• 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 - 7th of May 2019

Hi there and welcome to another dev diary for EU4. I am Pierre, I’ve been part of the EU4 Content Design team since December, and I feel honoured to be able to give you your first peeks at the new content we are making for the big European update and expansion we have planned for the end of the year.

This is the first of several dev diaries that will focus on the map changes we have made, giving large parts of the European map a much-needed revamp. I’ll be starting with Germany (which for purely arbitrary reasons shall for today include Switzerland and Bohemia, but not Austria). As @neondt stated in an earlier dev diary, our aim was not to recreate Voltaire’s Nightmare or to populate the entire HRE map with OPMs (this would have been eminently possible) but rather to create more depth and more interesting gameplay situations within it, righting various wrongs and finding ways to better represent the various dynamics of the empire’s territories along the way.

As with previous patches, all map changes shown here will be part of the free patch. In previous map previews, we have often revealed the idea groups of the new tags, and rest assured we will be adding new ideas to replace the generic German ones. However, the work to do so still lies in the future, so in the meantime I’d just like to give a shoutout to this thread – if you want to know what we are looking for in terms of threads suggesting new idea groups, look no further.

So without further ado…

South Germany

upload_2019-5-6_13-44-8.png


The lack of primogeniture in Bavaria until the 1500s led to several splits of the Duchy in the 14th century before its reunification in 1503. At game start, Wittelsbach Bavaria is divided between Munich, Landshut and Ingolstadt, who will have to fight it out for the duchy (or hope they inherit it). However, Bavaria can console itself with the fact that, once united, it will have considerably more resources at its disposal than in 1.28, with new provinces in Innbaiern (modern Innviertel, ceded to Austria in 1779; capital: Braunau), Freising, Rosenheim and Donauwörth (which has Swabian culture and is a releasable tag). We hope for Bavaria to become a strong power within the HRE in the next patch. To make this more likely, we will be adding DHEs such as this one to the Bavarian sub-duchies:

upload_2019-5-6_13-44-46.png


Also new to Bavaria is the inclusion of Regensburg as a Free City and Passau as a Bishopric. At present, the latter is a vassal under Munich, since historically Munich’s territories more or less surrounded Passau and we do not wish the latter to be easy food for Bohemia or Austria. Finally, Salzburg (already in the Bavarian geographic area) now has Bavarian culture, which more correctly represents its situation in 1444 – it was part of the Bavarian Circle and was only annexed by Austria as late as 1805.

Moving south, the large province of Tirol has been split in several pieces, with the independent County of Bregenz (currently Austrian culture) to the west representing one of the more challenging starting positions in the HRE (they have 5 development and an heir with low legitimacy). The main province has been further split between Inntal (capital: Innsbruck) and Etschtal (capital: Meran).

Switzerland, too, has seen a makeover. The Swiss Confederacy was a growing power in the 15th century but was not yet close to controlling all of what would become Switzerland. Whilst we elected not to start with individual independent Swiss Cantons (this would simply make them easy prey for Austria, Milan, Savoy and Burgundy), we did split off the largest independent force, the Three Leagues. In the process, Graubünden was split to become Illanz and Chur, and Fribourg/Freiburg was added west of Bern.

Finally, Swabia has seen considerable changes. Firstly, Austria’s holdings in Swabia (or “Further Austria” are better represented, with Breisgau now being ruled by Austria, as it was in history. Baden has been compensated with the addition of Durlach (which would later become Karlsruhe) to its north. Wurttemberg, which was the largest territorial state in Swabia but somehow is an OPM with 6 development in EU4, now has a new province in the form of Urach (capital: Reutlingen) and a substantial buff in terms of development. Additionally, Ravensburg has been swapped for the Free City of Konstanz, Alsace is now the Bishopric of Strasbourg, the new tag of Mulhouse has been added to represent the Decapolis in southern Alsace, and Ulm is no longer wildly mislocated.

To add a bit more interest to the area, states of Swabian culture will now be able to form Swabia.

Central Germany and Bohemia

upload_2019-5-6_13-45-34.png


Saxony has been given several new provinces but has also been split in two. Like Bavaria, Saxony did not have primogeniture; unlike Bavaria, Saxony never fully resolved this issue. As a result, in the 15th century, it was split several times, with the end result being the Treaty of Leipzig in 1485, where Saxony was split between the two brothers Ernest and Albert on lines similar to those displayed on the map above, except that both continued calling themselves Saxony and Ernest (Thuringia) gained Wittenberg and the Electorate. Thuringia/Ernestine Saxony later lost the Electorate to (Albertine) Saxony and split into many, many pieces. This all lies in the future in 1444 (via several planned DHEs), so the current division is based on that in 1445 between the brothers Friedrich and Wilhelm. Thuringia starts under PU by Saxony, but there will be several events which will make it a difficult subject to keep quiet for Saxony. New provinces are Zwickau in Saxony and three in Thuringia (previously one province with low development), which is now much better represented by Erfurt (Mainz has a core on this province to represent certain historical complexities), Weimar and Coburg (Franconian culture).

