Form Belgium in Rule Brittania

[Aurelio123]

Since lowlands are gonna be improved in 1.25 why not add option to form Belgium while at it? Lowlands have always been intreasting location in MP matches.Since none of the players would ever support you its best for 2 players to play in lowlands so they can beat burgundy alone(Holland and Brabant).After beating burgundy up with your ally holland gets to form netherlands,but brabant? Yeah they don't get to do anything unless they seek to take holland for themselfs.
Belgium should be formable the same way as netherlands,5-7 province requirement in southern lowlands.Hell there is even a mod that allows it so why not allow it in vanila game.Why am i not using that mod? Becose everyone uses vanila in MP.
You can form nations like hannover,westplhalia,egypt so whats wrong with forming belgium? Almost all nations in the game should have this so you have a goal when playing a nation. *cough* *0 formable nations in southern germany.*
If this is added maybe playing nations like flanders should be worth it instead of being compleatly unbalanced and always being one sided when it comes to playing in lowlands.
Becose right now,it's either holland or brabant,if you pick liege/flanders you are just making it harder for yourself becose the only thing you can do is expand north to form netherlands.

 

[Mingmung]

So because it's a country ruled by French elite, it can't be in EUIV? That's your reasoning behind this? Very poor if you ask me. A lot of countries in history have been ruled by a small elite. If this were a criteria to be excluded from EUIV, then nations like the US, the United Kingdom and Russia shouldn't be formable either. From my point of view, there is no reason to exclude Belgium and a lot of reasons to include it.

Belgium as a nation formed in 1830, but there were historical reasons for its independence. Ever since the Dutch Revolt against the Spanish, the Southern Netherlands (or what we know today as Belgium) has formed a separate identity. In EUIV we see formable nations like Italy and Germany, which as a united political entity were even younger than Belgium. The notion for these political unities and cultural unities existed before their actual political existence, but the same could be said about Belgium.

If you want to exlude Belgium as a formable nation, then in my opinion you'll have to come up with some very good gameplay reasons. Historical reasons are irrelevant because there are enough examples of formable nations already in the game which are completely unrealistic for the timeframe. It's really not that hard to add a formable nation. It's just some lines of code and some graphics that need to be added. As for players who want to try and form Belgium at this stage, I would recommend looking for a mod that adds Belgium as a formable nation. I'm sure it's out there somewhere. It's the closest thing you can get at the moment.

A good gameplay argument?

Well, tags like Flanders (with Flemish culture, even), Hainaut and Brabant already exist to fill in a role when Flemish or Walloon nationalists rise up.

 

[SibCDC]

A good gameplay argument?

Well, tags like Flanders (with Flemish culture, even), Hainaut and Brabant already exist to fill in a role when Flemish or Walloon nationalists rise up.

So again, the UK shouldn't exist because England, Scotland, Wales and Ireland are tags that fill in a similar role?

 

[Mingmung]

So again, the UK shouldn't exist because England, Scotland, Wales and Ireland are tags that fill in a similar role?

Indeed, the UK doesn't exist. GB does.

 

[SibCDC]

Indeed, the UK doesn't exist. GB does.

The argument still stands. In the same logic as "Belgium shouldn't exist because Flanders, Brabant and Hainaut exist as tags which fill a similar role", "Great Britain shouldn't exist because Scotland, Wales and England exist as tags which fill a similar role". I mean the point of formable nations is exactly to take a couple of other nations, smash them together and make a new nation which is not the same as the previous tag, but fills in a similar role.

 

[mechanical_Critter]

Formable exists for many reasons, it's not fair to dumb it down to a single and very vague reason. To me, it looks like it showcases ignorance of game mechanics rather than making a point.
As for GB, it exists as a twofold reason: first, its formation took place *during EU4 timespan*, second, the idea of forming a nation that has dominion over the British islands was in the air back to the legend of king Arthur, and the struggle to establish it dominated the politics of the British islands. This and that are NOT arbitrary reasons.

