Tinto Maps #6 - 14th of June 2024 - Great Britain & Ireland

[radioactive_bee]

I think the only locations in England that might warrant more impassable terrain would be the Pennines and the Dales, which pretty solidly separated Cumbria from Northumberland and restricted trade to a few passages in the valleys.

Maybe something like this? Would block travel over the lake district and pennines and instead restrict it through the Stainmore Gap and the Vale of Eden. I think some choke points might be useful given the prevalence of Scottish border raids in the region.

 

[Ttrgw]

The existence of a culture means that a country representing that culture can exist.
The existence of a Mercian culture in 1337 would mean that a Kingdom of Mercia could exist, and it would be possible to compete for the status of Bretwalda in 1337.

 

[SaintDaveUK]

A culture is not necessarily the same as a dialect, it is first and foremost a gameplay feature with gameplay ramifications, and so we need to be sure it reflects the design we want for each region.

We know English had many dialects. But splitting English up into multiple cultures weakens England in a variety of different ways and we need to be sure it creates better gameplay, and matches the narrative of England's story better than without.

 

[Balesir]

I would oppose granting the Earldoms of Chester, Hereford and Shrewsbury to Wales. They were areas where the English crown had less control, that's accepted, but placing them in Wales seems absurd given that Mercia was undeniably an Anglo-Saxon Kingdom and the lands were fully Anglicised long before the start date. You can look at the place names; they're all Anglo-Saxon-derived, not Celtic-derived. And while the Marches weren't governed by English law, they weren't governed by Welsh law either; the 1215 Magna Carta and 1277 Treaty of Aberconwy solidify a unique Marches law distinct from that of both England and Wales. I think using the autonomy and estates mechanics is the best way of dealing with them.

Yes, the idea is an interesting one, but ultimately I think, no, don't do it. The nobility of those areas had much more influence and interaction with the court of England than of Wales.

 

[matfer13]

No, Ireland and GB are are two seperate regions as mentioned in the opening of the diary. They are both in the same subcontinent.

So both GB and Ireland alone are on the same level of Iberia,France and Italy? Still seems exaggerated, wouldn't make more sense to have them together considered their history/distance/size or is there any particular reason of having them separated?

 

[William the Merry]

People are placing way too much emphasis on the fact that England was politically unified under one Crown. You're completely ignoring the dialectical differences of middle English that made Northerners almost completely incomprehensible to Southerners. There is a distinct North/South divide that remains to this day, and you think it shouldn't be represented in a game set in 1337 when the country was significantly more divided due to the inherent challenges of creating or maintaining a cohesive culture and language given the technology and lack of urbanisation at the time?

Others have already pointed out this source:

Middle English Dialects | Harvard's Geoffrey Chaucer Website

chaucer.fas.harvard.edu

And as others have pointed out, a seperate northern ethnicity wasnt really a thing. Speaking differently does not a different people make, or kids and commoners would be a different culture to adults and nobles. Let alone village to village prior to language standardisation

There is a notion of a north south divide today, yet us southerners can easily talk to northerners. People disagree whether the north is coventry and birmingham or only starts in manchester and liverpool. Or is liverpool scouse and so actually seperate from the rest of the north? Are geordies part of the north or their own thing when the most northern of all English cities. Is the north just the areas which became poor with deindustrialisation whilst the south is rich? If so, then plenty of southern areas would be "northern" due to similar economic depression compared to 20th century.

If today with so much more info at our fingertips we can't clearly identify where the North begins, how can we do it to back then. If every dialect means a new culture, then the culture map will be the most balkanised of any paradox game ever and run at a snailspace due to 300 northern southern western english speaker craftsmen and 299 western northern southern English speaker craftsmen

 

[matfer13]

A culture is not necessarily the same as a dialect, it is first and foremost a gameplay feature with gameplay ramifications, and so we need to be sure it reflects the design we want for each region.

