Most of the material discussed in this thread has now been coded up. You can download what I've done here. Comments are welcome as always.
-
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.
It seems to me that the TO, by the time it was historically partitioned needs to become a proper state, almost a nation. By that I mean it can't continue being a medieval state being run by a minute minority of German knights and merchants (the merchants were often peeved with the order anyway). White VS Grey is a struggle within that small German minority, I don't think they'd be able to rule segregated from their Baltic/Polish minorities forever.
They would have to have parts of the Baltic/Polish majority join the order. Or, alternatively, there could be a massive attempt to Germanize the Order's lands (as historically happened in Prussia). So the essential choice would be between an order with German culture and ties with the Hansa and northern Germany, gradually turning some provinces to German culture (notably coastal provinces) and one with Baltic/Polish culture. The first option would mean huge nationalist rebellions and probably dropping in the value of certain provinces. The second option would mean rebellions of the German 'old guard' wary of letting any poles/balts become an integral part of the order.
I just can't see the order surviving as a place dominated by a tiny German-landlord minority forever. They would have to broaden their power base somehow, either by accepting the Poles/Balts or massive Germanization.
They would have to have parts of the Baltic/Polish majority join the order. Or, alternatively, there could be a massive attempt to Germanize the Order's lands (as historically happened in Prussia). So the essential choice would be between an order with German culture and ties with the Hansa and northern Germany, gradually turning some provinces to German culture (notably coastal provinces) and one with Baltic/Polish culture. The first option would mean huge nationalist rebellions and probably dropping in the value of certain provinces. The second option would mean rebellions of the German 'old guard' wary of letting any poles/balts become an integral part of the order.
I just can't see the order surviving as a place dominated by a tiny German-landlord minority forever. They would have to broaden their power base somehow, either by accepting the Poles/Balts or massive Germanization.
Von_Koenig said:
It is a proper state - while its government is a bit unusual, it has laws, officials, procedures etc as any other state would. But a 'nation-state' is a very different concept. Nationalism might play a limited role in the late game, but I think it would be extremely anachronistic to introduce it in the 15th or 16th centuries, especially in a state which quite explicitly derives its legitimacy from Catholicism. It's like insisting that the Ottoman Caliphs should have thought of themselves first and foremost as Turks.
Von_Koenig said:
The Greys may have a German as their leader, but Poles would be the largest group in the Grey movement as a whole. The White leaders are predominately German, but even they integrate the Balts and Poles somewhat, in that they are granted equal status to Germans in the Teutonic army (which is pretty important, given that the Teutonic army is also the government). The reason Poles and Balts don't do better in the White TO is that there is very little social mobility, not so much because of active discrimination in favour of Germans. But there's nothing impossible about that - was Russia torn apart before 1820 by unhappiness about social immobility?
In any case the German population is not tiny - in the cities of the Teutonic heartland, they would be the majority, and they dominate not just the aristocracy, but virtually all social strata except for peasants. The only reason that there aren't millions of 'ethnic Germans' living along the Baltic coast in 2005 is that they were on the sharp end of the Russian Revolution, the Russian Civil War and WWII and its aftermath. But the German ruling class in 1419 is small, because the Teutonic Order is a very oligarchic state, with much power vested in a few individuals. This may or may not change, but it's more or less how the TO was in real life.
Also, there is a parallel process of cultural convergence, in the Baltic lands at least. The language of government remains German, but in other respects the Germans pick up aspects of Baltic culture, and the Balts in turn aspects of German culture. The Germanisation side of things is particularly pronounced in the Baltic aristocracy and urban population. This has already happened to a large extent by 1419, which is why the TO starts with 'baltic' and not German culture. I can call it 'balto-german' if you like, but since it's the only Baltic culture around, there seems little point.
You are correct, the nation-state was a later concept. However, a power base (or quasi-majority) of usually 1 ethnicity has been necessary to the construction of all empires. Ottomans did not always think of themselves as Turks, but it certainly helped a lot to have plenty of easy-to-manage Turks alongside the more troublesome ethnicities.Incompetent said:
Historically, states who did not have a big power base of their original ethnicity in the lands they conquered (Normans in France, French in England, Bulgars, English in America) have tended to either completely assimilate the locals, or get completely assimilated by them. I think this is important to think about, and most likely a process (one way or the other) that would very likely take hold of the order.
After all, a state (as opposed to a feudal setup as it was in the middle ages) with an army/bureaucracy/clergy dominated by German speakers is not going to run all that well if only 10% of the population speaks German (which is probably a realistic number if the TO conquers all baltic lands + Poland).
It's not so much lack of social mobility that gets to people, it's only an issue if it gets embroiled in ethnic or religious problems. And the TO, with a bureaucracy and military so German and so dependent on a slim slice of the population, is unliekly to be very viable.
I can see the logic in that, in which case it might be interesting to have a 'baltification' option for places like Poland or Russia (as we have already for ugric areas).
I'm thinking aloud here, but for instance, if you picked 'white' you might lose Polish culture, Baltify some Polish regions and get + land/quality/centralization, if you picked 'grey' (assuming a lot of the merchants are Polish) you might keep polish culture but --centralization and land (and maybe less cores in places too far from the trading coastlines?).
I too feel that the structure of the TO is entirely believable in the early years but becomes a stretch by the 1800s. The world is changing and the TO is not and there needs to be more tension associated with that. (Even, nay, especially if the TO are successful with their crusade.) They are a unique institution in the game, with a purpose that is focused and powerful but inevitably is bypassed by history. A result of the reformation is the lessening within Europe of the importance of religion and its increasing separation from the state. The TO should become more and more of an anachronism and the German leadership should be finding it increasingly difficult to justify their rule. In addition to dropping to Orthodox tech group if they stay with the Whites, we should consider an event cycle that focuses on a local challenge to the Order's rule. I'm not talking nationalism here, but I am thinking of a non-German challenge for leadership, probably built around a determined baltic noble with grander aspirations than joining the order and being subservient to the Germanic leadership. No doubt the individual will have a linneage that connects him to the pre-Catholic kings of the region. I realise there is already a civil war, but I'm thinking of something that would be represented predominantly by RR in a similar fashion to the pre-Michael Doukas period in Byzantium. The player could always, of course, give in to this 'Mikhail Joukasz' and transform the TO into a batic kingdom. Or else supress the uprisings. The event would have to occur during a weaker leadership and have triggers that include low stability.
MattyG said:
You make a good point - I could certainly develop the troubles faced by the White TO in the late game. Perhaps some calls for reform could be led by a liberal-minded priest, as such a figure would be hard for even the most authoritarian TO to silence. Also, if the calls came from an 'insider' it would allow the TO to reform without losing face. My worry ATM though is that the Whites won't be a viable option in MP - because they're aggressive, choosing White in the Civil War will ring big alarm bells for all their neighbours, who could pile in. Perhaps I'll make it a bit easier for them in the civil war, but rougher in the last 50-100 years of the game.
The idea of the 'change from within' is an interesting one. There could still be the option for a player to keep to the hard line. There's a lot of good examples out there of authoritarian regimes failing to buckle event when the writing is on the wall. (The 'wall' in the case is after 1820, of course).
Younger members of the order will be pushing for change if only because they see disaster if the order does not respond. And the hardline response would be to both purge the order and to DoW a neighbour to distract and silence their opponents (a tactic that remains true to this day).
action_a = {
. name = "Accede to the inevitable"
action_b = {
. name = "Purge the order and launch a crusade!"
. command = { type = stability value = -1 }
. command = { type = domestic which = innovative value = -2 }
. command = { type = domestic which = centralization value = 1 }
. command = { type = war which = ? }
. command = { type = revoltrisk which - 60 value = 2 }
. command = { type = ADM which = -2 value = 90 }
. command = { type = DIP which = -1 value = 90 }
. command = { type = MIL which = 2 value = 90 }
. }
}
Younger members of the order will be pushing for change if only because they see disaster if the order does not respond. And the hardline response would be to both purge the order and to DoW a neighbour to distract and silence their opponents (a tactic that remains true to this day).
action_a = {
. name = "Accede to the inevitable"
action_b = {
. name = "Purge the order and launch a crusade!"
. command = { type = stability value = -1 }
. command = { type = domestic which = innovative value = -2 }
. command = { type = domestic which = centralization value = 1 }
. command = { type = war which = ? }
. command = { type = revoltrisk which - 60 value = 2 }
. command = { type = ADM which = -2 value = 90 }
. command = { type = DIP which = -1 value = 90 }
. command = { type = MIL which = 2 value = 90 }
. }
}
If the nono- tolerant german aristocracy faction win, there could be polish and baltic uproars, the german bourgoise that had supported the other faction would now try to join the Hansa instead, since nationalism is a late isssue, this could happen very latr in game. (perhaps some smaller revolts earlier, then a calm before the storm). The late 1700s and the early 1800s should be a nightmare for the whites, but there should probably be events for the hard line government to resign, and a moderate govrenment to take office.
Also the concept of a military state would probably fail at some time, the greys turning to Baltland is good thing, meaning it has now also a civilian type government and is not any more just a order for knights. The whites are harder, but the revolts could force the whites to reform, perhaps declaring a kingdom, or something.
Also the concept of a military state would probably fail at some time, the greys turning to Baltland is good thing, meaning it has now also a civilian type government and is not any more just a order for knights. The whites are harder, but the revolts could force the whites to reform, perhaps declaring a kingdom, or something.
I think a good chain of events secularizing the order or at least demilitarizing it would be great.
Mettermrck said:
Secularisation: I have events to turn the TO into secular 'Baltland' if they go Protestant or Reformed, but not if they stay Catholic. This could be an option late in the game, but since the Knights are effectively warrior-monks, abandoning their religious bent is going to be difficult.
Demilitarisation: This is only going to happen if some army has/is formed to replace the Teutonic one. This is unlikely in the White state, as they massively expand the Order so it effectively becomes the whole army; for the Greys though, it would be possible. Some decision could be made after the civil war as to the continuing nature of the TO.
@yourworstnightm: most Poles and many Balts rise up in rebellion at the start of the civil war, so if the Whites win, it means they've already been decisively beaten. They might cause more problems later, but for the moment they'd be more worried about getting killed.
Incompetent said:
They probably would have had to have been defeated hard in a war and have to be nobody's vassal. In that case, there might be some soul-searching going on.
i think there is an important typo in one of the events in the "time of change" line.
Code:
event = {
id = 201323
random = no
country = LAT
name = "The aristocrats take over"
trigger = {
OR = {
event = 201318
event = 201319
}
}
desc = "However moderate [...] backwater"
date = { day = 3 month = february year = 1671 }
action_a = {
name = "The crusaders' rule is broken" #drastic, but consider where the sliders would have been with the Knights in charge!
command = { type = country which = KUR }
command = { type = technology which = [COLOR=DarkOrange]torthodox[/COLOR] }
command = { type = domestic which = centralization value = -4 }
[...]
}
No thats correct Therlun - you can even check the event scripting paper, orthadox must be written as torthodox.But thanks for noticin though
Maybe the white Order should meet a lot of revolts in the late 1700s and early 1800s, which will lead to Baltland revolter, also grey order should eb able to become Baltland without changing religon, very late in the game though...
Calipah said:No thats correct Therlun - you can even check the event scripting paper, orthadox must be written as torthodox.But thanks for noticin though
damn! I was so proud about the bug i found...
Therlun said:damn! I was so proud about the bug i found...
It's to differentiate it from the religion orthodox, the t in fromt referring to technology. The scripting needs to be careful with its values.
