Still no sweden/finland?

[Andy Shadows]

I was wondering, if anyone knows, is there going to be sweden/finland (finland controlled by sweden) in the game? Im big fan of TW series but still haven't seen finland. It would mean much to me and I think it could attract more finns to the series. Atleast they should have hackapeel (hakkapeliitta) mercs!

Just a humble wish from humble man..

[Dutch_guy]

Have no idea if they will.

As a matter of fact I've always hoped the Dutch would be incorporated in the total war series so much I would have done different in Medieval history ...
Oh well, it really is unlikely to ever happen however the day it happens beer's on me.

:balloon2:

[Watchman]

Atleast they should have hackapeel (hakkapeliitta) mercs!Don't be a silly bugger, mate. The Hackapells were a single regular light cavalry formation in the Thirty Years' War in the 1600s. Pike-and-shot period all the way through, nevermind Early Modern and not Medieval and a bit off the radar as far as the game's time brackets go.

[VeroImperatoreDiRoma]

:idea2:
You could have Sammi rebels!!?

[Duke John]

What is it with Swedes and Fins always demanding/asking for their nation to be in a game. No matter what forum I visit there is always the question of "Will there be Fins in the game?" and much more frequent than the request for any other country.

[TB666]

Well Sweden and finland as a province will probably be in but as a faction no.
And I fully support that choice by CA.
During this era Sweden wasn't very powerful nor influencial like the danes were.
Only time we would qualify as a faction would be 8 years before the game ends when Vasa becomes king.

[Sebastian Seth]

Would be nice if they added more land to north so that there would be land connection between sweden and finland. This way the novogrod and danes would have some nice fights in north.

[King Yngvar]

You could have Sammi rebels!!?

Hmm, they Sami people would first have to come up with the word "war" in their dictionary...



Well Sweden and finland as a province will probably be in but as a faction no.

Hmm, really... Why did they include Milan then? Norway and Sweden should seriously be put in the game, I'm sick and tired of never seeing any Scandinavian countries represented in games, and if they are it is always through Denmark or as "Vikings". What would be so hard with making two extra factions in the north, name them Norway and Sweden and give them the same units as Denmark?

[TB666]

What would be so hard with making two extra factions in the north, name them Norway and Sweden and give them the same units as Denmark?
Considering that there is only room for 21 factions right now and there are actually factions that were more important then Sweden were on the waiting list I say they shouldn't waste 2 slots on 2 factions that were weak. Only reason to add Sweden would be so that the danes won't have to fight rebels but adding a faction so that it will be destroyed sounds kinda pointless.
Right now CA wants every faction to have a unique feeling to it so adding 2 generic factions is out of the question.

[King Yngvar]

Considering that there is only room for 21 factions right now and there are actually factions that were more important then Sweden were on the waiting list I say they shouldn't waste 2 slots on 2 factions that were weak. Only reason to add Sweden would be so that the danes won't have to fight rebels but adding a faction so that it will be destroyed sounds kinda pointless.
Right now CA wants every faction to have a unique feeling to it so adding 2 generic factions is out of the question.

For multiplayer, having 3 factions with the same units is not such a bad idea.

Anyway, there is something that has always been bugging me, what is up with the faction limit? What is the complications of adding more factions than 21?

[TB666]

Anyway, there is something that has always been bugging me, what is up with the faction limit? What is the complications of adding more factions than 21?Huge slowdowns or the engine unstable maybe.
Only CA knows why but it is most likely a reason such as that.

[Kalle]

Well no matter if Denmark was more powerful Denmark never succeeded in claiming Sweden as a province.

Sure there was the Kalmarunion - it lasted as long as it had swedish support. Denmark never was powerful enough to hold Sweden by force.

Sweden on the other hand conquered Finland during the medieval period (12 century) through what started as Crusades. Now that would indeed be an intresting medieval thing that should put Sweden on the map as a playable faction.


What is it with Swedes and Fins always demanding/asking for their nation to be in a game. No matter what forum I visit there is always the question of "Will there be Fins in the game?" and much more frequent than the request for any other country.

