King of Kings DLC - Qizilbash does not make sense in Zoroastrian country / Eranshahr

[Shahyawn]

The Qizilbash were famously Shia-supremacist Turkoman soldiers who fought for the Safavids. If one were to convert the state religion to Zoroastrianism and choose to rename the country as Eranshahr and pick the Zoroastrian branching mission tree, the missions still have remnants of the Qizilbash and Persia's Shia identity in the mission tree: The illustration of the Rally the Warriors mission is clearly a Safavid Turkoman warrior and the subsequent missions "Qizilbash Loyalty", "Recruit the Qizilbash", etc. explicitly mention Persia's Shia soldiers.

It doesn't make sense to have missions that promote a Qizilbash estate and Qizilbash special unit recruitment when the country literally just turned away from Shia Islam and towards Zoroastrianism (why would there even be a Qizilbash estate in a Zoroastrian country/state??).

The Qizilbash special unit texts in the Persia dev diary writes "Qizilbash are Shia warriors of Turkoman origins... As a shia militant force... [they] oppose any anti-Shia sentiment from the state" It make no sense to have missions that uplift and promote the Shia-supremacist Qizilbash especially considering when you just went through a civil war to instill Zoroastrianism as the state religion - the supposed Qizilbash estate and special units would definitely not be loyal to the Zoroastrian state.

I'm not saying to remove a good chunk of the missions/brand new estate(s) from the Eranshahr/Zoroastrian Persia mission tree, but I do think it's a good idea to rename the estates/special units and the associated flavor texts that Eranshahr receives. Eranshahr/Sasanian Empire had a multitude of historical elite military branches to choose from: from the Sasanian Immortals (they existed and were a core part of the Sasanian military, they are not exclusive to Achaemenid period Persia - hell, even Pahlavi-era Persia had an Immortal brigade), to the nobility cavalry division / aka Savaran cataphract cavalry, to the Pushtigban, who were the Persian Emperor's personal bodyguards.

 

[eva3071]

Well, think of it this way, just because the Safavids abandon Islam in favor of Zoroastrianism doesn't mean that the Safavids will throw out all traditions that brought them to were they are. That just doesn't happen in real life. What is more likely to happen is that the Zoroastrian Safavids will seek to combine their traditions with Zoroastrianism, and build up their state that way. So it would totally make since that they would have Qizilbash regiments in a Zoroastrian Persia. In fact, any Zoroastrian revival would be colored by the expectations and traditions that the Islamic populace had built up over the centuries.

 

[Shahyawn]

Well, think of it this way, just because the Safavids abandon Islam in favor of Zoroastrianism doesn't mean that the Safavids will throw out all traditions that brought them to were they are. That just doesn't happen in real life. What is more likely to happen is that the Zoroastrian Safavids will seek to combine their traditions with Zoroastrianism, and build up their state that way. So it would totally make since that they would have Qizilbash regiments in a Zoroastrian Persia. In fact, any Zoroastrian revival would be colored by the expectations and traditions that the Islamic populace had built up over the centuries.

I totally agree with you in the sense that this mentality of embracing a fusion of Islamic and Zoroastrian influence could see itself shown in architecture, music, art, etc. but it's a completely different and alternative-historically inaccurate thing to say that the Turkoman Shiite militants who are violently against any state proclamation that goes against Shia doctrine would just kowtow to a Zoroastrian emperor. The Qizilbash were famous for how difficult it was to rein them in, especially during Abbas the Great's reign (see the number of times they conspired against him or the event where they executed his mother). If it was difficult to rein them in when the Safavid emperor was a fellow Shiite Turk, imagine how difficult it would be for a Persian emperor that has just installed Zoroastrianism as the state religion. Really, it makes no sense that this much power would be given to an aristocratic order that is historically known to be so out-of-sync with the emperor and his interests, even when the emperor was a Shiite Turk. It would make way more sense for the re-establishment of a Persian-based aristocracy that mimics the old Sasanian system (I mean, we are getting an Eranshahr national idea and tag, may as well slightly edit the missions that comes with the tag so that it better reflects the empire you just revived, instead of lazily slapping on Qizilbash infantry and cavalry onto anything Iranian).

 

[Blindbohemian]

Honestly if you think this is the least believable thing about Persia becoming Zoroastrian sometime after 1444 I don’t know what to tell you.

