. What we are looking at are 200 years during which few hundred people could gather in one place, and come to unanimous conclusions. This is truly astonishing. It could have slowed the reforms, but it didn't kill the country. Confederated Sejms proceeded without liberum veto rule, and as such could be a source of reforms if need be, if only there was the will for them.
Trigger: has the modifier „Nihil Novi”
Option#1 accept the practice, gain „Liberum Veto” modifier: +10 solidarity, slower reform points gain(or whatever it's called), #Veto casted event is enabled.
Option#2 veto the practice, -100 legitimacy, -3 stability
-Statutes of Nieszawa(reworked)
trigger: nobles' influence at least 60, at war(meant to fire during the war with teutons)
option#1 sign the statutes, gain „Statutes of Nieszawa” modifier: +10% administrative technology cost, +10% development cost, -5 royal authority. Gain 5 years worth of manpower
Option#2 refuse to sign it, -30 nobles loyalty, lose 5 years worth of manpower, gain 10 royal authority.
-Statutes of Piotrków(reworked)
trigger: nobles influence at least 60, 1496, at war
option#1 sign it, gain „Statutes of Piotrków” modifier: -20 burghers influence, +10 nobles influence. Gain 5 years worth of manpower
option#2 refuse to sign it, -30 nobles loyalty, lose 5 years worth of manpower, gain 10 royal authority
-Henrican Articles and Warsaw Confederation
trigger: solidarity >75, age of reformation.
Option#1 No stakes burning, +25 prestige, +500 splendor.
Pacta conventa and struggle for royal power events to be scrapped, as these would be actual mechanics.
Ending stagnation events replaced with a new now one:
-Drastic measures
Trigger: solidarity <50, at least one is true: ruler: ADM 5, DIP 5, MIL 5. At least one is true: has Nihil Novi, Liberum Veto, Statutes of Nieszawa, Statutes of Piotrków. Does not have „Stagnation” modifier.
Stage 1
Applicable options:
Option#1 Revoke Nihil Novi, „Ending the stagnation” event happens
Option#2 Revoke Liberum Veto, same
Option#3 Revoke Statutes of Nieszawa, same
Option#4 Revoke Statutes, same
Stage 2 Ending the stagnation:
If ADM 5 or Righteous Option#1 through pouch to heart, -3 YoI, gain 2.5 corruption, revoked.
If DIP 5 or Charismatic Negotiator Option#2 flatter, threaten, befuddle, refute. -500 DIP, revoked.
If MIL 5 or Bold Fighter. Option#3 With fire and sword, -25 nobles loyalty, spawn 4 level 3 noble rebels, revoked.
Option#4 chicken out, -5 royal authority, for 25 gain „Stagnation” modifier: -reform points.
VIII Ideas
Changes in bold.
Traditions:
cavalry cost -10%
army tradition decay -1%
Religious refuge:
possible advisors +1 #Jews
development cost -5% #population inflow
„Located at the crossroads of cultures, Poland has traditionaly been more accepting of various religious denominations. In the times when reformation fueled burning stakes all across Europe, her borders remained open to all people fleeing religious persecutions. Among those especially numerous were the Jews, who facing series of expulsions in the West, found a new home in Poland where their rights were protected by the Statute of Kalisz. At the peak of their settlement, three fourth of all Jews lived in Commonwealth compromizing a tenth of its population. Many of them worked for polish kings and nobles.”
Sarmatism:
army morale +10%
prestige from land battles +100% #gloryhounding
„Under the influence of Renaissance and Reformation a proto-nationalism began in Poland. The Polish nobility started to seek its own identity and ancestry, and saw it in the ancient Sarmatian people – horse lords that subjugated the territories east of Germania. Although dubious at best, the idea caught on. It allowed the Szlachta to set itself apart from the „inferior” peasants and to rationalize their own grip on power. The emergent „Sarmatian way of life” had changing character; but, the idea of noble-soldier carried on. All noble males were expected to learn how to fight from the very young age, and continue to practice for the lifetime.”
