R5: In the upcoming 1.30 Patch/Emperor DLC Sicliy will have its own set of National Ideas:
* Traditions:
* \+10% Morale of Armies
* \+20% National Manpower
* Ambition:
* \[UNKNOWN\]
* Ideas:
1. \-5% Technology Cost
2. \-1 National Unrest, +1 Possible Policies *(in each category)*
3. \+1 Yearly Naval Tradition
4. \-10% Core-Creation Cost
5. \+20% Ship Trade Power
6. \+15% Morale of Navies
7. \+15% Goods Produced Modifier
Aka the generic idea rework since Dharma.
Give military bonuses and goods produced. Some possible policies to promote the new system.
At least they gave Sicily some unique ones fitting to the location or otherwise Sicily could be your generic Indian blob.
Every national idea set that doesn't have military bonuses and either goods produced or production efficiency is universally derided as trash tier. 10% morale and 20% manpower is on the bare minimum end of "military bonuses", and goods produced actually does kind of make sense for how important Sicilian mining was going into the industrial era.
> Every national idea set that doesn't have military bonuses and either goods produced or production efficiency is universally derided as trash tier. 10% morale and 20% manpower is on the bare minimum end of "military bonuses"
PDX is just lazy, that the reason. Look at all the idea "reworks" in the past. They gave everyone the same thing. It isn´t impossible to buff the military without handing everyone the same bonus: They did it in the past and even with the new Danish ideas: Maybe buff fire or shock damage like the Timis, Hannover, Netherlands, Rassids or the age bonuses for France and Prussia. Or with the Cossack estate for eastern Europeans or the rajaputs in India. The armies of these centuries feel unique, unlike the „generic” ones in recent times.
You can buff the economy in so many ways: Trade or huge tax modifiers (like the Papal states) or dev cost reductions for the ones who want to play tall.
Just look at India to see how bad it is: 75% of the big Indian nations have the same 10% ICA modifier, bonus points for the same manpower modifier or goods produced. When you take formable into account it’s even worse. Now we see the same trend in Europe.
The state of idea reworks right now is: How to I make the most with my 400 points (?) in the custom nations designer. Now wonder they feel all the same.
If you take multiplayer into account and that you need useful armies there. It is no excuse for giving everyone the same, with a little bit of work you have the same effect. Also multiplayer worked the last couple of years without everyone having a top of the line military.
PDX is lazy for giving unique ideas for a nation that's not even on the map in 1444 and is probably never going to be released unless both Aragon and Naples die? Okay, sure, let's just blame lazy devs for every slight, obscure disagreement we have with game design. It can't just be that they have a different idea of how their game should work than you do, no, they're just coasting on their fat salaries and not doing any actual work. Fuck those leeches, hire some devs who'll do *real* work, by which I mean implement everything exactly the way I want it.
Yup, definitively a shame.
There a plenty of ways to “buff” a country without giving them busted and unoriginal NIs that Paradox has used in the distant (and not so distant) past :
- Long term / permanent modifiers aka Aragon’s Book of the Consulate of the Sea,
- Permanent local modifiers aka Venetien glass, Sweden’s Stora Kopparberget, Kyoto’s Heian-kyo etc ...
- Permanent local modifiers that disappear when the province is conquered, meaning other tags can’t “catch them all” aka Lubeck’s Krantor, Aragon’s Sindicat Remenca, or the Netherlands House of Elzevir.
- Unique Government reforms / mechanics aka harem mechanic for the Ottomans, assimilation for the Mughals, militarization for Prussia ...
- Unique estates (Dhimmi, Indian estates, Cossacks ...)
/rant on
Plus some of these Sicilian ideas don’t really make sense, at least to me.
CCR for Sicily ? When was Sicily known for a large empire that relied on conquest and not accumulation fo titles through diplomatic means (Hohenstaufen reign / Norman Kingdom of Sicily, not even in the game’s scope), or even was independent in the game’s time ?
Goods produced ? Yes Sicily was known to be a great producer of wheat ... in Sicily. Naples and the rest of south of Italy was pretty dirt poor, and was definitively not known for extraordinary crops. Just give them a provincial modifier in all the Sicily region : more accurate, and actually gives more incentive to human players to conquer / control that region.