Franconia has seen a few more provinces and tags added. Most importantly, Franconia itself is now a formable tag if you manage to unite the Franconian lands. This is however easier said than done as Franconia now includes two Free Cities and lands owned by strong neighbours (i.e. Coburg by Thuringia). Würzburg, the titular holders of the duchy, remain the strongest power, with a new province in Fulda (Rhenish i.e. Hessian culture) and vassal in Bamberg. Their main rivals, Ansbach, now have Bayreuth as their junior partners in PU. They are now also bordered on the west by Rothenburg, another new Free City. Finally, the large province of Mainz has been split and the new Franconian culture province of Aschaffenburg has been added.

Moving West, @Ofaloaf did some pyrotechnics to the lower Rhineland map to make space to squeeze in Jülich (owned by Berg). The Palatinate has a new province in Zweibrücken, and although Hessen has no new provinces, its provinces have been renamed to Oberhessen and Niederhessen, with Niederhessen (Kassel) now the capital and more affluent province.

Finally, Bohemia, like other regions, has gained some new provinces. Lusatia has been split in three (with Oberlausitz split between Bautzen and Görlitz). This has allowed us to make Lusatia an area and releasable tag, with the provinces now having Sorbian culture. Silesia, as you can see, has been split in two between Glogau and Opole. Silesia the tag still exists and can be formed by a Silesian country that owns all of Silesia and is not a subject. Bohemia and Moravia have seen three more provinces added, with space being made for Jindrichuv Hradec, Pardubice and Ostrava. Although this is quite a few new provinces, we split the development of existing provinces to make room for them, so Bohemian starting development is not noticeably higher; we will of course be paying attention to the balance side of things to avoid Bohemia becoming the Ottomans of Europe.

Northern Germany

upload_2019-5-6_13-46-21.png


We restrained ourselves from adding too many provinces to Brandenburg, mainly because this was not a very densely inhabited area and in 1444 few would have predicted that it would later rise to power. However, they did gain a new province in Brandenburg (the city) and are stronger than most of their neighbours, so if they can secure the alliances needed to keep the likes of Bohemia away, they are still well-placed to expand – especially since the sale of Neumark will now also grant them Dramburg.

Pomerania had a bit of a situation with their lack of primogeniture too (I seem to be repeating myself here). In fact, they split many, many times and were united much more seldom than they were divided. We went for a fairly conservative split and made them into Wolgast in the west and Stettin in the east, with new provinces in Wolgast and Rügen. A united Pomerania will of course be able to form Pomerania. Also, Rügen is a releasable tag that, in homage to Klaus Störtebecker and the hotbed of piracy that was the Baltic, will have the opportunity of going pirate if you own Golden Century.

The smaller states to the west of Brandenburg have each gained provinces, with Mecklenburg now correctly owning Stargard, Lüneburg’s significance better represented by the addition of Celle, and Magdeburg now owning the bishop’s summer residence of Halle. Braunschweig (previously one of the largest provinces of the HRE) has had the city of Göttingen split off it to the south (still owned by the Brunswick tag though) and is bordered to the east by the new Free City of Goslar, and the tag Verden now also owns a province called Verden as well as Stade.

Further west, Cologne too has an extra province in Paderborn (which is a releasable tag) and Berg is our new bordergore galore tag, owning Bielefeld as well as Berg and Jülich. Last but not least, Dortmund has also been added as a Free City.

Another change that we made in the north is in the cultures. There have been many calls for a “Lower Saxon” culture, and we have heeded these calls by splitting the Westphalian culture. Conveniently, this allows us to make the Kingdom of Hannover into the formable for the Lower Saxons and Westphalia into that for the Westphalians and Rhenish peoples.

upload_2019-5-6_14-54-18.png


As a final note, I’d add that our focus on the Holy Roman Empire gives us a good opportunity to add flavour events for the tags populating it. I’ve been loving reading through the suggestions in threads such as this one. Please keep them coming, and if there is any interesting historical event you would like to see in the game, feel free to ping me (I can also read German and French, so you can send me links in those languages too).

That’s it for now. Next week, I’ll be presenting a few of the German mission trees we have prepared so far.
 
Last edited:
You sound confusing I don't think you're a Dutch native speaker to deal with this. Firstly I find the map awful as it groups Dutch Low Saxon as a German dialect, not dutch. And before you argue, I'm going to remind you that the Dutch language has been influenced throughout history ranging from various time periods in history and dialectical influences (Frisian,Flemish,Brabant,Holland, to name a few) its more like a mesh of dialects that came into one and became the standards for modern Dutch. My Dutch teaches described this as 'Oerverwantschap' : Two languages or dialects come into contact with each other a lot during the time of language formation. There is mutual influence, and two very similar languages arise in an early phase, which then develop in their own way.

