Expanded Dynamic Civ Names (EDCNs)

[Mr_Hobo]

You didn't actually respond to any of my arguments, you just quoted yourself. A "they aren't Arabs and this is why" would have been much better and I would have stopped talking.

 

[SheaferDaDawg]

Is all this about a dynamic name, or something actually game changing? Because if neither party is going to convince the other, and it takes about 5 minutes to modify the list of names (or so I have been told), then why can't whichever group which is advocating the change just do it to their personal copy?

 

[iOnlySignIn]

You didn't actually respond to any of my arguments, you just quoted yourself. A "they aren't Arabs and this is why" would have been much better and I would have stopped talking.

If that is what you really think, then I've wasted my time. But thanks for telling me so I won't waste any more time.

Is all this about a dynamic name, or something actually game changing? Because if neither party is going to convince the other, and it takes about 5 minutes to modify the list of names (or so I have been told), then why can't whichever group which is advocating the change just do it to their personal copy?

I don't know. Why don't they?

 

[Mr_Hobo]

Ah. but which copy will come with the mod? Ah well, it isn't important!

 

[Swarbs]

You didn't actually respond to any of my arguments, you just quoted yourself. A "they aren't Arabs and this is why" would have been much better and I would have stopped talking.

They are Arabs. But Arabs are a panethnic group.

"Panethnicity is a political neologism[clarification needed] used in multicultural societies for the grouping together, and collective labeling, of various independently distinguishable, self-identified and self-sustained ethnicities into one all-encompassing group of people."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panethnicity

Suggest you read the section on Arabs which shows why the Iraqis should not be equated to the Arab civilization in DOC. They are an independently distinguishable ethnicity, which is included in the Arab group largely for political convenience.

The notion of Iraq as being part of some pan Arab civilization or ethnic group is, as you already noted, a result of war time propaganda by the Iraq version of the Ba'ath party.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ba'th

 

[DC123456789]

Just let Leoreth dcide. Although I really don't know why everyone is setting so worked up over a dynamic civ name that's basically only going to come up when the player wants it to.

 

[Noodz]

I hope IOSI is still taking suggestions. An old suggestion of mine that of mine that seems to be adopted:

They're barely in, but some suggestions for Brazil (and for the yet to be included argentinians)

Brazil, if:
*Tyranny, dynasticism or theocracy, regardless of everything else: Empire of Brazil (Kingdom of Brazil was a very short-lived name)
*Totalitarianism or representation or universal suffrage or egalitarianism: Federative Republic of Brazil (odd, yes. The dictatorship adopted the name, and it was kept by the democratic government. So it should represent BOTH a non-populist military dictatorship and a mature democracy)
*Vassalized to portugal: Principality of Brazil
*Default name: United States of Brazil

Argentina, if vassalized to Brazil: Transplatine province

I now realize i was too stringent on Federative Republic of Brazil, to the point where United States of Brazil barely shows up. So my suggestion:

only totalitarianism and universal suffrage (when not under tyranny/dynaticism/theocracy) trigger Federative Republic of Brazil. When not under these conditions, the default United States of Brazil applies.

 

[iOnlySignIn]

^ Your suggestions have been already adopted by Leoreth when he added Brazil.

This is from Brazil's DCN file (without any modification from me):

<TEXT>
<Tag>TXT_KEY_CIV_BRAZIL_DESC_DEMOCRATIC</Tag>
<English>Federative Republic of Brazil</English>
</TEXT>
<TEXT>
<Tag>TXT_KEY_CIV_BRAZIL_DESC_COMMUNIST</Tag>
<English>Socialist Republic of Brazil</English>
</TEXT>
<TEXT>
<Tag>TXT_KEY_CIV_BRAZIL_DESC_FASCIST</Tag>
<English>United States of Brazil</English>
</TEXT>
<TEXT>
<Tag>TXT_KEY_CIV_BRAZIL_EMPIRE</Tag>
<English>Empire of Brazil</English>
</TEXT>

The only thing missing is a Portuguese Vassal name for Brazil. On that, I think it should be
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_Brazil

What do you think?

Also, do you think Portugal could use a unique generic Vassal name? England ("Dominion of X"), Spain ("Viceroyalty of X"), France ("French X") all have one. I'm thinking "Portuguese X".

Come to think of it, I think the Dutch deserves it too. "Dutch X".

 

[Daedwartin]

^ Your suggestions have been already adopted by Leoreth when he added Brazil.

This is from Brazil's DCN file (without any modification from me):

<TEXT>
<Tag>TXT_KEY_CIV_BRAZIL_DESC_DEMOCRATIC</Tag>
<English>Federative Republic of Brazil</English>
</TEXT>
<TEXT>
<Tag>TXT_KEY_CIV_BRAZIL_DESC_COMMUNIST</Tag>
<English>Socialist Republic of Brazil</English>
</TEXT>
<TEXT>
<Tag>TXT_KEY_CIV_BRAZIL_DESC_FASCIST</Tag>
<English>United States of Brazil</English>
</TEXT>
<TEXT>
<Tag>TXT_KEY_CIV_BRAZIL_EMPIRE</Tag>
<English>Empire of Brazil</English>
</TEXT>

The only thing missing is a Portuguese Vassal name for Brazil. On that, I think it should be
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_Brazil

What do you think?

Also, do you think Portugal could use a unique generic Vassal name? England ("Dominion of X"), Spain ("Viceroyalty of X"), France ("French X") all have one. I'm thinking "Portuguese X".

Come to think of it, I think the Dutch deserves it too. "Dutch X".

I think Kingdom Of Brazil would work, as shortly before Brazil became independent, it was elevated to that of a Kingdom.

