No dude, I just came back from Sweden, and I learnt A LOT about Swedish history, and the definitive start of Swedish Civilization is under Gustav Vasa in 1523. Not to mention the Norse UHV are hard enough, its fine having a more protected area. What I'm NOT ok with though, is how all the Swedish territory is solid for the Norse, can we have it so that ok territory?
RFC Europe playtesting feedback thread
- Thread starter st.lucifer
- Start date
No dude, I just came back from Sweden, and I learnt A LOT about Swedish history, and the definitive start of Swedish Civilization is under Gustav Vasa in 1523. Not to mention the Norse UHV are hard enough, its fine having a more protected area. What I'm NOT ok with though, is how all the Swedish territory is solid for the Norse, can we have it so that ok territory?
ezzlar
Emperor
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2001
- Messages
- 1,843
Sweden what it looks like today is more 1500 yes, but there was a nation there earlier also. Nothing, absolutely nothing happens in Scandinavia before 1500 in this mod. If Sweden got more time to expand to Finland and create fuss in the baltic area it would be funnier to play. I think.
AbsintheRed
Deity
I would also keep the Swedish start in 1523, with Gustav Vasa breaking the Danish occupation of Sweden
This means the first free and absolutely Swedish state IMO
This means the first free and absolutely Swedish state IMO
I agree with you about Finland, it should have a more active role there, but I'm sure we can have them more active in Finland, and in Northern Europe in general, through other means that by making them spawn earlier. I really do think Sweden should be buffed up a bit.
Morholt
Prince
11th century is way too early, but Sweden in the 13th century would qualify for a civ imo. The foundation of Stockholm, conquest of Finland, reformation of the nobility and centralization of power to the king (who was previously an elected figurehead as in Poland-Lithuania) all happened in this time, as well as the first wars against the Russians.
Specifically the battle of Sparrsätra in 1247, founding of Stockholm between 1250-1252 or the coronation of Magnus Ladulås in 1275 might make sense.
EDIT: The Kalmar Union did not come into place until 1397 and is probably better represented as a vassalage than being the same civ anyways.
Specifically the battle of Sparrsätra in 1247, founding of Stockholm between 1250-1252 or the coronation of Magnus Ladulås in 1275 might make sense.
EDIT: The Kalmar Union did not come into place until 1397 and is probably better represented as a vassalage than being the same civ anyways.
Cosmos1985
King
Dear The Turk. While I and many many others have a great deal of respect for you, your knowledge, and your work to improve the different RFC mods, I find it very hard to understand why you insist on being a self-proclaimed expert on everything you come across. Good for you that you visited Sweden and learnt something about swedish history, but to proclam that "the definitive start of Swedish Civilization is under Gustav Vasa in 1523" is debateable at best, and laughable at worst. There was Swedish Kings 500 years before that - and this is just the well-etablished ones we're talking about here - and there is absolutely nothing that suggests that the swedish civilization wasn't born before 1523. Would it be possible for you to spend a few seconds before posting, to consider if what you've written maybe is a bit too insisting and/or arrogant, or just consider the possibility that it might come across like that to other people?
Thank you.
Ambreville
Deity
I'm definitely not an expert on the matter of Scandinavian history. I just looked up Sweden in wikipedia and found this:
The Kingdom of Sweden
"It is not known when and how the 'kingdom of Sweden' was born, but the list of Swedish monarchs is drawn from the first kings who ruled both Svealand (Sweden) and Götaland (Gothia) as one province with Erik the Victorious. Sweden and Gothia were two separate nations long before that into antiquity. It is not known how long they existed, Beowulf described semi-legendary Swedish-Geatish wars in the 6th century."
Erik the Victorious goes back to the 10th century.
Just a thought...
-------------
Edit -- following links there, I also found this:
"The first undisputed king of Sweden was Eric the Victorious, who lived around 970–994. He was succeeded by King Olof Skötkonung (late 960s – circa 1020), the first Christian king of Sweden."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Sweden_%28800%E2%80%931521%29
The Kingdom of Sweden
"It is not known when and how the 'kingdom of Sweden' was born, but the list of Swedish monarchs is drawn from the first kings who ruled both Svealand (Sweden) and Götaland (Gothia) as one province with Erik the Victorious. Sweden and Gothia were two separate nations long before that into antiquity. It is not known how long they existed, Beowulf described semi-legendary Swedish-Geatish wars in the 6th century."
Erik the Victorious goes back to the 10th century.
Just a thought...