As there it is possible, though really hard, for Union of Kalmar to become Orthodox, maybe we need to add additional events for TO, who can try to crusade Orthodox Union of Kalmar?
I haven't looked at the TO files for months, but there are several things I failed to sort out last time.
1. The leader waking/sleeping wasn't very good. I've sent modified files to MattyG which will hopefully improve matters on this score.
2. The civil war defeat events don't lead anywhere at the moment, they just leave a shattered TO. What I'll do is put some events in later that lead the Order back onto the White/Grey lines. You'll miss all the funky Christian/Wilhelm events though, and you'll end up on the opposite line to the one you supported in "Fork in the Road" (so eg if you supported the Greys and then lose, you'll eventually get the Whites). I'll probably also tighten up the loss conditions somewhat, so you really have to mess up to lose, and the AI may receive additional help if people are OK with AI cheats. Does this sound right for SP and 'hardcore' MP?
For more mainstream MP, the whole Civil War is probably too nightmarish for a player to cope with on top of the predations of other players; beginner SPers will probably find it upsetting as well. I'll try to make a 'softcore' version, probably with no chance of 'losing', and this can be put in a 'milder revolts' option (which should cover other serious revolts as well, such as Scotland's Turmoil and Byzantium's early 17th-century crisis).
3. I'm aware that the TO file is fairly 'flat' before the 17th century, as it's essentially a slightly modified version of what used to be in Abe 1. The only big event series in this period is the Russian crusade. If we have a religious war in Germany, the TO could also play a big part in that. Any ideas for the early TO are welcome.
4. If players go Protestant and end up as Baltland as a result, they should probably have a few events before the 17th century, when all the aristocratic stuff kicks in. I don't want to make a 'major' path for this, as I think the catholic Order is much more interesting; but if someone else has a big plan for Protestant Baltland, they're welcome to implement it.
5. The TO's cultural position is quite complicated. I don't want to discuss German culture right now as it leads to too many arguments, and in any case is best discussed in the context of some cataclysm in the HRE that causes the TO to get involved. But there are other cultural questions:
- Should the current Balts be split into Balto-Germans (ie a mixture of a minority of somewhat Baltified descendants of German colonists, and a majority of heavily Germanised Balts, who together form the dominant ethnic group for much of the game) and 'Lithuanians' (people who have kept their culture from the days of the pagan Grand Duchy of Lithuania)? I ask because it would make sense for some parts of the HRE to be assimilated to Balto-German, but not Baltic per se, and also we might want to give one or other of the cultures to other countries (eg if the TO disintegrates completely, the Hansa might conceivably get Balto-German, but never Lithuanian, while the right kind of Ukraine may get Lithuanian, but never Balto-German).
- How far should Baltic/Balto-German culture extend if everything goes well for the TO?
- However intolerant you think the TO is, it absolutely must have a decent cultural zone so it gets enough manpower. How should we model the situation where Poles and/or Russians are 'partly-right' culture - ie friendly enough to give manpower, but not totally loyal?
----------
Possibly. The TO doesn't currently have crusade events against all its non-Catholic neighbours as that would be suicidal. Instead it crusades in Russia because the Russians are divided, and conquest of Russia has been a goal of the Order for centuries; and in Finland late on because the Order is itching for a fight and it sees Finland as an easy target. So they might go on the attack vs Kalmar, but they'd only do it if they really had a good chance of restoring Catholicism.
So perhaps we could say this: if Kalmar goes Orthodox and one of Scotland or the Hansa are Catholic, and the TO and its potential ally are at peace, the TO can crusade if Scotland/Hansa offer support (which they probably won't unless they're narrow-minded, and Scotland won't if it's experiencing the Turmoil). Teutonic victory vs Kalmar leads to Kalmar turning Catholic again, and also resolving some border disputes in favour of Kalmar's enemies (depending on whom the TO call on for support).
1. The leader waking/sleeping wasn't very good. I've sent modified files to MattyG which will hopefully improve matters on this score.