 

[SibCDC]

But then again, the notion of a distinct Southern identity existed ever since the Dutch Revolt. For reference, have a look at these maps.

These are the Spanish Netherlands. From 1648 onwards, their exclusion from the Republic (today the Netherlands) was official. Ever since then, they have been a separate entity from the North (with an exception during French rule when both the South and the North were annexed into France and from 1815 to 1830 when they were united under the United Kingdom of the Netherlands).

These are the Austrian Netherlands, notice how nothing has really changed in the seperation between North and South, around this period, the political notion of an independent South started becoming popular. Schools and universities also started teaching 'Belgian history', a history limited to the duchies and counties of the South.

Now this is the most interesting map of all. This is a map of the United Belgian States (or the Verenigde Nederlandse Staten). This was an entity which revolted against the Austrians around the same time of the French Revolution (well within the timeframe of EUIV). It was very shortlived, but nonetheless, it confirmed the notion of a separate nation in the Southern Netherlands.

Last but not least, this is a map of modern Belgium. Belgium is an independent country since 1830 (just 10 years after the game ends which is really nothing for a game spanning 400 years). It has existed now for almost 200 years and has actively shaped the history of Europe. Whatever ideological reasons you might have for hating the country (being a Dutch revanchist or a British Brexit voter), you can not deny that the region of Belgium has had a distinct identity since the Dutch Revolt or at least its aftermath (even though the region was only nominally united under a personal union). They teach this at universities, they write this in books. It is a consensus accepted by a wide spectrum within the academical world of history. To deny this is to live in a fantasy world of memes. I'd suggest reading up on the subject and then come back with good arguments why Belgium shouldn't be included in EUIV as a formable nation.

 

[gronak]

From what pro Belgium people have said, it seems like if it were added it should only be added as a revolter tag, after being owned by a nation or two for a long time and the religion must be Catholic, as well as Netherlands already existing. Where's the identity and history if this doesn't happen?

 

[Tom D.]

I think it should just be a formable nation like any other nation in the game, nothing special.

 

[SibCDC]

From what pro Belgium people have said, it seems like if it were added it should only be added as a revolter tag, after being owned by a nation or two for a long time and the religion must be Catholic, as well as Netherlands already existing. Where's the identity and history if this doesn't happen?

I agree with most of what you said. It would pose an interesting challenge for players to try and form Belgium. But I disagree with Belgium only being able to form as a revolter tag. Nations like Flanders or Liège should be able to form Belgium, in very much the same way Holland or Friesland can form the Netherlands.

 

[Mudalls]

Funny.

My family are citizen of a "revolter nation" for two hundred years. A pretty stable one though. No revolution since (France had one empire, four republics and two kingdoms in the meanwhile). For a revolter nation, we are calm. We just wanted our independance. Is that so unbelievable that we are a people which want to rule themselves, even though we were first a group of duchies, principalties and counties ?

You know, the motto of Belgium is : "L'Union fait la force." meaning : "Strengh through Unity". Why do you think ? Because when we were divided, we falled to austrian, prussian, spanish or netherlandish hands.

Do we need to be ruled by UK for centuries and be denied right to vote to form united states in EU4 ? We don't.

Belgium should just be added as a formable nation. I cannot see one good reason it is not (for the flag reason, I gave you 3 possible other flags (from red/yellow/black vertical, to red/yellow black horizontal, without forgetting black/yellow/red horizontal) that were used in the beginning of the country). I'm actually schocked by the opposition to the idea of adding an existing, normal country to an historical game.

Ideology is the dead of reason.

 

[SibCDC]

Funny.

My family are citizen of a "revolter nation" for two hundred years. A pretty stable one though. No revolution since (France had one empire, four republics and two kingdoms in the meanwhile). For a revolter nation, we are calm. We just wanted our independance. Is that so unbelievable that we are a people which want to rule themselves, even though we were first a group of duchies, principalties and counties ?

