• 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.
I'd like to point out a misconception, the cabinet is not a fixed number. There are advances for example that increase the number of cabinet members, and you can make one the head of cabinet to double their effectiveness sorta like doubling up on it.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
If you compare that map with the TT feedback map you will be able to see how vastly changed the situation is within less than 100 years, including elimination of most hashed areas. Around that timestamp (49:50) he also shows that he assimilated a fully Bulgarian area to 90% Greek with the cabinet action really quickly. Ludi and other youtubers also commented on assimilation rates without video proof. I will admit I forgot that the pocket of Cappadocians still remained.

I do not appreciate calling me a liar, that is needlessly aggressive. I would guess you didn't mean to cause offense though. Next time maybe drop the accusation to "mistaken?" I would appreciate that.
I don't know what to call it other than lying, or you just completely misremembered it I guess. But again you say the situation has "vastly" changed, when what is what is shown in the pic is completely fine insofar as the AI is concerned. We don't even know what change actually happened for the region to go from hashed to not, it could be a mere 5-20% shift and there could still be Greeks in every locality.

IRL By 1500-1550 there was basically no real Greek community in Anatolia outside of the pontic coast, Cappadocia and parts of the Aegean coast.
 
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
1) A&C should primarily take place through government investment in infrastructure like universities, courts, theaters, and churches/mosques. Paradox has already included such modifiers for buildings, so this is prime for replacing the cabinet as the main mechanic. A&C infrastructure would be more rewarding than cabinet A&C button because players would have to weigh A&C against other building goals, it would provide incentive to build cultural infrastructure that was historically important, and it would encourage the player to interact with locations on the map rather than the cabinet menu. "I built a grand church/theater in [location] so people there gradually converted or learned my language" is more engaging than “cabinet member used abstract method to change culture in [location].” A&C infrastructure would be more realistic because players would focus on densely populated areas first (where A&C happened historically) and infrastructure like churches/schools encourage A&C in an intuitive and historical way. This could simultaneously be more realistic and fun by scaling with technology and state capacity over the span of the game. By end game, the player may even be able to build a school system like the French did to achieve mass A&C.
I'd say in this time period, the assimilation by the location "development" should only apply to the nobility and the burghers
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
you also seems to be confused about assimilation . assimilation isnt an ethnic cleansing , it means setting programs for peoples in new conquered areas to follow . its an administrative program , this is how Amazighs of north africa got arabised after the 50s , through education and urbanism and mono language of administrative jobs not leaving room to the native culture to prosper .
when you try to assimilate in game you do it education , language , customs , they dont send troops to wipe out the natives. you will always have that minority that will always have a sort of desire of independence because they are not your people. this is why balkanese still exist today , because they were only living ottoman style but the day they felt need to go independent they did . this didnt mean ottomans were strugling to turn them to turk in fact they hardly tried, they just did put a turkish type administration and overtime the locals integrated and spoke turk and used local currency and weared ottoman clothing and so on and even became proud ottomans (large portion of ottoman's most brilliant politicians and generals&admirals were balkanese not turk).
this is what the game mean , but all you here seems to be hinting to the more extreme spanish measures . that is literally a cleansing , a 700 years long civilisation wiped out and all its traces converted and peoples either converted for good or exiled. you cant have this result through classic assmilation but through opression and migration of your peoples to kick the natives away.


also these demands for core gameplay should wait till after release , like peoples didnt even play the game and you already asking for removal of core features from the game just because you watched some fools playing and giving lots and lots of innacuracies or claims based on bugs such as blobbing that was a bug .
give feedback but leave core gameplay to post release.
core mechanic change during mass playing not before release , so let them test the water and change will come after
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Actually most of Central Anatolia doesn't etven have stripped Greek minorities, it's mostly Turkmen and Mongolia minorities, so basically what changed up to 1420 in Ludi's game is just Mongols and Turkmen assimilating into Turks, lol
1747345902379.png
 
  • 1Haha
Reactions:
Actually most of Central Anatolia doesn't etven have stripped Greek minorities, it's mostly Turkmen and Mongolia minorities, so basically what changed up to 1420 in Ludi's game is just Mongols and Turkmen assimilating into Turks, lol
I think we just disagree over the semantics of vast change. I think assimilating part of Thrace from 90% Bulgarian to 90% Greek in a few decades by cabinet action is vast change. I also think large assimilation of minorities at game start within 100 years is vast change. You may also be correct in pointing out that we do not know the exact numbers/rates based solely on the hashes, but based on the videos I've seen I believe the rates are ahistorically high.

