I added another two options. The poll will be on for another while, no hurry ...
Hartmann
Hartmann
-
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 (plus military alliance) would be indeed another option, but playtesting seems to show, that the two then never get merged together into one country (which is a general problem of the current patch with vassalisations/diplomatical annexations by the AI) ....
Hartmann
playing tag
OK. Hartmann is on to me. This is the plan:
- Forget splitting heirs: exception might be England if it actually benefits from losing Ireland and has other associated 'upgrades'
- I like the Pommerania idea as a successor to the Hansa; a potential revolter
- I like Transylvania; not that I ever been there or approve of Vlad's methods (though some of you seem to be big fans of that sort of stuff! - yessiree!). But Transylvania may serve to weaken Hungary (which is kind of strong) and allow Austria a better chance of either vassalizing it or conquering it.
Does that leave any tags available Mr. H?
On another note, is it possible to have the Knights somewhow settle in Malta? Not at the start of the GC of course, but later on. Maybe a CB on Spain with the CB shield on Malta? I dunno; I was filled with ideas last night but every time I came to the site I experienced 'Forum interruptus'.
OK. Hartmann is on to me. This is the plan:
- Forget splitting heirs: exception might be England if it actually benefits from losing Ireland and has other associated 'upgrades'
- I like the Pommerania idea as a successor to the Hansa; a potential revolter
- I like Transylvania; not that I ever been there or approve of Vlad's methods (though some of you seem to be big fans of that sort of stuff! - yessiree!). But Transylvania may serve to weaken Hungary (which is kind of strong) and allow Austria a better chance of either vassalizing it or conquering it.
Does that leave any tags available Mr. H?
On another note, is it possible to have the Knights somewhow settle in Malta? Not at the start of the GC of course, but later on. Maybe a CB on Spain with the CB shield on Malta? I dunno; I was filled with ideas last night but every time I came to the site I experienced 'Forum interruptus'.
Re: playing tag
- Forget splitting heirs: exception might be England if it actually benefits from losing Ireland and has other associated 'upgrades'
I´m already forgetting that. I´m not sure about Ireland anymore, too...
- I like the Pommerania idea as a successor to the Hansa; a potential revolter
Pommerania existed and it´s already there since weeks. Hansa is now only Lübeck and Bremen (the core cities).
Military alliance 'Hansebund' exists between Hansa, Holstein and Pommern, but to include Prussia and the Order gives even better results gameplaywise. Noone has told me yet, if this would be historically tenable, though.
- I like Transylvania; not that I ever been there or approve of Vlad's methods (though some of you seem to be big fans of that sort of stuff! - yessiree!). But Transylvania may serve to weaken Hungary (which is kind of strong) and allow Austria a better chance of either vassalizing it or conquering it.
Hmm, I see the point. Nevertheless it looks rather fancy to me...
Does that leave any tags available Mr. H?
Herr H. says: Even with Pommerania in, we still have the PRO tag (on Doomie´s advice I interchanged KUR and PRO, so that Pommerania is now KUR). What to do with it? That´s what the poll is for... But I think I will leave it to Provence for now, so that the new version can be released soon.
On another note, is it possible to have the Knights somewhow settle in Malta? Not at the start of the GC of course, but later on. Maybe a CB on Spain with the CB shield on Malta? I dunno
I´ll try that.
I was filled with ideas last night but every time I came to the site I experienced 'Forum interruptus'.
*lol* ... I hope You got some 'satisfaction' from the forum again in the meantime...
Hartmann
- Forget splitting heirs: exception might be England if it actually benefits from losing Ireland and has other associated 'upgrades'
I´m already forgetting that. I´m not sure about Ireland anymore, too...
- I like the Pommerania idea as a successor to the Hansa; a potential revolter
Pommerania existed and it´s already there since weeks. Hansa is now only Lübeck and Bremen (the core cities).
Military alliance 'Hansebund' exists between Hansa, Holstein and Pommern, but to include Prussia and the Order gives even better results gameplaywise. Noone has told me yet, if this would be historically tenable, though.