Piechota Wybraniecka:
manpower +25%
infantry power +10%
Winged Hussars:
cavalry power +33%
cavalry ratio +10%
Wojsko Komputowe:
regiment cost -10%
To don't overlap with Ongoing Defense in Senate, it could be changed to Colonize Wild Fields(+1 colonist)
Found the Foreign Section:
discipline +5%
Focus on Field Defenses:
shock damage received -10%
Ambition:
hostile core creation cost +50%
Polish ambition is essentialy to be left alone and mind own business, while no despot tells you how to live, and that's what Poles fought for even after their country collapsed. They fought for it even when they could no longer remember free Poland and only knew it from stories. If that's not enough, then just imagine conquering a Polish province and doing census. Suddenly you have to administer people like Grzegorz Brzęczyszczykiewcz (born Chrząszczyżewoszyce, powiat Łękołody), or Strzeżymir Podrzujszczycki (born Szczerzec, powiat Jakimczyce). As a conqueror one can of course come up with new names, but that's extra administrative work again.
Traditions:
cavalry cost -10%
army tradition decay -1%
Religious refuge:
possible advisors +1 #Jews
development cost -5% #population inflow
„Located at the crossroads of cultures, Poland has traditionaly been more accepting of various religious denominations. In the times when reformation fueled burning stakes all across Europe, her borders remained open to all people fleeing religious persecutions. Among those especially numerous were the Jews, who facing series of expulsions in the West, found a new home in Poland where their rights were protected by the Statute of Kalisz. At the peak of their settlement, three fourth of all Jews lived in Commonwealth compromizing a tenth of its population. Many of them worked for polish kings and nobles.”
Sarmatism:
army morale +10%
prestige from land battles +100% #gloryhounding
„Under the influence of Renaissance and Reformation a proto-nationalism began in Poland. The Polish nobility started to seek its own identity and ancestry, and saw it in the ancient Sarmatian people – horse lords that subjugated the territories east of Germania. Although dubious at best, the idea caught on. It allowed the Szlachta to set itself apart from the „inferior” peasants and to rationalize their own grip on power. The emergent „Sarmatian way of life” had changing character; but, the idea of noble-soldier carried on. All noble males were expected to learn how to fight from the very young age, and continue to practice for the lifetime.”
Piechota Wybraniecka:
manpower +25%
infantry power +10%
Winged Hussars:
cavalry power +33%
cavalry ratio +10%
Wojsko Komputowe:
regiment cost -10%
To don't overlap with Ongoing Defense in Senate, it could be changed to Colonize Wild Fields(+1 colonist)
Found the Foreign Section:
discipline +5%
Focus on Field Defenses:
shock damage received -10%
Ambition:
hostile core creation cost +50%
Polish ambition is essentialy to be left alone and mind own business, while no despot tells you how to live, and that's what Poles fought for even after their country collapsed. They fought for it even when they could no longer remember free Poland and only knew it from stories. If that's not enough, then just imagine conquering a Polish province and doing census. Suddenly you have to administer people like Grzegorz Brzęczyszczykiewcz (born Chrząszczyżewoszyce, powiat Łękołody), or Strzeżymir Podrzujszczycki (born Szczerzec, powiat Jakimczyce). As a conqueror one can of course come up with new names, but that's extra administrative work again.
IX Map
Before I go to the provinces, I have complaints to make about Vistula Lagoon, and trade routes.
Marienburg/Elbląg and Warmia provinces shouldn't be inland. Vistula forms a delta with 2 major legs: Leniwka flowing to Gdańsk and Nogat also know as Elblągian Wisła. Both were navigable even for seafaring ships, what gave the ports of Vistula Lagoon access to the sea, even before the Strait of Baltiysk emerged in 1497. Until 17th century Elbląg itself was a larger port than Stockholm.
Today it's old town lays inland due to the process known as river accumulation of sediments that have created the aluvial plain of Żuławy Wiślane, and caused Vistula Lagoon to shrink(for comparison in high middle ages it reached 30-40kms further south.) Cutting off those provinces from the sea is ahistorical, and as I understand has been done to make forming Prussia easier, which is really f***ing stupid when you think about it. Because what happens is that you can get the most powerful government in the game with ease. You can start as Pomerania, ally Poland, promise them land, beat them to occupy Gdańsk and Koenigsberg, take them, and then just wait for protestantism protected by the very country you have robbed of ports. Maybe it's just me, but seriously, it shouldn't be that easy to get this government. Period.
The second complaint/request/suggestion.
