I agree. They were in two seperate sphears for hundreds of years. Most sources refer to the east slavic population of that area as Rusyns until they were incoporated into the USSR so it would make more sense to seperate them.
- 2
-
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.
This may be something useful for later in the game, maybe a decision for a formable Russia or something similar, Catherine the Great's Greek Project:
A 20th-century reconstruction of the proposed Greek Plan of Catherine the Great: in red, the "Neo-Byzantine Empire" for her grandson Konstantin, in blue the "Kingdom of Dacia" for Grigory Potemkin, in yellow the compensations for the Habsburg Empire and in blue-green those for Venice.
Catherine the Great dreamed of Russia conquering Constantinople and setting her second grandson, Konstantin Pavlovich, on the throne of a restored Neo-Byzantine empire.
According to their plans, the Ottoman Empire was to be replaced by the establishment of a new empire in the East, the identity of which was ascribed alternatively to a restored Byzantine Empire and to ancient Greece The throne of the new empire was to go to Catherine’s grandson Konstantin Pavlovich (1779–1831) – Pavel Petrovich’s son – on the only condition that he and his descendants would forever abandon all claims to the Russian crown. In such way, two state entities were to coexist, ruled by two Russian brothers – Alexander and Constantine.
The creation of a further, allegedly independent state – Dacia, incorporating Moldavia, Wallachia and Bessarabia, – was also envisaged Dacia would act as a buffer state between Russia and Austria, which the Empress was trying to involve in the dismantling of the Ottoman Empire Potyomkin himself strived for ruling the territory.
The idea never assumed the form of a public formulation, but it was fully expressed by Catherine in a memorandum addressed to the Austrian emperor Joseph II on 10 September 1782 The letter followed a secret alliance Catherine signed in 1781 with Joseph II, which was to be confirmed by the journey of her son Pavel Petrovich to the Habsburg Court A few months after the alliance was contracted (in the form of letters between the two sovereigns), the Grand Duke was received in Vienna – the main stopover of his European grand tour – with the staging of Gluck’s operas Iphigénie en Tauride and Alceste Both these works are based on subjects connected with ancient Greece.
Unlike the other soruces, this does not come from a historian but a Youtube video, so take it with a grain of salt:
Greek Plan - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
A 20th-century reconstruction of the proposed Greek Plan of Catherine the Great: in red, the "Neo-Byzantine Empire" for her grandson Konstantin, in blue the "Kingdom of Dacia" for Grigory Potemkin, in yellow the compensations for the Habsburg Empire and in blue-green those for Venice.
Catherine the Great dreamed of Russia conquering Constantinople and setting her second grandson, Konstantin Pavlovich, on the throne of a restored Neo-Byzantine empire.
According to their plans, the Ottoman Empire was to be replaced by the establishment of a new empire in the East, the identity of which was ascribed alternatively to a restored Byzantine Empire and to ancient Greece The throne of the new empire was to go to Catherine’s grandson Konstantin Pavlovich (1779–1831) – Pavel Petrovich’s son – on the only condition that he and his descendants would forever abandon all claims to the Russian crown. In such way, two state entities were to coexist, ruled by two Russian brothers – Alexander and Constantine.
The creation of a further, allegedly independent state – Dacia, incorporating Moldavia, Wallachia and Bessarabia, – was also envisaged Dacia would act as a buffer state between Russia and Austria, which the Empress was trying to involve in the dismantling of the Ottoman Empire Potyomkin himself strived for ruling the territory.
The idea never assumed the form of a public formulation, but it was fully expressed by Catherine in a memorandum addressed to the Austrian emperor Joseph II on 10 September 1782 The letter followed a secret alliance Catherine signed in 1781 with Joseph II, which was to be confirmed by the journey of her son Pavel Petrovich to the Habsburg Court A few months after the alliance was contracted (in the form of letters between the two sovereigns), the Grand Duke was received in Vienna – the main stopover of his European grand tour – with the staging of Gluck’s operas Iphigénie en Tauride and Alceste Both these works are based on subjects connected with ancient Greece.
Catherine the Great and Potemkin
'One of the great love stories of history, in a league with Napoleon and Josephine, and Antony and Cleopatra ... Excellent, with dazzling mastery of detail and literary flair' EconomistIt was history's most successful political partnership - as sensual and fiery as it was creative and visionary...
books.google.ro
Unlike the other soruces, this does not come from a historian but a Youtube video, so take it with a grain of salt:
- 5
- 2
In my opinnion they are either updating and adding things slowly since at least they changed the colour of greek or just don't care enough/have enough time and just go with the most spammed opinnion. But hopefully they'll slowly fix the south of hungary,ruthenia and transylvania( like there's no reason to put transylvanians in to the partium at the time that region isn't even considered to be a part of transylvania). I don't know how long it takes to edit these things on the developers parts, but I'm gonna give them the benefit of the doubt and assume that it takes quite a lot of time to skim through all the forums and the researching the mentioned topics, looking for sources and then actually implimenting it game wise.Here is the latest culture version over the feedback version. I played with the layer opacity (0-100%) of the latest version, so you can see the changes. This version presents only the dominant culture in comparison to the feedback. However, we have to consider that there is a bug in the latest version – a very thick stripe that goes from Anatolia to Hungary. In fact if you check the whole map you’re gonna notice that this stripe goes to Mecklenburg
View attachment 1240816
- 4
- 2
I really hope they fix the serbians in southern Hungary. That place was very much majority hungarian until the Ottomans conquered and destroyed it, leaving the serbs a lot of free land to settle. At most they would only be around the shores of the danube, not much further.