- I like Transylvania; not that I ever been there or approve of Vlad's methods (though some of you seem to be big fans of that sort of stuff! - yessiree!). But Transylvania may serve to weaken Hungary (which is kind of strong) and allow Austria a better chance of either vassalizing it or conquering it.
Hmm, I see the point. Nevertheless it looks rather fancy to me...
Does that leave any tags available Mr. H?
Herr H. says: Even with Pommerania in, we still have the PRO tag (on Doomie´s advice I interchanged KUR and PRO, so that Pommerania is now KUR). What to do with it? That´s what the poll is for... But I think I will leave it to Provence for now, so that the new version can be released soon.
On another note, is it possible to have the Knights somewhow settle in Malta? Not at the start of the GC of course, but later on. Maybe a CB on Spain with the CB shield on Malta? I dunno
I´ll try that.
I was filled with ideas last night but every time I came to the site I experienced 'Forum interruptus'.
*lol* ... I hope You got some 'satisfaction' from the forum again in the meantime...
Hartmann
Re: Re: playing tag
A little more development about Transylvania... i've more time
At the death of Mathias Corvin, Hungarian nobles refused his son to succede. they elected a weak king, ladislas Jagellon, king of Bohemia.
Hungarian kingdom falls then into a period of troubles: economic crisis, social troubles (1514: Dozsa revolt, 1526: Neusohl revolt), administration in the hands of the nobles, rivalty between 2 major families: Bathory and Zapolyai. The latter were the voïvoides of transylvania and had a very large autonomy.
When Turks invade Hungary during 1526, Johan Zapolyai refuses to hemp the king and creates his own army. The king of Hungary can then just oppose 26,000 men to the 50,000 Turks at Mohacs: the defeat destroys Hungarian independance.
Jean Zapolyai is then elected Hungarian king, but Istvan Bathory gives the kingdom to the Habsburg some months later. Johan Zapolyai asked then the help of the Turks and Suleyman did a second campaign in Hungary in exchange of the vassalization of Zapoyai.
Hungary is divided in 3: Turkish province, vassal state of transylvaia, and Habsburg controlled Hungary. This situation will remain until 1699.
Transylvania Kings:
johan Zapolyai until 1540
JohanII 1541-1572
Stephan Bathory ( 1573-1586) elected Polish king in 1576
Gabor Bethlen (1587-1629)
György Rakosi (1630-1648)
György II Rakosi (1649-1664)
Michael apafy (1665-1691?)
in 1691, transylvania is annexed by Austria.
in 1591, Transylvaniaattempted with Austria and Valachia to eliminate Turkish domination. During 2 years,1600-1602, Valachia and Transylvania unified under Michel the Brave.
So Transylvania would be a nation at start in 1492, with very bad diplomatic value with Hungary , - 2or -1 with Austria and 1 or 2 with Turkey.
IMHO, makes perfectly sense
A little more development about Transylvania... i've more time
At the death of Mathias Corvin, Hungarian nobles refused his son to succede. they elected a weak king, ladislas Jagellon, king of Bohemia.
Hungarian kingdom falls then into a period of troubles: economic crisis, social troubles (1514: Dozsa revolt, 1526: Neusohl revolt), administration in the hands of the nobles, rivalty between 2 major families: Bathory and Zapolyai. The latter were the voïvoides of transylvania and had a very large autonomy.
When Turks invade Hungary during 1526, Johan Zapolyai refuses to hemp the king and creates his own army. The king of Hungary can then just oppose 26,000 men to the 50,000 Turks at Mohacs: the defeat destroys Hungarian independance.
Jean Zapolyai is then elected Hungarian king, but Istvan Bathory gives the kingdom to the Habsburg some months later. Johan Zapolyai asked then the help of the Turks and Suleyman did a second campaign in Hungary in exchange of the vassalization of Zapoyai.
Hungary is divided in 3: Turkish province, vassal state of transylvaia, and Habsburg controlled Hungary. This situation will remain until 1699.