One would think that if there are two neighbouring trade nodes, with accesible borders, and historical accounts of trade between those lands, then those nodes will interact somehow. Apparently it's not true for everywhere. As Poland you can push all the way into Far East and pull trade from China, but you cannot pull trade from Romania or Bulgaria, ffs. The standards seem a little bit off.
The following routes should be added:
-Kiev->Baltic Sea
-Constantinople->Cracow
-Persia->Crimea
I have had it modded in for a while, it doesn't upset the mythical „balance of power,” it simply creates more natural expansion options. Try it in-house.
Here's a crude map of the region as suggested, without othodox devoutness to exactly historial borders. Provinces details follow. Population table for Poland in 15th century (I couldn't find one for Lithuania) can be found at the very bottom, as well as maps used for trade goods, with translated keys.
For consistency I will stick to the polish names here.
Poland region:
[Malopolska]:
Kraków 8 8 7 Salt, tier-2 centre of trade, „Wieliczka and Bochnia mines” modifier: +25% trade goods produced, -10% development cost.
Nowy Sącz 6 6 3 iron
Sandomierz 5 5 3 glass
Radom 5 5 3 iron
Tarnów 3 3 2 grain
[Wielkopolska]:
Poznań 5 5 4 paper tier-1 centre of trade
Gniezno 4 4 4 livestock
Kalisz 5 5 4 cloth
Leszno 4 4 2 cloth
Wałcz/Noteć 2 2 1 livestock
[Central Poland]
Sieradz 4 4 2 dyes
Piotrków 3 3 2 copper, latent coal
Łęczyca 5 5 3 grain
Kujawy 3 3 2 grain
Rawa 3 3 1 grain
[Mazovia]
Warszawa 5 5 4 cloth tier-1 centre of trade
Płock 2 2 1 grain
Ciechanów 4 4 2 grain
Wizna 4 4 2 grain
[Silesia]
Wrocław 6 6 4 cloth tier-1 centre of trade
Głogów 5 5 3 cloth
Legnica 5 5 3 iron
Świdnica 5 5 3 copper
[Upper Silesia]
Opole 3 3 2 glass, latent coal
Racibórz 2 2 2 iron, latent coal
Nysa 2 2 2 iron
[Bug] (river)
Lublin 4 4 2 cloth, tier-2 centre of trade
Podlasie 4 4 2 grain
Chełm 3 3 1 livestock
Brześć 3 3 2 wool
[Red Ruthenia]
Lwów 6 6 4 dyes, tier-2 centre of trade
Sambor 3 3 2 salt
Przemyśl 3 3 2 grain
Halicz 3 3 2 livestock
Bełz 3 3 2 grain, latent coal
Baltic region(relevant part)
[Royal Prussia]
Gdańsk 7 7 2 cloth tier-2 centre of trade, half of Vistula estuary
Tuchola 3 3 2 grain
Malbork 3 3 4 iron half of vistula estuary
Warmia 3 3 2 naval supplies
Toruń 4 4 2 paper tier-1 centre of trade
[Ducal Prussia]
Królewiec 5 5 4 gems tier-1 centre of trade
Klajpeda 3 3 1 naval supplies
Ostróda 2 2 2 naval supplies
Ragneta 1 1 1 naval supplies
Szczytno 2 2 2 naval supplies
[Samogita]
Rosienie 2 2 2 livestock
Kiejdany 2 2 2 livestock
Sejny 1 1 1 naval supplies
Kowno 2 2 1 grain
Troki 3 3 2 grain
[Vilna]
Wilno 6 6 4 cloth, tier-2 centre of trade
Grodno 3 3 2 wool
Brasław 3 3 2 livestock
