• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.

EU4 - Development Diary - 11th of June 2019

Welcome once again to the weekly EU4 development diary. I’m neondt, and today I’ll be talking about the French and Provençal mission trees, before handing you over to @Ofaloaf who will have more than a few words to say about the Dutch. I’ll also show you a few new government reforms just for fun.

I’ll start by addressing the elephant in the room: where’s Burgundy? We do indeed have a mission tree for Burgundy, but it is not yet time to reveal it. The Burgundian mission tree is tied to features yet unannounced and to reworks of certain significant events that we are not yet ready to talk about. The same is true of the Pope in Italy, and to a lesser extent some of the German nations. We’ll come back to this once we’ve started to talk about some of the mechanical changes and features coming in the European expansion.

dd_france.png


The French mission tree now stands as one of the most extensive in the game. When we re-worked the mission system during the development of Rule Britannia, France was one of the winners as our policy was to adapt as many old missions as possible to the new system and France happened to have rather a lot of those. The European expansion will go even further, adding 25 more missions for France.

For the sake of brevity we’ll focus only on what’s new rather than covering content you’re likely well familiar with already. Early on in the new tree are missions to develop two crucially important naval bases, neither of which begin in French hands in 1444. These are Brest, in Brittany, and Toulon, in Provence. Each will serve a slightly different purpose. Toulon’s dockyard mission will add a permanent modifier to the province giving Navy Tradition, as well as reducing ship cost and repair time in the province, making it an ideal base for your Meditterainean operations. Establishing the Brest dockyards meanwhile will reward you with an early Drydock building in the province, as well as 5 heavy ships for your fleet, which will be helpful for the proceeding missions which focus on defeating the English. To that end, the first step is to strengthen the Auld Alliance - you must ensure that a friendly nation in the British Isles (doesn’t have to be Scotland but it’s the most likely candidate) has at least 70 development. Completing this mission rewards claims on only those parts of the British Isles owned by England or Great Britain, with the goal of the Defeat the English mission simple being to reduce their power and drive them out of London. With the English defeated, France will truly rule the waves and you’ll have 10% more Naval Morale for the rest of the game.

France also has a shiny new set of missions that deal with its internal situation. Beginning as a feudal state ruled largely by regional nobles, France must move towards centralization in all of its forms. Breaking the power of the nobility is only the first step. Next you must impose religious unity through the institution of the Dragonnades, a set of policies designed to expel heresy from the nation. But it is not enough to rule the state - you must become the state. Crushing all notions of regional autonomy and bringing stability to the nation will enable the L’Etat c’est moi modifier, replacing the old decision of the same name. Also replacing an old decision, Versailles Palace will provide you with a significant prestige boost, some development in Paris, and fire the Commissioning of Versailles event. Next comes the Revolution. Embrace the Revolution or crush it, the choice is yours. Regardless, this will be a turning point for France and will lead you towards establishing a buffer of Client States and ultimately proclaiming French Hegemony over Europe. Moving back up the tree, France must also Establish the Musketeers, possible only under a highly skilled military ruler and fires the reworked and improved Royal Musketeers event. With a disciplined elite regiment of musketeers, you’ll need a place for them to recover from their injuries so that they can return to active service as quickly as possible, and so just must construct Les Invalides. You must have a high land forcelimit, a university in Paris, and at least 20 provinces with a military building. The reward is something I shamelessly stole from @Ofaloaf ‘s Venetian missions - an effect that reduces the likelihood of negative events about ill-health. In addition your manpower recovery rate will be improved by 10% for the rest of the game.

Several additional conquest missions appear throughout the tree. Following the Annex Alsace mission, you’ll be on the path to recreating Napoleon’s campaigns. Invading Switzerland, abolishing the Holy Roman Empire, “protecting” Poland and ultimately attempting an invasion of Russia will be on the to-do list. A successful siege of Moscow will fire the new Fire of Moscow event, bringing utter ruin and devastation to the city. Enforcing the French Claim to Naples will give you a claim on the Spanish crown, allowing you to start a war for the Spanish Succession.