 

[Shahyawn]

Honestly if you think this is the least believable thing about Persia becoming Zoroastrian sometime after 1444 I don’t know what to tell you.

The probability of a Zoroastrian restoration after the Safavids was quite low. The Zoroastrian population pre-1501 was persecuted and obviously low compared to 642, but the community was there and was sizable. The Safavids coming to power did them no favor since they intended on mass-converting Sunnis and Zoroastrians to Shia. The probability of a Zoroastrian restoration that uses an extreme Sectarian Shia militant order as its elite fighting force is even lower - far lower.

Besides, respectfully, your point is totally immaterial. We are getting an Eranshahr tag. It's a clear restoration of the Sasanian Empire - we don't know its flag yet, but based off the mission "A new Eranshahr", it's likely the Derafsh Kaviani. If we are getting a tag that elicits a pre-Islamic empire, the least they can do is slightly edit the mission tree so you're not raising militant Shiite soldiers while you're a Zoroastrian tag. We haven't seen the Eranshahr mission tree / if it has a slightly variant one compared to the Persia mission tree, so we'll see.

Hope I'm wrong and Eranshahr has slightly different missions than the ones circled.

 

[Republic of Mercury]

We are getting an Eranshahr tag

Strictly speaking, no we aren't. We're getting the possibility for Persia to change its name and map colour. The tag will still be "PER".

 

[Shahyawn]

Strictly speaking, no we aren't. We're getting the possibility for Persia to change its name and map colour. The tag will still be "PER".

I'm not exactly sure how that's gonna work to be honest considering we are getting Eranshahr national ideas. So we are getting a new flag, new color, new name, and new national ideas, but we can switch back between the color, flag, and name? I'm not sure if there's been a nation that's been able to do this in EU4 before this but I could be wrong.

 

[Oporto]

I'm not exactly sure how that's gonna work to be honest considering we are getting Eranshahr national ideas. So we are getting a new flag, new color, new name, and new national ideas, but we can switch back between the color, flag, and name? I'm not sure if there's been a nation that's been able to do this in EU4 before this but I could be wrong.

Actually I don't recall seeing a new flag - game mechanics would prevent it. I remember only NI, map color, new name and a different branch of missions.

 

[Shahyawn]

Actually I don't recall seeing a new flag - game mechanics would prevent it. I remember only NI, map color, new name and a different branch of missions.

You're right that there wasn't a new flag seen in the Persia dev diary but honestly I just assumed the flag would change since it would look really ugly and nonsensical to have a purple map color with the name "Eranshahr" and have the green, Safavid lion flag instead of the Derafsh Kaviani.

Why do you say game mechanics would prevent the country from getting a new flag?

 

[Oporto]

You're right that there wasn't a new flag seen in the Persia dev diary but honestly I just assumed the flag would change since it would look really ugly and nonsensical to have a purple map color with the name "Eranshahr" and have the green, Safavid lion flag instead of the Derafsh Kaviani.

Why do you say game mechanics would prevent the country from getting a new flag?

Because other than turning Revolutionary, flags of the countries don't change. That and forming another country, of course, which is a bit different matter.
I agree that Muslim flag for Zoroastrian Persia is inappropriate, as would the same flag for Coptic Egypt - which may be one of the reasons we didnt get it (and the unwillingness of devs to add any more tags), but it seems Zoro-Persia would have to make do with this one. There are no dynamic flags like in CK or Vic series.

 

[Republic of Mercury]

I'm not exactly sure how that's gonna work to be honest considering we are getting Eranshahr national ideas. So we are getting a new flag, new color, new name, and new national ideas, but we can switch back between the color, flag, and name? I'm not sure if there's been a nation that's been able to do this in EU4 before this but I could be wrong.

Different ideas don't require new tags. France gets a new idea set if it goes revolutionary, and the commonwealth (should) have different ideas if Lithuania forms it.

Japan can change colours, Malaysia, the Papal States, and any islamic nation can change names, to name a few. I don't think there's anything new in terms of game function going on.