[Kurland]
Goldynga 2 2 1 naval supplies
Żytawa 2 2 1 grain
Piltyń 1 1 1 naval supplies
Ozylia 2 2 1 grain
Ruthenia region:
[Polotsk]
Połock 4 4 2 iron
Witebsk 2 2 2 fur
Ułła 1 1 1 iron
Orsza 2 2 1 wool
[Black Ruthenia]
Nowogródek 2 2 1 fur
Słuck 2 2 1 livestock
Pińsk 2 2 1 wool
Turów 1 1 1 wool
[White Ruthenia]
Mińsk 4 4 2 salt(representative for potash production in Poland-Lithuania)
Mozyrz 2 2 1 grain
Mohylew 2 2 2 wool
Mścisław 2 2 1 livestock
Homel 1 1 1 livestock
[Volhynia]
Łuck 3 3 2 iron
Włodzimierz 2 2 1 livestock
Ostóg 2 2 1 livestock
Zwiahel 2 2 1 livestock
Krzemieniec 2 2 1 livestock
[Podolia]
Kamieniec 2 2 3 wool
Bracław 2 2 1 livestock
Winnica 1 1 1 wine
Humań 1 1 1 livestock
[Kiev]
Kijów 3 3 2 iron tier 2 centre of trade
Żytomierz 1 1 1 grain
Owrucz 1 1 1 livestock
Biała Cerkiew 2 2 1 grain
[Right Bank Ukraine]
Czerkasy 1 1 1 grain
Korsuń 1 1 1 grain
Czehryń 1 1 1 grain
[Zaporozhia]
Sicz 1 1 1 wool
Kudak 1 1 1 livestock
Mansur 2 2 1 livestock
Melitopol 3 3 2 salt
Yedishkul 3 3 2 salt
[Left Bank Ukraine]
Perjesław 2 2 1 grain
Łubnie 1 1 1 grain
Baturyn 1 1 1 grain
Połtawa 1 1 1 grain
[Severia]
Czernichów 2 2 1 iron
Nowogród 2 2 1 iron
Rylsk 1 1 1 livestock
Kursk 1 1 1 livestock
[Sloboda Ukraine]
Charków 1 1 1 iron, latent coal
Biełgorod 1 1 1 iron
Woroneż 2 2 1 livestock
Jelec 2 2 1 livestock
Other regions:
[Smoleńsk]
Smoleńsk 4 4 2 iron tier-2 centre of trade
Krasny 2 2 1 grain
Wiaźma 3 3 2 cloth
Briańsk 3 3 2 grain
Starodub/Poczep 2 2 1 livestock
[Yedisan]
Chadżybej 1 1 1 livestock Dnestr estuary
Kyzykermen 1 1 1 wine Dnieper estuary
Bendery 2 2 1 wine
Białogród 4 4 3 livestoce, Danube estuary
Perekop 3 3 2 salt
[Moldavia] (back in Constantinople trade node)
Suczawa 4 4 2 grain
Jassy 3 3 2 wine
Soroki 2 2 2 wine
Baków 2 2 1 wool
Gałacz 3 3 2 livestock
Poland region:
[Malopolska]:
Kraków 8 8 7 Salt, tier-2 centre of trade, „Wieliczka and Bochnia mines” modifier: +25% trade goods produced, -10% development cost.
Nowy Sącz 6 6 3 iron
Sandomierz 5 5 3 glass
Radom 5 5 3 iron
Tarnów 3 3 2 grain
[Wielkopolska]:
Poznań 5 5 4 paper tier-1 centre of trade
Gniezno 4 4 4 livestock
Kalisz 5 5 4 cloth
Leszno 4 4 2 cloth
Wałcz/Noteć 2 2 1 livestock
[Central Poland]
Sieradz 4 4 2 dyes
Piotrków 3 3 2 copper, latent coal
Łęczyca 5 5 3 grain
Kujawy 3 3 2 grain
Rawa 3 3 1 grain
[Mazovia]
Warszawa 5 5 4 cloth tier-1 centre of trade
Płock 2 2 1 grain
Ciechanów 4 4 2 grain
Wizna 4 4 2 grain
[Silesia]
Wrocław 6 6 4 cloth tier-1 centre of trade
Głogów 5 5 3 cloth
Legnica 5 5 3 iron
Świdnica 5 5 3 copper
[Upper Silesia]
Opole 3 3 2 glass, latent coal
Racibórz 2 2 2 iron, latent coal
Nysa 2 2 2 iron
[Bug] (river)
Lublin 4 4 2 cloth, tier-2 centre of trade
Podlasie 4 4 2 grain
Chełm 3 3 1 livestock
