• 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
May I suggest adding the option to reform the Duchy of Swabia?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duchy_of_Swabia

A former stem duchy in the HRE lasted until 1313 when it fractured into smaller states. The Hohenstaufen ruled until 1268 and some of their successor branches still rule large areas of the HRE in 1444. It's the former holding of HRE emperors (Barborossa & Henry VI). It could also be formed as a Swabian League member (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swabian_League) representing a unification of this defence league . Ultimately the league disbands with the reformation, so maybe a time deadline could be added to simulate that?
 
Possibility of creating new countries (Kingdom of Sicily, Padania, Lapland, Belgium, Lusatia, Slovenia, California and Texas).

Possibility of establishing the Slavonic Empire by playing a country belonging to cultural groups: West Slavic, East Slavic or South Slavic.

Countries belonging to a group of South Slavic cultures may form Yugoslavia.
Thank you for your suggestions. I have a few comments:
  • Lusatia should not be a formable, but exists either be releasable by Bohemia or a vassal of Bohemia at game start. I agree that the Lusatian culture should be created in Oberlausitz and Niederlausitz and be part of the West Slavic Group.
  • Slavonian culture part of the South Slavic group, I'm ok with that. The country should be Carnolia as mentionned by Calanon. Also, not a formable (thus a bit off topic here).
  • Kingdom of the Two Siciles has been mentionned in the past, but was disregarded by Paradox devs: "just become a Kingdom as Naples or Sicily, done", they basically said. Now, they also said that a split Great Horde/Golden Horde was unlikely, but it still happened. Who knows, Kingdom of the Two-Sicilies might be a thing in the future. I'd say the same for Belgium. Both those countries existed during the time frame.
Now, with the way cultures were reworked and you get a cultural union when you reach Empire rank, I don't think we need country formable for culture groups. Also, your idea of a Slavic Empire that would cover 3 different culture groups is very ambitious, to say the least. Is there something wrong with the alternative of a Russian Empire accepting west slavic cultures, or a Commonwealth/Bohemian Empire accepting east Slavic cultures? This is already possible in game now and should be close to what you intend to do. :)

Finally, as one of the people who suggested the Carpathian culture group, I'd be saddened to see it go. I agree 100% that Slovakian is a West Slavic language, but culture in EUIV does cover a lot more than just language. Basically, it has become something like "peoples that would go along with eachother well, usually under the same or related political entities". Regarding the Carpathian group, Hungarians and Slovakians lived both under the Kingdom of Hungary without major issues (even after the Turkish partition). They never were part directly of the Commonwealth nor Bohemia, thus no direct contact with Poles nor Czechs. Now you might argue that a king of Poland and a king of Bohemia (both Jagiellons) ruled Hungary at one time, which is true. But the kingdoms were never united, and quickly the PU got dissolved after the death of both kings.
Finally, regarding the Romanian principalties, it was argued that they had much more contact with Hungary/Transylvannia, than with either the South Slavics (Bulgarians), West Slavic (Poles) or East Slavic (Ruthenians). Also, I'd say that "culture group continuity" should be a valid concept for this game. Indeed, Transylvania could be divided into Hungarians, Romanians, Saxons and Székelys, but you would have 4 different culture in the space of 7 provinces, and belonging to 3 different culture groups (if Carpathian got split up). I remain convinced that a Transylvanian culture representing the melting-pot of cultures there, and linked to both the Romanian and Hungarians via the Carpathian culture group is the best gameplay decision and the least bad from an historical point of view.
 
I'd say the same for Belgium. Both those countries existed during the time frame.

Belgium did not exist during the timeframe. It declared its independence from the Netherlands in 1830; the Netherlands recognised this independence in 1839.

That is not to say it couldn't be added as a formable nation of course, because there are already some fictional/hypothetical/ahistorical formables in the game.
 
Belgium did not exist during the timeframe. It declared its independence from the Netherlands in 1830; the Netherlands recognised this independence in 1839.

That is not to say it couldn't be added as a formable nation of course, because there are already some fictional/hypothetical/ahistorical formables in the game.
Well my bad, by Belgium I meant the United Belgian States, that existed for a short period of time prior to the French Revolution. But it's clearly a Revolutionary state and the flag has the same colours as Revolutionary Burgundy. I don't think it's a coïncidence.