-------------
Edit -- following links there, I also found this:
"The first undisputed king of Sweden was Eric the Victorious, who lived around 970–994. He was succeeded by King Olof Skötkonung (late 960s – circa 1020), the first Christian king of Sweden."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Sweden_%28800%E2%80%931521%29
Hi Cosmos,
First off, I never ever, make what I say have to be a 100% case, I offer my opinion. I just came back from Stockholm, where in ever museum I went, they made it clear that 1523, sounded like the year when Sweden was united by Gustav Vasa and it removed its self from the Northern League/Union (or whatever it was called) with Denmark and Norway. That is why my good friend, I am saying 1523 is still a good year. If you change it to 800 AD or whatever, I'm going to disagree with you, but that is my interpretation of it, since that is when it became its own country, away from outside influences. Also some people were mad that it didn't get powerful enough, and I agree, but instead of pushing back its spawn date, there are other ways to make it powerful again. Hope that clearly states my point of view on this.
rock_star
Warlord
Even during the Viking age, the core Scandinavian nations were already starting to take shape in regional activity patterns. The western vikings (Norway) were the explorers, settling Iceland, Greenland, and the American shores. The southern Vikings (Danmark) were the conquerers, annexing Normandy and the Danelaw of England. The eastern vikings (Sverige) were the merchant traders, setting up trade routes and outposts in the Baltic, founding Rus', and earning money in the employ of Byzantine military service.
Of course, each did their fair share of exploring, raiding and traiding - none of the areas had a monopoly on any of the Viking's signature activities, but each group certainly had its priority, leading to culturally distinct Viking regions that went on to form distinct Nordic nations.
An earlier start day is certainly justifiable, but 1523 makes the most sense gameplay wise - for the same reasons Portugal starts in 1153 (when they declared sovereignty) and not 868 (when the region was established). Prior to 1523, they were a subject of the Danish crown - what kind of UHVs would work well for this period?
I agree that Sweden could be buffed a bit, though - the AI never becomes the menace the House of Vasa became for the Baltic nations. In the hands of the human, though, Sweden is one of the most lethal civs on the map. Those Karolin are just damned brutal for the poor, backwards civs in that region.
Of course, each did their fair share of exploring, raiding and traiding - none of the areas had a monopoly on any of the Viking's signature activities, but each group certainly had its priority, leading to culturally distinct Viking regions that went on to form distinct Nordic nations.
An earlier start day is certainly justifiable, but 1523 makes the most sense gameplay wise - for the same reasons Portugal starts in 1153 (when they declared sovereignty) and not 868 (when the region was established). Prior to 1523, they were a subject of the Danish crown - what kind of UHVs would work well for this period?
I agree that Sweden could be buffed a bit, though - the AI never becomes the menace the House of Vasa became for the Baltic nations. In the hands of the human, though, Sweden is one of the most lethal civs on the map. Those Karolin are just damned brutal for the poor, backwards civs in that region.
ezzlar
Emperor
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2001
- Messages
- 1,843
rock_star: For the AI an earlier Swedish start would work out well. For the human player, yes, that could be a bit over powered.
I still think an earlier start would better capture the dynamics of the scandinavian region, it is too empty and to calm.
And I am Swedish if you think I am biased
I still think an earlier start would better capture the dynamics of the scandinavian region, it is too empty and to calm.
And I am Swedish if you think I am biased
Exactly! Since RFC Europe is so specific of a game (compared to RFC), all the civs spawn when their state was officially created. There is no point in adding the Eastern Vikings or Svierge, because they are ALREADY represented by the Norse, who have Solid territory throughout Sweden. I've seen the AI Norse build cities in Sweden and it makes perfect sense, since the peoples of Scandinavia, were more or less marauders/explorers rather than actual civilization builders (until later on of course), that is why it makes more sense to represent the independent Sweden with its own King in 1523.
On a different note, I have not checked but does Scotland and Wales still flip to the English? In my honest to God opinion, there should be an independent Welsh city and perhaps two independent Scottish cities, which the English need to capture, because already right there your missing a crucial element of English history.
rock_star
Warlord
rock_star: For the AI an earlier Swedish start would work out well. For the human player, yes, that could be a bit over powered.
I still think an earlier start would better capture the dynamics of the scandinavian region, it is too empty and to calm.
And I am Swedish if you think I am biased
Svensken! Hur är det? I'm quite biased toward all things Scandinavian, myself, since my great grandfather was from Kalmar/Öland, and is my nearest "old-country" link in the family tree. Other than another grandfather Brigham Young, first leader of the Mormons after the death of the founder, the rest of my family tree is uninteresting, being of English or German stock from far too long ago to have any customs/traditions that haven't been completely sterilized by Americanisation, so the Swedish line is the one I most identify with. Nordic bias is fine with me, min vän.
In addition to the Spanish religion UHV requirement - I noticed the AA resource does not spawn outside Gibraltar when the first civ discovers astronomy. I know the AA system was reworked for this beta, but was the Gibraltar AA change intentional? My stategy as Spain was to skip astronomy and beeline for professional army, since the conquests are cheap to build, and I was running out of time to finish the larger colonies by the UHV time limit. Both Germany and England discovered astronomy, but no AA appeared for me, so I had to reload a few turns earlier and send a spy to Germany to steal astronomy (thanks be the Spaniards are great at espionage).
