-
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.
More events for the 'regular' EU2 period. I think that this huge and important area deserves to have more events than the few it already has. Also, I would like some info on when and why Firenze turned into Tuscany (I have discovered that they should actually start as Firenze, if it should be historical accurately).
In 1527, after the sack of Rome by Charles V's army, Florence overthrew the Medici (at that time basically the city was under the Medici Pope Clement VII with a cardinal and his nephews actually present in Florence). By 1529 the pope had reconciled with Charles, and an army was sent to restore the Medici. There was a long siege (4 months?) after which Florence was taken. Allessandro de' Medici was put in control, and made Duke of Tuscany by Charles V. In 1535 (I think) he was assasinated by a counsin, and a distant cousin, Cosimo I was made Duke. It was Cosimo who broadened the administation of Tuscany, and who broke the monopoly the Florentines had on administration. He was ultimately made Grand Duke, and when Siena revolted against Charles V he took Siena and annexed it.
There are events for this stuff in the EEP, and your welcome to adapt the ones I wrote (at least) for your own use.
There are events for this stuff in the EEP, and your welcome to adapt the ones I wrote (at least) for your own use.
Thanx, I will look at them when I get around to it. And thanx for the info. I have some questions though: when you say that Siena revolted, who did they revolt against? And are you saying that the Pope controlled the Republic of Florence/Firenze?
Forgive me, but my knowledge about Italy at that time period is not that great.... that's why I want to broaden my horizon.
After the Medici returned in 1512, Florence was basically under Cardinal Giovanni de Medici. In 1521 (I think) he was elected Pope Clement VII.
Siena had put itself under imperial (which basically meant Spanish) protection After kicking out the Petrucci family. This was around 1510-1520. Twenty years later as the Spanish tried to consolidate control they revolted.
Siena had put itself under imperial (which basically meant Spanish) protection After kicking out the Petrucci family. This was around 1510-1520. Twenty years later as the Spanish tried to consolidate control they revolted.
well the reason for the iroqouis is because they were a confederacy,right? Weren't the Cherokee and Dakota(Sioux?) also confederacies?
Isaac Brock:
I have been looking in to the Italian EEP events, and have found some I would like to use. There is one problem though: in most cases it doesn't say who made them. I don't have the most recent version of EEP installed, is that why?
I did manage to find one event with your name above (an interpretation of the League of Campbrai event for Venice which I like), but I think another guy helped you with that one as well. Would it be ok for me to use that event?
I have postponed the release of AoI because I would like to implement more events for Italian minors first, and the EEP has some good ones.
I have been looking in to the Italian EEP events, and have found some I would like to use. There is one problem though: in most cases it doesn't say who made them. I don't have the most recent version of EEP installed, is that why?
I did manage to find one event with your name above (an interpretation of the League of Campbrai event for Venice which I like), but I think another guy helped you with that one as well. Would it be ok for me to use that event?
I have postponed the release of AoI because I would like to implement more events for Italian minors first, and the EEP has some good ones.
In most cases the uncredited ones are mine. All of Savoy is, most of Tuscany, all of Siena, all of Mantua, all of Modena. Unattributed Venetian events are almost certainly Annibale's. I guess it could be documented better. I can let you know about any of the rest..
The League of Cambrai was by Phillip V, but I made some pretty radical changes to it.
Ultimately the events were all posted on the board, and as such, no one but Paradox can stop you from using them (not so sure whether they can either).
I'l be interested to see what you want to do with them..
edit: added Mantua, last line
The League of Cambrai was by Phillip V, but I made some pretty radical changes to it.
Ultimately the events were all posted on the board, and as such, no one but Paradox can stop you from using them (not so sure whether they can either).
I'l be interested to see what you want to do with them..
edit: added Mantua, last line
Yes, I know that I - in principle - can use anything I find on the board, but that's not polite, is it?
Do you think Phillip V would mind if I use that event? Basically, I like the idea about Venice getting a shield on Romagna. I don't think the event is fair the way Paradox made it, as a lot of nations gets a CB on Venice w/o them actually being aggressive.... Do you want to view how I incorporate the events before I release the mod?
