• 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.

MiniaAr

spammeur repenti
13 Badges
Jan 11, 2004
4.993
1.451
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Majesty 2 Collection
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • 500k Club
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cradle of Civilization
  • Europa Universalis IV: Dharma
To prove that I'm not throwing out big names without proof (a bit old but still):

From this topic:
https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/more-formable-countries.880917/page-8
Golden Horde as a formable: Ehh, I'd prefer something like 'Tatarstan' or 'Tataria' even if it's not historical, I don't like tags that have the government form in the name and would change the name of GH if there was anything reasonable to replace it with.
Yuan: I could see this being added.
Two Sicilies: Not significant enough. Sardinia-Piedmont at least has a use in upgrading Savoy from Duchy to Kingdom, but both Naples and Sicily are Kingdoms already.
Lotharingia: Very anachronistic. Probably not.
Latin Empire: Would be a cool alternative to Jerusalem, only thing I don't like is 'Empire' in the name.
Rajputjana: Sure, why not?
Turkey: Ehh, I think some sort of non-dynastic naming for dynastic countries that turn republics would be better.

I'd like to propose a new list of potential new formables countries:
  • Yuan: I know that technically the Yuan are represented by Mongolia (as the Northern Yuan), but a new tag would serve a gameplay purpose of representing a new conquest of China by Mongolian people, instead of the Manchu conquest. Conditions should be relatively similar in that one would need to unify most of Mongolia, and then get a big share of Northern China, including Beijing. I would limit the formation to countries with Mongolian, Oirat, Khalkha or Chahar cultures. The formation would give Empire rank as the Qing formation does. And it would also give access to the "unify China" CB.

  • Rajputjana/Rajahstan: This would represent a successful unifications of the various Rajput pincely states (thus reserved for Rajput culture). The tag formation would give kingdom rank as many smaller states start as duchy (Dhundar, Hadoti, Jaisalmer,...). The formation would also give claims on all Rajput areas not already owned and part of the requirement.

  • Rum: as in "The Sultanate of Rum". Now that the Ottomans get a specific government form, this tag formation would represent a re-unification of the major part of Anatolia by the various Turkish beyliks. The Ottomans were a special case of those beyliks, as very early they destined themselves to be a link between West and East, whereas the Turkish beyliks would probably have been content with ruling all the others.

  • Rhomania/Romaniæ/Rhomaniæ (pick your prefered version): This is a tag to represent a resurgent Latin Empire (Wiz didn't like tags with ranks in their names). There are still crusader states in the Agean, namely Athens and Naxos, and Achea can be released. I would argue that catholic states that took Constantinople would try and re-form the Latin Empire over converting to orthodoxy and adopting Greek culture. Therefore, the decision could also apply to even Venice or Genoa (or all Italian culture countries?). Regarding the name, and the potential argument about confusion with Romania formed by Wallachia or Moldavia, I think this is a non-argument. Indeed, we've had in the game Munster (Irish) and Münster (German) for years, and it's more a source of fun and entertainment than confusion.

  • Hansa: This one is probably a dream, but I'd like very much to see the somewhat frustrating trade league mechanics allow a successful trade league leader (more than 10 members, great trade revenues,etc...) to be able to integrate some or all of it's member states and form a more centralised country. This would likely requires events and/or difficult conditions to pull out, but a compentent played would have a nice goal to reach as a merchant republic in northern Germany (the formation should be available to a merchant republic of Westphalian culture).

  • Arelate: The last HRE emperor beig crowned King of Arles was Charles IV in Luxembourg in 1365, thus really not too long before the game. It could be formed by countries either:
    With Occitan primary culture: It's fine for Provence, Avignon and Dauphiné. But a bit less troublesome for Auvergne, Berry, Toulouse (and the Knights).
    With country tag Savoy, Provence, Avignon, Dauphiné. Those were the major counties constituant of the Kingdom. One of them might take the mantle and recreate the Kingdom for itself.
    As formation requirements, the provinces of Provence, Savoy, Lyon and Dauphiné were the major one (I think). Holding 3 of those 4 should allow to recreate the kingdom. Then, it will give claims on those 3 areas: Provence, Savoy and Romandie, as well as the single province of Franche-Comté. Also, it elevates the forming country to kingdom rank.
What do you think?
 
Last edited:
  • 15
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
Upvote 0
It's too old a title, besides there's already a "Lotharingia" on the map in 1444, the Duchy of Lorraine.

