Maybe we could limit Flemish to those who were not traditionally part of the German Kingdom (Bruges, Ghent, Atrecht and the County of Flanders overall).
-
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.
With which reason? Only because the other were part of the HRE?
Even Flanders and Artois became part of the HRE with the Treaty of Cambrai (1529) when the french king had to recognize imperial sovereignty over these areas.
Even Flanders and Artois became part of the HRE with the Treaty of Cambrai (1529) when the french king had to recognize imperial sovereignty over these areas.
A nice map:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2d/Deutsche_Mundarten.gif
My idea:
Keep it simple and use "Lower German", "Middle German", "Upper German" and "Silesian" for germany and Silesia.
For the Netherlands use simply "Dutch" and change it to "Flemish" a few years after the Netherlands became independent to show, that the difference between the Dutch and the Flemish became stronger because of religious reasons. (Calvinist Netherlands and Catholic Habsburg)
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2d/Deutsche_Mundarten.gif
My idea:
Keep it simple and use "Lower German", "Middle German", "Upper German" and "Silesian" for germany and Silesia.
For the Netherlands use simply "Dutch" and change it to "Flemish" a few years after the Netherlands became independent to show, that the difference between the Dutch and the Flemish became stronger because of religious reasons. (Calvinist Netherlands and Catholic Habsburg)
language - dialectgroup - dialectgroup - dialect
You see, that's no way to do it.
That's even more ahistorical then the way we have it right now.
Dutch national consciousness as such emerges in the 80 Years' War and their independence from the Empire formally recognized in the Peace of Westphalia. So, if anything, Flemish should be there first.
Before I forget Alex, it would be great if you could leave all the old cultures like German and Italian intact. In multiplayer, we don't usually use many cultures and if I'd revert back to them in the multiplayer scenario, I wouldn't have to change the Localisation and db files.
I will keep them in, in that case and also for an option maybe. Thus we can still keep Chefkoch's and still have divided aswell.
I'm just wondering, what are you going for with cultures? Historical accuracy? Game balance? Because if germany is split up into a lot cultures then France will definitely have an advantage over other players in multiplayer. Same with OE, considering the cultural differences between the inland desert arabs and the egyptian urban arabs it makes no sense to keep them the same but split ugric and scottish into several cultures.
I'm just kinda thinking that if it is historical accuracy that is the goal then there would never-ending tweaking to get things right but if it is game balance following somewhat historical lines then the map would look differently. For instance any scottish nation would probably have both scottish cultures and anyone else probably would not have either scottish culture as accepted culture so it is in essence an unnecessary split of cultures. Get what I am going for here?
I'm just kinda thinking that if it is historical accuracy that is the goal then there would never-ending tweaking to get things right but if it is game balance following somewhat historical lines then the map would look differently. For instance any scottish nation would probably have both scottish cultures and anyone else probably would not have either scottish culture as accepted culture so it is in essence an unnecessary split of cultures. Get what I am going for here?
Well yes I understand. We strife to consider the game mechanics and historical accuracy. And I don't see how a divided German culture will ruin the game? As I have stated the German nations will not only gain their own culture as accepted. Nations like Brandenburg and Austria will get events where they gain accept of cultures. We just don't like having 52 provinces with the highest population and highest income and manpower under the same culture. Austria as it is now has it too easy to take over Northern Germany, though they would revolt because of local difference like every other place. The problem is people might relate this time's "Germany" with today's. That is a problem because of the national feeling and that Germany was divided i many nations back then.
several tips about cultures in Central-Eastern Europe:
"Livonian" shold be named ruther "Lettish" and it is better to split Latgalian from it (but not necessary).
Smolensk and Severia for the 15th-18th centuries are defiantly Ruthenian not Russian (still there are not much differences).
Warmia should be German (Ostseer): http://img20.imageshack.us/img20/3645/prusy.png
Pomerelia should be "Kashubian"
"Livonian" shold be named ruther "Lettish" and it is better to split Latgalian from it (but not necessary).
Smolensk and Severia for the 15th-18th centuries are defiantly Ruthenian not Russian (still there are not much differences).
Warmia should be German (Ostseer): http://img20.imageshack.us/img20/3645/prusy.png
Pomerelia should be "Kashubian"
If you can come up with a good way to show that many in China and Japan has and had more than one religion then please do. As it is now it's not easy to show how Buddhism, Confucianism, Taoism, Shintoism and Folk Religion have almost the same followers there.
If you can come up with a good way to show that many in China and Japan has and had more than one religion then please do. As it is now it's not easy to show how Buddhism, Confucianism, Taoism, Shintoism and Folk Religion have almost the same followers there.
that's true,
you know some of the emperors of Ming believe in Taoism devoutly like Jia-Jing(1522-1566),he spend much money to bulid temples and his religion fanaticism led to a murder by some maid of honour(in 1542).if moders make a event to change the religion of China to Taoism in this years,it must be some rebellions and make more challenge to both AI and players.
just my advice
What I could do is making Taoism, Confucianism and Shintoism state religions only like Counterreform. They would have different benefits and maluses, but they will not have any provinces with their religon, because their provincial religion will be on of the Buddhist branches.
that's true,
you know some of the emperors of Ming believe in Taoism devoutly like Jia-Jing(1522-1566),he spend much money to bulid temples and his religion fanaticism led to a murder by some maid of honour(in 1542).if moders make a event to change the religion of China to Taoism in this years,it must be some rebellions and make more challenge to both AI and players.
just my advice
Even during the rare Taoist fanatical emperors' times, Confucianism was still the primary philosophy/religion in Ming. Just like surges of Buddhist fanaticism.
As the mod is from 1337-1914 do you consider to add new technology lvls ?
I hope this mod will be the same good as previous for EU2
I hope this mod will be the same good as previous for EU2
As the mod is from 1337-1914 do you consider to add new technology lvls ?
I hope this mod will be the same good as previous for EU2
We have already added new techs.
6 for land.
6 for naval.
2 for trade.
2 for infra.
The most difficult was to add before 1419, but we can always add more to the late years if needed.
We have already added new techs.
6 for land.
6 for naval.
2 for trade.
2 for infra.
The most difficult was to add before 1419, but we can always add more to the late years if needed.
Great.
What about scenarios?
Do you consider add scanario for "Spring of the Nations" from 1848 ?