Hey soooooooooo when are the population maps gonna drop for this region (I would just like to make sure that we haven't forgotten them)
- 1
-
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.
Hey huge fan here, its relieving to see that you guys really take feedbacks from the community seriously. What about personal union system? Is it going to stay the same or will it change? For example in project ceasar can we form a personal union as a Muslim nation?
Yes, they should clarify the criteria because if it's absolute... Don't get me wrong, your post is really interesting and I learn a lot. But, at the same time, as a French, it really made me think: if they add all the 1000 habitants cities and towns in Eastern Europe, they better add all of our towns and cities (the 200 which had a convent or the 500 that sent bourgeois to the king). With 20 millions inhabitants (almost 1/3 of the European population) we probably deserve a bit more cities and towns if the criteria is absolute.
- 1
I don’t understand why so few Paradox games include two-way peace treaties. Do we have an answer for this?
Historically, they were crucial in ending conflicts and balancing power, and they could add a new layer of depth to the gameplay. For example, at the beginning of the period in Project Caesar, while it’s true the Teutonic were at war with the Poles, the conflict actually ended in a bilateral peace with concessions from both sides.
Implementing such mechanics would bring more nuance and realism to the diplomacy system, I think we would have richer gameplay experiences while reflecting historical complexities more accurately.
Historically, they were crucial in ending conflicts and balancing power, and they could add a new layer of depth to the gameplay. For example, at the beginning of the period in Project Caesar, while it’s true the Teutonic were at war with the Poles, the conflict actually ended in a bilateral peace with concessions from both sides.
Implementing such mechanics would bring more nuance and realism to the diplomacy system, I think we would have richer gameplay experiences while reflecting historical complexities more accurately.
- 1
- 1
I see you kept name for Tábor province (in Jihočesko region) even if city/town of Tábor was not created up until 1420 when it was created by Hussites (by branch of radical Hussites called Táborité-Taborites). Much more important centre of this region was Sezimovo Ústí where local noble family resided.
Also I would suggest small historical easter egg. In Hradišťsko province especially in locations of Hradiště and Vizovice should be noticeable Wallachian minority which was result of Wallachian immigration which started early in 13th century into this region and eventually gave name for this region (Valašsko - [Czech] Wallachia). Wallachians then took part in important parts of our history like Vlach uprising during 30 years war. (but to be fair significant numbers of Wallachians came in 15. century)
Also I would suggest small historical easter egg. In Hradišťsko province especially in locations of Hradiště and Vizovice should be noticeable Wallachian minority which was result of Wallachian immigration which started early in 13th century into this region and eventually gave name for this region (Valašsko - [Czech] Wallachia). Wallachians then took part in important parts of our history like Vlach uprising during 30 years war. (but to be fair significant numbers of Wallachians came in 15. century)
Last edited:
- 1
There is Chodzież near Szubin and Żnin. There should be Wągrowiec. In 1337 Chodzież did not existed, but Wągrowiec did. In overall Wągrowiec was more important for that region.
- 1
This was explained by Johan, he said that the increase in difficulty to code the AI for two way peace deals would be exponential.
It's arguably not worth the development time, especially when the game presumably is still being built and there are more important priorities.
- 1
Sure, I totally agree. I just want to note that locations represent not only one town or city, but also some surrounding rural area within this location.
That's why I think that city/town criteria must be not absolute and universal only by pops, but relative to the region and represent some kind of regional power/trade/church importance.
Population number in the game is much more connected to the development indicator. And the development of the French rural locations must be significantly higher than that of the Ruthenian towns.
Bialystok, Grodno and Lida are certainly missing East Slavic populations. Still very critical of the existence of “Smolenskian” and “Severian”, they feel like utter fiction.
- 3
there is no such thing as eastern Poland, historically or administratively, the division into eastern and western Prussia in the line you show is the 19th century, it could be Pomerania and Prussia, or the division after the Thirteen Years' War into royal and monastic Prussia.
also in the 14th century there was still something like Górals, there are Vlachs
- 1
Hi,
I just want to add that Goniądz location in Podlasie province Masovia area - should be wetlands forest. Wetlands because Goniądz is located in the centre of Biebrza National Park which has a lot of swamps and Biebrza river has a lot of meanders too, this was also used in warfare.
I'm really glad to see actually this location in the game because I come from this little town that is forgotten now but was historically important, especially at this period of time.