Well, why should we always be denied the possibilty to do it? U got sumthin against swedes and finns?

Read up on scandinavian history and you will see how exciting it is, all the way from the periods described in the icelandic sagas and over the entire rivalry between sweden and denmark and how much fun it would be to try it in a good game.

VDMs DUX mod for mtw-vi has the swedes in it and I thank them for this :))

Kalle

[Andy Shadows]

Well no matter if Denmark was more powerful Denmark never succeeded in claiming Sweden as a province.

Sure there was the Kalmarunion - it lasted as long as it had swedish support. Denmark never was powerful enough to hold Sweden by force.

Sweden on the other hand conquered Finland during the medieval period (12 century) through what started as Crusades. Now that would indeed be an intresting medieval thing that should put Sweden on the map as a playable faction.



Well, why should we always be denied the possibilty to do it? U got sumthin against swedes and finns?

Read up on scandinavian history and you will see how exciting it is, all the way from the periods described in the icelandic sagas and over the entire rivalry between sweden and denmark and how much fun it would be to try it in a good game.

VDMs DUX mod for mtw-vi has the swedes in it and I thank them for this :))

Kalle

No offense southern people, but anyone in southern europe doesn't [edit: care] what happens in north as long as [edit: they] are not in danger; not in past and not now. That's why he's wondering about it. Sorry, but that's how I put it.

[Watchman]

Well, for most intents and purposes Scandinavia and the Med might as well have been on different planets. And the former was considered the backwater of the subcontinent for pretty good reasons...

After the Viking period the only ones the Scandinavians were a concern for were each other and the Baltic coastal ares; those might as well have been on the Moon as far as they concerned the southern and central parts of Europe where the real action was.

Not all that surprising we tend to get ignored.

And because just about everyone craves attention, and we Finns in particular seem to be running a cultural inferiority complex, we duly whine about it.

[aw89]

You can't really call the Scandinavians insignificant, didn't some Norwegian king try to conquer England about year 1000? (I really got to update myself on some medieval history)

[The_Doctor]

You can't really call the Scandinavians insignificant, didn't some Norwegian king try to conquer England about year 1000? (I really got to update myself on some medieval history)

Yes in 1066. Harold Hardrada(sp?) tried to conquer England but was beaten by Harold Godwinson. Then Billy the Bastard(who was part Norwegain) conquered England.

England also had three Danish kings from 1016-1040


Maybe Norway, Sweden and Finland will be non-playable factions.

[Andy Shadows]

And because just about everyone craves attention, and we Finns in particular seem to be running a cultural inferiority complex, we duly whine about it.

We are indeed culturally poor. Finnish culture? Hell, what is that? The problem about finns is that we have never really found our identity.

[TB666]

Maybe Norway, Sweden and Finland will be non-playable factions.
If by that you mean part of the rebels then yes.

[ZombieFriedNuts]

I think they are trying to up the number of factions from 21, and if they are a non playable faction you’ll only have to wait until a modder decides he wants to play as someone he can't.

:knight:

[ZombieFriedNuts]

Or you could always ask nicely
:2thumbsup:

[The_Doctor]

I thought the number of factions was increasing to 30.

[TB666]

I thought the number of factions was increasing to 30.
No not yet.
The last word was that they are looking into it but so far no word if they have done it or not.

[Sarmatian]

We are indeed culturally poor. Finnish culture? Hell, what is that? The problem about finns is that we have never really found our identity.

I heard that finnish movies are very good. That can be considered culture.

[Sarmatian]

Double post. Sorry

[NodachiSam]

Finland was kinda un-influencial to devote a faction to it... Sweden I could see in the later game. If the Dutch arn't even in.... They were part of HRE for the longest time and not to influencial either. (My ancestors are Dutch BTW). I don't remember until what date this game is supposed to end. They could be later factions.

People can and probably will mod it in though, don't you worry :D I hope they can do at least 30 factions.

[Sebastian Seth]

Well, for most intents and purposes Scandinavia and the Med might as well have been on different planets. And the former was considered the backwater of the subcontinent for pretty good reasons...