Which I think is the case for Dutch, (and I speak for myself as a native speaker)

Secondly, according to Wikipedia the standardisation of the Dutch language started around the 15th century so this would make up for a good argument to keep status quo https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutch_language#Modern_Dutch_(15th_century_–_present):
Allereerst moet ik toch maar even bewijzen dat ik een Nederlander ben. Secondly, I live about 10 km away from the border with Germany, so this is concerns local history for me. This is also the reason why I brought up Borculo. I must concede that the point I was trying to make was a bit too much just rambling on my part.

It is true that there is a lot of influence that dialects located next to one another have. But this is also applicable to influence that Dutch Lower Saxon has gotten from the east. To this very day, if you speak in propper dialect, you can make yourself understood east of the border, but not in Amsterdam. Lower Saxon is, after Frisian but before Dutch, the language most closely related to English. And just so you could get a bit of a feel for it, I would recommend reading reading a bit on the Lower Saxon wikipedia, just to get a feel for it how different it is.
Secondly, according to Wikipedia the standardisation of the Dutch language started around the 15th century so this would make up for a good argument to keep status quo https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutch_language#Modern_Dutch_(15th_century_–_present):
so please don't waste a culture for some Drentse boeren
First, I wasn't advocating for a different culture, it would be better if the provinces were made Westphalian, the subgroup under which most of the dialects fall.
Secondly, we seem to disagree on what the Statenvertaling was. From what I understand, it was written in the dialect of Holland at the time, which was a combination of the old dialect of Holland, and Brabantian and Flemish, brought there by refugees after Flanders and Brabant were retaken by the Spanish following the Plakkaat van Verlathinge. I wouldn't doubt that it would be understandable by people east of the IJssel, but simply isn't the same as Lower Saxon. Not to forget that the Achterhoek and Twente remained majority catholic areas, receiving missionaries from the nearby Bishopric of Münster.
thirdly, you did research on the dutch language yet you forgot to mention that the already existing Flemish culture is historically inaccurate to exist in the eu4 timeline. It shouldn't be there. The Flemish culture, the identity as we know today originated from a political movement in opposition to the foundation of Belgium in 1830.

same for the wallonian "culture". Before the foundation of Belgium Wallonian was the word used by Dutch-speakers to refer French-speakers. So technically Wallonian culture is also historically inaccurate to exist in the eu4 timeline. (But I do acknowledge the meaning of the world gradually changed to only include Francophones in the lower countries)
I didn't mention this mainly because it was a can of worms I wasn't willing to touch. A Flemish/Brabantian split would be obvious, but the problem arises in Limburg. Where Lower Saxon can be seen as the most Dutch German, Limburgish is the most German Dutch. Not to forget that oficially, the upper-rhine area dialect is a Dutch/Lower-Frankish dialect, most closely related to Limburgish. Maybe just include it in Brabantian, with one or two rhineland provinces (Julich would be a nice candidate).

Fifthly, what the map failed to show was that Kleverland (or Cleves) was Dutch language territory in eu4 period so I'd suggest to change Cleves to Dutch culture for better accuracy
as well here's a bilingual signpost just for fun:
em_bord.jpg
Actually, I'm very well aware of this. Firstly, Kleef is in the upper Rhineland area, so I would refer back to my previous point. Secondly, areas like the County of Bentheim or Lingen also used Dutch as a governmental language. But I doubt whether the usage of Dutch was as widely spread to consider it as the language used in everyday interaction.
 
I don't want to tell two Dutch speakers about the Dutch language but from what I thought was the situation was that Kleve/Kleef historically spoke South Guelderish (Zuid-Gelders), a dialect of Low Franconian, closer to Hollandic, Flemish etc. than for example, Low Saxon, spoken in Groningen. The Kleverländisch dialect today is not commonly spoken anymore like many German minority languages. The day to day usage of the local language declining in usage since the 19th century with the advent of mass industrialization and unification in Germany.
 
Looks good to me. o: I'm a bit worried about Bavaria being weakened further, but at the same time reuniting the duchy looks like fun.

I'm more upset about Ravensburg, solely because that's such a cool name. This may ahve been already addressed, but -- is the tag actually going to be removed? or just the province renamed? If it's the former, I'll have to do my Ravensburg campaign on an earlier version.~
 
Allereerst moet ik toch maar even bewijzen dat ik een Nederlander ben. Secondly, I live about 10 km away from the border with Germany, so this is concerns local history for me. This is also the reason why I brought up Borculo. I must concede that the point I was trying to make was a bit too much just rambling on my part.