We know English had many dialects. But splitting English up into multiple cultures weakens England in a variety of different ways and we need to be sure it creates better gameplay, and matches the narrative of England's story better than without.

That's exactly what I thought, I don't know how fast culture conversion is or how impactful it but if it is better for gameplay than it makes more sense to keep it united and considering the game starts in 1337 and ends in the early 19th century(a long period where English drastically changed from Middle to modern) it makes for a better solution than having it slowly die out like the gaelic languages

 

[SaintDaveUK]

So both GB and Ireland alone are on the same level of Iberia,France and Italy? Still seems exaggerated, wouldn't make more sense to have them together considered their history/distance/size or is there any particular reason of having them separated?

The distinction between Britain and Ireland is highly significant. Culturally, politically, historically, physically, and most importantly, gameplaywise.

They weren't united until 1801, and even that only lasted another century or so, so they weren't a natural union. Most importantly for Caesar, it easier for us to work with Ireland-specific mechanics like the High Kingship.

 

[matfer13]

The distinction between Britain and Ireland is highly significant. Culturally, politically, historically, physically, and most importantly, gameplaywise.

They weren't united until 1801, and even that only lasted another century or so, so they weren't a natural union. Most importantly for Caesar, it easier for us to work with Ireland-specific mechanics like the High Kingship.

Cool
So Can you tell me if are Finland and the baltics(estonia, latvian and lithuania) in their own regions as well or are they part of Scandinavia and Poland?

 

[William the Merry]

The distinction between Britain and Ireland is highly significant. Culturally, politically, historically, physically, and most importantly, gameplaywise.

They weren't united until 1801, and even that only lasted another century or so, so they weren't a natural union. Most importantly for Caesar, it easier for us to work with Ireland-specific mechanics like the High Kingship.

Britain and Ireland didnt form a unitary state until 1801, but the Lordship of Ireland followed by the Kingdom of Ireland would forever be wed to the Kingdom of England for the game period, besides a few pretenders claims like James II after the Glorious Revolution, and Philip II as part of his raids on England.
The Acts of Union that made a unitary state from England and Scotland was 1707 yet Britain will be one region, even if a Balliol kingdom (which the English player would likely wish to achieve early on) would make Scotland as subjugated as Ireland.

Surely one british isles region suits the purposes better, and any gameplay issues can use a custom "region of ireland" scope, ck3 uses custom regions like "carolingian iberia" for decisions, and ck2 used regions for achievements like "eurasian steppe"

 

[Katana500]

Will Scotland be able to claim Irish High Kingship via the Bruce claim. The Bruce campaign in Ireland would be within living memory at the start of the game and Edward Bruce was the last Irish High King.

 

[William the Merry]

Will Scotland be able to claim Irish High Kingship via the Bruce claim. The Bruce campaign in Ireland would be within living memory at the start of the game and Edward Bruce was the last Irish High King.

Hopefully the campaign isnt as devastating as the last Bruce invasion

 

[Urnus1]

I think frankly it's hard for members of the community to make an informed opinion about how split-up cultures will be without knowing how cultures work in Project Caesar, or even really what they're supposed to represent. That said, it does seem incongruous to me to split up Poitevin and Saintongeais but keep English as one culture.

 

[Vispian]

But splitting English up into multiple cultures weakens England in a variety of different ways and we need to be sure it creates better gameplay, and matches the narrative of England's story better than without.

Lets say we add Northumbrian into the English Culture groups (Which would include Anglo-Irish and assumedly Scots), which is the only cultural divide I think makes sense. Is there a way to unite your culture groups peacefully? Not saying its an instant button click, but that cultural assimilation is faster than cultural conversion at the very least?

I think a lot of concerns people have is, do we have a system for cultures that is dynamic and allows for the merging or diverging of cultures. I.e. Strong Decentralised vs Centralised values etc.

edit: A decentralised valued nation may allow unique identities to form as a Anglo-X name. Anglo-Irish, Anglo-Dutch, Anglo-Cantonese etc etc. Would be an easy way to simulate this idea with a few unique examples at the start date like Scots. Would help to develop a cultural mixing to that of primary culture. Whilst a centralised nation would attempt to solidify a strong singular identity.