After the Viking period the only ones the Scandinavians were a concern for were each other and the Baltic coastal ares; those might as well have been on the Moon as far as they concerned the southern and central parts of Europe where the real action was.

Not all that surprising we tend to get ignored.

I don't think they deside the factions by what was significant in that era and what was not. It seems they are adding factions that are different from each other. Denmark, sweden and norway would all be more or less same kind of factions with same kind of units so they make take only one of them. Then they add factions like azteks because it brings something different.


And because just about everyone craves attention, and we Finns in particular seem to be running a cultural inferiority complex, we duly whine about it.

Yeah, the swedes told us that we should have culture after they lost us to russians. Now we seem to be looking for one. :laugh4:


Finland was kinda un-influencial to devote a faction to it... Sweden I could see in the later game. If the Dutch arn't even in.... They were part of HRE for the longest time and not to influencial either. (My ancestors are Dutch BTW). I don't remember until what date this game is supposed to end. They could be later factions.

People can and probably will mod it in though, don't you worry :D I hope they can do at least 30 factions.

If they make the map to big enough it prolly wont be too hard to change the colors of danish units and make swedish and finnish.

[Watchman]

I can see how a case could be made for separate Danish, Swedish and Norwegian factions (although given their extreme proximity and limited territory in MTW scale maps, odds are two won't live past the first twenty or so turns making the whole exercise a bit of a waste...), particularly as AFAIK general ecology meant the military developements of Scandinavia proper differed from that of Europe proper (of which Denmark counts as a part in the context, due to geography and ecology). They had all developed into something-like-kingdoms by the beginning of the Middle Ages proper. But Finns ? Bah. If the Finns of Early Middle Ages would rank a faction, then so would the pagan tribes of northern Germany and the Baltic areas. Most historians these days seem to agree that the Swedes did not so much "conquer" Finland in the military sense as sort of "colonize" it by gradually spreading their influence and overlordship among the scattered pagan tribes residing here, although naturally a fair few skulls were duly split on both sides in the process and the progress cemented through the tried-and-true expedient of fortification (all the more so as the new subjects weren't always too happy about having to adopt Christianity and pay taxes to some distant ruler).


You can't really call the Scandinavians insignificant, didn't some Norwegian king try to conquer England about year 1000? (I really got to update myself on some medieval history)
Yes in 1066. Harold Hardrada(sp?) tried to conquer England but was beaten by Harold Godwinson. Then Billy the Bastard(who was part Norwegain) conquered England.

England also had three Danish kings from 1016-1040See the part "after the Viking period."


I heard that finnish movies are very good. That can be considered culture.We've got Kaurismäki, and that's about it these days. And he's not terribly profilic. Most of the native stuff in the theaters is crap even compared to the low end of foreign imports (well, low-end American 'comedies' and action movies are arguably the rock bottom but...).

[Lazul]

Gha!

How can someone be Against adding Sweden as a faction? In MTW the map was stupid in the north, the danish could take Sweden in one attack against some petty spearmen/vikings, yet in reality they got their asses handed to themselfs several times and never managed to take the country.
Sweden actually expanded more during the period then Denmark did (landmass, not economical).
Since they can just have the same units as Denmark, no further work is needed to make the Swedish faction.

Also, add Gotland!... that island was fought over several times. In MTW, the island didnt even exist. That would another province to fight over in the north.

[Antiochius]

Hi,

I think that sweden must be part of the game. if not ,the north of europe will be very empty. Finland , hm, i have never heard that finland was an great, powerful country. Perhabs i`m wrong, but i guess not. now, let`s see that the develpoers wil do.
If not, the modding teams will surely make one of this faction.

[Trithemius]

Didn't Sweden's period of unification and independence come a bit late in the piece for a game that starts in 1080? I had thought that Sweden sort of leapt onto the stage of Europe in the 16th C., fought some wars in Lithuanian and Poland, and then wore itself out during the Thirty Years War, which left it unable to deal effectively with Imperial Russia, which in turn lead to it becoming (and remaining) a "second-tier" power?