It is true that there is a lot of influence that dialects located next to one another have. But this is also applicable to influence that Dutch Lower Saxon has gotten from the east. To this very day, if you speak in propper dialect, you can make yourself understood east of the border, but not in Amsterdam. Lower Saxon is, after Frisian but before Dutch, the language most closely related to English. And just so you could get a bit of a feel for it, I would recommend reading reading a bit on the Lower Saxon wikipedia, just to get a feel for it how different it is.

First, I wasn't advocating for a different culture, it would be better if the provinces were made Westphalian, the subgroup under which most of the dialects fall.
Secondly, we seem to disagree on what the Statenvertaling was. From what I understand, it was written in the dialect of Holland at the time, which was a combination of the old dialect of Holland, and Brabantian and Flemish, brought there by refugees after Flanders and Brabant were retaken by the Spanish following the Plakkaat van Verlathinge. I wouldn't doubt that it would be understandable by people east of the IJssel, but simply isn't the same as Lower Saxon. Not to forget that the Achterhoek and Twente remained majority catholic areas, receiving missionaries from the nearby Bishopric of Münster.

[in dutch concerning linguistics]
Wat leuk dat je ook nederlands bent. Wistje ik wil je iets leuks vertellen. ik ben ooit een keer gebuisd geweest voor het vak Nederlands, omdat ze me verweten dat ik te veel in dialect sprak. Ik woon zelf in West-vlaanderen en andere nederlandstaligen vinden me onverstaanbaar als ik in dialect klap. (want klappen is west-vlaams voor spreken)


Nu, dat je van de streek komt is mooi genomen. Misschien moet ik jouw even een vraag stellen. Weet jij het verschil tussen een streektaal en een dialect? Als je een woordenboek mag vragen, groeien de begrippen langzaam aan elkaar. Ik vraag dit omdat in 2018 het Nedersakasisch door de Nederlandse regering als streektaal beschouwd werd. Nederland heeft dus zo 3 regionale talen erkend: Fries, Limburgs en Nedersakasisch.

Sindsdien wordt het begrip 'streektaal' steeds vaker gebruikt als 'dialect met officiële erkenning'. Maar, welke dialecten dat zijn wordt zuiver bepaald door politieke overwegingen. Het Zeeuws heeft bijvoorbeeld geen erkenning gekregen, hoewel de situatie van die groep dialecten niet wezenlijk anders is dan die van het Nedersaksisch. De dienstdoende minister – de Groninger Johan Remkes – vond het indertijd echter welletjes met de steeds toenemende hoeveelheid erkenningsaanvragen.

Het zeeuws mag dus zo anders klinken en moeilijker zijn dan het Nedersaksisch toch blijft de beslissing louter politiek. Zelfs het groeperen van dialecten kan problematisch lijken voor een dialect dat zich zo onafhankelijk kan ontwikkelen. Het feit is, taalgroepen of niet. we beschouwen dialect en taal meer als politieke keuzes, En trouwens Nedersaksisch klinkt verstaanbaar voor een Nederlandstalige en dit is omdat Nedersaksisch dezelfde taalontwikkelingen heeft meegemaakt als bijvoorbeeld het vlaams, brabants en hollands hebben gemaakt. Om je een voorbeeld te geven: de brabantse expansie was een klankverschuiving dat grotendeels de nederlandse taal kenmerkt: https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brabantse_expansie (het zeeuws en het fries hebben deze bijvoorbeeld niet meegemaakt, maar de rest van de Nederlandse dialecten waaronder nedersaksisch wel!) en dan heb je ook nog de Hollandse expansie https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollandse_expansie toen Hollandse uitspraak de norm wordt ten tijden van het republiek (dat het vlaams en zuid brabants niet heeft meegemaakt, maar het nedersaksisch wel!)
[/dutch]

The fact is, there is too many similarities and influences the Dutch (and not specifically Holland, but the Netherlands as a whole, with its regiolects and dialects ) had on Lowersaxon Dutch or Lower Lowersaxon. I named the Brabantian and Hollandic vocal shifts that were a defining factor for the Lowersaxon dialect that made the language stand off from the lower german language. But then one could also not forget the Frisian influences on Dutch lowersaxon seen in the northern parts of the Netherlands. Lastly, you mentioned the Statenbijbel which dictated the standards for Standard Dutch and standardised the language. The statenbijbel is considered very diverse containing lots of dialects and regiolects native to Dutch Republic. It was specifically written so everyone in the republic could understand it. De statenbijbel also has little Flemish influence since it was commisioned for that reason and the Statenbijbel also had 3 authors, none of which were flemish/brabant migrants

and of course there's the Oerverwantschap I love to talk about: Two languages or dialects come into contact with each other a lot during the time of language formation. There is mutual influence, and two very similar languages arise in an early phase, which then develop in their own way.