I think the fact we have not had a DD on these topics has lead to much debate over what a culture is in the game, how best to represent it, how it works with language systems etc etc.

 

[radioactive_bee]

I've had Friday's tinto map on my mind for the past couple days and I thought I'd make some suggestions that could be of use. I'd firstly like to say I'm absolutely in awe at the game's scope and depth, and to have such an active and responsive development team is such a blessing. I'd also like to thank the contributors to Friday's thread, and I've tried to include as much of everyone's feedback as possible. I've based these maps off a number of different websites and books, but I'm happy to provide sources and my reasoning behind all of my decisions. WG Hoskin's Local History in England was especially useful, and I'd strongly recommend it for anyone interest in the area.

On the question of location density in England, I recognise the futility of trying to represent every minor town and village, yet I feel the preeminent status of England, politically, economically, and militarily, through much of the game's time period warrants a high level of detail and historical accuracy. England's economy was diverse and de-centralised at the time, and slightly increasing density allows representing the full breadth of its primary sector, from salt pans in Nantwich to sandstone quarrying in Reigate. A higher location density would also allow for a more granular military and occupation simulation, and though it's rare to see England be partitioned in games, I think allowing for the representation of the frequent local uprisings and peasant revolts that threatened the crown would add a deal of flavour, not to mention the border wars with Scotland and Wales.

Of course, I do not expect every suggestion I've made to be implemented, but I've done quite a deal of research and I do hope some of my suggestions could be of use if there are plans to redraw any areas of the UK. The maps I've drawn up give England ~160 locations (compared to the current ~110), leaving it with around ~30% more locations per square km than Ireland and fitting, I feel, given it had a population nearly an order of magnitude higher. I've also given every shire its own province - they operated highly autonomously, especially before the Tudour era, and I feel giving the likes of Westmoreland a province whilst merging the wealthy, populous shires of the Thames valley may not be ideal for balance.

Many of the current English locations don't align with historic borders and in some cases don't include their eponymous towns, which I've used GIS to try to prevent. I've tried to base all location borders off the historic English 'hundreds', the subdivisions within counties, used from before the Norman invasion to the 19th century and largely remaining constant border-wise. Any locations that didn't at least hold a market at the game's start date I've also renamed, though this excludes the likes Manchester and Sheffield and therefore might not be ideal for the later quarter or so of the game.

Anyways,

I haven't included any impassible terrain on the borders, though their likely should be some (also in Cumbria). Starting in Cumberland, Penrith was a wealthy market town and the target of multiple Scottish raids, whilst Egremont was more prominent than Cockermouth through the game's time period, serving as a local textile and mining hub. In Westmoreland, I'd suggest adding Furness, a geographically and politically distinct area (actually an exclave of Lancashire, though this probably doesn't need to be implemented). Lancashire proper developed rapidly through the latter half of the game's time period and probably deserves a somewhat heightened degree of representation. Preston was one of the wealthiest market towns in the nation, as was Wigan, positioned strategically on the road to London. Blackburn was a major textile centre beginning in the 14th century, whilst Leyland was a small market town yet economically and politically distinct from its more industrial environs. Salford was more prominent than Manchester through the game's time period, and though Liverpool was also a small town in 1337, it did host a market and began to grow significantly earlier than Manchester.