Transylvania Kings:
johan Zapolyai until 1540
JohanII 1541-1572
Stephan Bathory ( 1573-1586) elected Polish king in 1576
Gabor Bethlen (1587-1629)
György Rakosi (1630-1648)
György II Rakosi (1649-1664)
Michael apafy (1665-1691?)
in 1691, transylvania is annexed by Austria.
in 1591, Transylvaniaattempted with Austria and Valachia to eliminate Turkish domination. During 2 years,1600-1602, Valachia and Transylvania unified under Michel the Brave.
So Transylvania would be a nation at start in 1492, with very bad diplomatic value with Hungary , - 2or -1 with Austria and 1 or 2 with Turkey.
IMHO, makes perfectly sense
langue d'Oc
I agree that it is a good idea to keep Provence as a possible revolter. I have seen it emerge from time to time and it gives some nice action to France and it's intrusive Italian policy. Also, the langue d'Oc is not represented without it and if I recall this area was still a cauldron of dissent to both the Papacy and the King of France. Can someone disabuse me of this notion, or is this generally true? If so, I would argue that Provence should remain and be given negative relations to France and the Papacy.
If this is largely agreeable, and given the changes as you decsribed, I would favor releasing the new version as soon as you can. I look forward to the new patch!
BTW, I think then we should maybe have you (Herr H) take a rest from editing and we can maybe organize specific 'agenda items' that you would like to have closure on. I think there are lots of loose (and good) ideas in these threads that need to be brought together to get some systematic attention. You could offer 'issues' and we could form teams or assume individual responsibility for gathering info and reporting in. As I understand it, there are a number of historians here who could have access to great resources and who can better ground the game in history.
I agree that it is a good idea to keep Provence as a possible revolter. I have seen it emerge from time to time and it gives some nice action to France and it's intrusive Italian policy. Also, the langue d'Oc is not represented without it and if I recall this area was still a cauldron of dissent to both the Papacy and the King of France. Can someone disabuse me of this notion, or is this generally true? If so, I would argue that Provence should remain and be given negative relations to France and the Papacy.
If this is largely agreeable, and given the changes as you decsribed, I would favor releasing the new version as soon as you can. I look forward to the new patch!
BTW, I think then we should maybe have you (Herr H) take a rest from editing and we can maybe organize specific 'agenda items' that you would like to have closure on. I think there are lots of loose (and good) ideas in these threads that need to be brought together to get some systematic attention. You could offer 'issues' and we could form teams or assume individual responsibility for gathering info and reporting in. As I understand it, there are a number of historians here who could have access to great resources and who can better ground the game in history.
I like Your ideas regarding future organisation, Savant, especially as I will not have that much time anymore in the near future. I think after the next version is released, we have reached some kind of culmination point. Save probably one country we will then not have to throw in new countries anymore and can concentrate on the 'finetuning': leaders, monarchs, resources, CB shields, diplomatical relations and such.
With Laurent Favres values, the greatpowers do great in fact. France is maybe even a tad too good always annexing everyhting in the West peu á peu. Even the Netherlands (when they have beaten Spain) are promptly assaulted and annexed by France shortly thereafter.
I have much better results when additionally throwing in Bretagne, but the known problem is, that France will not diplomatically annex them. Only much later, when relations get worse and the vassalship is revoked, France will take them by war.
I also test Ireland. I don´t think that it is fair to say that when doing this, we implement a country that didn´t exist. Morocco and Algier also didn´t exist in the same way. There were some three different duchys in Ireland all with complete genealogies which we will combine into one by abstraction just like with Marocco and Algeria.
Anyway it´s not easy to recompense England for the loss of Ireland (save one province): I gave them higher tech, 25k in England, 6k in Calais and 10k in Ireland and I still think of doing more for them (e.g. fortresses). Sometimes they hold their own quite good now, but sometimes they just seem so incapable loosing where they shouldn´t (it´s obviously an AI problem here).
What I can say for sure is this: The game is much more fun with Ireland and Bretagne in. I know, this is not our criterion for implementatio, but I wanted to state it nevertheless...
Hey, and the changings with the Knights worked (diplomacy&CBshield) - at least in this way, that they got annexed by Turkey. I didn´t see this EVER in my games before.
Hartmann.
