Re: Russia corrections
Thanx for sharing Your opinion with us, Tanone.
There are always many different settings which are plausible and one often cannot say that a given design is the only correct one. It depends on the criteria one puts into action and there´s also always the aspect of personal taste. I´ll try to reply to all Your comments as good as I can (I´m really lacking sleep, so I hope I can make myself halfway clear):
Actually it was my opinion about Ryazan that Raphael post in the discussion. I think that Ryasan is not very important mainly because it was really weak and under very strong influence of Moscow. Actually the main reason why Ryazan was not incorporated in Russia was that Ivan III was quite happy to have it as vassal (same can be told about Pskov). Actually all this pappet states (Pskov and Ryazan) should be vassals of Russia and in military alliance with her at the begining of game.
- Please note, that in the original GC Ryazan is part of Kazan. So the new setting is much more correct.
- Puppet=vassal. Of course Ryazan was only a puppet, that´s why I made it a vassal. But I will in future editions give them even better relations to Russia and put them into a military alliance, too. It should be always on the brink of annexation.
- Why then put it in at all?
a)Now, first, some Russians even urged me to.
b) Second, Ryazan is on all maps of that time and I always try to have the political map right. I love it, when I go into political mode and everything looks like on my most favorite maps.
c) Thirdly, though Ryazan is mostly annexed during the first twenty years of the game, this is not ALWAYS the case and this makes the game more fun.
d) Fourthly a player can now decide to actually PLAY Ryazan, which is very nice and challenging to boot.
- I will think about Pskov (alliance, vassal).
To follow history you should made Kazan vassal too but I afraide that can damage gameplay. Pskov and Ryazan was annexed immidiatly when they have made motion into leaving vassalization. Kazan leave this status in mid-XVI and was taken by force.
I know. But exactly because making Kazan a vassal will hamper Russian efforts to expand to the south, I didn´t do it.
Talkinf about vassals I was surprised that everybody just forget that Poland-Lithuinia is not one country but two independent countries with ralation like Castile-Aragon and Denmark-Sweden with one difference: most of time Poland and Lithuinia have different rulers but all of them was brothers to maintaine union. Actually Lithuinia was unstable country (sort of federation of west russian pricipalities under rulling of Lithuinian Great Prince) and it was in dynastic union with Poland untill 1569 when it was incorporated into newly created country of Rech Pospolitaya (russian spelling). But before this event it was very big possibility that Lithiunia will be incorporated into Russia (and this fact will stop all Russian Polish conflicts). This should be very big catholic country which takes more then half of current Poland-Lithuinia provinces.
No, I don´t forget that. I would have liked to have Lithuania in the game at least as a possible revolter. I read about several times of splitting of the Polish-Lithuanian commonwealth, and if I remember correctly, Poland and Lithuania were even not under the same ruler at the beginning of the game (when Ivan III reigned in Russia). But as with Spain, I think it would pose serious difficulties for gameplay to split Poland and Lithuania - even if one makes relations close, alliance, vassalship etc.
Actually I was really surprised about message in which Sibiria was described so powerful in history that it takes control of Kazan and defeats Astrakhan.
Hehe, I have Russian sources about this.
Needed to clarify that Sibiria never have common boder with all khanates on Volga (Kazan, Astrakhan and Golden Horde).
I know that they had no border with Kazan. But that didn´t prevent Mamuk from conquering it and being Khan there for a while. The concept of 'border' is a bit moot with regards to the region anyway as the Tatars were nomads and roamed wherever they didn´t find resistance. In 1491/92 Astrachan was hard pressed by Sibir and they *almost* conquered it.
It was distant country which was very weak and unstable. Most of time before conquest it was vassal of Russia and leave this status when was conquered by Astrakhan prince Kuchum. Then Russia take steps to take Sibiria under control to stop raids on her borders.
Yes, but this was much later than 1492 timespan. Russia conquered Siberia in 1581 (I think). In 1492 the Muscovites didn´t even dream of getting to Siberia.
Suggestion about Novgorod. If you what to create this revolt-country I think you should put deadline for it appearance. It could not appear as a result of revolt after reign of Ivan IV. It was so heavily plundered during his reign that never rose to status of important city.
You are right. I make a mental note about it.
Please do not remove Ingermanlandia from Teutonic order. Of cause it should be russian but this province is the only stimul for Russia to have wars with order (in game terms). She needs port to begin colonization and if Ingermanladia will be russian from beginin this will give port to Russian and settlers too.
No, that premise isn´t true. Not Your fault, we all made that error here, too!
Ingermanland is now a level one colony with port, yes. But the Russians CANNOT buy anything in that province - no armies and no ships - until the province achieves city status. Also a port doesn´t provide settlers. Only a wharf does, which cannot be build until much later.
Same can be told about Astrakhan and Kars which have big ports and have big trade across Caspian sea. But if somebody adds port to Astrakhan you should remove ship technologies from that country or it will begin to build fleets.
Will think about that. But it´s maybe not that important?
About Russian leaders. All list of russian leaders should be rewritten. I have already tries that by providing to Philipp Thibaut with russian leaders but it looks like he have taken some from my list and left his own strange leaders. Some of them have strange dates of appearance and some of them have misspellings in names and some of leaders complitely strange. I will made new list and post it as soon as possible but first of all remove leader Striga-Obolenski. This general are already dead in 1492. He can be changed into general Danilo Shenya (wivh was very well-known exactly at the begining og game). Polish leader Michael Glinski and russian leader Glinski is one man and his start and end dates should be corrected like this (polish Michael Glinski from 1492 till 1505 (he was well-known fro his fightings with crimeans) and russian leader with same name should appear in 1505 untill 1535). I think it will be good idea to add russian monarches as leaders (Ivan III, Vassiliy III, Ivan IV, change general Godunov enddate into 1599 when he become monarch Boris Godunov, change general Alexis into monarch Alexis I and add Peter I). Statistics for them already provided in the game. Souwarow should live till 1800. Admiral Uchakov should be from 1780 till 1817 and his name should be spelled like Ushakov. General A.Orlov in fact is admiral and was well-know for his victory in Chesma. There was his brover Ivan Orlov who was general (not really good and well-known). Please can it be done somehow that russian explorers will appear in Pacific coast. Its really amazing to have cossak Dezhnev appear in Baltic and sail him all around world to Pacific. Same can be told about Turkish Ahmend which appears in Medditerrian and should be in Indian ocean.
I noted most of this, too. I´m eagerly waiting for someone to come and set the files straight or at least provide me with a fully corrected leaderlist with all stats etc. Maybe You are interested?
Thanx for Your input again!
Best wishes,
Hartmann