So what did Dutch Lowersaxon give to the Dutch language?
Not a few words. Honest, answer we don't know. and linguists have a hard time guessing Middle Dutch (Middelnederlands) and Dutch lowsaxon appart from litterature in the Netherlands. Both language groups were mutual, but the pronunciation is slightly different. At times of no standard language words were often written differently at will of the author words like maegt, maeght, maget , magt. Therefore, one could not distinguish dutch lowersaxon from lower frankish)

I didn't mention this mainly because it was a can of worms I wasn't willing to touch. A Flemish/Brabantian split would be obvious, but the problem arises in Limburg. Where Lower Saxon can be seen as the most Dutch German, Limburgish is the most German Dutch. Not to forget that oficially, the upper-rhine area dialect is a Dutch/Lower-Frankish dialect, most closely related to Limburgish. Maybe just include it in Brabantian, with one or two rhineland provinces (Julich would be a nice candidate).

which Limburg are we talking about? The historic one or the modern one?


Actually, I'm very well aware of this. Firstly, Kleef is in the upper Rhineland area, so I would refer back to my previous point. Secondly, areas like the County of Bentheim or Lingen also used Dutch as a governmental language. But I doubt whether the usage of Dutch was as widely spread to consider it as the language used in everyday interaction.
I looked it up and the place was in the dutch sphere of influence with a lot of Dutch migrants there so if Dutch was spoken in the legislation, the bridge between Dutch lowsaxon and Standard Dutch should not be too high.
 
With new Alpine provinces the need for Italian names for the new provinces for warmongering Italian players to conquer. I would suggest:

Fribourg: Friburgo
Llanz: Ilonte
Konstanz: Costanza
Inntal: Tirolo Settentrionale/Enoponte
Etschal: Alto Adige/Merano
Lienz: Alto Drava/Agonto
 
Some minor details but Dutch isn't a mix of dialects as its portrayed. Dutch originates from Low Frankish and predominantly originated in Brabant and Flanders, hence your comment about Flemish does make some sense as Dutch in 1444 was mainly the southern dialects and only the Hollandic dialect was a bit different from this Low Frankish as it was influenced by a substrate of Frisian / Ingveonic. Hence you have a shift of the soft G to a J in Gij VS Jij
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Sea_Germanic
I heavily refute the way you describe that Dutch isn't a mix of dialects. When in most ways it definitely was. Diverse dialects all have had their own influences on the dutch language that constituted the standards of dutch standardised language. It's not that the Dutch language belongs to one dialect only or to one sub branch only. Of course the dialect of holland became the standard but with considerable influence from other regions of the Dutch republic and not forget migrations from Flanders and Brabant.

However the Line between as you put it Drenthse boeren and Dutch is actually not based on dialect but rather on Low Saxon. Drenthe, Overijssel (Twents and Urks) and Achterhoeks/Veluws are not a Dutch dialect even though it is often portrayed as such. It's heavily influenced by it, but it is by definition not part of the same branch of west Germanic as its closer to Westphalian dialect and thus part of the Ingveonic languages.

what caught my eye is the wikipediapage linked you gave me. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Sea_Germanic if you switch the article's language to Nederlands or West-Vlams , you'll get totally different content of what ingvaenoic influences contains and where it has spread to. and it states Flemish is part of north sea germanic languages. where as on the english wiki page does not. This shows a biased wikipedia.

Yeah it's pretty interesting nonetheless, I think Dutch lowsaxon has been through many influences and vocal shifts. This shows that not only language is alive. but that it should also evolve constantly, a thing that sometimes (like language) is hard to put into a game. Then again, this discussion should have been held about culturue, less about languages. Right?

Only because of dutch standardization did Hollandic become the standard dutch dialect and did dialects in the rest of the country start to dissappear and as you put it it only remained with the Drenthse boeren. But that's because of the stigma and rural nature of preserving older dialects.

as a Fleming I never had this feeling. odd. must be some dutch thing to feel your language is dominated by hollanders.
:eek:

Drentse boeren*
you made a spelling error
yeah the rural stigma and also because few people lived in Drenthe, they were all exempted from taxation because the province was so poor

Walloon was a seperate French dialect closer to Lorrain dialect than Parisian dialect, plus culture isn't just language but also people. Hence Walloon is a good culture as the Walloon people are distinct enough in their history to seperate them from France. Aka Liegian citizens wouldn't consider themselves French and Hainaut / Namur might wanna have a word with you too.

I acknowledge that's a good argument. But then again they spook different languages in wallonia (Champenois,Picardy,Liègois,..) and they overlooked Luxemburg completely tho. should be german culture.
 
33/5000


Bohemia was always a superpower in Germany
That is a false statement as when the last Bohemian Holy Roman Emperor dyed a huge power struggle took place that weakened Bohemia’s strength and their position in the HRE ,and from the crisis the Haus von Habsburg and Austria rose to power and while they did gain some strength back later on they were never as powerful as they were during the times of them holding the title of the Holy Roman Emperor. However that is not saying that they weren’t among the most powerful in the HRE and like many other nation states in the HRE, they too fought for the influence in the HRE even if it was short lived due to them becoming heretics with the whole Hussite deal. Also what was the 33/5000 for?
 