 

[Shahyawn]

Because other than turning Revolutionary, flags of the countries don't change. That and forming another country, of course, which is a bit different matter.
I agree that Muslim flag for Zoroastrian Persia is inappropriate, as would the same flag for Coptic Egypt - which may be one of the reasons we didnt get it (and the unwillingness of debs to add any more tags), but it seems Zoro-Persia would have to make do with this one. There are no dynamic flags like in CK or Vic series.

Different ideas don't require new tags. France gets a new idea set if it goes revolutionary, and the commonwealth (should) have different ideas if Lithuania forms it.

Japan can change colours, Malaysia, the Papal States, and any islamic nation can change names, to name a few. I don't think there's anything new in terms of game function going on.

Oof, damn good points, both of you. I really hope the devs really reconsider on this issue and make Eranshahr a tag then, too. I honestly noticed this as soon as I read the Persia dev diary but I didn't even consider the possibility of Eranshahr not being its own tag, because of the flag issue. I was really looking forward to an immersive Zoroastrian Eranshahr/Sasanian Empire restoration run, but this doesn't feel immersive - it feels slapped on and lazy (in regards to Qizilbash issue and the flag issue). It would be really egregious if they left Eranshahr with the dynastic flag of the Safavids, yet with the royal purple map color and name of Sasanians.

 

[Slaytanic]

I don't understand why are we forced to build multiple exceptions on top of each other for Eranshahr. It needs a way to have distinct ideas from Muslim Persia, while being the same tag. It needs a way for different map color and name, while being the same tag.

Why can't they just add a single new tag and have it be a lot more immersive, with a proper flag, and especially Iranian and Zoroastrian cultured names for rulers, advisors and provinces... I refuse to think adding a single tag, not to mention one that the AI will never form, is the straw that breaks the camel's back when it comes to "performance". Even if every single update from now until the end of times added ONE new tag it would still probably be fine because every update used to come with dozens of new tags and that's why it was a problem.

 

[Republic of Mercury]

I don't understand why are we forced to build multiple exceptions on top of each other for Eranshahr. It needs a way to have distinct ideas from Muslim Persia, while being the same tag. It needs a way for different map color and name, while being the same tag.

Why can't they just add a single new tag and have it be a lot more immersive, with a proper flag, and especially Iranian and Zoroastrian cultured names for rulers, advisors and provinces... I refuse to think adding a single tag, not to mention one that the AI will never form, is the straw that breaks the camel's back when it comes to "performance". Even if every single update from now until the end of times added ONE new tag it would still probably be fine because every update used to come with dozens of new tags and that's why it was a problem.

I think the fact the AI would never form it is part of why it isn't being added; every tag impacts performance, and from what I understand, the impact gets worse with each additional tag. It doesn't matter if the tag doesn't exist, and has no cores, just its definition effects game performance. So I guess the devs don't want to take that performance hit for a tag that will never appear in the majority of games.

 

[Loganplayseu4]

I think the fact the AI would never form it is part of why it isn't being added; every tag impacts performance, and from what I understand, the impact gets worse with each additional tag. It doesn't matter if the tag doesn't exist, and has no cores, just its definition effects game performance. So I guess the devs don't want to take that performance hit for a tag that will never appear in the majority of games.

Yet they defined a new tag for the East India Company in Domination. Same for the Latin Empire. And the Angevin Empire. Though, they may have replaced unused tags for some.

You are right that any tag definition adds exponential performance hits, but they don't seem to care about that as much as you may think.

 

[Republic of Mercury]

Yet they defined a new tag for the East India Company in Domination. Same for the Latin Empire. And the Angevin Empire. Though, they may have replaced unused tags for some.

You are right that any tag definition adds exponential performance hits, but they don't seem to care about that as much as you may think.

I'm not trying to state how much they do or don't care about performance, I'm just stating that "[they should add this tag because it's] one that the AI will never form" actually makes less sense than "They should add this tag because it will frequently appear", based on the post I was replying to.

 

[Korsjan Rīkis]

I also think that Eranshahr should be a separate tag. If it has the Safavid flag, it's just immersion breaking. If the devs are reluctant to adding it as a new tag, wouldn't it be easier to just rename Mazanderan to Eranshar upon forming it, give it empire rank, new ideas, colour, but you have the right flag at least?

 

[The Norman Yoke]

I also think that Eranshahr should be a separate tag. If it has the Safavid flag, it's just immersion breaking. If the devs are reluctant to adding it as a new tag, wouldn't it be easier to just rename Mazanderan to Eranshar upon forming it, give it empire rank, new ideas, colour, but you have the right flag at least?