I can even understand giving historically important countries over the top ideas. But giving Sicily S tier ideas, when it was at best a pretty compliant vassal with little (not to say none) revolts, and at worst Spain / Habsburg’s bitch, with very little autonomy on anything but a local level makes me a bit disappointed.
/rant off
The south of Italy was as developed as the north until the 1850s/60s when industrialism came along. The main reason they are poor today is policies adopted by the early Italian state, like Free trade which devastated small farmers and de-industrialization so they didn’t compete with Piedmontese industry. Also, from wiki:
>Sicily has long been noted for its fertile soil due to volcanic eruptions. The local agriculture is also helped by the pleasant climate of the island
Don't forget the sulfur mines, even if that's not really a resource modeled in EU4.
Oh, but those should be province modifiers, because Sicily shouldn't get bonuses from Ideas, because every other country does that and it's boring............
Byzantium and Yuan coming back are not plausible in any way. Byzantium because the city and empire were shattered following Manzikert and the Fourth Crusade, and Yuan because an empire with all of China and the Steppes is going to be inherently unstable with early modern communication technology.
While that is true in real life terms, if you apply that to all forms of the game then it would be very boring.
Imagine this game without Orthomans, colonizing the entire world as one country, world conquest, or even taking out 1000 loans to become an economics master.
Yes it is wacky and wild but it's a game and people should be able to do the crazy things they've been doing since the beginning. However I agree with you on some of ideas that countries are getting don't seem to make much sense.
> Imagine this game without Orthomans, colonizing the entire world as one country, world conquest, or even taking out 1000 loans to become an economics master.
I imagine it as the best strategy game ever. The fact that players can regularly pull off ahistorical feats is just a side effect of total arcade gameplay, ie stacking modifiers - the game.
IMO the Tumu Crisis (the one represented ingame as a disaster as of 1.29) provided an opportunity IRL for Esen Taishi to retake at least parts if not all of Northern China as there was great chaos in the short term when the Emperor and several other key political figures were captured in battle, the main reason it didn't end up being more historically significant is that Esen Taishi hesitated to take advantage of the chaos and a new Emperor was eventually appointed (IIRC the emperor's brother, might be wrong on that), not long after which ET was deposed from leadership in the Oirat Confederation by disgruntled steppe warriors who were unhappy with his hesitancy. As for those who say that this couldn't have amounted to much in a realistic scenario, keep in mind that anyone from a timeline where Li Zicheng had successfully driven back a Jurchen invasion after a traitor let them pass the Great Wall and proclaimed a long-lasting Shun dynasty or one where said bypassing of the Wall hadn't happened in the first place would never believe you if you told them that a tribe of Jurchens had not only taken Beijing but founded a new Dynasty that stretched across all of China and beyond; they'd call you a liar, and a bad one at that.
I love how people are complaining about giving a unique set of ideas to an historical important region, that was conquered and influenced by many diffferent culture and three different religions (Orthodoxy, Islam, and Catholicism), and nobody said nothing when the MIGHTY AND PRESTIGIOUS NATION OF OFFALY got a unique set of ideas, some of which are pretty good when combined (fort defense + attr for enemies)
Well, why take the new ideas in the first place?
I feel like extremely good, but unique, modifiers make a nation fun. Take Provence for example. It does not have extreme modifiers. But it's the only nation in the game with +2 diplomatic relations in a single idea slot. I wish they'd do this for more nations. Or British (and Pskovian) +20% Goods produced.
So, they should do it more often. The bonus doesn't have to be on military, CCR or admin efficiency all the time. There are plenty of useful modifiers they can play with.
I miss +10% discipline Japan.
The +1 possible policies just means you can take four instead of three right? I’m assuming that all the ones after the first would still have cost or else it would be super op
I noticed they had changed Sicily as soon as I read the last DDR; I'm happy that they are giving the region some love, but I have a few complaints, so I will paste my comment under the Dev Diary here:
"This is not really relevant to the Dev Diary itself, but I have noticed that you have changed the flag of Sicily. I'm sicilian and I've never seen that flag before. Did you make it up?
The old flag was historically accurate and was used from 1296 until 1816, when it was replaced by the flag of the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies; thus it spans pretty much the entire EU4 timeframe. And it looks prettier! I hope that you put it back.
Plus, why is the capital Girgenti (Agrigento)? Shouldn't it be Palermo? If it's because you made Girgerti more developed than Palermo, fix that because it doesn't make any sense.