Thus, I rescind my comment, a formable Belgium is not really required. What would be nice though is that countries of Flemish or Wallonian culture that go Revolutionnary get the same flag as Burgundy. :)
 
Maybe Indonesia or Nusantara could be added as a formable nation? Again, this is a country that in reality was only formed MUCH later, but based on an idea that actually existed earlier. It could be similar to formables like Scandinavia and Arabia that are already included, in the sense that it could be formable for a state that manages to dominate the whole region.

The notion of Nusantara was mentioned in 1336 (and perhaps already before) to describe all the vassals and tributary states of Majapahit (see the map below). So the idea would be that Nusantara or Indonesia can be formed by a nation that owns this area. I would say that a number of provinces spread throughout the archipel should be mandatory: at least some provinces on each of the big islands: Sumatra, Java, Borneo, Sulawesi and the Western tip of New Guinea, plus some important smaller islands like Ambon. Forming Nusantara/Indonesia would give claims on all remaining provinces in the entire Indonesian archipelago (the Indonesia and Moluccas regions in EU IV).

Majapahit would be the most obvious nation to form Nusantara/Indonesia, but I'd say that all nations with either Malay or Pacific culture should be allowed to do it.

Majapahit_Empire.svg

It would be different from the existing formable tag 'Malaya' in that it unites the whole archipelago, not just the Malayan provinces in the West.
 
Last edited:
What about United Kingdom? You'd need to own Ireland and have a higher administration tech. It would be for flavor but it could give you more hefty naval bonuses than being Great Britain.
 
What about United Kingdom? You'd need to own Ireland and have a higher administration tech. It would be for flavor but it could give you more hefty naval bonuses than being Great Britain.
Paradox is generally against making new tags just for the sake of making new tags so I'm pretty sure UK is out of question.
 
Paradox is generally against making new tags just for the sake of making new tags so I'm pretty sure UK is out of question.
Can you imagine if they added it though and called it United Kingdom? "Kingdom of United Kingdom"

I toyed with the idea of a Britain & Ireland tag in my mod but I decided it wasn't really worth it.
 
I think CNs need more options for formable nations upon becoming independent, and that maybe some of these would have different requirements based on what areas of the region they control, for example the Columbia region can have Columbia, Venezuela, Guyana, Suriname, and "Gran Columbia" if you control most or all of the region.

La Planta would have Chile and Argentina, Peru would have Ecuador and Bolivia with Peru as the high requirement tag to form.

this would require a lot of hypothetical alt-history stuff for regions that have never had multiple nations/colonies in them, but it always feels immersion braking when I see a little 8 province colony form the "USA" and lay claim to the entire east cost that is currently occupied by a massive 20+ province "Florida" that surrounds them on all sides(by the way colony names should also be able to change based on what area(s) they cover, the "thirteen colonies" doesn't make a lot of sense when it's only just starting as a new 5 province CN.
 
What about Uyghuristan as a formable for Uyghur culture nations? The only starting Uyghur culture nation in EU4 is Yarkand. So have Yarkand take historical Uyghur lands and then be able to form Uyghuristan which would have an Empire rank..

images


This modern flag (1933) would still be plausible as the crescent and star represent Tengriism and the blue color is the color of the Gokturks which means "sky Turks", a group of ancient nomadic Turkic people.
 
Has the Angveian Empire been suggested?

Requirements

  • Is England
  • France is a junior partner w/ England
OR Owns
  • Paris
  • Aquitaine
  • Reims
  • Toulouse
  • London
  • Lancaster
  • York
  • Northumbland
 
Has the Angveian Empire been suggested?

Requirements

  • Is England
  • France is a junior partner w/ England
OR Owns
  • Paris
  • Aquitaine
  • Reims
  • Toulouse
  • London
  • Lancaster
  • York
  • Northumbland
It's been suggested too many times. The Angevin Empire is a historiographical term (which I have refused to use in my essays) to describe the situation of the kings of England also holding fiefs in France. I think an Angevin Empire tag would be utterly pointless. Also it wasn't an empire.
 
It's been suggested too many times. The Angevin Empire is a historiographical term (which I have refused to use in my essays) to describe the situation of the kings of England also holding fiefs in France. I think an Angevin Empire tag would be utterly pointless. Also it wasn't an empire.

Would you accept Angveian Kingdom???