With Laurent Favres values, the greatpowers do great in fact. France is maybe even a tad too good always annexing everyhting in the West peu á peu. Even the Netherlands (when they have beaten Spain) are promptly assaulted and annexed by France shortly thereafter.
I have much better results when additionally throwing in Bretagne, but the known problem is, that France will not diplomatically annex them. Only much later, when relations get worse and the vassalship is revoked, France will take them by war.
I also test Ireland. I don´t think that it is fair to say that when doing this, we implement a country that didn´t exist. Morocco and Algier also didn´t exist in the same way. There were some three different duchys in Ireland all with complete genealogies which we will combine into one by abstraction just like with Marocco and Algeria.
Anyway it´s not easy to recompense England for the loss of Ireland (save one province): I gave them higher tech, 25k in England, 6k in Calais and 10k in Ireland and I still think of doing more for them (e.g. fortresses). Sometimes they hold their own quite good now, but sometimes they just seem so incapable loosing where they shouldn´t (it´s obviously an AI problem here).
What I can say for sure is this: The game is much more fun with Ireland and Bretagne in. I know, this is not our criterion for implementatio, but I wanted to state it nevertheless...
Hey, and the changings with the Knights worked (diplomacy&CBshield) - at least in this way, that they got annexed by Turkey.
I didn´t see this EVER in my games before.Hartmann.
Hi all,
Province ideas....
hmm... i agree that Poland, Spain, and France should not be seperated from their possesions... doesn't work in the game.
Eire, I don't think we should change this at all; if we make it an independent country it would be incorrect, if we make it neutral provinces we are going to see portugese or teutonic order colonies there.
Small states such as Ramadan, Sivas, Montenegro and Luca:
I don't think any of these states deserve to be in the game, they do not fill an entire province and none of them had any 'imperial stature' they were at best old left over middle ages states that were still in existence as buffer states.
Montenegro is in Ragusa as we have it now; Ragusa the state actually did not go very far inland and Montenegro did not really reach the sea. The Montenegrans were just a bunch of Slavic/Illyrian hillman who did not want to pay Turkish taxes; they did not have embassies around Europe or a standing army or a government. Tribal nations are hard enough to represent outside Europe in this game, lets not bring some into Europe. As far as i am concerned 'Montenegro' is represented by that time when playing Turkey you promote a tax collecter in Kosovo or Ragusa and the province then revolts a couple of times.
Everyone needs to remember that NONE of these nations are really nation-states! Saying that Montenegro was a different nation than the Ottomans in 1492 is not the same as saying that in 1992. The Ottomans consisted of many nations, as did France, Spain, England, China etc.
That does not mean that every little 'nation' needs to be represented.
I would very much support changes in Italy however. I think the PRO tag is mostly fine as there was a great deal of Cathar, Jewish, Templar, Visigothic etc sympathy in that region that still exists to this day. Do some reading about French draft riots in Marseilles during WW2! they didn't consider themselves French in 1942 nor in 1492.
I think Mantua has at least some right to be independent; I think much of the reason for them being part of Venice is that the Marquis of Mantua in 1492 was also Captain-General of the Armies of Venice (and curiosly enough not in the game) even though Mantua was not a real part of Venice.
I have been reading some old sources about that area and period, especially the letters of the Marquessa of Mantua which are extensive. She was also the daughter of the 'D'este' general in the game and she was the sister-in-law of the 'L. Sforza' general/monarch in the game and she was one of the major supporters of Da vinci and Michaelangelo.
Unfortunately, it is not very clear on what Mantua's position was at this point. hmm...
Also, the Emilia' province in the game is basically the D'este lands and estates which is considered to be rivaled in wealth, affluence, culture, etc to be rivaled by only one other state in Italy: Milan. Venice is shown as to rich on their own in this game; Their money was from trade and some lace production, not a massive population to be taxed. I think Mantua and D'Este should be independent and the resource in Venice should be changed to cloth.
What happens if you change a provinces resource to the 'nothing' tag? does this work? i'm tempted to do this for a number of provinces in Europe which have a default resource which doesn't really exist.
Oh, yeah, regarding the Knights/Malta question, are we sure this is not already implemented into the game? i have played 1 full game and 1 partial as Turkey and in both case i annexed Rhodes early on and in both games Malta eventually revolted from Spain and formed the new country 'Knights'.