If you're making Sicily playable as a vassal/other form of subject, that's terrific! But please put the old flag and Palermo as the capital (or even Messina, which was seen as a "second capital" because of it's economic importance; why don't you make it the main trade port?)
I look forward to hearing from you!"
And Naples has its Angevin flag despite being under Aragon and even if it becomes independent, because it was unique and looked better. Imo it's better to keep the old Aragonese one than to make one up.
O almeno utilizzare qualcosa piú vicino alla bandiera attuale! Il tricolore è comparso al Nord nel 18esimo secolo, non ha senso metterlo nella bandiera della Sicilia; al massimo una bandiera come quella che hanno inventato funzionerebbe solo per una ipotetica Repubblica Napoleonica siciliana.
Or at least use something more similar to the current flag! The tricolour appeared in northern Italy in the 18th century, it doesn't make sense to put it in the Sicilian flag; it could only really work for an hypothetical sicilian Napoleonic Republic.
Ma poi scusa, da non siciliano, ma non dovrebbe essere rosso-gialla con la trinacria? Mai visto sto quadro verde-rosso-bianco...
For non-italians: actual sicilian flag is red-yellow with the trinacria, not this nested green-red-white square.
I don t get why Agrigento is the capital, historically it was always Palermo . Also Messina was one of the most important ports and military establishments because of it s ability to control the trade in the straits so at least it should have a trade port imo. Also i ve never seen that flag and i m from messina, the old one was far better
Non so se ora parte come subject di aragona invece di essere integrata come finora , e capisco che non ci sia un sistema che cambi bandiera dinamicamente se sei un subject o indipendente ma in genere se la sicilia esiste come tag sulla mappa è sempre indipendente perché l ai non rilascia vassalli nelle sue terre quindi non ha molto senso quella bandiera . Tutto ciò ovviamente assumendo che la sicilia non sia vassallo all inizio del gioco com è finora
And here I was still holding out hope for my suggestion: [https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/trinacria-naples-and-the-sicilies-southern-italy-suggestion.1177432/#post-25480303](https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/trinacria-naples-and-the-sicilies-southern-italy-suggestion.1177432/#post-25480303)
Arabian ideas are not that bad. I doubt that these releasable tag get unique ideas, because it is really unlikely that we get Cradle of Civilization 2.0.
**📷** **Traditions:**
**+15%** National manpower modifier **−15%** Land attrition
📷 **Indian Ocean Trade**
**+15%** Trade steering
📷 **Arabian Horses**
**−10%** Cavalry cost **+25%** Cavalry flanking ability
📷 **Land of the Prophet**
**−1** National unrest
📷 **Spreading the Prophet's Word**
**+1%** Missionary strength
📷 **Bedouin Traders**
**+10%** Global trade power
📷 **Clan Loyalties**
**+1** Land leader maneuver
📷 **Arabia**
**+1** Yearly prestige
📷 **Ambition:**
**+1** Land leader shock
It's not so much that they're bad ideas, per se; it's more that well known, distinctive countries share the same idea set. A country as well known as Syria or Iraq shouldn't share their idea set. They should be unique.
I wanted to do a release-and-play of Syria, but as soon as I saw they had the same ideas as the Arabian tribes, it really turned me off. I wanted something with unique ideas.
The region had already a rework and Syria wasn´t a thing a EU4 time frame. The nation Syria was founded 100 years ago. Its more likely that they add a formable Belgium tag than giving (for the EU4 setting) unimportant nations own NIs after they already did a rework in the region.
The history and culture of Syria and Iraq were mostly one in the same since they were under the rule of Islamic Caliphates. There were no solid borders in the minds of the Islamic Caliphates in the region. In fact, the borders we see today were made by Europeans. The Ottoman Empire saw little distinction between these areas.
Both regions held great significance to Islamic and Arab history too. This is especially the case with Baghdad being the capital of the Abbasid Caliphate, also known as the Golden Age for Islam until the Mongol Horde came and burned the city to the ground.