It doesn't seem like much of a contender for faction status to me, unless you are specifically playing from about 1500 (1521 I believe...) until 1800 (1809, or thereabouts); which shunts it into a later section of history than MTW2 will be addressing.

[Trithemius]

Gha!

How can someone be Against adding Sweden as a faction? In MTW the map was stupid in the north, the danish could take Sweden in one attack against some petty spearmen/vikings, yet in reality they got their asses handed to themselfs several times and never managed to take the country.
Sweden actually expanded more during the period then Denmark did (landmass, not economical).
Since they can just have the same units as Denmark, no further work is needed to make the Swedish faction.

Also, add Gotland!... that island was fought over several times. In MTW, the island didnt even exist. That would another province to fight over in the north.

Sweden can be incorporated as a non-sovereign state of Denmark?

Inconceivable? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalmar_Union)

Sweden, while having a rich local history of wars and great statesmen and so on, didn't greatly impact on affairs outside of of its very small sphere until much later in history. Sweden might be an excellent candidate for a powerful "rebel" or "independent" territory, but they probably can't be believably a faction - unless the developers are planning on some "what if" type situations.

[Lazul]

you know, the game is a What If.... otherwise it would be very predictable to play! :laugh4:


"Sweden can be incorporated as a non-sovereign state of Denmark?"

*slowly draws his bastard-sword* hu? :knight:

[Trithemius]

you know, the game is a What If.... otherwise it would be very predictable to play! :laugh4:

This is quite true, although if Sweden is a faction then Brittany should probably be too (since Brittany had its own monarch, and had successfully established control over the two march-counties that were supposed to contain it! :D)


"Sweden can be incorporated as a non-sovereign state of Denmark?"

*slowly draws his bastard-sword* hu? :knight:

Sweden didn't have its own king during the Kalmar Union? This is pretty much the meaning of "non-sovereign" for states of the period, isn't it? The Swedes got steadily sick of it though, and withdrew in 1521 (as alluded to in my other post).

No need to get stroppy about it - unless I am seriously messing up my history (and I am sure someone will correct me, probably with references even!, if I am).

*doesn't really understand nationalists* ;)

[Mount Suribachi]

Ah, its like stepping into a time machine is this thread ~:)

At least there's no Scots whinging about how they're not a playable faction this time ~;)

To all you Swedes and Finns, don't take it personal, but given the limit on playable factions, there are good reasons you're not in the game. Given that only 1 of Genoa and Venice is playable and they were miles more important in the Medieval period, I wouldn't complain. If it were a renaissance/reformation era game, then sure, stick the Swedes in.

I suggest if you wanna play as those countries you go buy Europa Universalis II ~:)

[Kalle]

No point to buy eu II now that eu III is on the way :2thumbsup: (swedish made games btw those paradox ones :2thumbsup: ) Sadly they lack the tacitcal combat part of totalwar. The campaign part is so so much better.


Sweden didn't have its own king during the Kalmar Union? This is pretty much the meaning of "non-sovereign" for states of the period, isn't it? The Swedes got steadily sick of it though, and withdrew in 1521 (as alluded to in my other post).


This is such a gross simplification that its almost silly. Also Sweden withdraw from the union much sooner then this but Denmark held on to the union much longer then that.

Kalle

[Trithemius]

Ah, its like stepping into a time machine is this thread ~:)

It's my fault I guess, I'm fairly new to the Org forums really. :)


To all you Swedes and Finns, don't take it personal, but given the limit on playable factions, there are good reasons you're not in the game. Given that only 1 of Genoa and Venice is playable and they were miles more important in the Medieval period, I wouldn't complain. If it were a renaissance/reformation era game, then sure, stick the Swedes in.
~:)

Indeed!
I'm a big fan of Swedish military history under the Vasa dynasty! I'd love to see a Renaissance game involving their campaigns in Lithuania and during their phase of the Thirty Years War!

[Trithemius]

This is such a gross simplification that its almost silly. Also Sweden withdraw from the union much sooner then this but Denmark held on to the union much longer then that.