Seems to work for me!
Michael
Province ideas....
hmm... i agree that Poland, Spain, and France should not be seperated from their possesions... doesn't work in the game.
Eire, I don't think we should change this at all; if we make it an independent country it would be incorrect, if we make it neutral provinces we are going to see portugese or teutonic order colonies there.
Small states such as Ramadan, Sivas, Montenegro and Luca:
I don't think any of these states deserve to be in the game, they do not fill an entire province and none of them had any 'imperial stature' they were at best old left over middle ages states that were still in existence as buffer states.
Montenegro is in Ragusa as we have it now; Ragusa the state actually did not go very far inland and Montenegro did not really reach the sea. The Montenegrans were just a bunch of Slavic/Illyrian hillman who did not want to pay Turkish taxes; they did not have embassies around Europe or a standing army or a government. Tribal nations are hard enough to represent outside Europe in this game, lets not bring some into Europe. As far as i am concerned 'Montenegro' is represented by that time when playing Turkey you promote a tax collecter in Kosovo or Ragusa and the province then revolts a couple of times.
Everyone needs to remember that NONE of these nations are really nation-states! Saying that Montenegro was a different nation than the Ottomans in 1492 is not the same as saying that in 1992. The Ottomans consisted of many nations, as did France, Spain, England, China etc.
That does not mean that every little 'nation' needs to be represented.
I would very much support changes in Italy however. I think the PRO tag is mostly fine as there was a great deal of Cathar, Jewish, Templar, Visigothic etc sympathy in that region that still exists to this day. Do some reading about French draft riots in Marseilles during WW2! they didn't consider themselves French in 1942 nor in 1492.
I think Mantua has at least some right to be independent; I think much of the reason for them being part of Venice is that the Marquis of Mantua in 1492 was also Captain-General of the Armies of Venice (and curiosly enough not in the game) even though Mantua was not a real part of Venice.
I have been reading some old sources about that area and period, especially the letters of the Marquessa of Mantua which are extensive. She was also the daughter of the 'D'este' general in the game and she was the sister-in-law of the 'L. Sforza' general/monarch in the game and she was one of the major supporters of Da vinci and Michaelangelo.
Unfortunately, it is not very clear on what Mantua's position was at this point. hmm...
Also, the Emilia' province in the game is basically the D'este lands and estates which is considered to be rivaled in wealth, affluence, culture, etc to be rivaled by only one other state in Italy: Milan. Venice is shown as to rich on their own in this game; Their money was from trade and some lace production, not a massive population to be taxed. I think Mantua and D'Este should be independent and the resource in Venice should be changed to cloth.
What happens if you change a provinces resource to the 'nothing' tag? does this work? i'm tempted to do this for a number of provinces in Europe which have a default resource which doesn't really exist.
Oh, yeah, regarding the Knights/Malta question, are we sure this is not already implemented into the game? i have played 1 full game and 1 partial as Turkey and in both case i annexed Rhodes early on and in both games Malta eventually revolted from Spain and formed the new country 'Knights'.
Seems to work for me!
Michael
Michael
A wealth of ideas and info you have! I am so tired right now, I can't reply but wished to ack that I read your post with interest. Get back to you tomorrow.
A wealth of ideas and info you have! I am so tired right now, I can't reply but wished to ack that I read your post with interest. Get back to you tomorrow.
I disagree about Montenegro, they were Orthodox Serbs(not Illyrians) who did not want to pay taxes, but they were certainly not under the Ottoman Empire, not even in name.
They werent just hillmen, they did have a few cities like Cetinje, and even a few ports (they did reach the sea) like Kotor and Bar.
I think they are worthy of implementation, but if we did, we would have to scrap Ragusa That might make things more interesting though, Montenegro would be no ones vassall...
We could implement them by giving them a stability of -3, and by giving them a level 3 or 4 fortress.
They werent just hillmen, they did have a few cities like Cetinje, and even a few ports (they did reach the sea) like Kotor and Bar.