I've shrunk Berwick upon tweed, in Northumberland, down quite a bit, as I can't find much evidence the border wars surrounding it involved anywhere but the town itself. Bedlington was another politically distinct hundred and an early coal mining centre, and also serves to break up the large and unusually square Newcastle location. Northallerton was razed in 1318 and took centuries to redevelop - Bedale was a sizeable market town nearby that managed to survive. Helmsley, a prominent weaving and market town, was also strategically and militarily important. In the East Riding, Norton (with its sister town of Malton) hosted a market and was economically distinct from the more nautically-based locations of Bridlington (a major fishing port) and Hull. Beverley should unquestionably be included, as one of the largest towns in England for a period and an incredibly prosperous market, though I've shifted it east slightly to make room for Selby, another market town (and later industrial and shipbuilding centre) responsible for disseminating much of the region's coal and textile production. In the West Riding, Sheffield and Bradford were both 19th-century industrial towns (though Sheffield did begin to grow in the 18th century with the textile industry, perhaps warranting its inclusion). Skipton is another market town, by far the most prominent in its large (and somewhat desolate) geographical area, whilst Ripon was a wealthy ecclesiastical centre. Pontefract and Doncaster also fall into this category, with Doncaster perhaps the wealthiest in its Riding and Pontefract hosting a large garrison that came to prominence in the civil war.

Apologies for the numbers of arrows on this one!

In Cheshire, I've removed the modern railroad town of Crewe in favour of the large market centre and salt hub of Nantwich. Stockport, another market town on the road to London, was also a large producer of flax and later a textile hub. I've rearranged Shropshire quite a bit to more represent their actual locations, and added in the rural market of Clun to represent the more forested areas of the county less connected to the hub of Shrewsbury. At least at the game's start, I'd imagine both Clun and Oswestry would hold sizeable Welsh minorities. I've switched around Leominster and Hereford's locations in Herefordshire, and replaced Kington with the comparably sized (but on the opposite side of the county) Ledbury. In Worcestershire, Dudley was more prominent than Kidderminster for most of the game's period, serving as perhaps the nation's largest iron market, though I can see the case for including Kidderminster of its textile industry. Evesham was the largest market town serving the south of the shire.

The midlands were densely populated and at the heart of the industrial revolution, and I've tried to include towns that represent the area through the game's entire period. In Staffordshire, Stoke was a railroad town that only came to prominence in the early 20th century, whilst Newcastle-Under-Lyme was a major textile hub and market dating to the 12th, with the region around it also heavily involved in ceramic production. Leek was another market town and textile hub serving Staffordshire and Derbyshire, whilst Lichfield was a cathedral city with a notable leather industry. Wolverhampton began as a wool town but developed a strong iron industry by the 16th century, and developed further through the industrial revolution. I've shuffled the borders within Warwickshire a bit, and also added Warwick itself, which lacked much of a market economy but was perhaps the most important military centre in the midlands. I've kept Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire mostly the same, with only some border changes, though I'd suggest switching Buxton (a victorian spa town) for the market town of Glossop. In Leicestershire, I've shrunk Rutland back down to its normal size and swapped the industrial town of Loughborough for the ancient and wealthy market town (England's third oldest) of Melton. In Lincolnshire, Skegness frequently washed away and the more immobile town of Louth had a much larger market, and I've also traded the name for the southwestern region (Kesteven) for that of its largest market, Granham. Lastly, Spalding was by far the largest market in the marshes of southern Lincolnshire, distinct from the more solid ground around Boston.

The southwest, given its comparable population density to the rest of the nation, also feels to be slightly lacking in location numbers. In Cornwall, I've added Penryn, the largest harbour in medieval Cornwall and the point of departure for the county's tin, and Bodmin, a market town at the centre of multiple Cornish uprisings and a major copper producer. In Devon, Bideford was a wealthy port town, contributing much to the colonisation of the Americas and by the 15th century only behind London as the nation's largest port. I'm not sure if the port cities of Plymouth and Exeter adequately represent the economic and geographical situations of the Dartmoor highlands; Okehampton and Bampton were both considerable market towns on each side of the county. In Somerset, I've swapped Bristol, located in Gloucestershire, for Bath, a wealthy Roman spa town that also served as a regional trade centre. Portishead, apart from sharing a name with one of England's greatest bands, was a large fishing port, whilst Minehead was Somerset's largest trade port through the game's time period. Yeovil, in the southeast, was a thriving market town based on the trade of livestock. In Dorset, Shaftsbury was another important market town and textile producer on the road to London.