Okay then. About that Venice event, do you think Phillip V would mind? Do you speak with him on regular basis? (through icq or something)
Nope (I don't speak with him). By the way it would be nice if you mention (in comments) that they are EEP events.
Okay, I'll take my chances then and include it. As I understand it, most of it is done by you anyway. I'll mention both of u along with EEP in my credits.
I have been testing AoI a lot lately, and have discovered that the 1816 scenario needs some serious tweaking. Especially the Americas needs some work.
This means that I'll have to postpone the release once again...
I apologize if I keep anyone waiting, but I just don't think the 1816 scenario is worth playing yet.
New ETA: 10-14 days (I have limited time on my hands, since I have work and a social life to attend as well... )
This means that I'll have to postpone the release once again...
I apologize if I keep anyone waiting, but I just don't think the 1816 scenario is worth playing yet.
New ETA: 10-14 days (I have limited time on my hands, since I have work and a social life to attend as well...
)
There were quite a few North American Indian "nations". Iroquis and the Cherokee were part of a larger confederation I believe called the "Five Nations". The Cherokee alone were quite "civilized" in their own way. The Iroquis far in the past actually were cannibals.
The Hopi and Navajo tribes were actually pretty civilized as well. Both actually used irrigation techniques for crops. They actually were using Maize(which they had gotten from the Central American tribes were it originated) and developed it into the corn that we know of today.(I can't remember whether it was the Hopi or the Navajo who did that)
The Miami and Potowhatami(sp) tribes of the midwest(Indiana, Southwest Ohio, Southern Michigan, and Northern Kentucky)oh let's not forget the Shawnee as well. The Miami and Potowhatami were relatively peaceful tribes. The Shawnee were slightly more warlike than the Miami.
All the tribes/nations I have mentioned actually had a relatively complex code of honor not that terribly dissimilar to the Code of Chivalry.
But they also had an incredible warped(IMHO) sense of how they tortured prisoners. See the movie "A Man Called Horse" to get a sense of this. A prisoner being tortured would actually SUGGEST novel ways for his captors to torture him! A "brave" would be immensely proud of his ability to withstand pain.
Anyway, many of them also had a code of "laws". The Iroquis and the Cherokee were well known for this, as were the others I have mentioned to a lesser extent.
There was a tribe in southern California that were VERY advanced for their time. They mysteriously disappeared by the time Cortes conquered the Aztecs. Nobody seems to know that happened to them. Some believe they had contact with either Spanish or amazingly enough the Chinese and contracted some virulent disease that wiped them out.
So needless to say, I think just arbitrarily considering that so many NA "nations" weren't really such is kind of European centric. But then again, it IS called Europa Universalis. I just had to respond about this though. And no, I am not a Native American....just a student of history.
Oh almost forgot...the Dakota weren't actually called that. They were and still are called the Lakota.
Lakota? Really? Then why are they called Dakota in the game?
Is it like Delaware being called Lenape?
Is it like Delaware being called Lenape?
Amric: You're right of course, all of them are nations in their own way. But the hole thing is about EU2 having limited number of country tags. That is why some nations have to be removed in order to make more than a few new ones. And when you look at the nations in game, I'm sure you'll have to admit that the Native American nations are the first ones to go considering the game mechanics... they just are the least important ones. Anyway, there's an interesting conversation about "What's a country?" in this thread: http://www.europa-universalis.com/forum/showthread.php?threadid=56737
Originally posted by Hive
Lakota? Really? Then why are they called Dakota in the game?
Is it like Delaware being called Lenape?
Exactly...Personally I think it was a lack of checking facts thoroughly. Sweden actually colonized the area that the Delaware Indians inhabited at one time calling it New Sweden. The Lakota are actually what many people called the Sioux Indians. They called themselves the Lakota. When N and S Dakota became states they were called Dakota as a backhanded compliment to the Lakota.