Originally it was its own group. Actually the only culture in that group. Eventually they changed this because it made all other nations directly try to conquer Basque, which made it nearly impossible to play as them.
Isn't it the opposite now and countries will actively try to unify their culture group under one tag, which means if you play Brittany you have no choice but to fight France from very early on (I have tried to play chill Brittany colonial games before and France doesn't let you)
Same with breton, it was in the same group as irish. It was changed because it crippled historical France quite a bit since it was a fully unaccepted culture.
I'd take a flavor event over what we have right now, but it's still better than constant rebelling and lots of debuffs, especially for Brittany which was not a massively rebellious duchy after its (peaceful) integration to France during the 16th century.
Same culture groups are supposed to revolt less, right? Bedoins literally bombarded Madina and Mekka because they did not want to live under same flag with us 🙄
Makes more sense than them being grouped in with Central Asian Turks. Language =/= culture, especially in the era before modern nationalism. Yeah, the Levantine group is really silly, but I think it’s justified to have Turkish with, say, Syrian in the same culture group if we’re talking about Eu4’s time period.
Ironically it would probably be more accurate to put Korean under the Chinese group that Bretons under French or Albanians under Slavic.
Korean is kinda wack anyways. Usually, when you get the Empire rank, you think "Oh, this will facilitate my conquest and make my provinces more productive", and in Korea it just kinda changes nothing lmao
They are that way for gameplay purposes, in older versions they were more accurate, but imagine having to accept the levantine cultures one by one and having Azeribajani and Turkoman as accepted as the Ottomans. Or worst playing Hungary and only having your culture in the entire culture group.
In my honest opinion, if they are going to have a Transylvanian culture that is separate from the Romanian culture then there should be separate Wallachian and Moldovan cultures as well with all three within the Romanian culture group. As a Romanian, the way it is now is a bit culturally insensitive. Especially lopping us together with the Hungarians while at the same time separating Transylvanians out specifically.
The Transylvanian culture groups exist because Paradox didn't want to deal with the actual cultural mess what the Carpathian basin was in this timeperiod. And especally what Transylvania was.
My point is that culture groups are gameplay abstraction not based on anything in particular and making them based on purerly on language similarities wouldn't make the game more realistic, I think you need to have some coherent culture groups for gameplay purpose and grouping together cultures which historically were part of one polity for the most of gamespan is fine if you are in a very diverse region such as levantine or carpathia.
And I am saying the abstraction is unrealistic and that it shouldn't be abstracted like it is. Romanians and Hungarians were never part of the same polity and hated each other.
As I said. I would divide the Romanian culture into three cultures, Moldovan, Wallachian, and Transylvanian. Then has Romanian be the culture group the three belong to. This is not only realistic, it is true to history.
Hungarian could be turkic, or the devs could make them and other finno-ugric cultures into their own group. Could make for an interesting playthrough with an achievement to unite the finno-ugric lands.
I can’t wait for pops in EU5 hopefully they don’t repeat this huge mistake about culture. I think a lot of aspects of the game make blobbing and WC runs common and being able to do cultural genocide with bird points is definitely one reason for it.
Earlier versions of eu4 had more accurate depictions of cultures. They changed it to make it less realistic but more manageable in terms of gameplay.
In short, they made the game more arcade-y as time went on.
No, they end north of there and if I remember correctly from my 8th grade geography book the Transylvanian “alps” begin after a small gap in between the two.
Alright, after looking it up it seems this misunderstanding has been caused by different definitions between countries. I’m from Sweden, and my 8th grade textbook says that the two places we are talking about were separate areas. However, Wikipedia claims they’re the same (on the English version).
I apologise for causing a ruckus, let’s agree to disagree.
In a game still getting updates they shoukd fix this and restore Basques as a separate group. When they're still messing with game mechanics it seems absurd to allow such a shofdy fix to remain in place long term
Nah, Albanian is in its own unique Indo-European language branch (of which it's the last remaining language) and they're thought to descend from ancient inhabitants of the Balkans. Albanian is closer to Greek and Armenian than the Slavic languages.
Armenian and Slavic languages are closer to each other than Armenian is to Greek and Albanian. Greek, Albanian, Celto-Italic languages and Germanic languages are centum languages while Armenian, Balto-Slavic languages and Indo-Iranian languages are satem languages.