I think they are worthy of implementation, but if we did, we would have to scrap Ragusa
That might make things more interesting though, Montenegro would be no ones vassall...We could implement them by giving them a stability of -3, and by giving them a level 3 or 4 fortress.
But how would you possibly simulate their ability to remain unconquered? Even a level 4 fortress would be taken eventually.
- I think that Britanny has definitely the right to be implemented (vassal, top relations, military alliance). There were intermarriages with France since 1491, but they were not annexed til 1532. This also makes the game more interesting. The new tech settings more than compensate France for the initial 3 province loss. The only thing maybe preventing this implementation now is the current inability of the engine to annex *any* country diplomatically.
- I now see the historicity problems about Ireland and so I´ll most probably scrap it again. Makes it also easier for England to hold it´s own.
- Kastille/Aragon and Poland/Lithuania splits will NOT be implemented as the game simply cannot handle them.
- As stated repeatedly, I will NOT scrap Ragusa for Montenegro.
- I will leave Provence (PRO tag) alone for the next version - the poll will be on for a time to come ...
Requests:
- If Serbia should be implemented in the future, someone has to give me a 'reasonable' monarch list for them.
- I also need the rulers of Bremen, in case this bishopry will finally make it.
Hartmann
- I now see the historicity problems about Ireland and so I´ll most probably scrap it again. Makes it also easier for England to hold it´s own.
- Kastille/Aragon and Poland/Lithuania splits will NOT be implemented as the game simply cannot handle them.
- As stated repeatedly, I will NOT scrap Ragusa for Montenegro.
- I will leave Provence (PRO tag) alone for the next version - the poll will be on for a time to come ...
Requests:
- If Serbia should be implemented in the future, someone has to give me a 'reasonable' monarch list for them.
- I also need the rulers of Bremen, in case this bishopry will finally make it.
Hartmann
Posted this in the main thread also, but as it is important: Johan just fixed a bug responsible for the lack of diplomatical annexations. This means: Bretagne will be IN!
To prevent misunderstandings: This has nothing to do with what we will reserve the PRO tag for.
Hartmann
To prevent misunderstandings: This has nothing to do with what we will reserve the PRO tag for.
Hartmann
Re: playing tag
Great info on Hungary, do you have an answer for a related question of mine:
My map source hints that both Silesia and Moravia (eastern part of Czechia) belonged to Hungary in 1492. And that Bohemia proper belonged to Hungary in 1526. Can you comment?
Rgds,
Johan
Originally posted by laurent Favre
A little more development about Transylvania... i've more time
<snip>
So Transylvania would be a nation at start in 1492, with very bad diplomatic value with Hungary , - 2or -1 with Austria and 1 or 2 with Turkey.
IMHO, makes perfectly sense
Great info on Hungary, do you have an answer for a related question of mine:
My map source hints that both Silesia and Moravia (eastern part of Czechia) belonged to Hungary in 1492. And that Bohemia proper belonged to Hungary in 1526. Can you comment?
Rgds,
Johan
Lycortas2
Mantua if I recall correctly was the kingdom that Venice had taken control of and that the Papacy formed the Treaty of Cambrai to get back. It involved some dynastic dispute that the Venetians took advantage of and that the Papacy, slow to act, found itself humiliated over and so wished to wage war but had to form a coalition to do so. In which case, I would keep it in Venice for that reason. Also, As the better maps of the era illustrate, Venice controlled more territory than is actually depicted in the startup. Their realm extended to the outskirts of Milan. Milan was essentially a rump of what it had been, with Venice controlling Brescia.
The 'production' of Venice was salt, glass, fish, and finished metals. Certainly it produced these goods as well as traded them.
I agree on Provence and thanks for the validation.
Mr. H - I agree with your choices on the IGC changes. If France works well with Bretagne separate, there is no reason not to implement it as it would be both historically accurate and not hurt gameplay. I'm curious about how that will work myself.
I also strongly agree on excluding Montenegro. Lycortas succinctly outlined my own reservations: they were reclusive, were diplomatically, cultrurally, and militarilly a non-factor. You (H) also provided good technical reasons why it would be a non-starter. How could they even compare to Ragusa on any basis other than they would 'add a twist to the game'? That is not a sound basis for substituting any country for another.