Swindon, in Wiltshire, only came to prominence in the mid 19th century, superseding the nearby Highworth only after the latter was devastated by disease. The market town of Trowbridge was the largest cloth producer in south-east England through to the early modern period, and also serves to break up the long and awkwardly shaped Chippenham location. Amesbury was another prominent market town and the home of Stonehenge. In Gloucestershire, I've moved the county seat of Gloucester to more accurately represent its position and area of influence, and moved the major port of Bristol to be within it. Cirencester's market was the centre of Gloucestershire's wool industry, and Berkeley was yet another prominent port and market also of military significance. In Hampshire, I've split the port town of Lymington, also Britain's largest producer of salt, off, and also Andover, the largest market town in northwestern Hampshire.

The three suggestions I've gone over already only include suggestions for changing, adding or removing locations; not provinces. The southeast is the only region of England in which the provinces don't line up exactly with the shire borders, and given their regional power and autonomy during the game's period I'd really suggest elevating them all to the same level. If size constraints mean some must be combined, I'd suggest combining Oxfordshire and Buckinghamshire (under the name Buckinghamshire), Bedfordshire and Hertfordshire (under the name Hertfordshire), and Huntingdonshire and Cambridgeshire (under the name Cambridgeshire).

In Berkshire, on many of the roads to London and one of the wealthiest shires yet currently only consisting of Windsor, I've split off the market towns and pilgrimage sites of Reading and Newbury, and the wool production and trade hub of Abingdon. From Oxfordshire I've split Henley, a major market town on the Thames, and Banbury, another livestock and textile trade hub. I've split Buckinghamshire into the eponymous Buckingham, the county seat and market town of Aylsebury, and the mill and paper town of Wycombe, helping to bring its population from 160k to a number more in line with its neighbours. I've also split the ecclesiastically-important and once prominent market town of Mursley off. From Bedford I've split off the market and chalk-mining town of Dunstable, and Biggleswade, the trade hub for eastern Bedfordshire and the counties surrounding it. I would also really suggest splitting the city of St Albans off from Hertfordshire, and I've also split off the market town of Hitchin (how many more market towns can their be??), which grew wealthy off exporting wool and grain to London.

I'm still not entirely sure the best way to demonstrate London at the time. London and Westminster had began to conglomerate by this point, and whilst I see the vision of seperating them I don't think it represents the situation at the time. I've instead split the more rural western 2/3s of Middlesex off, here given the name of the market town of Uxbridge, though there are a wealth of small settlements in Middlesex to choose from. London's Urban sprawl had also crossed the Thames by 1337, but Southwark, and its tax revenue, remained with Surrey until 1889. Surrey was a wealthy, economically diverse and densely populated county, and apart from Southwark and Guildford I've also added the quarrying and cereal hub of Reigate, and the market town and textile nexus of Farnham. I've split Sussex roughly along its five administrative subdivisions, adding the market and fishing town of Brighton and the port and shipbuilding town of Lewes. In Kent, Rochester was a much larger town than Chatham until the latter gained military dockyards in the 19th century, and Greenwich was a prominent London 'suburb' of royal importance.

Up in Norfolk, Thetford was the county's largest town and an important trade hub on the road to London, whilst Fakenham served as a more regional market yet was economically distinct from King's Lynn and Great Yarmouth. Lavenham, in Suffolk, became the wealthiest town in England for a considerable period off the textile trade, and the market town of Stowmarket was important locally and helps break up the large locations. Ely, in the marshes of northern Cambridgeshire, was a religious hub home to the nation's wealthiest monastery, and Royston's situation on the crossroads of two Roman highways brought it considerable prominence and wealth. From Huntingdon I've also split St Ives, one of the largest markets in the nation, bringing the livestock and grain of the arable east into London. In Essex, I've swapped the railway city of Southend for Prittlewell, the earlier fishing port it absorbed, and added Barking, on the outskirts of London and serving as a fertile hunting ground for the upper classes (alternative name Romford?) I've also moved Chelmsford to more accurately represent its location, and replaced the village of Hedingham with the wool market (and by the 16th century, major saffaron producer) of Walden, and the milling and agricultural town of Halstead.