Wat leuk dat je ook nederlands bent. Wistje ik wil je iets leuks vertellen. ik ben ooit een keer gebuisd geweest voor het vak Nederlands, omdat ze me verweten dat ik te veel in dialect sprak. Ik woon zelf in West-vlaanderen en andere nederlandstaligen vinden me onverstaanbaar als ik in dialect klap. (want klappen is west-vlaams voor spreken)
(I'll be sticking to English) Whilst I myself haven't had many of these kinds of problems, I did hear that the debating team on my school made it to the national final in one year, and that they lost. They strongly had the suspicion that this was because of them speaking with an accent. The teacher didn't really mind, he himself spoke a lot in actual dialect outside of the Dutch lessons.

Nu, dat je van de streek komt is mooi genomen. Misschien moet ik jouw even een vraag stellen. Weet jij het verschil tussen een streektaal en een dialect? Als je een woordenboek mag vragen, groeien de begrippen langzaam aan elkaar. Ik vraag dit omdat in 2018 het Nedersakasisch door de Nederlandse regering als streektaal beschouwd werd. Nederland heeft dus zo 3 regionale talen erkend: Fries, Limburgs en Nedersakasisch.

Sindsdien wordt het begrip 'streektaal' steeds vaker gebruikt als 'dialect met officiële erkenning'. Maar, welke dialecten dat zijn wordt zuiver bepaald door politieke overwegingen. Het Zeeuws heeft bijvoorbeeld geen erkenning gekregen, hoewel de situatie van die groep dialecten niet wezenlijk anders is dan die van het Nedersaksisch. De dienstdoende minister – de Groninger Johan Remkes – vond het indertijd echter welletjes met de steeds toenemende hoeveelheid erkenningsaanvragen.
Yes, I'm very well aware of this. And I can remember the paper (TC Tubantia, a local paper) being filled about it the day that "compact" was signed. I saw both celebration and skepticism. The celebration is quite obvious, recognition for "something we already knew". But the skeptics said it didn't go far enough. Lower Saxon isn't placed on the same level as Frisian, and this really is the Dutch Golden Rule for a local language. Frisian is given in schools, Lower Saxon isn't. Towns have their name displayed in both Frisian and Dutch, in the Lower Saxon areas it's just Dutch. And it prevents Lower Saxon from getting the same European recognition as Frisian has, meaning that the Dutch government can't be forced to do something about Lower Saxon disappearing. Or that's at least what I got from it. But it must be said this is rather difficult since there isn't a standard way of writing Lower Saxon, whilst Frisian does have it, despite local differences. All different dialects have their different quirks.

Het zeeuws mag dus zo anders klinken en moeilijker zijn dan het Nedersaksisch toch blijft de beslissing louter politiek. Zelfs het groeperen van dialecten kan problematisch lijken voor een dialect dat zich zo onafhankelijk kan ontwikkelen. Het feit is, taalgroepen of niet. we beschouwen dialect en taal meer als politieke keuzes, En trouwens Nedersaksisch klinkt verstaanbaar voor een Nederlandstalige en dit is omdat Nedersaksisch dezelfde taalontwikkelingen heeft meegemaakt als bijvoorbeeld het vlaams, brabants en hollands hebben gemaakt. Om je een voorbeeld te geven: de brabantse expansie was een klankverschuiving dat grotendeels de nederlandse taal kenmerkt: https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brabantse_expansie (het zeeuws en het fries hebben deze bijvoorbeeld niet meegemaakt, maar de rest van de Nederlandse dialecten waaronder nedersaksisch wel!) en dan heb je ook nog de Hollandse expansie https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollandse_expansie toen Hollandse uitspraak de norm wordt ten tijden van het republiek (dat het vlaams en zuid brabants niet heeft meegemaakt, maar het nedersaksisch wel!)
Reading about this, things do become clear. First of all, the article about the Brabantian Expansion doesn't mention this tonal shift occurring for Lower Saxon. (this being the oe>uu>ui shift) This shift only comes about in the Hollandic Expansion. Urks and West-Veluws have completely adopted the uu, and even partially shifting to ui. Oost-Veluws, Sallands, Drents and partially "Achterhoeks" (to be more specific, the Gelders-Overijssels variant). Have largely shifted to uu, but have retained oe somewhat. Last but not least, Gronings, Twents and the remaining bit of "Achterhoeks" (the Graafschaps-Twents variant) have shifted the least, adopting maybe some uu, but largely remaining with oe. And for me, I learned that both "huus" and "hoes" are proper ways of pronouncing our word for "huis". And it's actually quite logical that the Brabantian Expansion didn't (generally, Liemers is the exeption) affect the lands east of the IJssel. Around the middle of the 15th century the Hanseatic League was at the height of its power. And, mainly being based in the cities of Northern Germany, the lingua franca of the league became Lower Saxon. The cities along the IJssel would have formed a shield to "protect the Pure Low Saxon from Frankish influence from Brabant and Holland". When its power waned, and the Zuiderzeetrade came into its own, it isn't strange that the original pronunciation began a slow retreat eastwards.