Finally we’ve added new colonial missions for France. France will now be tasked with expanding in South America, establishing the France Antarctique colony. The missions will also follow historical French activities in North America and their struggle to dominate the fur trade through establishing relationships with the native peoples. These missions culminate in a mission to bring liberty, equality, and fraternity to the oppressed colonies of your rivals, supporting American Independence. If you successfully liberate one of these colonies, you’ll be rewarded with permanent access to the Liberation CB. France will also be incentivized to sail eastward. Indian Dominance tasks you with expelling all other European powers from India in the Age of Revolutions (granting cheaper Trade Company Investments), while French Indochina aims at the early conquest of Vietnam.

dd_provence.png


Good King René was a man with a lot of titles. Or at least a man who believed he had a lot of titles. Certainly he ruled as Count of Provence and Duke of Anjou, and Duke of Lorraine through his marriage to Duchess Isabella. Only a couple of years before our start date he ruled as King of Naples before being ousted by the Aragonese. In addition to Naples, René also claimed to be the rightful ruler of Sicily, Aragon, and Jerusalem, and professed through his coat of arms a connection to Hungary.

The Provençal mission tree will task you with making these bold pretensions a political reality. René must begin by finding some way for his claims to be taken seriously, and this can be achieved either by conquering Corsica or reaching 100 total development (Provence begins with 73 in the current iteration of the map). This will grant you cores on Naples. You heard right, that’s cores on Naples, rather than permanent claims. This is a rare case where we feel it makes sense to grant cores as a mission reward, as René lost Naples so close to the start of the game. Retaking Naples will be quite a challenge, but should you succeed the world will recognize you as a King, improving your government rank. You’ll also get permanent claims or Union CB’s (as appropriate to how the political situation has developed) on your rightful possessions in Aragon and Sicily. These campaigns again will be no easy feat, as you’ll likely have to battle the Iberians quite extensively on both land and sea. Accomplishing this task will not be the end of your struggles however. You’ll then be tasked with pursuing the more outrageous claims of the House of Anjou - the Kingdoms of Hungary and Jerusalem. Taking up the mantle of the Crusades will likely put you on a collision course with the mighty Ottomans, while claiming to be the King of Hungary is unlikely to sit well with the Habsburgs. Besides being an opportunity to snag the Good King René achievement, being King of Jerusalem will present some new in-game opportunities which we’ll talk about another time.

Provence also has many somewhat more local and immediate concerns besides the (re)conquest of René’s birthright. Uniting Provence with Lorraine is critical, as is establishing a relationship with the Holy Roman Empire. Joining the Empire, despite its name, need not involve Provence being a member state - becoming the Emperor or abolishing the HRE will also suffice. The status of Avignon is also a concern. Once the seat of the Avignon Papacy, it is no longer quite so vital to the Holy See. It may be possible to convince the Pope to part with the city with some careful diplomacy, or failing that a good old fashioned siege will also do the job. With Avignon integrated into Provence, the logical next step is of course the conquest of all Occitania, and from there the conquest of France itself. The King of Kings mission closes much of the mission tree, requiring in addition 1000 total development. It grants not only the Empire government rank but also a permanent boost to your Legitimacy and a 20% reduction to the cost of Diplomatic Annexation, useful for integrating all of the Personal Unions you’ve likely accumulated along the way.

Good King René was more than a holder of unrecognized titles. He was also a great patron of the arts, sponsoring the Renaissance and patronizing the Church. Completing the Sponsor the arts mission will reward you with the means to Develop Provence, which requires Aix to have at least 30 development and all other provinces in the state to have at least 15. The next priority will be the establishment of the aforementioned naval base at Toulon. Although it is the French national anthem, La Marseillaise was originally a marching song of the Marseille National Guard. This mission requires 80% Army Professionalism, and on completion reward a permanent 25% boost to your Drill gain and decay.

------------------------------------------------

Hey again, @Ofaloaf in the saddle again and it's time to talk about our good pals, the Dutch. EU4's timeframe saw the Low Countries go from a disparate collection of feudal vassals and small duchies into one of the preeminent powers of Europe and, dare I say it, the world. Distilling this rich history into a mission tree, needless to say, has been a heck of a challenge.

NED_missions.jpg


Dutch missions are shared between the Netherlands proper and the Dutch minors that are present in the game in 1444. All of the missions except for the two rightmost mission chains are available to the minors, although the available missions should naturally prod a minor to eventually reach the conditions to form the Netherlands anyways. Their missions are largely concerned with three themes: protecting the Low Countries, getting rich, and going places to get even more rich.