I also don't find the cabinet action to be a fun or realistic idea, and seeing such fast assimilation by the AI would hamper my enjoyment of the game. It seems not seeing fast assimilation would hamper your enjoyment of the game. Maybe there can be a game rule to appease us both, and the types of players we represent.

There is no need to jump to calling people liars, and you can absolutely call it mistaken or misremember rather than lying. If, for instance, you said something I thought to be inaccurate, I would assume you were mistaken, not lying in bad faith. I am sure you are are a good faith actor and don't mean any offense, I just want the vibes on the forum to be good :)
 
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
I'd like to point out a misconception, the cabinet is not a fixed number. There are advances for example that increase the number of cabinet members, and you can make one the head of cabinet to double their effectiveness sorta like doubling up on it.
On top of this, the cultural hegemon gains the ability to assimilate an entire area per cabinet member. With that in mind while it might not be possible to core the entire world it's probably possible to core a continent or two. (Ignoring colonization.)

EDIT: I forgot integration would still be one province at a time, so that would be your bottleneck. Or actually fighting wars. Who knows?
 
Last edited:
  • 2Like
  • 1
Reactions:
I think this is all part of the broader, and very natural, problem that comes out of trying to balance two very different approaches (conversion vs humanism) that were not balanced in reality for the sake of making a compelling game with meaningful choice.

In EU4, you could entirely negate unrest by being humanist and so they had to make it so cultural conversion was so easy that you could convert the entire world within the span of the game timeline despite the factual reality that the largest and most powerful empire in human history could not eradicate the culture of their closest neighbour over the course of 800 years.
 
  • 2Like
Reactions:
I think that for the sake of the game, there should be a way to reduce unrest via conversion. However, I think that to respect the history of cultural resilience shown by many cultures, they should introduce a middle ground between absolute conversion and no conversion, similar to the levels of tolerated, accepted, primary culture through humanist mechanics.

I talked about this idea in another thread, but the tl;dr is that I think that in a relatively practical amount of time, through either the methods the game has implemented so far or what OP has suggested, you should be able to partially convert a culture, partially reducing unrest and partially integrating the province to get more resources from it. You could have the first level (equivalent to tolerated if taking a humanist approach) representing an integration of legal systems and other power structures, the next level representing the conquerer's language becoming the prestige language used in business and official proceedings, and the third level representing full conversion (these are just examples but you get the point).

One thing that I think should definitely feature regardless of whether you agree with the above system or not is a "cultural memory" system (maybe there is a better name someone more creative can come up with) but the idea is that at the lower tiers of conversion, if a country with the conquered culture reconquers their culture's land that has been converted to another culture, they will be able to rapidly have those people convert back. I think this is essential. Obviously I don't have the game and so I can't confirm the veracity of their claims, but some youtubers have said that some provinces have had half their population converted in 20 years. Sure, if you want to believe that can happen that is fine (I don't) but claiming that people entirely forget and abandon their original culture within their own lifetime and can't reconnect with that culture when they have their original country retake their land is an insane claim and is completely contrary to any reality.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
I think this is all part of the broader, and very natural, problem that comes out of trying to balance two very different approaches (conversion vs humanism) that were not balanced in reality for the sake of making a compelling game with meaningful choice.

In EU4, you could entirely negate unrest by being humanist and so they had to make it so cultural conversion was so easy that you could convert the entire world within the span of the game timeline despite the factual reality that the largest and most powerful empire in human history could not eradicate the culture of their closest neighbour over the course of 800 years.
EU5 doesn’t have that balance issue though, unless things that give you cultural capacity end up being really OP, so this cabinet action exists to… what? Preserve EU4’s legacy of a genocide button?

Speaking of, this is still a genocide button. You are in a matter of decades changing a large population’s culture via centrally directed state action. Any real world examples of this working are considered a genocide, I guarantee it. Forced marriages with men of the preferred culture is pretty much the only way this could be done, since public schooling isn’t a thing yet, and every other measure either involves killing people or is better represented by the culture being non-accepted.
 