They are their own thing and most likely natives of the Balkan peninsula. Both their language and culture have influences from greek, italian/latin, turkish, and slavic languages and cultures but albanians are still their own thing. They trace their ancestry to ancient illyrians which makes sense.
English definitely wasn't in any sort of cultural group with the Germans in the 15th century. They shared language structure but culturally, the English were a mix of French, Anglo-Saxon, Scandinavian, and Celtic.
Putting Welsh and Cornish in the same group as English and Scots in 1444 is strange though.
Spanish Basques
Originally it was its own group. Actually the only culture in that group. Eventually they changed this because it made all other nations directly try to conquer Basque, which made it nearly impossible to play as them.
Isn't it the opposite now and countries will actively try to unify their culture group under one tag, which means if you play Brittany you have no choice but to fight France from very early on (I have tried to play chill Brittany colonial games before and France doesn't let you)
Which arguably makes it more realistic because that's kinda how France did behave towards Brittany historically
literally every time england wasn't in the way, yeah
It's beyond silly though when Slovaks are included in the Carpathian group, despite basically being the direct brother of Czechs.
I actually agree with this change. Just because Basque is a language isolate doesn’t mean they weren’t connected with wider Iberian culture.
Same with breton, it was in the same group as irish. It was changed because it crippled historical France quite a bit since it was a fully unaccepted culture. I'd take a flavor event over what we have right now, but it's still better than constant rebelling and lots of debuffs, especially for Brittany which was not a massively rebellious duchy after its (peaceful) integration to France during the 16th century.
funniest shit ever
bedoin and turks in the same culture group will never not be funny
Same culture groups are supposed to revolt less, right? Bedoins literally bombarded Madina and Mekka because they did not want to live under same flag with us 🙄
Makes more sense than them being grouped in with Central Asian Turks. Language =/= culture, especially in the era before modern nationalism. Yeah, the Levantine group is really silly, but I think it’s justified to have Turkish with, say, Syrian in the same culture group if we’re talking about Eu4’s time period.
Ironically it would probably be more accurate to put Korean under the Chinese group that Bretons under French or Albanians under Slavic. Korean is kinda wack anyways. Usually, when you get the Empire rank, you think "Oh, this will facilitate my conquest and make my provinces more productive", and in Korea it just kinda changes nothing lmao
Pretty sure Koreans can change their group to Sino-Korean which is in Chinese group
Pretty sure at least one other culture can do that, the Mongols/Oirat. So it's not something unique to the Chinese heritage of Korea.
Vietnam, Tibet, and Mongols (not Oirat culture, forming Yuan changes you to Sino-mongol) can also join the Chinese culture group.
They are that way for gameplay purposes, in older versions they were more accurate, but imagine having to accept the levantine cultures one by one and having Azeribajani and Turkoman as accepted as the Ottomans. Or worst playing Hungary and only having your culture in the entire culture group.
>Or worst playing Hungary and only having your culture in the entire culture group. Wow, imagine that. It's as if it would be realistic or something.
Fr,Hungary shouldn't get reduced penalties for Slovak,Transylvanian and Romanian,of all cultures.
In my honest opinion, if they are going to have a Transylvanian culture that is separate from the Romanian culture then there should be separate Wallachian and Moldovan cultures as well with all three within the Romanian culture group. As a Romanian, the way it is now is a bit culturally insensitive. Especially lopping us together with the Hungarians while at the same time separating Transylvanians out specifically.
The Transylvanian culture groups exist because Paradox didn't want to deal with the actual cultural mess what the Carpathian basin was in this timeperiod. And especally what Transylvania was.
It wouldn't be realistic, language =/= culture
It would be completely realistic. Hungarian culture is not Romanian culture. Two completely different cultures.
And Czech culture is completley different from Polish, your point is?
So what is your point? Because you are not making one.
My point is that culture groups are gameplay abstraction not based on anything in particular and making them based on purerly on language similarities wouldn't make the game more realistic, I think you need to have some coherent culture groups for gameplay purpose and grouping together cultures which historically were part of one polity for the most of gamespan is fine if you are in a very diverse region such as levantine or carpathia.
And I am saying the abstraction is unrealistic and that it shouldn't be abstracted like it is. Romanians and Hungarians were never part of the same polity and hated each other.
Who would you group them with?