If you "withdraw" and the king decides to prevent you from doing so with his army then I would argue that the withdrawal was unsuccessful?

I was under the impression, from my reading, that the Danes were finally expelled in 1521, and that sovereignty was reasserted finally with the coronation of the Vasa king, Gustav I.

It's simplified because it is three-line post on a forum; I don't think that additional length would add much though, unless you feel that the dates are disproved by more recent scholarship?

[Lazul]

*doesn't really understand nationalists* ;)

haha, I'm really not that much of a nationalist when it comes to politics, but I like Swedish history so much, having studied it for about two and half years, I would love to have a Swedish faction in.

The more factions, the better, if ask me. :2thumbsup:

[Kalle]

Well u are wrong Trithemius in many aspects (all aspects).

Ever heard of Sten Sture (younger and older)?

Ever heard that it was a union only possible as long as the swedes supported it?

Neither did the danes give up on the union idea only cause Gustav became king.

I can see no reason not to include Sweden in the game other then there being a limit on number of factions and again I cant understand why there must be such a small number of possible factions to play. How realistic and/or historic is it for instance to conquer all of Europe and Middle East as the russians, aragonese, danes (danes couldnt even conquer Sweden) and so on in the medieval era?? That is as unrealistic as doing it with the Swedes. But having the opportunity to do it in game should be there.

Kalle

[Trithemius]

Well u are wrong Trithemius in many aspects (all aspects).

Uh, right - so the Danes were not expelled in 1521? Gustav I was not the first Swedish king of Sweden since the Kalmar Union?


Ever heard of Sten Sture (younger and older)?

The regents of of Sweden? :/


Ever heard that it was a union only possible as long as the swedes supported it?

I don't disagree that Swedish approval of the Union diminished rapidly, however this does not mean that the Swedes were an independent and sovereign state. They were engaged in warfare with the Danes over their sovereignty but this did not conclude in their favour until 1521, and was solemnitised by the subsequent coronation of Gustav I.


Neither did the danes give up on the union idea only cause Gustav became king.

Of course they didn't? They were, however, unable to prevail militarily or diplomatically over the House of Vasa.

I'm really not sure how (a) this means I was wrong or (b) how these points of yours advance your argument at the expense of mine?


I can see no reason not to include Sweden in the game other then there being a limit on number of factions and again I cant understand why there must be such a small number of possible factions to play. How realistic and/or historic is it for instance to conquer all of Europe and Middle East as the russians, aragonese, danes (danes couldnt even conquer Sweden) and so on in the medieval era?? That is as unrealistic as doing it with the Swedes. But having the opportunity to do it in game should be there.

At the time of the start of the game, centralised Swedish power is significantly less than that of Denmark. By contrast, Sweden's phase of expansion and influence takes place in the mid-16th C. which places it outside the scope of the dates mentioned in connection with MTW2 so far. If we compare this with the Kingdom (or Duchy, or County; depending on who you ask) of Brittany it is becomes abundantly clear that Brittany would be a more reasonably choice as a faction.

While I understand that you feel strongly about the importance of Sweden, and its history, I don't see how that makes anything I have said less true? Sweden would enjoy an important role in any game that started around 1530 (when MTW2 is supposed to end), but it simply was not as influential as other kingdoms during the medieval period - revisionist nationalist history-work aside.

[Kalle]

Uh, right - so the Danes were not expelled in 1521? Gustav I was not the first Swedish king of Sweden since the Kalmar Union?


They were expelled yes, they tried to come back many times though so their expelltion was neither certain nor at an end. In their eyes comeback was a matter of time, as they had been thinkin ever since they first were thrown out.

No, Gustav was not the first Swedish king since the Kalmar Union. Some of those listed here were regents over all countries in the union. Several others were kings of Sweden since, as I now said many times, Denmark had not power enough to force Sweden into union. Mark the word union also. It was a union (with denmark as the powerful partner), never a danish conquest of sweden.