Anyway, I think it's easier to sell Burgundy getting its own "formable" if doesn't actually require a new tag. It's just elevating Burgundy to Kingdom level, giving then autonomy reduction and some claims, and maybe putting them in the HRE.
 
It's too old a title, besides there's already a "Lotharingia" on the map in 1444, the Duchy of Lorraine.

Anyway, I think it's easier to sell Burgundy getting its own "formable" if doesn't actually require a new tag. It's just elevating Burgundy to Kingdom level, giving then autonomy reduction and some claims, and maybe putting them in the HRE.
Can't make Burgundy a kingdom in the HRE without making it an elector or giving it some special status
 
It's too old a title, besides there's already a "Lotharingia" on the map in 1444, the Duchy of Lorraine.

Anyway, I think it's easier to sell Burgundy getting its own "formable" if doesn't actually require a new tag. It's just elevating Burgundy to Kingdom level, giving then autonomy reduction and some claims, and maybe putting them in the HRE.

Well, Burgundy is in need of some new or revised content.
 
I just want to throw it out there that the Second Kingdom of Burgundy was also known as the Kingdom of Arles - so that's an alternative name instead of Lotharingia.
And that only ended in 1378, soooo...
From the essay I wrote, I couldn't find if Charles wanted to take another title, but at the time people tended to refer to it as the grand duchy of the west. I don't think it absolutely needs a new tag but it could be nice. Not sure what the flag would be though, unless you use the proper ducal flag for Burgundy and use the Burgundian Cross for the new tag.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Can't make Burgundy a kingdom in the HRE without making it an elector or giving it some special status

I'm sure that some solution to the problem could be crafted.

Well, Burgundy is in need of some new or revised content.

Which is why I'm okay with Burgundy getting a decision for something more exciting then "form SuperFrance or NoobNetherlands"
 
Which is why I'm okay with Burgundy getting a decision for something more exciting then "form SuperFrance or NoobNetherlands"

I, personally, don't really think Lotharignia would change that or be altogether more exciting - if I'm going to play Burgundy, I would prefer more events focusing on the Burgundian attempts at becoming a separate kingdom instead of reforming into one via a decision.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
Which is why I don't actually want a simple "form Lotheringia". I think mods have the "ridiculous formables just for the purpose of giving players lots of claims" market more or less cornered.
 
  • 7
Reactions:
It's too old a title
Less so than Roman Empire, which is in the game. And as I've said, Brabant dukes(and some other Dutch and west German countries iirc) claimed the title of rulers of Lotharingia before Burgundy devoured the duchy.

Burgundy should fight for becoming a kingdom on its own. Combined with Lorraine and its unions, Burgundy's development is very close if not already beyond 300. Then Burgundy could use some event in lines of "Good job! You became a kingdom!". Changing tag to become a kingdom is too easy way out for such a huge country. That's why my vision for Lotharingia/Arles/Lothier would be an empire rank, not kingdom.

I imagine implementing this formable tag wouldn't be much additional work if devs were already working on the flavour for extant Burgundy.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
Flat out no, an Empire of Lotharingia in the late middle ages is flat out silly. You cannot use Rome as an example. For one, forming the Roman Empire in EU 4 is extremely difficult to form, requiring most of the Mediterranean world to even do. It's an easter egg, not something that's meant to be a plausible outcome of historical events. And frankly it doesn't matter what some rulers claimed the title of, claiming long dead fancy titles is something of a hobby of Western Monarchs. A good example being everyone and their dog claiming the Kingdom of Jerusalem in the late medieval period.

This is the problem with community suggested formables. Everyone seems to want huge empires with perma claims on all the best land in the area.
 
Last edited:
  • 1
Reactions:
Flat out no, an Empire of Lotharingia in the late middle ages is flat out silly. You cannot use Rome as an example. For one, forming the Roman Empire in EU 4 is extremely difficult to form, requiring most of the Mediterranean world to even do. It's an easter egg, not something that's meant to be a plausible outcome of historical events.

This is the problem with community suggested formables. Everyone seems to want huge empires with perma claims on all the best land in the area.
That's not my point though. I want it not because of "muh claims", but as another goal for Burgundy. Imagine, you've become a kingdom of Burgundy, what can you do next? Form France? Why would you, you're already another kingdom which will most likely form its own national identity later on. The Netherlands? Are you kidding?! Blob mindlessly? Well, that's an option but there's no real goal on a horizon. Lotharingia would at least give some sort of direction, if making it an empire rank is too much, then it could require a country to be at least of kingdom rank so that Burgundy wouldn't "cheat" to become a kingdom.