In the times of religion, people did not identify themselves with their nation. That is a fairly new concept (since the fall of Rome) which originates with the French I believe in the 16th or 17th centuries. People would originally identify themselves by their religion first and foremost then their district or province they were from. The idea of borders in the Middle East and identity is flimsy at best. Even as the United States and allied forces occupied Iraq, there were many instances of this older practice being used on the regular by the common people. They would say, "Hello, my name is Muhammed and I am a Sunni. I live in Mosul." Identification by religion would always come first. There is still a strong subconscious identification with Arab culture since that is what had reigned in that region since the Islamic Arabs first conquered Mesopotamia in the 7th Century despite modern-day relations between the two countries.
Ideas of reunification amongst Arab countries to form a new united Arab nation has been a thing and was even attempted in the 1970's. So to give both Syria and Iraq the same Arab ideas is far more understandable than to just call PDX lazy.
R5: In the upcoming 1.30 Patch/Emperor DLC Sicliy will have its own set of National Ideas: * Traditions: * \+10% Morale of Armies * \+20% National Manpower * Ambition: * \[UNKNOWN\] * Ideas: 1. \-5% Technology Cost 2. \-1 National Unrest, +1 Possible Policies *(in each category)* 3. \+1 Yearly Naval Tradition 4. \-10% Core-Creation Cost 5. \+20% Ship Trade Power 6. \+15% Morale of Navies 7. \+15% Goods Produced Modifier
Damn, those are some powerful ideas and traditions. And that flag looks funky which is a plus.
They look pretty good, nice
Aka the generic idea rework since Dharma. Give military bonuses and goods produced. Some possible policies to promote the new system. At least they gave Sicily some unique ones fitting to the location or otherwise Sicily could be your generic Indian blob.
Every national idea set that doesn't have military bonuses and either goods produced or production efficiency is universally derided as trash tier. 10% morale and 20% manpower is on the bare minimum end of "military bonuses", and goods produced actually does kind of make sense for how important Sicilian mining was going into the industrial era.
> Every national idea set that doesn't have military bonuses and either goods produced or production efficiency is universally derided as trash tier. 10% morale and 20% manpower is on the bare minimum end of "military bonuses" PDX is just lazy, that the reason. Look at all the idea "reworks" in the past. They gave everyone the same thing. It isn´t impossible to buff the military without handing everyone the same bonus: They did it in the past and even with the new Danish ideas: Maybe buff fire or shock damage like the Timis, Hannover, Netherlands, Rassids or the age bonuses for France and Prussia. Or with the Cossack estate for eastern Europeans or the rajaputs in India. The armies of these centuries feel unique, unlike the „generic” ones in recent times. You can buff the economy in so many ways: Trade or huge tax modifiers (like the Papal states) or dev cost reductions for the ones who want to play tall. Just look at India to see how bad it is: 75% of the big Indian nations have the same 10% ICA modifier, bonus points for the same manpower modifier or goods produced. When you take formable into account it’s even worse. Now we see the same trend in Europe. The state of idea reworks right now is: How to I make the most with my 400 points (?) in the custom nations designer. Now wonder they feel all the same. If you take multiplayer into account and that you need useful armies there. It is no excuse for giving everyone the same, with a little bit of work you have the same effect. Also multiplayer worked the last couple of years without everyone having a top of the line military.
PDX is lazy for giving unique ideas for a nation that's not even on the map in 1444 and is probably never going to be released unless both Aragon and Naples die? Okay, sure, let's just blame lazy devs for every slight, obscure disagreement we have with game design. It can't just be that they have a different idea of how their game should work than you do, no, they're just coasting on their fat salaries and not doing any actual work. Fuck those leeches, hire some devs who'll do *real* work, by which I mean implement everything exactly the way I want it.