You know, the motto of Belgium is : "L'Union fait la force." meaning : "Strengh through Unity". Why do you think ? Because when we were divided, we falled to austrian, prussian, spanish or netherlandish hands.

Do we need to be ruled by UK for centuries and be denied right to vote to form united states in EU4 ? We don't.

Belgium should just be added as a formable nation. I cannot see one good reason it is not (for the flag reason, I gave you 3 possible other flags (from red/yellow/black vertical, to red/yellow black horizontal, without forgetting black/yellow/red horizontal) that were used in the beginning of the country). I'm actually schocked by the opposition to the idea of adding an existing, normal country to an historical game.

Ideology is the dead of reason.

I think most of the opposition here is for ideological reasons or because of the whole meme thing (Belgium is not a real country). Personally, I don't see why adding Belgium would be a problem.
I can see that you're hurt on a personal level regarding this issue. It can be very insulting to read ignorant opinions about your own country, but you'll have to cope with half of the internet not even knowing where Liège is on a map.

 

[Mudalls]

Thank you for your message, SibCDC. I was becoming to think no one understand how I was feeling about that particular issue.

I don't mind people not knowing where Liège, or even Belgium is. But people judging without actually knowing, it's something I do mind. when it stopped me from having equal treatment.

So, I was asking this simple question : is it possible for PDX to think a second time about allowing player (I don't ask that for the AI) to form Belgium when owning some places in wallonia and Flanders ? For exemple, Brüssels, Hainaut, Liège, Gent and Antwerp would be a nice requirement. I don't mind tech 20 requirement to represent the late formation of Belgium in Europe.

 

[Stratagyfan101]

Belgium tag should be added to the game, but not formable. It should exist only through a dynamic historical event (are these even things anymore?).

Netherlands is independent. Netherlands is Protestant or reformed. Walloon/Flemish provinces are Catholic. Maybe add some low stability or war exhaustion, or require Netherlands capital to be occupied. Boom event fires. Belgium exists.

 

[Tom D.]

Maybe add some low stability or war exhaustion, or require Netherlands capital to be occupied. Boom event fires. Belgium exists.

Low stability or war exhaustion for the Netherlands? I somewhat get the low stability because there was obvious some unrest in the south otherwise the revolution wouldn't have happened, but war exhaustion? The UK of the Netherlands wasn't even in a war when the Belgian Revolution occurred, also applies to their capital being occupied, where do these requirements come from? This doesn't show the historical reasons why the Belgian Revolution occurred at all.

 

[Stratagyfan101]

Low stability or war exhaustion for the Netherlands? I somewhat get the low stability because there was obvious some unrest in the south otherwise the revolution wouldn't have happened, but war exhaustion? The UK of the Netherlands wasn't even in a war when the Belgian Revolution occurred, also applies to their capital being occupied, where do these requirements come from? This doesn't show the historical reasons why the Belgian Revolution occurred at all.

Some alt-history possibilities for the event to fire. Its not like the existing DHEs are all that accurate, and war exhaustion or an occupied capital are more likely than low stability.

 

[MrMcQue]

Thank you for your message, SibCDC. I was becoming to think no one understand how I was feeling about that particular issue.

I don't mind people not knowing where Liège, or even Belgium is. But people judging without actually knowing, it's something I do mind. when it stopped me from having equal treatment.

So, I was asking this simple question : is it possible for PDX to think a second time about allowing player (I don't ask that for the AI) to form Belgium when owning some places in wallonia and Flanders ? For exemple, Brüssels, Hainaut, Liège, Gent and Antwerp would be a nice requirement. I don't mind tech 20 requirement to represent the late formation of Belgium in Europe.

Yeah, an entire nation is missing: Meme all the time and avoid a serious answer

One German province has a wrong capital: REVOLT