Wrong concepts of cultures in Paradox Games

[Feyd]

I write about EU 3, for talk about cultures in africa.

Paradox team, diivide Tuareg to african group, and berber to semitic group.

That is a huge mistake. Berber, or amazigh culture, is the native culture of nort africa, and tuareg culture are only nomadic imazighen (nomadic berber)
Tuareg is not beduin! Beduir are arabs, tuaregs are amazigh (berbers)

Then, Tuareg = amazigh = berber, and then, they must be the same culture and be in african group. More info:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berber_people

 

[Junuxx]

Perhaps, in-game 'Berber' culture means arabicized Berbers?

 

[6354201]

Perhaps, in-game 'Berber' culture means arabicized Berbers?

Yeah, I think that is what is meant to be represented.

 

[unmerged(148296)]

All of what become's the Ottoman's non-european Empire, is in the same group. when deciding culture groups, nationality is most important to paradox. take the Flemish/Dutch, there was no distinction in the game's timeline, yet one forms Netherlands, and the other Belgium.

 

[Feyd]

Yeah, I think that is what is meant to be represented.

Thas wrong, for arabized berbers, there a culture called "maghreb_arabic", then, paradox make differences betwen berber and arabized berbers, I think, they dont know exactly what is amazigh culture and tuareg.

 

[Junuxx]

Thas wrong, for arabized berbers, there a culture called "maghreb_arabic", then, paradox make differences betwen berber and arabized berbers, I think, they dont know exactly what is amazigh culture and tuareg.

Maghreb arabs are ethnically arabic, aren't they?

 

[unmerged(89077)]

Maghreb arabs are ethnically arabic, aren't they?

Yes.

And the Tuareg are not Berber. A

And for the info of the OP, wikipedia is very far from being a reliable source as it is run by a clique of admins etc who make sure things are done their way and implement rules that Jimmy Wales never envisaged, wanted, nor realizes are in place!

 

[unmerged(101035)]

That's actually a fair point I would think. It doesn't make any more sense than, say... making the North American tribes part of the English group because England owned it historically. Berbers still retain their own culture and language to this day in rather large amounts in countries like Morocco, I don't really see how you could call it "arabicised berbers" and call it a day. Berbers aren't Tuareg, no, but the point was they should probably be in their own culture group... and they probably should be, it's not close to Arabic of any sort. I mean if you bother having all those Indian regimes with ruling cultures different than most of their provincial cultures some of which are even outside their own culture group, seems like the same is perfectly applicable in North Africa.

Then again, probably not any more messed up/simplified than anywhere else outside of Europe, so I'd imagine it is probably not too high on anyone's to do list.

 

[Pitt The Elder]

Keep in mind there might also be wider gameplay issues to consider. Now, in this case I won't even pretend to know anything, and the fact that Castille rampages over the place 110% of the time, so it might not be super relevant, but Paradox has been known to make some debatable choices in the cultural department in order to make certain power blocks stronger/weaker.

 

[unmerged(37198)]

Keep in mind there might also be wider gameplay issues to consider. Now, in this case I won't even pretend to know anything, and the fact that Castille rampages over the place 110% of the time, so it might not be super relevant, but Paradox has been known to make some debatable choices in the cultural department in order to make certain power blocks stronger/weaker.

heck they even moved turkish culture away from the groupe its suposed to be in, to the arabic, for game play ballance

so if something is plain wrong with cultures, its often intended to achive a better ballance

 

[BritNavFan]

Well, if you're going to improve the accuracy of cultures in Africa the first thing to do is break up the "African" group. Berbers do not have anything in particular in common with, for example, the Yoruba, other than being on the same continent.

My understanding is that the Tuareg are a subgroup of the Berbers. However, for my Africa mod I put the Tuareg in the (new) Tuareg group and left the Berbers in the Arab group (after giving long consideration to making a Berber group containing Berber and Tuareg). Taking the Berbers out of the Arab group would give Morocco a strong tendency to break up into Arab and Berber parts and/or for Algeria to conquer Morocco. Merging the Tuareg and the Berbers into one culture would cause Algeria to start aquiring at least one province south of the Sahara from rebellion. Also, the Tuareg and Berbers are certainly different enough to count as different cultures.

I also made the provinces of Tripoli Maghreb Arab culture. While there were certainly Tuareg in the back country, the city of Tripoli was not a Tuareg city (and was actually annexed by the Hafsid dynasty of Tunisia a few years after 1399).

 

[unmerged(148296)]

culture is a hard thing to pin down. It is not historically clear, many parts. The way culture groups act in game, suggests that we should look as a culture group as a group of cultures that get along better than those outside the culture group. Although I do think it is odd that spain get "conquered barbary pirates" for conquering morrocan cities, when tripoli was a major pirate port.

 

[Generalmotors]

Speaking about wrong countries' classifications, Transylvania is not Hungarian, and, maybe a greater mistake, is not Catholic, but Orthodox. At times Hungarians ruled Transylvania, but the dominant religion was always orthodox. The fact that Hungarians are granted the culture of Transylvania comes from a time when Romanians were not considered a nation in Transylvania, they were considered inferior people, and had no rights whatsoever. This is not nationalistic argue, is the truth, look in any history book.
Also, Hungarians and Romanians do not belong to Slavic culture. That is a huge mistake. Romanians and Hugarians are not Slavic. Romanians are Latins, Hungarians are a special culture, most specialists say they belong to the " Finno-Ugric" culture, that brings together Estonian, Finnish and Hungarian languages.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slav

Green-East Slavic
Dark green- South Slavic
Light green - West Slavic

Romania and Hungaria are in the middle.

 

[Abraxas]

Also, Hungarians and Romanians do not belong to Slavic culture. That is a huge mistake. Romanians and Hugarians are not Slavic. Romanians are Latins, Hungarians are a special culture, most specialists say they belong to the " Finno-Ugric" culture, that brings together Estonian, Finnish and Hungarian languages.

There's more to culture than linguistic affiliation. Customs and traditions are way more important for people in their daily lives, and among those the Hungarians surely have more in common with their Slavic neighbors than with the Finns. Also, as seen in your map, Romania lies between east and south Slavic peoples so it's rather obvious they should have something in common with those Slavs. Beside, what other culture group would you put Romanian in? There's no coherent "Latin" culture group anyway.

 

[Generalmotors]

There's more to culture than linguistic affiliation. Customs and traditions are way more important for people in their daily lives, and among those the Hungarians surely have more in common with their Slavic neighbors than with the Finns. Also, as seen in your map, Romania lies between east and south Slavic peoples so it's rather obvious they should have something in common with those Slavs. Beside, what other culture group would you put Romanian in? There's no coherent "Latin" culture group anyway.

Of course. But how do 2 czechs who happen to meet in New York recognize each other as members of the same culture group? Not by language?

 

[Stigandr]

There's more to culture than linguistic affiliation. Customs and traditions are way more important for people in their daily lives, and among those the Hungarians surely have more in common with their Slavic neighbors than with the Finns. Also, as seen in your map, Romania lies between east and south Slavic peoples so it's rather obvious they should have something in common with those Slavs. Beside, what other culture group would you put Romanian in? There's no coherent "Latin" culture group anyway.

I was pretty dubious about Hungary being put in the West Slavic group at first - but I've come to the conclusion it's to give them a chance to do something culturally; to conquer lands where they don't get a big penalty. I think the same is the case with Romania; both countries are made Slavic for gameplay reasons.

 

[Abraxas]

Of course. But how do 2 czechs who happen to meet in New York recognize each other as members of the same culture group? Not by language?

By language they recognize each other as Czechs, i.e. members of the same culture, not culture group I'll admit, though, that this is quickly turning into an exercise in hair splitting. Even the concept of having a single 'culture' as a homogenous block with clearly discernable boundaries is a gross simplification, but such simplifications are necessary to produce a functioning game. For even more obvious reasons, this is also true for culture groups.

I was pretty dubious about Hungary being put in the West Slavic group at first - but I've come to the conclusion it's to give them a chance to do something culturally; to conquer lands where they don't get a big penalty. I think the same is the case with Romania; both countries are made Slavic for gameplay reasons.

That is essentially what I was trying to say with my earlier posting. As this thread shows once again, the decisions on culture grouping are about finding a balance between historical accuracy and gameplay balance. And in this case I indeed believe it was a good decision to include Romanian and Hungarian as Slavic cultures even if that does not correspond perfectly with common perceptions of culture.

 

[Mohreb]

Speaking about wrong countries' classifications, Transylvania is not Hungarian, and, maybe a greater mistake, is not Catholic, but Orthodox. At times Hungarians ruled Transylvania, but the dominant religion was always orthodox. The fact that Hungarians are granted the culture of Transylvania comes from a time when Romanians were not considered a nation in Transylvania, they were considered inferior people, and had no rights whatsoever. This is not nationalistic argue, is the truth, look in any history book.

You should precise wich history books you are looking in i mean transilvania (Erdely) is an always disputed place of history ... and history books (sory) but are not a proof of any kind ... What culture was in transilvania? you could look at history books and say romanian but you could also look at other history books and say it was hungarian ... I think each country try to justify its claim on that territory so they write their history books in a way that justifies it.

 

[Lokicat]

These threads in EUIII forum are fascinating, a great way to learn so much about the links between cultures.

I view Paradox's approach around cultural groups in EUIII to represent who the nations hang out with during the 400 years the game runs for, not some perfect anthropological representation of where they come from in the tens, hundreds of thousands of years before the game starts (i.e. do you judge someone by their parents or their peers, or both?)

Given this, it is important to understand the EUIII is a game and though the links as presented may not be correct in all situations, they do enhance the game play. Adding Hungarians and Romanians to the Slavic group makes playing these nations easier as they are less likely to have revolts and to go further in the game. Considering they are in the Eastern Tech group any assistance of this type helps, so I think Paradox has come up with a great way make them playable.

I always keep in mind at all times if I don't agree with the way the cultures are allocated at the start, I can play the game and convert the culture with narrow minded policies. By playing the game I can decide if Alsace Lorraine is truly French, German, Italian, Scandinavian or whatever you choose. In my current game these provinces have become Bavarian as part of my von Luxembourg empire. In another they changed to be Lombardian as part of my Milanese empire.

Alternately just edit the text file used to start the scenario so a province is part of the culture matches your history books...

 

[unmerged(25822)]

Culture system is not perfect but it works , if you don't like the displayed culture (or the group it belongs) feel free to edit the files , it only takes 30''.

Talking about who is who and lived where is a debate that never concludes.

What the game misses is mixed marriages