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.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly. You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Periphery?
Prague, Lubeck and Cologne in 14. Century were not perhiphery.
Those were powerhouses of HRE, that could at least compare with places like Venice, Paris or Florence.
Non of your suggesdtion could be considered on par with those greatest European cities in late medieval ages...
I meant periphery as in on the edges of Germany (see the picture that I posted), not that they're not important.
Prague had only half the inhabitants of Augsburg in 1300 and fewer than Nuremberg and Frankfurt, so I don't think it's that much more important, certainly not on par with Paris.
A question that may have already been asked about the HRE: what is still hard-coded like in EU4? Will it be possible to mod it to make the HRE a culture-based empire instead of being religion-based?
Can we roleplay as the Hohenzollern from wherever they are at game start of the game and be given Brandenburg by the Emperor via flavor events/decisions/missions?
Hildesheim having Legumes doesn't make much sense. The Hildesheim Börde has the best soil in Germany and to this day you can see mostly wheat and sugar beets being planted. The location should produce wheat and a lot of it. It probably should even get a modifier for extremely high fertility.
We didn't get a development map in the original thread, so here's some feedback for development! First, a map, because that's what we all like:
The green-orange scale is for locations that had a recorded urban population in 1300, the red scale is for locations that do not have urban populations in the dataset I used. I colored those more or less arbitrarily, going by development that I would expect based on factors such as proximity to major rivers or urban centers.
I cut off some of Switzerland and Moravia, sorry.
(The colors are not meant to match the development map in the game.)
While a map is pretty to look at, I realize that it's pretty much useless for feedback, so I have some hard numbers too!
I went through a dataset of European urban populations from 700 to 2000 (I honestly don't remember where I downloaded it, but you should be able to find it with google) and matched each city that had at least a population of 1000 in 1300 with its location on the map.
This isn't a perfect measure for pre-Black Death urbanization, since we'd need to know the total population of the location as well, but it should at least give a decent idea which places have more development and which places are more rural and less developed.
Of course, there is more to development than just urban population, but I think it's a good starting point. Right now, it looks like it's mostly just based on vegetation.
I meant periphery as in on the edges of Germany (see the picture that I posted), not that they're not important.
Prague had only half the inhabitants of Augsburg in 1300 and fewer than Nuremberg and Frankfurt, so I don't think it's that much more important, certainly not on par with Paris.
Your numbers are wrong. Might be true in 15 century after the devastatiln of Hussite wars.
In 1300 they should be about the same.
Furthemore Prague had whole Bohemian crown behind it, with royals often winning the emperorship.
Augsburg, Nurenberg, Frankfurt are just city states either as free cities or bishoprics....
Center of Political and military power will always multiply the importance and reach of its trade potential.
Afterall Venice without its merchant fleet and ducat bankers is just a town build in the swamp.
Florence without its art patronage and florent bankers is just a town built in italian countryside. Paris without its royal banners is just provincial town. Lubeck without its trade alliance is just a fishing town, and Antwerpen without global trade is just a border defense town against the Vikings and the Frisians....
The estimate of 10000 in 1300 (from the dataset of European urban populations 700-2000) is proxied, you are welcome to provide a source for a better estimate.
It's true that Prague's population exploded in the 14th century, in fact several Bohemian cities experienced a lot of growth at this time.
In 1337 it was likely already double or triple the number in 1300, and it only kept growing afterwards.
I'm not saying that Prague shouldn't be a market center, but it certainly wasn't on the level of Paris in 1337 and its best years were still to come.
Furthemore Prague had whole Bohemian crown behind it, with royals often winning the emperorship.
Augsburg, Nurenberg, Frankfurt are just city states either as free cities or bishoprics....
Center of Political and military power will always multiply the importance and reach of its trade potential.
Afterall Venice without its merchant fleet and ducat bankers is just a town build in the swamp.
Florence without its art patronage and florent bankers is just a town built in italian countryside. Paris without its royal banners is just provincial town. Lubeck without its trade alliance is just a fishing town, and Antwerpen without global trade is just a border defense town against the Vikings and the Frisians....
I am really happy with the changes you made to Switzerland The area's still look a bit strange to me, but I see others have already commented on it with good suggestions.
There is one thing that was already mentioned in the original thread and has not changed in the current setup, but is clearly wrong. Maybe it was overlooked:
The location of Neuchâtel really should be Arpitan rather than Franc-Comtois, since the local dialect (Le patois neuchâtelois) is Arpitan. Below is a map of all the Francoprovençal/Arpitan dialects in Switzerland found here. As you can see, it is basically all of modern French speaking Switzerland, with the exception of the Jura Canton (which is already correctly Franc-Comtois in your setup).