The fact is, there is too many similarities and influences the Dutch (and not specifically Holland, but the Netherlands as a whole, with its regiolects and dialects ) had on Lowersaxon Dutch or Lower Lowersaxon. I named the Brabantian and Hollandic vocal shifts that were a defining factor for the Lowersaxon dialect that made the language stand off from the lower german language. But then one could also not forget the Frisian influences on Dutch lowersaxon seen in the northern parts of the Netherlands. Lastly, you mentioned the Statenbijbel which dictated the standards for Standard Dutch and standardised the language. The statenbijbel is considered very diverse containing lots of dialects and regiolects native to Dutch Republic. It was specifically written so everyone in the republic could understand it. De statenbijbel also has little Flemish influence since it was commisioned for that reason and the Statenbijbel also had 3 authors, none of which were flemish/brabant migrants
As stated above, I did not find proof that the Brabantian Expansion affected Lower Saxon, only that that tonal shift occured because of the Hollandic Expansion, which only occured under the Republic. I wouldn't doubt a man from Overijssel would be able to understand the Statenvertaling. And researching this, I've come to understand a bit more about the dialects in Belgium. Flemish (and Zeelandic) are seperate from Brabantian, and to this very day keep being influenced by Brabantian. What is commonly known as "Flemish" here is actually Brabantian.

what caught my eye is the wikipediapage linked you gave me. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Sea_Germanic if you switch the article's language to Nederlands or West-Vlams , you'll get totally different content of what ingvaenoic influences contains and where it has spread to. and it states Flemish is part of north sea germanic languages. where as on the english wiki page does not. This shows a biased wikipedia.
This is an interesting one. From my understanding, Frisian, English and Low Saxon are grouped together under Ingvaenoic. Yet, I've also come across information which groups Dutch, Frisian and Lower Saxon together under Low German, a group separate from the rest of the German language. If you keep this in mind, it is also clear why for example the Statenvertaling would be understandable in the eastern Republic, Lower Saxon is closer to Dutch than it is to the rest of German.

as a Fleming I never had this feeling. odd. must be some dutch thing to feel your language is dominated by hollanders.
:eek:
It's something that remains to this day. Back in the days of the Republic, Holland went through an incredible economic development, eventually coming to bankroll the entire war. The political divisions that came about were also generally based on this devide. Holland (and Zeeland by extension) made its money through trade, and were navally inclined. The rest of the provinces feared invasion, so they were inclined to support a strong army. This was also a concept known at the time, the Garden of Holland, the ring of provinces around Holland would protect it. Outside of the first two decades of the war, pretty much all of the actions of the Eighty Years War occured in the rest of the northern provinces or the southern provinces. It was Holland that pushed for peace, hoping it would improve trade. Holland supported Van Oldebarneveld, whilst the rest supported Maurits. And trough becoming the economic center of the country, it became the political center of the country. Even today, many people outside of the Randstad feel like it's only the west that matters in the eyes of the political elite.
 
Another change that we made in the north is in the cultures. There have been many calls for a “Lower Saxon” culture, and we have heeded these calls by splitting the Westphalian culture. Conveniently, this allows us to make the Kingdom of Hannover into the formable for the Lower Saxons and Westphalia into that for the Westphalians and Rhenish peoples.

View attachment 478303

@Caligula Caesar

The province of Oldenburg should have Lower Saxon culture.
Historically the core territory of Oldenburg was a part of the Engern region between Westfalen and Ostfalen.
Its dialect of Low German is also different from the one spoken in actual Westphalia.
 
I'm waiting to see what the new Italian peninsula map will look like but I'm feeling very pessimistic with what we can see about the Alps. The Valtellina was one of the most strategically important areas of the 16th century and was a linchpin to the Habsburg empire. It was controlled at different times by Milan, The Grey League, The Papal States, France, Austria, Napoleonic Italy and even briefly Independent. The region that was famous for literally allowing tens of thousands of soldiers to traverse through it, but being impassable wasteland, especially a game that has such a heavy focus on the 16th and 17th centuries is completely perplexing.

Ticino already being part of Waldstätte is also anachronistic, as the Leventina valley remained part of Milan (with Imperial title and authorization) until 1500 due to the threat of French invasions and remained a source of tension between Milan and the old Swiss Confederacy for years.
 