  • 4
  • 1
Reactions:
perhaps the assimilatiln was/is too fast, but

- the Greek/Turkic case in Anatolia has a lot of special boni snd should be turned down a bit
- there where some bugs allowing for faster assimilation

- Many cultures are similar
- assimilation means reciprocal acceptence of a rather interpersonal relationship, i.e. "yeah I will follow King Kasimir and not Duke Wilibald anymire." It does not mean I gave to change language, customs, clothes etc. - at least not totally.
(When I here the current rethorics in our western, pluralistic democracies, I think at least some have higher demands w.r.t. assimilation, than back then.
- gameplay-wise either vultures do not matter or they must be changable (i.e. either we get meaningful rebellions for not-assimitede, non-core locations or we can deal with them by assimilation)
- some cabinet action might be overpowered, but there arealways oportunity- costs. (If 50+ years is not long enough, the action becomes so bad, I will not use it )
 
EU5 doesn’t have that balance issue though, unless things that give you cultural capacity end up being really OP
I have no idea how powerful it will be, all I know is that it has been confirmed that WC is possible by developers on the Steam forum (I don't support this to be clear) and this means in practice that they will have to allow you to be able to not have to deal with overwhelming rebels, I assume, through cultural tolerance mechanics.

Speaking of, this is still a genocide button. You are in a matter of decades changing a large population’s culture via centrally directed state action. Any real world examples of this working are considered a genocide, I guarantee it. Forced marriages with men of the preferred culture is pretty much the only way this could be done, since public schooling isn’t a thing yet, and every other measure either involves killing people or is better represented by the culture being non-accepted.
100% agree. I think that the "culture conversion" mechanic is a childish abstraction that allows the player to get what they want without feeling horrible about themselves and what they are doing.

The most, and perhaps only, universally successful "culture conversion" method is already fully integrated into the game through the pop system. You can in the game deport people from certain lands, or raise specific locations with the cultures you want to "convert" as levies and run them into enemy stacks or let them starve to death, while encouraging resettlement from people of your own culture. This is what culture conversion is, but this is such a naturally sickening idea to every sane person that they need to abstract these atrocities to a button where you get a cabinet minister to do equally horrifying things in a slightly different way.

I do think that EUV is a game, mostly, played by adults who have a separation between themselves and the simulation they are a part of, so I don't think the game needs to chastise them for acting immorally, but I do think the game could be a bit more intellectually honest about what pressing that button entails.

A simple way to do this would be to just remove the button, and integrate conversion into laws, for example, public beatings for speaking the national language, land seizures, discriminatory tax rates, forcing people to take on names from your culture, fabricating famines or mass poverty and then creating soup kitchens or work camps that require conversion to benefit from, and publishing pamphlets depicting the converting culture as naturally inferior and incapable of running a state. (All of these things are real examples that happened to my own people, and by far not the worst examples)

At the very least, I think that they could include some events that could give players an indication of what is happening. But yes, the truth is that conversion from a central authority, especially in the time that game puts forward, necessitates violence and genocide.
 
  • 3
  • 3
  • 1Like
Reactions:
- assimilation means reciprocal acceptence of a rather interpersonal relationship, i.e. "yeah I will follow King Kasimir and not Duke Wilibald anymire." It does not mean I gave to change language, customs, clothes etc. - at least not totally.
This isn't what assimilation represents ingame. This is what cultural acceptance/province intigration represents ingame. Assimilation literally is changing your customs, language, clothes, etc.
I have no idea how powerful it will be, all I know is that it has been confirmed that WC is possible by developers on the Steam forum (I don't support this to be clear) and this means in practice that they will have to allow you to be able to not have to deal with overwhelming rebels, I assume, through cultural tolerance mechanics.
Technically world conquest doesn't have to be stable, your empire might implode within the century because holding all that together is impractical, but yeah that's my assumption too, that you can tolerate or accept all the largest cultures in your empire and this will gut most separatist movements.
 
  • 3Like
  • 3
Reactions:
The problem with that is the game will be designed around certain assumptions on what is possible. If you gamerule it away but the game design still assumes it's available, that can cause problems.
I think we need to agree that there is no solution that perfectly makes everyone happy. A game rule while not perfect is the closest we can get to an harmonious outcome.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
On top of this, the cultural hegemon gains the ability to assimilate an entire area per cabinet member. With that in mind while it might not be possible to core the entire world it's probably possible to core a continent or two. (Ignoring colonization.)
Yeah, I really don't want to see that. I'd be disappointed if the world looks homogeneous at the end date.

Maybe cultural hegemon could get some other kind of bonus, possibly to flag A&C or ability to accept other cultures?
I think we need to agree that there is no solution that perfectly makes everyone happy. A game rule while not perfect is the closest we can get to an harmonious outcome.

You might be right, and I'd rather see that than nothing. It may even work fine. However, I am concerned that a core part of the gameplay will be cabinet culture assimilation because so many features/strength are locked behind primary culture pops.

If the balance issue is tied to inability to raise armies or cores from non-majority primary pop areas, I'd rather see that disconnected or tuned down than see a gameplay loop focused on ahistorical cultural erasure programs.