Alternatively, Lotharingia could be a tag for countries from that area excluding the Burgundy itself, sort of like it is with the Ottomans being unable to form Byzantium or Arabia. Lorraine and Nevers would have some objective and Low Countries could decide wether they want strong trading ideas of the Netherlands or slightly bigger de jure of Lothier.
 
Really want a formable Burma as at the moment we have nothing representing it's remarkable rise to power!

We don't need another formable Indian state we already have 3...

Yuan would be nice, gives more flavour to the the Far East which I'm all for!

Latin Empire sounds cool and would give more purpose to Crusader states.

I'm not for these really old countries such as Lotharingia being formed as it's just pointless, unrealistic and never would have happened in a million years. Whilst EU4 can't be completely railroaded it's still a history game and needs to be realistic..

A formable Occatania would be nice considering Catalonia exists.

I've always thaught Zimbabwe would be cool. The game starts just after the fall of the empire and I dint see why it should be an option considering it also exists today..
 
Last edited:
Really want a formable Burma as at the moment we have nothing representing it's remarkable rise to power!

We don't need another formable Indian state we already have 3...

Yuan would be nice, gives more flavour to the the Far East which I'm all for!

Latin Empire sounds cool and would give more purpose to Crusader states.

I'm not for these really old countries such as Lotharingia being formed as it's just pointless, unrealistic and never would have happened in a million years. Whilst EU4 can't be completely railroaded it's still a history game and needs to be realistic..

A formable Occatania would be nice considering Catalonia exists.

I've always thaught Zimbabwe would be cool. The game starts just after the fall of the empire and I dint see why it should be an option considering it also exists today..
There is a formable for Burmese countries i's called Shan
 
  • 1
Reactions:
There is a formable for Burmese countries i's called Shan
No Shan is for Shan culture which is in the Thai group. In real life Shan is a region in Eastern Burma which wants to separate as the Shan people don't feel Burmese. The only Burman Country in 1444 start is Taungoo and it can't form Shan nor should it be able to but it should be able to form Burma is it did..
 
Yuan isn't state, is dynasty (Borjigin). Look at history files "KHA - MongolKhanate.txt" you have "#Mongol Khans of the Northern Yuan Dynasty".
Yes, but that's probably the only way to represent it in game - same as we have Ming, Qing and dozens of Daymios.

And if we talk about formables - how about Siam? Of all I know Ayutthaya managed to conquer more or less the whole Siam at some point, even called themselves rulers of Siam. Wouldn't it make sense to make Siam a formable nation?
 
Yes, but that's probably the only way to represent it in game - same as we have Ming, Qing and dozens of Daymios.
IMO non-westernized China and Japan need new, own mechanism - not new TAGs.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
Why not both though? It makes sense for those dynasties to have their own tags and by no means does it prevent far east from getting lots of flavour, quite contrary actually.
Since these two countries need dynamic states. To the throne of the Celestial Empire can sit dynasty Mongolian, Manchurian, Vietnamese, Chinese or Jewish - who have "Mandate of Heaven" should be Emperor. Historically there have been cases that there were two Chinese Empire in this time, with different dynasty - so meybe mechanism Civil War like a HoI4, but less static?

This is only thoughts...
 
Yes, but that's probably the only way to represent it in game - same as we have Ming, Qing and dozens of Daymios.

And if we talk about formables - how about Siam? Of all I know Ayutthaya managed to conquer more or less the whole Siam at some point, even called themselves rulers of Siam. Wouldn't it make sense to make Siam a formable nation?
In 1448 actually, and already rather inevitable by 1444 as the then king of Sukhothai was the only son and heir of the king of Ayutthaya. They used to have a PU but when PU was removed for non-christians it was changed to a vassalage instead of annexing Sukhothai to Ayutthaya.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Yuan isn't state, is dynasty (Borjigin). Look at history files "KHA - MongolKhanate.txt" you have "#Mongol Khans of the Northern Yuan Dynasty".
Even if the Borjigins are not the rulers, the Yuan can be revived. Originally, the Qing dynasty called itself the Jin dynasty after a previous Jurchen dynasty in the north of China. The latter Jin were ruled by the Aisin Gioro clan, while the Northern Jin were ruled by the Wanyan clan.