Mantua if I recall correctly was the kingdom that Venice had taken control of and that the Papacy formed the Treaty of Cambrai to get back. It involved some dynastic dispute that the Venetians took advantage of and that the Papacy, slow to act, found itself humiliated over and so wished to wage war but had to form a coalition to do so. In which case, I would keep it in Venice for that reason. Also, As the better maps of the era illustrate, Venice controlled more territory than is actually depicted in the startup. Their realm extended to the outskirts of Milan. Milan was essentially a rump of what it had been, with Venice controlling Brescia.
The 'production' of Venice was salt, glass, fish, and finished metals. Certainly it produced these goods as well as traded them.
I agree on Provence and thanks for the validation.
Mr. H - I agree with your choices on the IGC changes. If France works well with Bretagne separate, there is no reason not to implement it as it would be both historically accurate and not hurt gameplay. I'm curious about how that will work myself.
I also strongly agree on excluding Montenegro. Lycortas succinctly outlined my own reservations: they were reclusive, were diplomatically, cultrurally, and militarilly a non-factor. You (H) also provided good technical reasons why it would be a non-starter. How could they even compare to Ragusa on any basis other than they would 'add a twist to the game'? That is not a sound basis for substituting any country for another.
Re: Re: playing tag
Ladislas II jagellon was both king of hungary (1490-1516) and Bohemia (1471-1516).His son Louis II ruled both kingdom until 1526. At his death, his succession came into the hands of the Habsburg.
It was a personal union, witthout common institutions, and hungarian king was elected.
regards,
laurent
Ladislas II jagellon was both king of hungary (1490-1516) and Bohemia (1471-1516).His son Louis II ruled both kingdom until 1526. At his death, his succession came into the hands of the Habsburg.
It was a personal union, witthout common institutions, and hungarian king was elected.
regards,
laurent
Savant,
I understand your feelings about Mantua...
I don't know if they deserve to be independent or not at this point. Probably not i guess, but i'm not sure, still researching!
Hartmann, one change i would make is your art academy in Venice should more acurately be in Mantua as Mantua was with Florence the most interested in supporting art, music, science etc. and i would list Milan before Vanice for an art academy. No, i don't hate Venice but their wealth was based on trade and they tended to be fairly reactionary and conservetive when it came to new things (other than new ship designs!).
I do not agree that Milan was a 'rump'; the regent and later Duke was also Duke of Bari which was about half of the Province of Apulia in the game, and wasn't Milan overlord of Bergama and Montferrat at this time?
Also, does it seem like Firenze is a bit to far south? they have Firenze where Siena or Perugia should be. I think maybe this was done to give Luca a full province, but honestly, Luca's territory was very small.
Thanks for the complement! i wish i could provide as much as some of you have!
So, can we have a Cathar/Templar/Jewish state of Septimania show up as a revolter in Languedoc or Quercy? i could easily make a monarch file for the 'country as well!
okay, maybe not...
Michael
I understand your feelings about Mantua...
I don't know if they deserve to be independent or not at this point. Probably not i guess, but i'm not sure, still researching!
Hartmann, one change i would make is your art academy in Venice should more acurately be in Mantua as Mantua was with Florence the most interested in supporting art, music, science etc. and i would list Milan before Vanice for an art academy. No, i don't hate Venice but their wealth was based on trade and they tended to be fairly reactionary and conservetive when it came to new things (other than new ship designs!).
I do not agree that Milan was a 'rump'; the regent and later Duke was also Duke of Bari which was about half of the Province of Apulia in the game, and wasn't Milan overlord of Bergama and Montferrat at this time?
Also, does it seem like Firenze is a bit to far south? they have Firenze where Siena or Perugia should be. I think maybe this was done to give Luca a full province, but honestly, Luca's territory was very small.
Thanks for the complement! i wish i could provide as much as some of you have!
So, can we have a Cathar/Templar/Jewish state of Septimania show up as a revolter in Languedoc or Quercy? i could easily make a monarch file for the 'country as well!
okay, maybe not...
Michael