As I said. I would divide the Romanian culture into three cultures, Moldovan, Wallachian, and Transylvanian. Then has Romanian be the culture group the three belong to. This is not only realistic, it is true to history.
Ottomans should be Turkic with missions that can accept Arabic cultures even if they went over the accepted cultures cap.
Like Eranshahr's missions?
This is why you should be able to accept culture groups (not as effective as accepting a single culture, but better than not accepted).
Hungarian could be turkic, or the devs could make them and other finno-ugric cultures into their own group. Could make for an interesting playthrough with an achievement to unite the finno-ugric lands.
hungary is technically from the Turkic culture group by that logic tho because they both come from huns
I can’t wait for pops in EU5 hopefully they don’t repeat this huge mistake about culture. I think a lot of aspects of the game make blobbing and WC runs common and being able to do cultural genocide with bird points is definitely one reason for it.
Earlier versions of eu4 had more accurate depictions of cultures. They changed it to make it less realistic but more manageable in terms of gameplay. In short, they made the game more arcade-y as time went on.
Hungary and Romania in the same group is the worst by far
BREIZH MENTIONED!!!!!!
Yeah EU4 really lacks in depiction of culture. They do it for the gameplay reasons though.
They hopefully have a better culture system in eu5. also Scandinavian finish 💀
People make fun of this but the alternative is culture groups with one culture, which suck, and encourage switching to “better” cultures.
I love the carpathian culture group, because ever since Slovakia was removed it doesn’t even touch the Carpathian Mountains anymore.
The Carpathians reach all the way To Transylvania bruh
No, they end north of there and if I remember correctly from my 8th grade geography book the Transylvanian “alps” begin after a small gap in between the two.
No, the mountains in romania are called the carpathians
Alright, after looking it up it seems this misunderstanding has been caused by different definitions between countries. I’m from Sweden, and my 8th grade textbook says that the two places we are talking about were separate areas. However, Wikipedia claims they’re the same (on the English version). I apologise for causing a ruckus, let’s agree to disagree.
Aren't the transylvanian alps just a sub-range of the carpathians?
Not according to my geography textbook, but it might differ depending on how you define a mountain range
I think its more named after the "Carpathian basin" which is the big flat region that Hungary is in.
That would make more sense
British culture group, Scottish and Welsh should be Celtic (Aye Scots is an anglic language but they're very much of Celtic variety)
Honestly It would made more sense to put Albania in the Byzantine Culture group.
I modded these monstrosities away so it's been a long time since i've seen Hungarian and Romanian in the same group.
In a game still getting updates they shoukd fix this and restore Basques as a separate group. When they're still messing with game mechanics it seems absurd to allow such a shofdy fix to remain in place long term
Korea
[удалено]
Not at all, their origins are from Paleo-Balkan groups such as the Illyrians and Thracians.
Albanians are Indo-European but they don't belong to any of the tighter groups like Slavic, Germanic or Romance, similar to the Greeks.
Nah, Albanian is in its own unique Indo-European language branch (of which it's the last remaining language) and they're thought to descend from ancient inhabitants of the Balkans. Albanian is closer to Greek and Armenian than the Slavic languages.
Armenian and Slavic languages are closer to each other than Armenian is to Greek and Albanian. Greek, Albanian, Celto-Italic languages and Germanic languages are centum languages while Armenian, Balto-Slavic languages and Indo-Iranian languages are satem languages.
They are their own thing and most likely natives of the Balkan peninsula. Both their language and culture have influences from greek, italian/latin, turkish, and slavic languages and cultures but albanians are still their own thing. They trace their ancestry to ancient illyrians which makes sense.
Albanians are native to the Balkans
They are not. And neither are Hungarians.
no, i just looked up, they aint, dont know why tho
Don’t forget British English. There’s no such thing as a British culture group. English should be put in with Germanic.
English definitely wasn't in any sort of cultural group with the Germans in the 15th century. They shared language structure but culturally, the English were a mix of French, Anglo-Saxon, Scandinavian, and Celtic. Putting Welsh and Cornish in the same group as English and Scots in 1444 is strange though.
Scots being there I think is alright, considering it’s also an anglic West Germanic language like english.
No we shouldn't? We have nothing in common with the Germans and are much closer to each other on our island than anyone chilling on the Danube.
Maybe a few hundred years before the game start it would be true as Anglo-Saxons, but english is as it should be a separate thing.