A lot of the early missions are concerned securing and protecting the state's independence; 'Assert Our Sovereignty' straight-up requires the country to be independent and own four provinces, which means if you're playing as one of Burgundy's vassals you'll want to backstab that big wine-colored blob at the first opportunity. 'Sea Beggars', meanwhile, encourages you to build up a respectable fleet of light ships, useful for both harassing your naval enemies in a pinch and hogging all the power in trade nodes.

As the country develops, the scope of its economic interests should gradually push it to look beyond Europe for greater trade opportunities. It starts off humbly enough; historically, the Netherlands began trading in Baltic grain decades before it ever really started investing in transatlantic and East Indies ventures. From its initial forays in the Baltic, however, the Dutch began to rapidly expand, challenging Iberian commercial monopolies by sending their own merchants to places previously visited only by the Spanish and Portuguese.

Soon, two significant trading companies were chartered, the Dutch East India Company (or Vereenigde Oostindische Compangie, known also as the VOC) and the West India Company (Westindische Compangie, WIC, sometimes known with a 'Chartered'/Geoctroyeerde slapped to the front of its name as well). The VOC founded colonies from South Africa to the East Indies, and even briefly had a foothold in Taiwan. The WIC tried to emulate the VOC's wealth and extent in the Americas, but its New Netherlands colony was eventually taken by the British and its main port, New Amsterdam, became the obscure town of New York City, and its attempt to seize Brazil from Portugal floundered. I trust that you can do better than that.

Lastly, the Netherlands has two mission chains solely for it, starting with 'Strengthen the Vroedschappen' and 'Merge the Stadtholders'. Both these chains play into the Dutch Republic government's mechanics and the struggle between the Orangists (big fans of the House of Orange) and the Statists (big fans of being a republic where they get the money and the glory), because all the missions in those chains affect the Orangist-Statist balance of power. None of them require a certain level of Orangist or Statist control, but, for example, if you manage to pull off a Glorious Revolution where the Prince of Orange successfully subjugates Britain, oh man you bet the Orangists would enjoy a boost to their popularity and influence. Any swing from completing a mission can be mitigated with an election or by completing Orangist and Statist missions at the same time, or you can just let politics fluctuate as the fortunes of the Orangists and Statists ebb and flow.

------------------------------

And now back to me for one last thing. We heard you liked interesting new government reforms, and I even heard a few pleas for “stable dictatorships”. Displayed below are three new government forms that are exactly that:

dd_govs.png

[As always, all numbers are WIP and may not represent final values at release]

Protectorate Parliament is a unique government reform available to England only if they choose to side with the Parliamentarians during the English Civil War. It represents the ‘Rump Parliament’ of Lord Protector Cromwell and his successors. The Protectorate Parliament is a tier 1 government reform (and legacy government) that does not have elections, but uses the Parliament mechanics and has a higher absolutism cap than other republics.

The Junker Stratocracy is unique to Prussia, serving as a republican equivalent to the Prussian Monarchy reform. Stratocracy enables the Militarization mechanic, has a very high absolutism cap, and grants passive Militarization gain. Most importantly, rulers are not decided by either elections or by birth. When the ruler of a Stratocracy dies, they are succeeded by the nations’ best General, who will become the new Field Marshal. The Field Marshals’ stats are based on the number of pips they had as a General, much like the Pirate Kings of Golden Century.

Speaking of Pirate Kings, the Board of Admirals reform allows non-pirate republics to abandon any semblance of democracy and give total political power to the Navy, with the Lord High Admiral serving as head of state and new rulers being raised from the ranks of your Admirals. Enacting this reform will require you to complete Naval ideas.

All of these reforms are far from the ideals of republicanism, and so will have a reduced base republican tradition gain.

That’s all from this rather wordy dev diary! Next week I hope you’ll join us for the last in our series of map dev diaries, this time focusing on Austria and the Balkans.
 
Last edited:
  • 2Like
  • 2
Reactions:
In everyday speech a word of germanic origin is much more common than of romance origin.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Germanic_and_Latinate_equivalents_in_English

So English is this contrast very germanic, another point of english is that its grammatical structure is closer to germanic than French, lacking many of the conjugation in verbs one would expect from French or Latin.
The fact that it is even a question to be debated means that while english clearly isn't a romance language it is not fully a germanic language, this is not on the level of loan words, every language has those, no english had romance in it on a whole other level than any other germanic language.
that is a very simplistic view. It makes a huge difference if you simply count every word in the dictionary, or if you weight that word with its frequency of usage. after all, most words in the dictionary are hardly ever used. (the pareto principle, or 80-20 rule, applies to words, so 80% of the words spoken make up 20% of the dictionary content) if you take frequency of usage into account, there is a vast shift towards the germanic rooted words.