I'm waiting to see what the new Italian peninsula map will look like but I'm feeling very pessimistic with what we can see about the Alps. The Valtellina was one of the most strategically important areas of the 16th century and was a linchpin to the Habsburg empire. It was controlled at different times by Milan, The Grey League, The Papal States, France, Austria, Napoleonic Italy and even briefly Independent. The region that was famous for literally allowing tens of thousands of soldiers to traverse through it, but being impassable wasteland, especially a game that has such a heavy focus on the 16th and 17th centuries is completely perplexing.

Ticino already being part of Waldstätte is also anachronistic, as the Leventina valley remained part of Milan (with Imperial title and authorization) until 1500 due to the threat of French invasions and remained a source of tension between Milan and the old Swiss Confederacy for years.
It's too small to incorporate on the map; it also has no major town or city.

Como was being considered after player feedback, that and a connection between the Three Leagues and Milan would be sufficient.
 
It's too small to incorporate on the map; it also has no major town or city.

Como was being considered after player feedback, that and a connection between the Three Leagues and Milan would be sufficient.

The actual Valtellina (German: Veltlin) valley would just be part of the province. For sake of abstraction the Grafschafts/Conteas of Bormio (German: Worms) and the Valchiavenna (German: Kleven) valley would also be part of the province. Essentially the modern Italian province of Sondrio. It would essentially be the entire eastern Alps wasteland. As you can see the acquisition of the Italian territories in the 16th century nearly doubled the physical size of the Grey Leagues.

641px-Geschichte_Graubuenden.png

While population numbers were low in the region, that was typical of alpine areas and the valleys of the Valtellina were a major source of tax income as tightly controlled a trade route through the Alps. Bormio (technically a vassal of Como rather than directly) in particular.
 
I really like the changes you have made to the german map and I am glad you finaly push on to Germany, since it has been a long time since Germany has been changed somehow.
However I must say that I have some suggestions to improve the cultural feeling while playing the german minors.

First of all, I would reconsider renaming "Niederhessen" and "Oberhessen" into "Nordhessen" and "Südhessen".
It may not bother any of you out there, but for me - a Hessian - it makes a difference, since actually there is no worth mentionable elevation to legitimate the terms "Ober-" and "Nieder-" ("Upper-" and "Lower-" ). Also it would reflect the cultural differences in Hessia itself in a more traditional way, since today it is kinda like northern Hessia versus southern Hessia, even though it is kind of like to brothers fighting over some toy and nothing serious.

Secondly, I would love to see the nation of Kolberg in Pommerania as a releasable tag, since historicly it was often split up between itself and Pommerania. (as far as I know)
One can easaly give it some standart idea sets like the pommeranian or the danzig ones to keep it simple, but add a little bit more flavour to the region.

Thirdly, I guess it may be a good idea to rework the standart german mission trees in a more cultural based way.
What I mean by that is that a country in the westphalian culture gets missions to form Westphalia and countries with the lower saxon culture get some missions to later form Hanover.
These are just examples to let you know my intentions. It doesn't nessessarely need to be the lenght of the bavarian ones, but I figure it could be around 3 to 5 mission sets with claims to 2 or 3 provinces or an area and ae reductions or some other boni. The mission objectives could be around becoming the most influencial power in the cultural area etc.

I hope this comment gets read by some nice people and I wish you a good day and the best of luck in your next campaign.
 
I really like the changes you have made to the german map and I am glad you finaly push on to Germany, since it has been a long time since Germany has been changed somehow.
However I must say that I have some suggestions to improve the cultural feeling while playing the german minors.

First of all, I would reconsider renaming "Niederhessen" and "Oberhessen" into "Nordhessen" and "Südhessen".
It may not bother any of you out there, but for me - a Hessian - it makes a difference, since actually there is no worth mentionable elevation to legitimate the terms "Ober-" and "Nieder-" ("Upper-" and "Lower-" ). Also it would reflect the cultural differences in Hessia itself in a more traditional way, since today it is kinda like northern Hessia versus southern Hessia, even though it is kind of like to brothers fighting over some toy and nothing serious.

Secondly, I would love to see the nation of Kolberg in Pommerania as a releasable tag, since historicly it was often split up between itself and Pommerania. (as far as I know)
One can easaly give it some standart idea sets like the pommeranian or the danzig ones to keep it simple, but add a little bit more flavour to the region.

Thirdly, I guess it may be a good idea to rework the standart german mission trees in a more cultural based way.
What I mean by that is that a country in the westphalian culture gets missions to form Westphalia and countries with the lower saxon culture get some missions to later form Hanover.
These are just examples to let you know my intentions. It doesn't nessessarely need to be the lenght of the bavarian ones, but I figure it could be around 3 to 5 mission sets with claims to 2 or 3 provinces or an area and ae reductions or some other boni. The mission objectives could be around becoming the most influencial power in the cultural area etc.

I hope this comment gets read by some nice people and I wish you a good day and the best of luck in your next campaign.
Actually Niederhessen is a historical term for the Cassel area.

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