Brześć 3 3 2 wool
[Red Ruthenia]
Lwów 6 6 4 dyes, tier-2 centre of trade
Sambor 3 3 2 salt
Przemyśl 3 3 2 grain
Halicz 3 3 2 livestock
Bełz 3 3 2 grain, latent coal
Baltic region(relevant part)
[Royal Prussia]
Gdańsk 7 7 2 cloth tier-2 centre of trade, half of Vistula estuary
Tuchola 3 3 2 grain
Malbork 3 3 4 iron half of vistula estuary
Warmia 3 3 2 naval supplies
Toruń 4 4 2 paper tier-1 centre of trade
[Ducal Prussia]
Królewiec 5 5 4 gems tier-1 centre of trade
Klajpeda 3 3 1 naval supplies
Ostróda 2 2 2 naval supplies
Ragneta 1 1 1 naval supplies
Szczytno 2 2 2 naval supplies
[Samogita]
Rosienie 2 2 2 livestock
Kiejdany 2 2 2 livestock
Sejny 1 1 1 naval supplies
Kowno 2 2 1 grain
Troki 3 3 2 grain
[Vilna]
Wilno 6 6 4 cloth, tier-2 centre of trade
Grodno 3 3 2 wool
Brasław 3 3 2 livestock
[Kurland]
Goldynga 2 2 1 naval supplies
Żytawa 2 2 1 grain
Piltyń 1 1 1 naval supplies
Ozylia 2 2 1 grain
Ruthenia region:
[Polotsk]
Połock 4 4 2 iron
Witebsk 2 2 2 fur
Ułła 1 1 1 iron
Orsza 2 2 1 wool
[Black Ruthenia]
Nowogródek 2 2 1 fur
Słuck 2 2 1 livestock
Pińsk 2 2 1 wool
Turów 1 1 1 wool
[White Ruthenia]
Mińsk 4 4 2 salt(representative for potash production in Poland-Lithuania)
Mozyrz 2 2 1 grain
Mohylew 2 2 2 wool
Mścisław 2 2 1 livestock
Homel 1 1 1 livestock
[Volhynia]
Łuck 3 3 2 iron
Włodzimierz 2 2 1 livestock
Ostóg 2 2 1 livestock
Zwiahel 2 2 1 livestock
Krzemieniec 2 2 1 livestock
[Podolia]
Kamieniec 2 2 3 wool
Bracław 2 2 1 livestock
Winnica 1 1 1 wine
Humań 1 1 1 livestock
[Kiev]
Kijów 3 3 2 iron tier 2 centre of trade
Żytomierz 1 1 1 grain
Owrucz 1 1 1 livestock
Biała Cerkiew 2 2 1 grain
[Right Bank Ukraine]
Czerkasy 1 1 1 grain
Korsuń 1 1 1 grain
Czehryń 1 1 1 grain
[Zaporozhia]
Sicz 1 1 1 wool
Kudak 1 1 1 livestock
Mansur 2 2 1 livestock
Melitopol 3 3 2 salt
Yedishkul 3 3 2 salt
[Left Bank Ukraine]
Perjesław 2 2 1 grain
Łubnie 1 1 1 grain
Baturyn 1 1 1 grain
Połtawa 1 1 1 grain
[Severia]
Czernichów 2 2 1 iron
Nowogród 2 2 1 iron
Rylsk 1 1 1 livestock
Kursk 1 1 1 livestock
[Sloboda Ukraine]
Charków 1 1 1 iron, latent coal
Biełgorod 1 1 1 iron
Woroneż 2 2 1 livestock
Jelec 2 2 1 livestock
Other regions:
[Smoleńsk]
Smoleńsk 4 4 2 iron tier-2 centre of trade
Krasny 2 2 1 grain
Wiaźma 3 3 2 cloth
Briańsk 3 3 2 grain
Starodub/Poczep 2 2 1 livestock
[Yedisan]
Chadżybej 1 1 1 livestock Dnestr estuary
Kyzykermen 1 1 1 wine Dnieper estuary
Bendery 2 2 1 wine
Białogród 4 4 3 livestoce, Danube estuary
Perekop 3 3 2 salt
[Moldavia] (back in Constantinople trade node)
Suczawa 4 4 2 grain
Jassy 3 3 2 wine
Soroki 2 2 2 wine
Baków 2 2 1 wool
Gałacz 3 3 2 livestock
I category - large cities, II towns with ~2000 populations, III towns with ~1000 population IV ~400 population
Last edited:
- 2
Upvote
0