... and then you haven't even considered grammar.
There are a lot of germanic words not in use either. That principle strikes both ways. Yes english is not a romance language but it is not a fully Germanic language either, this is on a level far above the number of loan words other germanic languages have. My ancient languages professor always referred to english as one of the mongrel languages.

Also this method needs to have basic filler words removed because they are vastly over represented, The, of, and, and so on, and I really don't think grammar matter all that much while the words we use for actions and concepts shape how think of these actions and concepts, hence why the impact of all of english's elite words being romantic in nature becomes so considerable. Because expressing any complicated ideas without them is impossible, while every simple word had a little used romance equivalent the advanced concepts are romance only.
Also yeah the grammar may be germanic but the aplhabet isn't, all germanic languages have umlaut letters, english speakers don't even know how to pronounce the umlaut letters.
 
Last edited:
There are a lot of germanic words not in use either.
nobody even claimed that to be an argument.

My ancient languages professor always referred to english as one of the mongrel languages.
that's fine, but unless you also give a definition of "mongrel language", the statement is completely meaningless. and even then, how does that support any of the arguments of the debate?

Also this method needs to have basic filler words removed because they are vastly over represented, The, of, and, and so on
fine, you can do that, i doubt it changes much in the bigger picture

and I really don't think grammar matter all that much while the words we use for actions and concepts shape how think of these actions and concepts
uhm what? you lost me there.

Also yeah the grammar may be germanic but the aplhabet isn't, all germanic languages have umlaut letters, english speakers don't even know how to pronounce the umlaut letters.
now that argument is pure nonsense...
first, english spelling makes no sense whatsoever. just ask a random person to pronounce "worcester"
second, there's no germanic alphabet (unless you count runic futhark, but nobody uses that anymore).
third, serbian and croatian are written in completely different alphabets [cyrillic vs. latin], yet are still pretty much the same language.
and fourth, just because you don't write down the umlauts doesn't mean they aren't there. plus in english you have the "th" sound which has disappeared in most other germanic languages, and never appeared in a romance language.
 
Hello !

Great dev diary ! I'm really looking forward for this ! You are doing an amazing work !

I know we have to wait until next week, but every week I hope : will there be a mission tree / some new formable country in wallonia/belgium area ? (Like Belgium :p ? or Lotharingia ? or even a "wallonian" tag ? I mean Scandinavia is formable !).

Or at least the extension of this bloody +1 yearly devotion to legitimacy and republican tradition in Liege national idea ? I'm really so sick of playing a theocracy :'( ... and I can point out some historical argument in favor of it if you want :D (like the constitution of Liege which was kind of a democratic one, and the multiplied attempt by some people to revolt in order to form a real democracy (and send the prince away).

My absolute dream would be a mission tree for Liege or Burgundy and/or flemish minor to form an united Belgium !
 
The fact that it is even a question to be debated means that while english clearly isn't a romance language it is not fully a germanic language, this is not on the level of loan words, every language has those, no english had romance in it on a whole other level than any other germanic language.

There are a lot of germanic words not in use either. That principle strikes both ways. Yes english is not a romance language but it is not a fully Germanic language either, this is on a level far above the number of loan words other germanic languages have. My ancient languages professor always referred to english as one of the mongrel languages.

Also this method needs to have basic filler words removed because they are vastly over represented, The, of, and, and so on, and I really don't think grammar matter all that much while the words we use for actions and concepts shape how think of these actions and concepts, hence why the impact of all of english's elite words being romantic in nature becomes so considerable. Because expressing any complicated ideas without them is impossible, while every simple word had a little used romance equivalent the advanced concepts are romance only.
Also yeah the grammar may be germanic but the aplhabet isn't, all germanic languages have umlaut letters, english speakers don't even know how to pronounce the umlaut letters.

Except that english also has umlaut lol.

Umlaut is most prominent in German because it shows it with a seperate stylistic mark, but that doesn't mean English doesn't have it.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germanic_umlaut

Also when we compare lexical origin VS lexical similarity we can better understand what English falls into.

Calling it a mongrol language simply because it incorporates more heavily from Romance languages is a bit silly.