AbsintheRed
Deity
Now the AAs are visible, only if your civ knows the secrets of Astronomy
So you have to research/get it
So you have to research/get it
The games I have had with the Spanish I always end up with an almost entirely spy based research with my own limited to key techs for wonders/projects. +2EP/City is not much to start with but once buildings are in place in 15 cities you'll run out of stuff to steal/sabotage before you run out of EP 
Reason is that for all the power of Guilds/Apprentice, you just can't keep up with the French/German grassland cottage farms .. the peninsula is huge and while it can be covered by razing and moving a bunch of cities to curb corruption, it just takes too damn long.
Reason is that for all the power of Guilds/Apprentice, you just can't keep up with the French/German grassland cottage farms .. the peninsula is huge and while it can be covered by razing and moving a bunch of cities to curb corruption, it just takes too damn long.
Morholt
Prince
1523 is certainly one year that makes sense as a starting point for Sweden - but it's sort of like having Portugal start in 1640 (when they gained independence from the Iberian Union). They are adequately represented by Spain before that, right?
Cosmos1985
King
I don't disagree at all that 1523 is the best spawn-point gameplay-wise, but that is really something else than stating that there for sure was no swedish civilization before this - just as well as you would be laughing your ass to pieces if anyone claimed that there was no turkish civilization before the ottoman spawn. Or what do I know - insert similar examples.
And yeah it was called the Kalmar Union, but it only lasted for less than 150 years, and Sweden was an independent nation long time before that. Find me just one swede that will say the swedish civ was not born before 1523, and I'll concede - I doubt that it's possible though.
And yeah it was called the Kalmar Union, but it only lasted for less than 150 years, and Sweden was an independent nation long time before that. Find me just one swede that will say the swedish civ was not born before 1523, and I'll concede - I doubt that it's possible though.
AbsintheRed
Deity
Don't worry, noone thinks there was no swedish civilization before 1523
Maybe with the expection of The Turk
I still think in RFCE we can better represent Sweden with the 1523 spawn, but I do see your points.
And the overall feel is that most players would gladly see an earleir swedish start...
I don't know, we have to discuss this with 3Miro and Merijn
Maybe with the expection of The Turk
I still think in RFCE we can better represent Sweden with the 1523 spawn, but I do see your points.
And the overall feel is that most players would gladly see an earleir swedish start...
I don't know, we have to discuss this with 3Miro and Merijn
Cosmos1985
King
Don't worry, noone thinks there was no swedish civilization before 1523
Maybe with the expection of The Turk
I still think in RFCE we can better represent Sweden with the 1523 spawn, but I do see your points.
And the overall feel is that most players would gladly see an earleir swedish start...
I don't know, we have to discuss this with 3Miro and Merijn
It would just very likely lead to fighting between Sweden and DK/Norway - who really have enough on their hands already. The Kalmar Union would be hard to work into it, an auto-vassalisation would not be fun for a swedish player, and if we don't force that, we would like see those two fighting each other at a time when they were united in a personal union. It could work in theory, but I'd guess there is lots of other stuff to prioritized before this.
The idea is not completely stupid though - could mean the annoying UHV of getting to Crimea could be removed from the Norse, and having a Swedish civ earlier would open up the door for interactions between them and the Kievan Rus etc.; it would not be very easy to get to work in-game though. Anyway, my "vote" would be that we save this for a later day, and focus on other issues first.
Ambreville
Deity
Don't worry, noone thinks there was no swedish civilization before 1523
Maybe with the expection of The Turk
I still think in RFCE we can better represent Sweden with the 1523 spawn, but I do see your points.
And the overall feel is that most players would gladly see an earleir swedish start...
I don't know, we have to discuss this with 3Miro and Merijn
From a game standpoint, I can see why the Gustav Vaasa approach was the one originally retained. What if there was an earlier Civ in Sweden, followed with a critical event in the 1500's when the House of Vaasa takes over? For the AI, the old Civ falters and is replaced with the normal Vaasa monarchy (not much change from the present version). For a live Sweden player, the choice becomes available to choose whether to remain part of the original ruling house or become the House of Vaasa. Shouldn't that address the issue?
The only problem I see is that the early presence of a separate civ in Sweden makes life so much harder for the Danes. Would a permanent alliance for a specific period actually work out, including co-UHV's???
Then whats the point of having the Norse? The current Norse have solid territory throughout Scandinavia and should represent all the Viking people, as their UHV dictates. I don't understand what the point is of coming up with new UHV's for two nations, just to push back the starting date of one civilization. Currently I know the Swedish are too weak, but that can be adjusted through different means. I just think there are better things to be working on, rather than reworking the Norse and the Swedish, and rebalance everything again. The Swedish are not overrun by anyone after they spawn, and they can hold their own weight, they just need to be directed towards Finland more, and I think it will be fine.
As for the Portugal reference, they had already declared their nation, with the help of the Pope. It was only later, during a war of succession, that Spain claimed control of the throne, and marched into Portugal annexing it into the Union of Iberia. So nothing like the circumstances in Sweden I believe.
As for the Portugal reference, they had already declared their nation, with the help of the Pope. It was only later, during a war of succession, that Spain claimed control of the throne, and marched into Portugal annexing it into the Union of Iberia. So nothing like the circumstances in Sweden I believe.
Similar threads