Margareta 1389 - 1396
Erik av Pommern 1396 - 1439
Kristofer av Bayern 1441 - 1448
Karl Knutsson Bonde 1448 - 1457, 1463 - 1465, 1467 - 1470
Kristian I1457 - 1464
Sten Sture den äldre (Riksföreståndare) 1470 - 1497, 1501 -1503
Hans (Johan II) 1497 - 1501
Svante Sture(Riksföreståndare) 1504 - 1512
Sten Sture den yngre (Riksföreståndare) 1512 - 1520
Kristian II 1520 - 1521


The regents of of Sweden? :/


Since you obviously have not heard of them I think you should not try to argue against me without reading more about this epoch in Scandinavia.


I don't disagree that Swedish approval of the Union diminished rapidly, however this does not mean that the Swedes were an independent and sovereign state. They were engaged in warfare with the Danes over their sovereignty but this did not conclude in their favour until 1521, and was solemnitised by the subsequent coronation of Gustav I.


First of all Gustavs coronation didnt solemnitise anyhtin in the views of others then the Swedish supporters of him. To the danes he was not a legal king. Thus its kind of anachronistic to see his coronation as the defenitive end of the union because Sweden on many more occasions had to fight vs Denmark.

Second, so you claim that Sweden was ruled by Denmark from Margareta to Gustav?? That is not true as proved by the list of regents above.


Of course they didn't? They were, however, unable to prevail militarily or diplomatically over the House of Vasa.


The house of wasa was until Gustav not the most famous or powerful Swedish noble family. The Stures probably were (as can be understood looking at the regentlist above). The military power of the Wasafamily were the people of the province Dalarna where Gustav stirred up rebellion against Christian II who in 1520 had taken Stockholm and and seemed to have restored the union (once more). As proven many times before Denmark could not force the union on Sweden if the Swedes didnt want it and this time it happened to be Gustav (wasa - a later added prefix, gustav was never called wasa during his days) who was the leader of the swedes when they threw the danes out.


I'm really not sure how (a) this means I was wrong or (b) how these points of yours advance your argument at the expense of mine?


Maybe now you know??


At the time of the start of the game, centralised Swedish power is significantly less than that of Denmark. By contrast, Sweden's phase of expansion and influence takes place in the mid-16th C. which places it outside the scope of the dates mentioned in connection with MTW2 so far. If we compare this with the Kingdom (or Duchy, or County; depending on who you ask) of Brittany it is becomes abundantly clear that Brittany would be a more reasonably choice as a faction.


Agreed about centralized power at the start of the game. However MTW had 3 startingperiods. Maybe this game have to?? Nonetheless Swedens biggest add on to its territory happened during the time this game spans, i.e. Finland. This I have stated in earlier post. First by what was called crusades and later on colonisation and subduing of the finns. So not only should Sweden be in the game, they should also have crusader units :2thumbsup:

Swedens rise to great european power came later as u say but in this game i want the chance to make it happen earlier. Brittany, sure i would love to play them too but no on expense of Sweden.


While I understand that you feel strongly about the importance of Sweden, and its history, I don't see how that makes anything I have said less true? Sweden would enjoy an important role in any game that started around 1530 (when MTW2 is supposed to end), but it simply was not as influential as other kingdoms during the medieval period - revisionist nationalist history-work aside.

I have above showed that you are wrong in what you say and that is ok, just wish you would read up a bit before you start talk. BUUUT what is not ok is your last part, you are threading on a very thin line. What do you mean with revisionist nationalist history??

Kalle

[GFX707]

I think that everyone wants to see their own country in the game, no matter how small or insignificant that country was during the medieval period.

All that matters to me is that Scotland is finally in the game!!!! Ha ha! eat that Swedish people! Just kidding....but I hope you see my point ;)

[Kalle]

id love to play scotland and be able to take england :):)

kalle

[Kagemusha]

All i can say that in the date that the game starts there was no Finland in the area of Modern Finland there where the Finish tribes of Hämäläiset,Savolaiset and Karjalaiset.Also the Northern parts of Finland was habited by the Saami people.There was no united Kingdom or King of Finland and that is the reason why there shouldnt be a faction called Finland.Btw way im also from Finland.Concerning our Western neighbours the Swedes im not going to say anything about should or shouldnt they be in the game.:bow:

[King Yngvar]

The more factions, the better, if ask me

Agreed, if they can add every faction in Europe, I hope they do so. Even if it means the game will take longer time to make.

