Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

How should Austria-Hungary be represented?

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • 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.
Victoria 3 12181 Bug Reports 8059 User Mods 552 Multiplayer 65 Suggestions 3294 Tech Support 953 After Action Reports (AARs)
Show only dev responses
Pressburger

Pressburger

Insignificant State Fetishist
15 Badges
Dec 11, 2011
348
308
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Victoria 2
  • 500k Club
  • Mount & Blade: Warband
  • Mount & Blade: With Fire and Sword
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Divine Wind
  • Heir to the Throne
We've seen and gathered from various replies that there will be multiple subject types. I was therefore curious about how should A-H be most accurately represented: as one country or two countries with Hungary being the junior subject of a certain type?

EDIT:
To clarify, I am specifically asking about portraying the Compromise in 1867, not the 1836 starting date
 
Last edited:
  • 8Like
Reactions:
Definitely two countries in a personal union. People are used to Austria-Hungary as one country that is true. But the entire point of the whole arrangement was that there would be two countries in a personal union, only sharing foreign policy. Same case with Sweden-Norway or even Russia and Finland.

Otherwise, it just seems that the Hungarian nationalists only goal was to rename the Austrian Empire? Without any actual gains.
 
  • 12
  • 5Like
  • 2
  • 1Haha
Reactions:
I am also curious about that. While it would make sense if Finland is seen as autonomous to see Hungary as a subject, it would definitely be a big change in the way the country is shown on the map. Maybe there could be an "internal subject" kind of map, something that helps preserve the sense that those countries are whole, but in reality are pretty much separate. Also, would we be allowed to meddle into our subjects affairs, to make a "triple monarchy"?
 
Last edited:
  • 3Like
  • 1Love
Reactions:
Skales said:
Definitely two countries in a personal union. People are used to Austria-Hungary as one country that is true. But the entire point of the whole arrangement was that there would be two countries in a personal union, only sharing foreign policy. Same case with Sweden-Norway or even Russia and Finland.

Otherwise, it just seems that the Hungarian nationalists only goal was to rename the Austrian Empire? Without any actual gains.
Click to expand...
Having Hungarian as an accepted culture whilst you lose chances to win over the slavs does kinda show it
 
  • 4
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Arizal said:
I am also curious about that. While it would make sense if Finland is seen as autonomous to see Hungary as a subject, it would definitely be a big changein the way the country is shown on the map. Maybe there could be an "internal subject" kind of map, something that helps preserve the sense that those countries are whole, but in reality are pretty much separate. Also, would we be allowed to meddle into our subjects affairs, to make a "triple monarchy"?
Click to expand...
They have said that Finland and Norway will both be independent so it’s a possibility that they could be two separate under a personal Union as they said Norway would be
 
Battlex said:
Having Hungarian as an accepted culture whilst you lose chances to win over the slavs does kinda show it
Click to expand...

I mean, kinda? But not really. For one the Czechs and the Poles were most definitely accepted in Austria proper. And Croatians in Hungary. Hungary was also independent in all aspects except for the foreign policy, they even had their own military. There's no reason to not show them as independent other than a sense of convention.
 
  • 3Like
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
In Vicky 2, Austria started as just that - Austria - and 'reformed' into Austria-Hungary as a compromise if they lost enough power and influence. I can see something similar working in Vicky 3, where losing the authority necessary to keep the Hungarian nationalists at bay will lead to Hungary being released as a junior partner in a PU to represent Austria-Hungary, or if Austria drops the ball completely, breaks away as an independent nation.

Should also be applied to other substates of the Habsburg Empire. I'd like to see the possibility of Austria completely fracturing into its component nations, loosely held together by a single head of state. Like an Austrian Commonwealth of sorts, if things go really wrong for them.
 
  • 18
  • 6Like
Reactions:
Well Austria-Hungary didn't form until 1867. Since the start date is 1836, it would just be the unitary Austrian Empire at game start. I'd imagine there will be an event chain on how to deal with events that IRL led to the 1867 Compromise. The options will probably include maintaining a unified Austrian Empire, releasing Hungary as an independent state, or enacting the Compromise as it happened historically.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
I think splitting up too many nations because they had some autonomy is a but too much and should be represented by internal politics. Otherwise, if Austria-Hungary is divided up one should also divide up other countries that had high levels of autonomy. Germany should be divided into its princes just being vassals under Prussia (or the german emperor). This german emperor shouldn't even have control over the armed forces of the princes, just in case of war, like they had historically. If the function of the state is similar to Vicky II then a single state is suitable as most of the function under the control of the player was shared, but the Hungarian faction should become more powerful and probably gain a veto or similar large amount of influence

edit:language
 
Last edited:
  • 7
  • 5
Reactions:
Helmic____ said:
I think splitting up too many nations because they had some autonomy is a but too much and should be represented by internal politics. Otherwise, if austria hungary is divided up one should also divide Germany into its princes just being in a PU under Prussia (or the german emperor) and this german emperor shouldn't even have control over the armed forces of the princes, just in case of war. If the function of the state is similar to Vicky II then a single state is suitable as most of the function under the control of the player was shared, but the Hungarian faction should become more powerful and probably gain a veto or similar large amount of influence
Click to expand...

The other German states being under the PU of Prussia is not correct, they quite literally had their own monarchs! Also, there's a difference between a federal state, such as the US and Germany. And two separate countries in a personal union. The sort of slippery slope argument doesn't seem to hold water here, Finland and Norway, which are countries with almost the exact same situation as Hungary after the compromise, are shown as personal unions.
 
  • 15
  • 2
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Skales said:
The other German states being under the PU of Prussia is not correct, they quite literally had their own monarchs! Also, there's a difference between a federal state, such as the US and Germany. And two separate countries in a personal union. The sort of slippery slope argument doesn't seem to hold water here, Finland and Norway, which are countries with almost the exact same situation as Hungary after the compromise, are shown as personal unions.
Click to expand...
Yeah, but the system would be very similar even though the subject nations would have their own monarchs. And the german empire was not a federal state and the princes had a ton of autonomy up until ww1. For example they had their own armies and economic policies with the armies only being controlled by the german government in times of war.

edit: and Austria-Hungary also had a common army, something that would probably be missing if they are represented as different states
 
Last edited:
  • 2
Reactions:
Nostalgium said:
In Vicky 2, Austria started as just that - Austria - and 'reformed' into Austria-Hungary as a compromise if they lost enough power and influence. I can see something similar working in Vicky 3, where losing the authority necessary to keep the Hungarian nationalists at bay will lead to Hungary being released as a junior partner in a PU to represent Austria-Hungary, or if Austria drops the ball completely, breaks away as an independent nation.

Should also be applied to other substates of the Habsburg Empire. I'd like to see the possibility of Austria completely fracturing into its component nations, loosely held together by a single head of state. Like an Austrian Commonwealth of sorts, if things go really wrong for them.
Click to expand...
Hapsburg commonwealth is a historic phrase I've heard for the collection of territories in the early modern era, but not Austrian commonwealth. Hpm has the danube federation. United States of Greater Austria is one historical but unrealised suggestion
 
  • 2
Reactions:
At least at the start, the Hapsburg domain is unified.

map2.PNGmap4.PNG
 
  • 5Like
Reactions:
It should be represented as one country because otherwise core Austria is likely not strong enough to stand up to the other great powers. Gameplay balance should be the primary consideration.
 
  • 6
  • 4
Reactions:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back