Regards, Paweł
I just want to add that Goniądz location in Podlasie province Masovia area - should be wetlands forest. Wetlands because Goniądz is located in the centre of Biebrza National Park which has a lot of swamps and Biebrza river has a lot of meanders too, this was also used in warfare.
I'm really glad to see actually this location in the game because I come from this little town that is forgotten now but was historically important, especially at this period of time.
Regards, Paweł
No, they are not, they follow the same logic as all other cultures in the region. Severian culture is not there due to the Severian tribe itself, but due to the name of that land, that historically comes from the name of the tribe.
The cultural division is based on the historical political division of the Kyivan Rus, based on its biggest and the most stable duchies that had existed for several centuries. According to this book, there is a strong suggestion that East Slavic identity evolved around the biggest principalities, so:
Volhynian culture - historical lands of the Volhynian Duchy
Halychan - the Duchy of Halych
Polesian - the Duchy of Turov-Pinsk
Polatskian - the Duchy of Polatsk
Smolenskian - the Duchy of Smolensk
Severian - the Duchy of Chernihiv
Ruthenian - the Duchies of Kyiv and Pereyaslav
Novgorodian - the Republic of Novgorod
Muscovite - the Duchies of Vladimir-Suzdal and Moscow
The core territory of the Duchy of Chernihiv is called Severia till now and it is the same cultural ethnographic region of Ukraine as Volhynia or Galicia. And the people that lived there at that time were called 'Sevruyks', they were kind of unique because they got used to live under much more direct mongolian rule than other southern Ruthenians. So it fits perfectly into the game logic.
Last edited:
- 8
- 1
- 1
None of these “tribes” feature any distinct culture, language or customs whatsoever. In this timeframe, they were still all one east slavic people group, or at least split into “Russian” and “Ruthenian”, there is no way you are able to argue for the existence of a “Smolenskian” or “Severian” culture, language or dialect.
- 3
- 1
Will you add some achivements for Silesia? Cuz I would really love to do some of them! Also will silesia recive their own set of ideas and missions?
Last edited:
- 1
- 1
Nonsense. Maybe noone can argue only because of lack of really detailed sources from that period.
It is accepted that Old Ruthenian had many dialects. Some scientists do not even recognize Old Ruthenian as a language, but just as a term to describe dozens of East Slavic dialects in the ~9 – 13th centuries.
Even the common official Church Slavonic language had difeerent variations everywhere (called ізвод) because of different local influences.
But even when scientists try to classify the vulgar dialects into some groups, like here:
Хабургаев Г. А. Древнерусский язык // Языки мира. Славянские языки / ред. колл. А. М. Молдован, С. С. Скорвид, А. А. Кибрик и др. — М.: Academia, 2005. — 656 с.)
it turns out that 'Central dialect zone (Duchies of Polatsk, Smolensk, Chernihiv) contained genetically inhomogeneous dialects ... '.
In all others dialect zones they say about the dialects in plural too.
So it actually looks like I can argue the possibility that Smolensk was somehow different from Chernihiv. If even the book published by the Academy of Sciences says that even closer dialects within this one dialect group in the 13th century were inhomogeneous. And then there were another 50-100 years to 1337 of complete disintegration of the Kyivan Rus and totally different fates and political reality of each duchy.
Also according to this book, there is a strong suggestion that East Slavic identity evolved around the biggest principalities, so I think the devs have made the best decision that reflects the nuances for this region to have cultures based on the political division, that had lasted for around 400 years.
Last edited:
- 5
- 3
- 2
- 1
- 1
There should be achievement for Duchy of Legnica, if they form Poland and maybe move capital to Wrocław - Dukes of Legnica were oldest branch of Piast family and therefore, considering principle of primogeniture, had strongest claims for kingdom of Poland.
- 2
- 1
The Ukrainian name for Galicia is "Halychyna" not "Halychia", I've just noticed. I think "Halicia" is an alternative Latin name and you might've gotten the two mixed up.
- 1
Very nice!
You've added Wiślica and that's good, but you've kept Busko-Zdrój and it's not make many sense since Busko wasn't even a siginificant village in that time.
I strongly suggest to change it into "Nowy Korczyn" or "Nowe Miasto Korczyn" as I mentioned before.
You've added Wiślica and that's good, but you've kept Busko-Zdrój and it's not make many sense since Busko wasn't even a siginificant village in that time.
I strongly suggest to change it into "Nowy Korczyn" or "Nowe Miasto Korczyn" as I mentioned before.
- 1
- 1