I really do hope some of the information I've given here might be of use! I'm happy to answer any questions anyone might have and I'd love to hear thoughts and suggestions

 

[SaintDaveUK]

Britain and Ireland didnt form a unitary state until 1801, but the Lordship of Ireland followed by the Kingdom of Ireland would forever be wed to the Kingdom of England for the game period,

The Lordship of Ireland and Kingdom of Ireland are also both tied to the Ireland region and have their own mechanics surrounding the Ireland region. It's much much clearer to everyone than tying mechanics to 4 areas.

I think frankly it's hard for members of the community to make an informed opinion about how split-up cultures will be without knowing how cultures work in Project Caesar, or even really what they're supposed to represent.

I know, it's a bit unfair on you guys at this early stage. Hopefully once we are ready to talk about culture more in depth it will help the discussions.

 

[radioactive_bee]

For reference, here's a map of England's shires and hundreds as they appeared in the Domesday book of 1086. Border changes were scarce through the medieval and early modern period, barring the exchange of exclaves and enclaves, though more precise GIS shapefiles for exact timeframes are not difficult to find. Hundreds generally line up with local economic regions and 'spheres of influence' and served as an important system of local government in England well into the 19th century.

Also of use may be crown taxation records, showing the cities most important to English economy and trade. The rankings below are taken from WG Hoskin's aforementioned book, and show the shifts in England's economic centres as the game's time period progresses. A good deal of these cities had fallen from prominence by the Georgian era, yet were vital to England through the lade medieval and Tudor periods.

Rank	1334	1377	1523-7	1662	1801
1	Bristol	York	Norwich	Norwich	Manchester
2	York	Bristol	Bristol	York	Liverpool
3	Newcastle	Coventry	Newcastle	Bristol	Birmingham
4	Great Yarmouth	Norwich	Coventry	Newcastle	Bristol
5	Lincoln	Lincoln	Exeter	Exeter	Leeds
6	Norwich	Salisbury	Salisbury	Ipswich	Plymouth
7	Shrewsbury	King's Lynn	Ipswich	Great Yarmouth	Norwich
8	Oxford	Colchester	King's Lynn	Oxford	Bath
9	Salisbury	Boston	Canterbury	Cambridge	Portsmouth
10	Boston	Beverley	Reading	Canterbury	Sheffield
11	King's Lynn	Newcastle	Colchester	Worcester	Hull
12	Ipswich	Canterbury	Bury St Edmunds	Deptford	Nottingham
13	Hereford	Bury St Edmunds	Lavenham	Shrewsbury	Newcastle
14	Canterbury	Oxford	York	Salisbury	Exeter
15	Beverley	Gloucester	Totnes	Colchester	Leicester
16	Gloucester	Leicester	Worcester	East Greenwich	Stoke-upon-Trent
17	Winchester	Shrewsbury	Gloucester	Hull	York
18	Southampton	Great Yarmouth	Lincoln	Coventry	Coventry
19	Coventry	Hereford	Hereford	Chester	Ashton-under-Lyne
20	Cambridge	Cambridge	Great Yarmouth	Plymouth	Chester
21	Stamford	Ely	Hull	Portsmouth	Dover
22	Spalding	Plymouth	Boston	King's Lynn	Great Yarmouth
23	Exeter	Exeter	Southampton	Rochester	Stockport
24	Nottingham	Hull	Hadleigh	Lincoln	Shrewsbury
25	Plymouth	Worcester	Wisbech	Dover	Wolverhampton
26	Hull	Ipswich	Shrewsbury	Nottingham	Bolton
27	Scarborough	Northampton	Oxford	Gloucester	Sunderland
28	Derby	Nottingham	Leicester	Bury St Edmunds	Oldham
29	Reading	Winchester	Cambridge	Winchester	Blackburn
30	Bampton	Scarborough	Stamford	Sandwich	Preston
31	Rochester	Stamford	Northampton	Maidstone	Oxford
32	Newbury	Newark	Windsor	Leeds	Colchester
33	Northampton	Ludlow	Plymouth	Leicester	Worcester
34	Leicester	Southampton	Maldon	Northampton	Ipswich
35	Colchester	Pontefract	St. Albans	Chatham	Wigan
36	Bridgwater	Reading	Chichester	Ely	Derby
37	Newark	Derby	Winchester	Chichester	Warrington
38	Peterborough	Litchfield	Long Melford	Gateshead	Chatham
39	Cirencester	Newbury	Sudbury	Southampton	Carlisle
40	Bridgnorth	Wells	Rochester	Derby	Dudley
41	Bury St Edmunds	Bridgnorth	Nottingham	Ludlow	King's Lynn
42	Ely	Cirencester	Nayland	Warwick	Cambridge