 

[keli]

Austrian-Hungarian Monarchy (or Austria-Hungary) when Austria controls Wien and Buda(pest) and is in dynasticism and around ~1850 ?

 

[DC123456789]

It's in when Austria (capital is Wien) runs Representation, at least under the old civics.

 

[iOnlySignIn]

^ Yeah, and I haven't changed that since I'm pretty sure

(1) Leoreth added that when he did the HRE/Prussia split and

(2) Leoreth knows German/Austrian history better than I do.

 

[yurisusuki]

I don't remember if i suggest this here..

If Portugal Move the palace to brazil

''United Kingdom of Portugal And Brazil


If Brazil Move the palace to Porto Alegre

''Riograndense Republic

IF Russia move palace to Kiev
Early '' Principality of Kiev''

Later '' Ukranian Republic''

If the Ottomans Conquer Rome

Ottoman sultanate of rome..or Ottoman-Roman Empire

If Mehemed had conquered rome probably something like that would be happened

 

[iOnlySignIn]

I don't remember if i suggest this here..

If Portugal Move the palace to brazil

''United Kingdom of Portugal And Brazil

Already in.

If Brazil Move the palace to Porto Alegre

Riograndense Republic

Not enough historical significance + chance of in game occurrence.

IF Russia move palace to Kiev
Early '' Principality of Kiev''

Already in as Kievan Rus. Early medieval Russia in game is always large enough to represent all the Rus' states instead of just one Principality. I seriously considered adding Republic of Novgorod (I have a special fondness of it) but decided against it for that reason.

Later '' Ukranian Republic''

Sorry, same case as Riograndense Republic

If the Ottomans Conquer Rome

Ottoman sultanate of rome..or Ottoman-Roman Empire

If Mehemed had conquered rome probably something like that would be happened

Now this is a very interesting idea.

However, I don't think the Ottoman Sultans would have changed the name of their state to have Roman features even if that did happen.

"Roman Emperor" functions better as a title (as in SoI) along such titles as "Commander of the Faithful" or "Holy Roman Emperor".

Actually I have some problems with the existing Ottoman DCNs in game too. Even though the head of the Ottoman state carried such titles such as Caliph, Sultan, Emperor, Commander of the Faithful, Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques, etc. the Ottomans never referred to their state with such names as
Ottoman Sultanate
Ottoman Empire
Ottoman Caliphate
Turkish Empire
^ (These are the DCNs you actually see Turkey with in game depending on a bunch of conditions, mostly Civics and religion)

Instead they call their state
Devlet-i Âliye-yi Osmâniyye
The Sublime Ottoman State

So I've always wondered whether I should make The Sublime Ottoman State the most widespread and default DCN for Turkey.

 

[ales_]

I think yes.

 

[therox]

If Brazil switch the Capital to Recife or Fortaleza

Confederação do Equador

 

[mrrandomplayer]

Now this is a very interesting idea.

However, I don't think the Ottoman Sultans would have changed the name of their state to have Roman features even if that did happen.

"Roman Emperor" functions better as a title (as in SoI) along such titles as "Commander of the Faithful" or "Holy Roman Emperor".

Actually I have some problems with the existing Ottoman DCNs in game too. Even though the head of the Ottoman state carried such titles such as Caliph, Sultan, Emperor, Commander of the Faithful, Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques, etc. the Ottomans never referred to their state with such names as
Ottoman Sultanate
Ottoman Empire
Ottoman Caliphate
Turkish Empire
^ (These are the DCNs you actually see Turkey with in game depending on a bunch of conditions, mostly Civics and religion)

Instead they call their state
Devlet-i Âliye-yi Osmâniyye
The Sublime Ottoman State

So I've always wondered whether I should make The Sublime Ottoman State the most widespread and default DCN for Turkey.

That seems pretty reasonable.

 

[iOnlySignIn]

List of recent changes:

New Portuguese Vassal Names

New Dutch Vassal Names, including
New Netherlands (America)
New Holland (Brazil)
Dutch Golden Coast (Mali)

Fixed a bug where modern Islamic democratic names do not appear correctly.

New Ottoman Description
The Ottomans
'The Turks' is no longer appropriate since Seljuks and Mughals are Turks too.

New Ottoman Fascist Name
Pan-Turkic Empire

Ottoman default name is now Sublime Ottoman State

Ottomans become Caliphate when they destroy/vassalize Arabia, Egypt, Byzantium, and Seljuks.

 

[Mr_Hobo]

New Ottoman Description
The Ottomans
'The Turks' is no longer appropriate since Seljuks and Mughals are Turks too.

Would the Ottoman Turks make more sense? As I understand it, the Ottomans were the ruling dynasty, although I am not sure about that. Calling them simply "the Ottomans" seems analogous to calling the French "the Bourbons." It also makes me think of furniture.

The rest of the names look good though!

 

[iOnlySignIn]

Would the Ottoman Turks make more sense? As I understand it, the Ottomans were the ruling dynasty, although I am not sure about that. Calling them simply "the Ottomans" seems analogous to calling the French "the Bourbons." It also makes me think of furniture.

The rest of the names look good though!

The Ottomans is the description of their civilization.

Ottoman Turks is the description of their people.

<TEXT>
<Tag>TXT_KEY_CIV_OTTOMAN_DESC</Tag>
<English>The Ottomans</English>
</TEXT>
<TEXT>
<Tag>TXT_KEY_CIV_TURKEY_DESC_PEOPLES</Tag>
<English>Ottoman Turks</English>
</TEXT>
<TEXT>
<Tag>TXT_KEY_CIV_TURKEY_DESC_DEFAULT</Tag>
<English>Sublime Ottoman State</English>
</TEXT>