- 5
@Pavía sorry for this late suggestion. I think it would be better if you could change the language "South Slavic" to "Western South Slavic" instead. This way Bulgarian is included without the naming giving the player a wrong impression of the linguistic relationship, and it includes Slovenian dialects in it too, which Serbo-Croatian wouldn't if it was used as an alternative.
You definitely have a lot of stuff to go through so I hope you'll manage to take a glance at this. Hopefully I haven't repeated an idea already given by someone, too many posts to check to be sure.
You definitely have a lot of stuff to go through so I hope you'll manage to take a glance at this. Hopefully I haven't repeated an idea already given by someone, too many posts to check to be sure.
- 3
- 1
If we are going to divide the South Slavic languages into two parts and to be fair and have equal syntax, then the "Bulgarian dialect" should also be in the East South Slavic language. But I generally disagree with this division two languages, honestly, whether all South Slavic dialects should be in the same language (Slavonic or South Slavic) or divided into three (modern Slovenian, Slavonic (Serbocroatian) and Bulgarian), or four languages (the state of the 14th century Slovenian, Slavonic (Croatian-Bosnian), Serbian and Bulgarian).
- 4
- 2
- 2
Does anyone have an opinion on my suggestion of making Montenegrins a SOP?
Edit: If you disagree, please say why; people disagreed last time too, but no one gave any reason to oppose it.
Edit: If you disagree, please say why; people disagreed last time too, but no one gave any reason to oppose it.
Last edited:
- 8
SoPs are for hunter gatherers societies or those society who don't abide by the landed society laws, obviously Montenegrins are a settled people
- 5
- 3
- 2
Montenegro is separate from the Ottoman Empire in the Victoria era; did they regress in political sophistication or something over the EU5 period?
Montenegrins could just be presented as their own culture (I don't know how much they separated themselves from Serbs already in the 14th century), but if justified, the culture could be called Zetian, and they would use the Eastern Shtokavian dialect just like Serbian. But I wouldn't call them Montenegrins in the 14th century, because this identity arose after the occupation of the Turkish Empire. In the 14th century, Duklja was also called Zeta, which is the predecessor of Montenegro. SOP is out of the question, because as others state, they were already settled and were residents of the Serbian Kingdom.
- 3
- 2
By "settled" do you just mean they weren't nomads, because I'm pretty sure many of the SOPs in China weren't nomadic either.
- 1
...because there's several intervening empires in the period between the Middle Ages and the Victorian era?
Like, I don't know what this statement is supposed to be at all. "Montenegro was a thing in the Victorian era so it should be a thing in 1337" is, like, a completely nonsensical statement.
You've got multiple centuries of political evolution of what's going on in Montenegro before you have anything approaching a state. Trying to shoehorn that into 1337 with an SoP of all things would require that the ethnogenesis of Montenegrin be complete in 1337 (since the way the devs are approaching SoPs is "one SoP per culture") which is absurd.
What you want are DHEs leading to the formation of a landed Price-Bishopric of Montenegro under the right circumstances. Shoehorning them into 1337 is incoherent.
- 4
- 1
Maybe I expressed myself incorrectly, I meant that they lived exactly the same as the Serbs and other nations in the Balkans, paid taxes, had a legal system, their own representative with the title of lord, who served the Serbian Kingdom and then the Empire. I can't find anywhere that they were less developed and ignored the Serbian Crown and were their own masters without a representative. In fact, Zeta was administratively divided into two parts at the time, Lower and Upper Zeta, meaning that there was such an organization and that the system operated for several years, someone had to pay taxes and have some kind of order.
- 4
You could maybe incorporate other migration events into the game. Like either for specific preprogrammed historic events or randomly when certain criteria are met. For instance if a provonce has lost a certain amount of population et.c you could get a pop up event in which a neighbouring culture has some migrants that would like to move to your province. 1. you can accept and gain more pops and manpower, production or refuse and suffer decreases in them. This could create some interesting AI and player situations whith some interesting cultural/ warfare dynamics(obvisouly as a minority). Like if you specifically raid a province of someone to weaken their cultural presence there. They either have to lose or losen cultural control over the province which would require admin power to reverse or maintain cutural integrity, but have a decrease in manpower and productivity.
- 1
- 1
I think it makes perfect sense for the Montenegrins (note: it's not actually correct to speak of "Montengrins", I just mean the tribal slavs who lived in the vicinity of the modern country) to be an SOP. They were a tribal people outside the control of state power. SOPs aren't tied specifically to hunter gatherers, I don't know where you learned that from. They're also not exclusively supposed to represent nomads.
- 3
That's what tribal-type pops are supposed to represent, not SoPs.
Maybe I didn't really understood what the SoPs are supposed to represent that's fair, but claiming there was stil a group of tribal slaves especially in Montenegro is pretty far fetched. Regarding people who escape from state power control like Maronites who fled to the mountains or Ruthenians in the wild fields or Hungarians who fled to the forest to escape the ottomans I don't know how paradox would design these groups and calling them tribals seems weird