It doesnt have the safavid flag, it had the sassanid flag in past dev diaries no?

Yet they defined a new tag for the East India Company in Domination. Same for the Latin Empire. And the Angevin Empire. Though, they may have replaced unused tags for some.

You are right that any tag definition adds exponential performance hits, but they don't seem to care about that as much as you may think.

EIC was a new tag so it could be as autonomous as the EIC was compared to the other EICs. Angevin empire was dumb tho and they shouldve just kept england with the quartered arms

According to the Persia dev diary, we are able to change the name of Persia and its color to Eranshahr and purple, respectively, as well as get new national ideas. But there is a disclaimer saying that you are allowed to change the name back to Persia and its color to green. If that's the case, then according to the dev diary, Eranshahr cannot be a tag and therefore cannot have its own custom flag, based on how the game files work. I think it would look really ridiculous and egregious to have an Eranshahr with royal purple as its map color, but with the green, Safavid Shiite lion and sun emblem / flag. I kindly ask the devs to consider turning Eranshahr into a fully-fledged tag that will allow it to have the Derafsh Kaviani as its flag.

On another note...

The Qizilbash were famously Shia-supremacist Turkoman soldiers who fought for the Safavids. If one were to convert the state religion to Zoroastrianism and choose to rename the country as Eranshahr and pick the Zoroastrian branching mission tree, the missions still have remnants of the Qizilbash and Persia's Shia identity in the mission tree: The illustration of the Rally the Warriors mission is clearly a Safavid Turkoman warrior and the subsequent missions "Qizilbash Loyalty", "Recruit the Qizilbash", etc. explicitly mention Persia's Shia soldiers.

It doesn't make sense to have missions that promote a Qizilbash estate and Qizilbash special unit recruitment when the country literally just turned away from Shia Islam and towards Zoroastrianism (why would there even be a Qizilbash estate in a Zoroastrian country/state??).

The Qizilbash special unit texts in the Persia dev diary writes "Qizilbash are Shia warriors of Turkoman origins... As a shia militant force... [they] oppose any anti-Shia sentiment from the state" It make no sense to have missions that uplift and promote the Shia-supremacist Qizilbash especially considering when you just went through a civil war to instill Zoroastrianism as the state religion - the supposed Qizilbash estate and special units would definitely not be loyal to the Zoroastrian state.

I'm not saying to remove a good chunk of the missions from the Eranshahr/Zoroastrian Persia mission tree, but I do think it's a good idea to either rename the estates/special units and their associated flavor texts that Eranshahr receives. Eranshahr/Sasanian Empire had a multitude of historical elite military branches to choose from: from the Sasanian Immortals (they existed and were a core part of the Sasanian military, they are not exclusive to Achaemenid period Persia - hell, even Pahlavi-era Persia had an Immortal brigade), to the nobility cavalry division / aka Savaran cataphract cavalry, to the Pushtigban, who were the Persian Emperor's personal bodyguards.

View attachment 1032414

Qizbilash are a new estate and so part of the cost of the dlc. Paradox likely hedging bets people would want a new estate with a funky religion that leads into persias new event chains and disasters than zoro persia without the estate. Christian mamlukes likely still has mamlukes estate despite them having no way to exist if Christian

 

[Korsjan Rīkis]

It doesnt have the safavid flag, it had the sassanid flag in past dev diaries no?

No, it's the same Safavid flag, sadly. But then again, it was the 1st DD, maybe something has changed.

I'm also disappointed that you can't pick Safavids/Safavid Empire as your name upon forming Persia as Ardabil. They should have made it into an event like for Malaya, where you could choose between Persia, Iran and Safavids/Safavid Empire (the latter only, if formed by Ardabil).

 

[Loganplayseu4]

Yet they defined a new tag for the East India Company in Domination. Same for the Latin Empire. And the Angevin Empire. Though, they may have replaced unused tags for some.

You are right that any tag definition adds exponential performance hits, but they don't seem to care about that as much as you may think.

Also:
This isn't even a thing to be debated. This change was already made:

Forgot to mention this before. Eranshahr is already a tag now, so I'd assume the flag swaps.