If you are looking for academic sources, they are easy to find by just googling Le patois neuchâtelois, just an example here
The estimate of 10000 in 1300 (from the dataset of European urban populations 700-2000) is proxied, you are welcome to provide a source for a better estimate.
It's true that Prague's population exploded in the 14th century, in fact several Bohemian cities experienced a lot of growth at this time.
In 1337 it was likely already double or triple the number in 1300, and it only kept growing afterwards.
I'm not saying that Prague shouldn't be a market center, but it certainly wasn't on the level of Paris in 1337 and its best years were still to come.
It's impressive that cities like Augsburg, Nuremberg and Frankfurt were such important trade centers then, when they didn't have power to back it up.
Frankfurt was ideally located that it'd always be a major trade centre. That's been true pretty much from when it was settled through to today.
Augsburg was located on a major trans-Alpine trade route but its wealth and importance was due more to the wealthy bankers that lived there.
Nuremberg on the other hand was ruled by a very wealthy branch of the Hohenzollerns and was a centre of saffron production. When the Hohenzollerns focused their wealth and attention on Brandenburg after acquiring it and the value of saffron fell, Nuremberg declined greatly in importance.
Nuremberg on the other hand was ruled by a very wealthy branch of the Hohenzollerns and was a centre of saffron production. When the Hohenzollerns focused their wealth and attention on Brandenburg after acquiring it and the value of saffron fell, Nuremberg declined greatly in importance.
Nah, while saffron and the spice trade in general was important in Nuremberg, its most important economic sector was metalworking. It had a monopoly on certain techniques (like wire drawing) and was the major consumer for the output of many German mines. It was also known for its black powder, made in giant copper cauldrons and Nuremberg is where the Saiger process was perfected, which directly lead to the Central European silver mining booms in the Ore Mountains and Tyrol.
The Burgrave also didn't have any power in the city anymore after the 13th century and Nuremberg still kept its importance for hundreds of years as one of the most important cities in the HRE.
To nitpick a few of the area names: Goriska: Gorizia is the name for this region that was used in English. Süd Tirol: South Tyrol - English spells this as Tyrol. Wallis: The French name Valais is used in English by default.
Also, Zierikzee should probably be added to better smoothen the location sizes. Idk what it is about Middelburg but the comparatively large size of its location just, bothers me for some reason. You can see it sticking out like a sore thumb in every location sized map mode.
Please not like that! Already in the 1300s, Goeree-Overflakkee (the north island) was (with the exception of a small bit) associated to the County of Holland (although it was not one island at that point, but that is a different story). See for example the map from wiki:
Combining it with Schouwen-Duiveland (the south island in your proposal) makes no sense imo.
I don't know if it fits in this feedback or in a feedback of the french feedback but why did you translated "Savoie" (French) or "Savouè" (Arpitan) in english in the name of the "House de Savoie" ? Why did this house gets a translation when the House "De Bourgogne" didn't ?
My next question may already been answered before but how does the dynamic names work ? Is there a game rule to set dynamic naming of country based on culture, or countries like Dauphiné, Bourgougne, Savoie etc will always be spelled in English (or game selected language) ?
Also will the names of countries be tied to selected game language like in EU4 (if you set your game in French, names of countries in game are in french) or can thoses options : game language and location naming language can be separate ? Like Having the game in english and countries in french ?
After looking on the map I really think that Paradox needs to have some kind of standard when it comes to sizes, like how you created "4-7 location rule" for provinces.
It was mentioned a few times that there will be mechanics that interact with entire Areas, like culture conversion or integration, so the split that you have right now will just lead to huge letdowns in the actual games. When in one campaign I will be able to integrate ~30 locations simultaneously in Bohemia, in the other campaigns I will only be able to integrate 7 locations in lower Swiss or 10 location in left Austria, which in turn will feel really underwhelming and unbalanced, like Im wasting my cabinet member away.
I also cant understand why those divisions are made to begin with:
You didnt split Silesia and left it huge, but you split Swiss into 3 areas. Why?
You merget "Tyron and Tlentino" into single area, but split Austria in halfs despite them having the same size. Like, for what reason?
You merged "Veneto and Friuli", but didnt make historical "Alsace-Lorraine" and left them on their own?
No merge for Salzburg and Corinthia despite them being the same size as Tyrol and Trentino?
Atleast some of those need to get merged. For gameplay, for balance, for game mechanics.