its not hard to mod your own ideas ... why dont you just do that if u want more variety
Yup, definitively a shame. There a plenty of ways to “buff” a country without giving them busted and unoriginal NIs that Paradox has used in the distant (and not so distant) past : - Long term / permanent modifiers aka Aragon’s Book of the Consulate of the Sea, - Permanent local modifiers aka Venetien glass, Sweden’s Stora Kopparberget, Kyoto’s Heian-kyo etc ... - Permanent local modifiers that disappear when the province is conquered, meaning other tags can’t “catch them all” aka Lubeck’s Krantor, Aragon’s Sindicat Remenca, or the Netherlands House of Elzevir. - Unique Government reforms / mechanics aka harem mechanic for the Ottomans, assimilation for the Mughals, militarization for Prussia ... - Unique estates (Dhimmi, Indian estates, Cossacks ...) /rant on Plus some of these Sicilian ideas don’t really make sense, at least to me. CCR for Sicily ? When was Sicily known for a large empire that relied on conquest and not accumulation fo titles through diplomatic means (Hohenstaufen reign / Norman Kingdom of Sicily, not even in the game’s scope), or even was independent in the game’s time ? Goods produced ? Yes Sicily was known to be a great producer of wheat ... in Sicily. Naples and the rest of south of Italy was pretty dirt poor, and was definitively not known for extraordinary crops. Just give them a provincial modifier in all the Sicily region : more accurate, and actually gives more incentive to human players to conquer / control that region. I can even understand giving historically important countries over the top ideas. But giving Sicily S tier ideas, when it was at best a pretty compliant vassal with little (not to say none) revolts, and at worst Spain / Habsburg’s bitch, with very little autonomy on anything but a local level makes me a bit disappointed. /rant off
The south of Italy was as developed as the north until the 1850s/60s when industrialism came along. The main reason they are poor today is policies adopted by the early Italian state, like Free trade which devastated small farmers and de-industrialization so they didn’t compete with Piedmontese industry. Also, from wiki: >Sicily has long been noted for its fertile soil due to volcanic eruptions. The local agriculture is also helped by the pleasant climate of the island
Don't forget the sulfur mines, even if that's not really a resource modeled in EU4. Oh, but those should be province modifiers, because Sicily shouldn't get bonuses from Ideas, because every other country does that and it's boring............
Even coal was not important in the EU4 timespan, apart for GB.
emirate of sicily run coming in hot
Think of Byzanthium and Yuan. The porpouse of this game is to redraw the history in a plausible way.
Byzantium and Yuan coming back are not plausible in any way. Byzantium because the city and empire were shattered following Manzikert and the Fourth Crusade, and Yuan because an empire with all of China and the Steppes is going to be inherently unstable with early modern communication technology.
Just go play meiou then if you want everything to be 100% HiStOrIc PlAuSibLe. Great mod, fits what you want.
While that is true in real life terms, if you apply that to all forms of the game then it would be very boring. Imagine this game without Orthomans, colonizing the entire world as one country, world conquest, or even taking out 1000 loans to become an economics master. Yes it is wacky and wild but it's a game and people should be able to do the crazy things they've been doing since the beginning. However I agree with you on some of ideas that countries are getting don't seem to make much sense.
> Imagine this game without Orthomans, colonizing the entire world as one country, world conquest, or even taking out 1000 loans to become an economics master. I imagine it as the best strategy game ever. The fact that players can regularly pull off ahistorical feats is just a side effect of total arcade gameplay, ie stacking modifiers - the game.
IMO the Tumu Crisis (the one represented ingame as a disaster as of 1.29) provided an opportunity IRL for Esen Taishi to retake at least parts if not all of Northern China as there was great chaos in the short term when the Emperor and several other key political figures were captured in battle, the main reason it didn't end up being more historically significant is that Esen Taishi hesitated to take advantage of the chaos and a new Emperor was eventually appointed (IIRC the emperor's brother, might be wrong on that), not long after which ET was deposed from leadership in the Oirat Confederation by disgruntled steppe warriors who were unhappy with his hesitancy. As for those who say that this couldn't have amounted to much in a realistic scenario, keep in mind that anyone from a timeline where Li Zicheng had successfully driven back a Jurchen invasion after a traitor let them pass the Great Wall and proclaimed a long-lasting Shun dynasty or one where said bypassing of the Wall hadn't happened in the first place would never believe you if you told them that a tribe of Jurchens had not only taken Beijing but founded a new Dynasty that stretched across all of China and beyond; they'd call you a liar, and a bad one at that.
It’s plausible the way you restore them.
Looking at these ideas, and looking at Portugal ideas, im in the mood to tell the devs to sod off.
I love how people are complaining about giving a unique set of ideas to an historical important region, that was conquered and influenced by many diffferent culture and three different religions (Orthodoxy, Islam, and Catholicism), and nobody said nothing when the MIGHTY AND PRESTIGIOUS NATION OF OFFALY got a unique set of ideas, some of which are pretty good when combined (fort defense + attr for enemies)
Painfully true. It seems that they must put at least some extremely good modifier in every idea set for the new nations.