 

[Vispian]

The reason I like this post is not because England needs to be this granular but it highlights the maximalist position on England's granularity without going too insane like that 500 location French post the other day. My main issue with the current map is there are plenty of locations that are just named wrong, weird boundaries etc etc.

Somewhere like Devon where my own location rework in a previous comment turns it into 5 - Exeter, Totnes, Okehampton, Plymouth and Barnstaple - accurately reflecting the geographic breakdown of Devon and its uniquely robust and important economy at the start date. Devon in reality doesnt need to have the north split into 2 or Cornwall split anymore past 3 to represent the economies, geography or population etc.

But this maximalist position is one i enjoy because it gives a good perspective, to go what is possible and in turn critique what is not valuable as a location, which then can be reasonably reduced in granularity.

 

[matfer13]

The Lordship of Ireland and Kingdom of Ireland are also both tied to the Ireland region and have their own mechanics surrounding the Ireland region. It's much much clearer to everyone than tying mechanics to 4 areas.


I know, it's a bit unfair on you guys at this early stage. Hopefully once we are ready to talk about culture more in depth it will help the discussions.

I see... so that's why you guys created the Pale as a separate tag instead of having it controlled by England directly, I assume the there's gonna be some mechanic preventing the English from owning land in Ireland directly and having the Pale first conquering then forming the kingdom of Ireland as a PU and then annexing it through some mechanic like Scotland in EU4 with the acts of union...

Did I get close?

 

[William the Merry]

Lets say we add Northumbrian into the English Culture groups (Which would include Anglo-Irish and assumedly Scots), which is the only cultural divide I think makes sense. Is there a way to unite your culture groups peacefully? Not saying its an instant button click, but that cultural assimilation is faster than cultural conversion at the very least?

I think a lot of concerns people have is, do we have a system for cultures that is dynamic and allows for the merging or diverging of cultures. I.e. Strong Decentralised vs Centralised values etc.

edit: A decentralised valued nation may allow unique identities to form as a Anglo-X name. Anglo-Irish, Anglo-Dutch, Anglo-Cantonese etc etc. Would be an easy way to simulate this idea with a few unique examples at the start date like Scots. Would help to develop a cultural mixing to that of primary culture. Whilst a centralised nation would attempt to solidify a strong singular identity.

I think the fact we have not had a DD on these topics has lead to much debate over what a culture is in the game, how best to represent it, how it works with language systems etc etc.

What player will want 101 mixed cultures to form rather than just assimilating into the main culture. The number of mixed race people will be tiny for much of the game period, so the odd exceptions where they became majorities can just be their own culture ala eu4 mexican forming after Spanish conquer the area.