2. The civil war defeat events don't lead anywhere at the moment, they just leave a shattered TO. What I'll do is put some events in later that lead the Order back onto the White/Grey lines. You'll miss all the funky Christian/Wilhelm events though, and you'll end up on the opposite line to the one you supported in "Fork in the Road" (so eg if you supported the Greys and then lose, you'll eventually get the Whites). I'll probably also tighten up the loss conditions somewhat, so you really have to mess up to lose, and the AI may receive additional help if people are OK with AI cheats. Does this sound right for SP and 'hardcore' MP?
For more mainstream MP, the whole Civil War is probably too nightmarish for a player to cope with on top of the predations of other players; beginner SPers will probably find it upsetting as well. I'll try to make a 'softcore' version, probably with no chance of 'losing', and this can be put in a 'milder revolts' option (which should cover other serious revolts as well, such as Scotland's Turmoil and Byzantium's early 17th-century crisis).
3. I'm aware that the TO file is fairly 'flat' before the 17th century, as it's essentially a slightly modified version of what used to be in Abe 1. The only big event series in this period is the Russian crusade. If we have a religious war in Germany, the TO could also play a big part in that. Any ideas for the early TO are welcome.
4. If players go Protestant and end up as Baltland as a result, they should probably have a few events before the 17th century, when all the aristocratic stuff kicks in. I don't want to make a 'major' path for this, as I think the catholic Order is much more interesting; but if someone else has a big plan for Protestant Baltland, they're welcome to implement it.
5. The TO's cultural position is quite complicated. I don't want to discuss German culture right now as it leads to too many arguments, and in any case is best discussed in the context of some cataclysm in the HRE that causes the TO to get involved. But there are other cultural questions:
- Should the current Balts be split into Balto-Germans (ie a mixture of a minority of somewhat Baltified descendants of German colonists, and a majority of heavily Germanised Balts, who together form the dominant ethnic group for much of the game) and 'Lithuanians' (people who have kept their culture from the days of the pagan Grand Duchy of Lithuania)? I ask because it would make sense for some parts of the HRE to be assimilated to Balto-German, but not Baltic per se, and also we might want to give one or other of the cultures to other countries (eg if the TO disintegrates completely, the Hansa might conceivably get Balto-German, but never Lithuanian, while the right kind of Ukraine may get Lithuanian, but never Balto-German).
- How far should Baltic/Balto-German culture extend if everything goes well for the TO?
- However intolerant you think the TO is, it absolutely must have a decent cultural zone so it gets enough manpower. How should we model the situation where Poles and/or Russians are 'partly-right' culture - ie friendly enough to give manpower, but not totally loyal?
----------
Freiksenet1987 said:
Possibly. The TO doesn't currently have crusade events against all its non-Catholic neighbours as that would be suicidal. Instead it crusades in Russia because the Russians are divided, and conquest of Russia has been a goal of the Order for centuries; and in Finland late on because the Order is itching for a fight and it sees Finland as an easy target. So they might go on the attack vs Kalmar, but they'd only do it if they really had a good chance of restoring Catholicism.
So perhaps we could say this: if Kalmar goes Orthodox and one of Scotland or the Hansa are Catholic, and the TO and its potential ally are at peace, the TO can crusade if Scotland/Hansa offer support (which they probably won't unless they're narrow-minded, and Scotland won't if it's experiencing the Turmoil). Teutonic victory vs Kalmar leads to Kalmar turning Catholic again, and also resolving some border disputes in favour of Kalmar's enemies (depending on whom the TO call on for support).
Last edited:
Yes, that's good idea. I think HSA can support TO to gain Holstein, if they don't have it and Scotland to gain some swedish provinces from Kalmar, because Kalmar won't press claims on Sweden if it turns Orthodox.
If Poland not conqering Galich, then not going eastern way.
At tannenberg should be ally of Teutonic Order.
At tannenberg should be ally of Teutonic Order.