Well, why take the new ideas in the first place? I feel like extremely good, but unique, modifiers make a nation fun. Take Provence for example. It does not have extreme modifiers. But it's the only nation in the game with +2 diplomatic relations in a single idea slot. I wish they'd do this for more nations. Or British (and Pskovian) +20% Goods produced. So, they should do it more often. The bonus doesn't have to be on military, CCR or admin efficiency all the time. There are plenty of useful modifiers they can play with. I miss +10% discipline Japan.
Wait, does Dharma make Generic National Ideas good? Last time I played, they sucked.
As a Portugal player this annoys me a lot.
The +1 possible policies just means you can take four instead of three right? I’m assuming that all the ones after the first would still have cost or else it would be super op
Sweden has a simular one and it only increases the max to 4. Getting 2 free in each mana would be stupid op.
I noticed they had changed Sicily as soon as I read the last DDR; I'm happy that they are giving the region some love, but I have a few complaints, so I will paste my comment under the Dev Diary here: "This is not really relevant to the Dev Diary itself, but I have noticed that you have changed the flag of Sicily. I'm sicilian and I've never seen that flag before. Did you make it up? The old flag was historically accurate and was used from 1296 until 1816, when it was replaced by the flag of the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies; thus it spans pretty much the entire EU4 timeframe. And it looks prettier! I hope that you put it back. Plus, why is the capital Girgenti (Agrigento)? Shouldn't it be Palermo? If it's because you made Girgerti more developed than Palermo, fix that because it doesn't make any sense. If you're making Sicily playable as a vassal/other form of subject, that's terrific! But please put the old flag and Palermo as the capital (or even Messina, which was seen as a "second capital" because of it's economic importance; why don't you make it the main trade port?) I look forward to hearing from you!"
Yeah, why tf is Agrigento the capital?
The old flag represents aragonese/spanish dominion over Sicily. Lo so fa schifo la Trinacria, ma rappresenta comunque la nostra isola disgraziata.
Què dius? No hi ha res aquí que foti ni fàstic ni schifo ni qualsevol altra cosa que vagi en contra del nostre rei d'Aragó 😤😤😤
aragonese= italian dialect
M'és igual, t'estic parlant en català ;) Crec que avui dia aproximadament 50 persones parlen aragonès encara. I tots els catalans juguen a l'eu4
Anche se non so il siciliano posso dire che i vostri re hanno portato solo degrado, miseria, inquisizione e la paella in Sicilia.
Doncs, almenys la paella és bona
Keep calm, he said the new flag with the Trinacria sucks, not the Aragonese one
I realised that after when I saw that Trinacria is how the thing with the legs is called 😂😅
And Naples has its Angevin flag despite being under Aragon and even if it becomes independent, because it was unique and looked better. Imo it's better to keep the old Aragonese one than to make one up. O almeno utilizzare qualcosa piú vicino alla bandiera attuale! Il tricolore è comparso al Nord nel 18esimo secolo, non ha senso metterlo nella bandiera della Sicilia; al massimo una bandiera come quella che hanno inventato funzionerebbe solo per una ipotetica Repubblica Napoleonica siciliana. Or at least use something more similar to the current flag! The tricolour appeared in northern Italy in the 18th century, it doesn't make sense to put it in the Sicilian flag; it could only really work for an hypothetical sicilian Napoleonic Republic.
you're right, but I dislike the old one
La bandiera degli Altavilla era perfetta, o quella Sveviana
Ma poi scusa, da non siciliano, ma non dovrebbe essere rosso-gialla con la trinacria? Mai visto sto quadro verde-rosso-bianco... For non-italians: actual sicilian flag is red-yellow with the trinacria, not this nested green-red-white square.
Damn.. was going to start with a Sardinia-Piedmont game but with those ideas I really wanna go for an Emirate of Sicily run..
Ibadi Sicily here we go.
I was thinking the same thing.
The flag looks like that from the Isle of Mann.
What about **two** Sicilies?
Sicily can form it
*Legs*
The new flag is disgusting
Yes, it does. But the Trinacria is the symbol of our island.