[Gurkhal]

The more factions, the better, if ask me

I'll second that. Even if I would say that emerging factions would be to favour insteed of more starting factions.

Some Pagan faction in the east would be intressting, maybe the Wendals (spelling?), I've read a book about the Nordic Crusade not long ago and they seemed like a very intressting people, both cultural, military, religious and geographical.

[Watchman]

The Swedes weren't terribly involved in continental European affairs during the Middle Ages (then again, neither were the Danes), but they were quite a factor in the Baltic region and particularly the eastern parts. They were constantly butting heads with the Novgorodians and later Moscow over where exactly the respective spheres of influence went in what is now Finland for one, and AFAIK squabbled quite a bit with the Danes and Norwegians (Långe leve nordiske samarbetet! ~;) ) particularly over the ownership of Skåne, the southernmost tip of Scandinavia proper. This no doubt was a factor that also kept the Danes from getting very involved with happenings further south.

As far as these things go they qualify as a faction just as much as Danes; the Norwegians I don't really know too much about, but Finns are Right Out being the bunch of bickering little pagan tribes they now were at the beginning of the period covered (later on, should the game have something similar to the old MTW's Early/High/Late starting dates, they were already under Swedish overlordship anyway).

[Trithemius]

Kalle: A regent is not a king. A Dane who is entitled as "King of Sweden" is not a Swede. During the Kalmar Union Sweden did not act as a sovereign kingdom (hence "Swedish King of Sweden").

This makes it less acceptable as fully developed faction than other kingdoms in Europe over the span of time the game is intending to cover.

I apologise if you think my brevity is a sign of my lack of reading, since it is not; rather it is a concerted effort to be brief.


I have above showed that you are wrong in what you say and that is ok, just wish you would read up a bit before you start talk. BUUUT what is not ok is your last part, you are threading on a very thin line. What do you mean with revisionist nationalist history??

I am treading a very thin line? Are you going to call me uneducated again?
You can recast historical events in whatever way you like to attend to the needs of your patriotism, I don't deny that; but you can't expect others in an international setting to be as readily accepting of your slant on things. Australians are no less susceptible to this reimagining of events - ask one about Breaker Morant, or Gallipoli, or the Kokoda Track and you'll see this is true.

In any event I don't really have anything further to say. I still think that there is no reason to include Sweden as a faction, unless we want to include Ragusa/Dubrovnik and the County of Toulouse as independent factions. Save it for a Renaissance era military game.

[Trithemius]

The Swedes weren't terribly involved in continental European affairs during the Middle Ages (then again, neither were the Danes), but they were quite a factor in the Baltic region and particularly the eastern parts. They were constantly butting heads with the Novgorodians and later Moscow over where exactly the respective spheres of influence went in what is now Finland for one, and AFAIK squabbled quite a bit with the Danes and Norwegians (Långe leve nordiske samarbetet! ~;) ) particularly over the ownership of Skåne, the southernmost tip of Scandinavia proper. This no doubt was a factor that also kept the Danes from getting very involved with happenings further south.

As far as these things go they qualify as a faction just as much as Danes; the Norwegians I don't really know too much about, but Finns are Right Out being the bunch of bickering little pagan tribes they now were at the beginning of the period covered (later on, should the game have something similar to the old MTW's Early/High/Late starting dates, they were already under Swedish overlordship anyway).

The Swedes would make an excellent "super independent" province I think. So that taking them would require a reasonable amount of attention from either the Danes (going northish) or the Novgorodians (going westish). Same probably works for Scotland, Brittany and other similar places.

I think that the Danes are probably the most likely of Scandinavian candidates (Finns, please don't bash me!) for faction status because of their earlier history of expansion into other factions areas (England) and their comparatively early centralisation of power.