English is a Germanic language heavily influenced by French.

The Latin and Greek can be disregarded somewhat as Dutch and German have quite a few influences from them as well and nobody claims they are mongrols.

Screenshot_20190612-084618.jpg
Origins_of_English_PieChart.svg.png
 
Calling it a mongrol language simply because it incorporates more heavily from Romance languages is a bit silly.
Not my term, that term was used by the head of the study of languages. He used it describe languages which significantly straddled the divide between to lingual groups. And I can feel where he got it from I speak several Germanic languages and English always felt like it was the odd one out.
Also I would love to continue this discussion but we've gotten very far from the topic because of an offhand comment about English which had next to nothing to do with the subject of the low countries.

second, there's no germanic alphabet (unless you count runic futhark, but nobody uses that anymore).
The germanic variants of the latin aplhabet, and I am talking about letters like åäöü and so on. Which the Germanic languages all use in some capacity while English use exactly the same letters as french does. the dots ¨ are often colloquially referred to as umlauts, now that you mention it I seem to recall that's not the correct word for them but I argue like Wittgenstein that words means what people use them for so I guess they are called umlauts now. I know what the word means in German but that's not what I was referring to.
But again we've gotten of topic.
 
Last edited:
Not my term, that term was used by the head of the study of languages. He used it describe languages which significantly straddled the divide between to lingual groups. And I can feel where he got it from I speak several Germanic languages and English always felt like it was the odd one out.
Also I would love to continue this discussion but we've gotten very far from the topic because of an offhand comment about English which had next to nothing to do with the subject of the low countries.


The germanic variants of the latin aplhabet, and I am talking about letters like åäöü and so on. Which the Germanic languages all use in some capacity while English use exactly the same letters as french does. the dots ¨ are often colloquially referred to as umlauts, now that you mention it I seem to recall that's not the correct word for them but I argue like Wittgenstein that words means what people use them for so I guess they are called umlauts now. I know what the word means in German but that's not what I was referring to.
But again we've gotten of topic.

Dutch uses the French way of alphabet and again you show your lack of knowledge.

And even then it's highly debatable because almost all languages change their respective Latin alphabet to suit their need.

Th should be incorporated in the English language but has simply been simplified to Th because it's more uniform.

Same with Wh which retains some of its unique sound in a few dialects in english.

Modern research and ideas are generally better than some old teacher you once had. Many professors loose their sense of quickly adapting fields that have many different nuances. Say History, Archeology, Biology etc.

I wouldn't ask a 80 year old professor about the way of genetic replication and Crispr-9
 
historically, the Netherlands began trading in Baltic grain decades before it ever really started investing in transatlantic and East Indies ventures. From its initial forays in the Baltic, however, the Dutch began to rapidly expand, challenging Iberian commercial monopolies by sending their own merchants to places previously visited only by the Spanish and Portuguese.
This was very nicely explained. I myself could use more of this kind of historical background, especially for trade. Something for the immersion other than "take province trade power", "send ships to protect trade", "get the modifiers"...
 
And I can feel where he got it from I speak several Germanic languages and English always felt like it was the odd one out.
there is no doubt that english does that, but i think that most objective measurements you could put to it, will come to the conclusion that it's still quite thoroughly in the germanic language family. it's mostly the vocabulary where english took a few odd turns historically, but there's more to a language than just vocabulary.


The germanic variants of the latin aplhabet, and I am talking about letters like åäöü and so on. Which the Germanic languages all use in some capacity while English use exactly the same letters as french does.
uhm, have you read a french text, ever? i can come up with several letters that french uses that are absent in english: ç, ë and œ, plus a few accents. almost no two germanic languages use the same set of "umlauts" (a more correct term in this context would be "diacritical marks") , and languages like french and spanish also don't use the exact same modifications of the original latin alphabet. this is NOT an argument in the debate whether two languages fall into the same language family at all.
 
Dutch uses the French way of alphabet and again you show your lack of knowledge.
We weren't talking about dutch we were talking about english, frisian and platt. And two of these use diacritics and english is the one which does not.
Modern research and ideas are generally better than some old teacher you once had. Many professors loose their sense of quickly adapting fields that have many different nuances. Say History, Archeology, Biology etc.
Except you haven't provided any research, just claims. And again we're off topic.

uhm, have you read a french text, ever? i can come up with several letters that french uses that are absent in english: ç, ë and œ, plus a few accents. almost no two germanic languages use the same set of "umlauts" (a more correct term in this context would be "diacritical marks") , and languages like french and spanish also don't use the exact same modifications of the original latin alphabet. this is NOT an argument in the debate whether two languages fall into the same language family at all.
Diacritics matter about as much as grammar does and like you've just pointed out, that means not at all. Words shape how we describe, and by extension perceive, the world around us, whether the verb goes first or last does not.
 
Last edited:
This was very nicely explained. I myself could use more of this kind of historical background, especially for trade. Something for the immersion other than "take province trade power", "send ships to protect trade", "get the modifiers"...

The Netherlands got most of their trade profits through the baltic sea, not from spice trade.
In the baltic sea they traded in high quality wood, weapons and iron. Which came through the Netherlands as a crossroad between the baltic sea, north sea, the channel and great rivers such as the rhine.
 
Protectorate Parliament is a unique government reform available to England only if they choose to side with the Parliamentarians during the English Civil War. It represents the ‘Rump Parliament’ of Lord Protector Cromwell and his successors. The Protectorate Parliament is a tier 1 government reform (and legacy government) that does not have elections, but uses the Parliament mechanics and has a higher absolutism cap than other republics.

Any chance a reform could be added 'Westminster/Parliamentary Monarchy' that slightly combines Monarchy mechanics with a Prime Minister, similar to the Dutch Republic but with party loyalties, e.g. Whigs. The office of Prime Minister rose to prominance within the latter era for Eu4 and having a chain to get to this point after the civil war would be neat.
If this isn't something that could be on the cards what about a culture tag for British republics where their elected leaders are tagged "Prime Minister", unless choosing the 'Presidental System". Personally triggered by British President eww :p
 
uhm, no. diacritics matter only in written language, but the vast majority of language is spoken. and grammar matters in spoken language.
First of most of our sources are written, we can't hear how people talked in 1500, only read. Unless there are time bottled version of languages left as minority languages somewhere (more on that later).
Secondly grammar matters for communication but it does not alter the meaning or tone of a sentence the way a word can.
Thirdly which letters are available can affect spoken language because language is often standardised around it's written form, for an example it's no coincidence that English has lost the Å Ä Ö sounds and happens not to have letters for them. Dutch also had the Ö sound as evident by the fact that Afrikaans has it (got to love time bottle languages), they however spelled it with a two os a thing which Danish also did before the Ø was introduced (funny story when sweden took over Skåneland they corrected the names to use öö instead, Hence place names like Höör). Note how danish introduced a new letter and managed to hold on to the sound while dutch didn't and lost it.
Again it's a fascinating subject but this is not the time or the place.
 
First of most of our sources are written, we can't hear how people talked in 1500, only read.
uhm, no. we can trace vowel shifts across languages and thus reconstruct how people (probably) spoke long before we even have written sources for.

Thirdly which letters are available can affect spoken language because language is often standardised around it's written form
if that were the case, english would still be pronounced like in the shakespearean era
English has lost the Å Ä Ö sounds and happens not to have letters for them.
that's plain untrue. you can easily pick 3 words which are spelled with the letter "a" but have completly different sounds for that letter, and that's made even worse by different dialects treating the same word differently... say "bath"...
 
uhm, no. we can trace vowel shifts across languages and thus reconstruct how people (probably) spoke long before we even have written sources for.

if that were the case, english would still be pronounced like in the shakespearean era
that's plain untrue. you can easily pick 3 words which are spelled with the letter "a" but have completly different sounds for that letter, and that's made even worse by different dialects treating the same word differently... say "bath"...
English being a mess, is hardly proof of your points.I said often not always also English may have been standardized at some point but it sure isn't today.
 
maybe not, but it's even less proof for YOUR points.

i'd argue that english spelling could be made more consistent by introducing some diacritical marks for those umlauts that it does have but fails to write down.
 
maybe not, but it's even less proof for YOUR points.

i'd argue that english spelling could be made more consistent by introducing some diacritical marks for those umlauts that it does have but fails to write down.
But as you have already argued then you'd need a dozen ways to write these words in England alone. Or do you mean regional pronunciations would go away? Yeah... I don't think that is something that would go over very well.
 
Huh? other languages have standardized and (mostly) consistent spelling, while still retaining dialects... (mass media like TV is a way heavier force driving back dialects)