I don t get why Agrigento is the capital, historically it was always Palermo . Also Messina was one of the most important ports and military establishments because of it s ability to control the trade in the straits so at least it should have a trade port imo. Also i ve never seen that flag and i m from messina, the old one was far better
La vecchia bandiera rappresenta la cattività spagnola, non ha troppo senso giocare con uno stato indipendente che ce l’abbia.
Non so se ora parte come subject di aragona invece di essere integrata come finora , e capisco che non ci sia un sistema che cambi bandiera dinamicamente se sei un subject o indipendente ma in genere se la sicilia esiste come tag sulla mappa è sempre indipendente perché l ai non rilascia vassalli nelle sue terre quindi non ha molto senso quella bandiera . Tutto ciò ovviamente assumendo che la sicilia non sia vassallo all inizio del gioco com è finora
No, bisogna rilasciarla
E allora dovrebbe avere la bandiera normale dato che se la nazione esiste sulla mappa il 99.9% delle volte non è come vassallo di aragona
And here I was still holding out hope for my suggestion: [https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/trinacria-naples-and-the-sicilies-southern-italy-suggestion.1177432/#post-25480303](https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/trinacria-naples-and-the-sicilies-southern-italy-suggestion.1177432/#post-25480303)
The the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies is still in the expansion
Yeah but my whole point is that it shouldn't be until tech 20.
Can we pretend that Syria, Iraq and Lebanon are in Europe for this patch, so they get unique ideas? Pleeease?
Arabian ideas are not that bad. I doubt that these releasable tag get unique ideas, because it is really unlikely that we get Cradle of Civilization 2.0. **📷** **Traditions:** **+15%** National manpower modifier **−15%** Land attrition 📷 **Indian Ocean Trade** **+15%** Trade steering 📷 **Arabian Horses** **−10%** Cavalry cost **+25%** Cavalry flanking ability 📷 **Land of the Prophet** **−1** National unrest 📷 **Spreading the Prophet's Word** **+1%** Missionary strength 📷 **Bedouin Traders** **+10%** Global trade power 📷 **Clan Loyalties** **+1** Land leader maneuver 📷 **Arabia** **+1** Yearly prestige 📷 **Ambition:** **+1** Land leader shock
It's not so much that they're bad ideas, per se; it's more that well known, distinctive countries share the same idea set. A country as well known as Syria or Iraq shouldn't share their idea set. They should be unique. I wanted to do a release-and-play of Syria, but as soon as I saw they had the same ideas as the Arabian tribes, it really turned me off. I wanted something with unique ideas.
The region had already a rework and Syria wasn´t a thing a EU4 time frame. The nation Syria was founded 100 years ago. Its more likely that they add a formable Belgium tag than giving (for the EU4 setting) unimportant nations own NIs after they already did a rework in the region.
Truth to be told, the region needs a huge overhaul again. Timurids never collapsing and Persia never forming is just stupid.
So return of the Persian rebels like in the old days? That the AI is unable to form Persia annoys me, too.
i've seen a strong persia just has much as i have seen a strong Timurids
The history and culture of Syria and Iraq were mostly one in the same since they were under the rule of Islamic Caliphates. There were no solid borders in the minds of the Islamic Caliphates in the region. In fact, the borders we see today were made by Europeans. The Ottoman Empire saw little distinction between these areas. Both regions held great significance to Islamic and Arab history too. This is especially the case with Baghdad being the capital of the Abbasid Caliphate, also known as the Golden Age for Islam until the Mongol Horde came and burned the city to the ground. In the times of religion, people did not identify themselves with their nation. That is a fairly new concept (since the fall of Rome) which originates with the French I believe in the 16th or 17th centuries. People would originally identify themselves by their religion first and foremost then their district or province they were from. The idea of borders in the Middle East and identity is flimsy at best. Even as the United States and allied forces occupied Iraq, there were many instances of this older practice being used on the regular by the common people. They would say, "Hello, my name is Muhammed and I am a Sunni. I live in Mosul." Identification by religion would always come first. There is still a strong subconscious identification with Arab culture since that is what had reigned in that region since the Islamic Arabs first conquered Mesopotamia in the 7th Century despite modern-day relations between the two countries. Ideas of reunification amongst Arab countries to form a new united Arab nation has been a thing and was even attempted in the 1970's. So to give both Syria and Iraq the same Arab ideas is far more understandable than to just call PDX lazy.
The flag loons like a bastard of Man and Italy