[Watchman]

Well, except that by the period normally considered "Middle Ages" both Sweden and Norway were both centralized kingdoms, as much as anyone now was by the standards of the time (ie. feudal hodge-podge with the monarch a primus inter pares). And the Swedes expanded quite actively eastwards over the Baltic too - it took them some time to take over most of Finland, but the rough partition line with the Novgorodians was drawn in the eastern part of the region (and duly regularly contested with arms, as was only good and proper so far as the contemporaries were concerned). They also did dabble a bit in getting involved with Christianizing the Baltic pagans, but by that point thanks to the Schwertbrudern and the Teutonic Order the latter were so hostile to such entreaties the project was quickly dropped.

That's a bit too active for a standard TW Rebel/neutral faction, if you ask me.

The large isle of Gotland, Skåne and much of Norway seem to have been the main bones of contention between the Swedes and the Danes. I'm under the strong impression the Norse spent most of the time getting caught underfoot. What any of them were doing before the period covered is quite irrelevant to the discussion - by that logic the whole lot of them would merit full faction status, given the Norse and Danish habit of getting involved in the local politics of Dark Ages Western Europe and England and the Swedish tendency to do the same alongside the great Russian rivers ('course, none of the three were overly particular about the direction of their voyages). Does the name "Rus" ring a bell ?

[econ21]

Polite notice: historical debate is fine, but please keep it civil. A good model is the academic one - provide facts and reasoned argument, but do not demean people holding contrary views. If what you post would not be acceptable in a school classroom or university seminar, don't post it.

[Kalle]

Well my post was deleted so I wont write here anymore about this.

It seems strange that it is ok to call someone revisionistic and nationalistic when this is not the case. Please moderator, where is the revisionism? What did I say that was not true?

What it comes down to though is that some people want to be able to play their country in the game, a valid wish, and some want to deny them the possibility, which in my eyes is strange.

Kalle

[Trithemius]

Well, except that by the period normally considered "Middle Ages" both Sweden and Norway were both centralized kingdoms, as much as anyone now was by the standards of the time (ie. feudal hodge-podge with the monarch a primus inter pares). And the Swedes expanded quite actively eastwards over the Baltic too - it took them some time to take over most of Finland, but the rough partition line with the Novgorodians was drawn in the eastern part of the region (and duly regularly contested with arms, as was only good and proper so far as the contemporaries were concerned). They also did dabble a bit in getting involved with Christianizing the Baltic pagans, but by that point thanks to the Schwertbrudern and the Teutonic Order the latter were so hostile to such entreaties the project was quickly dropped.

I'm not sure what you mean by "normally considered" - definitions seem to vary extraordinarily, even between staff within a single academic institution (at least in my experience! ;)).

I personally believe that "expansion" is not sufficient justification - as mentioned if this was the case then the kings/dukes (or, to ask the Carolingian kings, counts) of Brittany are even more suited for inclusion as a faction, given this areas role in the history of the Angevins, and thus of England and France, and their expansion into the march counties along with borders.

If it was Sweden that was able to form a union Norway and Denmark as the senior partner, and enforce it via diplomacy or military force, then it would make sense to include Sweden as the playable and fully developed faction in Scandinavia. However, historically this wasn't the case and it seems reasonable to assign the status to Denmark in light of this. Given that the developers are unlikely to present three fully detailed Scandinavian factions, but will probably include one, Denmark seems the most justifiable choice in the terms of our history.


I should stress that I am not attempting to make light of history of Sweden, or its importance in the progress of Balkan politics. I am simply stating my opinion about this topic, after considering the pertinent historical factors. Finally, despite the claims of my various would-be interlocutors, none of the 'revelations' they have made about the history of the region have been anything new to me; you might say that all of my bells have been ringing for some time. ;)

I think this seam is pretty much exhausted now, at least until the next TW sequel comes out?

[econ21]

I wont write here anymore about this.



I think this seam is pretty much exhausted now, at least until the next TW sequel comes out?

And so on that happy note of consensus: :closed: