Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
The only places I can even see Agrarian being viable is in Egypt and maybe the northern half of India. At least the forest and mountain ones have more terrain on the map, especially in the north for the forest ones.
I think if there was some sort of smaller boost for Plains terrain then it would be a worthwhile tradition; that or more farmlands.
Edit: Mesopotamia and the south-western tip of Africa could also be viable, but there's very little reason to expand such a culture beyond those points.
1) only cultures with several farmlands have this tradition
2) alternatives are something like "refined poetry" taking the same slot
3) You never want to expand your culture beyond your domain, instead let vassals of your culture form hybrid cultures
Sure, but a lot of those cultures have a handful, at best, in the entire world region where they're located.
The Dutch come to mind with two* farmland in their cultural area and the surrounding cultures don't even have the tradition despite having more farmland.
Also the distribution of farmlands vs. plains is 100% arbitrary, and doesn't reflect the actual geography. I think it is meant as a balance measure, to make sure that some capitals at least get the chance to stay ahead of development for the rest of the realm.
The agrarian tradition also helps a lot with this, +30% flat development bonus is massive and you even get +20% on top if athletic, and +20% taxes if diligent or patient.
While obviously some cultures are meant to be high-tech where others remain underdeveloped, like india vs. scandinavia is no competition.
And keep in mind that the default development growth is exactly 0/month, you always need a neigboring county with higher development to cause any growth.
So you just max out development in your (farmlands) capital which is a multiple times faster than any other terrain. Then move on to the least developed county and repeat.
It isn't arbitrary. There is a carefully constructed system. But plains doesnt mean the absence of farmland it just means the preponderance of the county isnt developed farmland.
A carefully constructed system that makes a handful of floodplain locations the only viable agrarian culture spots, while cultures that start with agrarian are left with a useless tradition?
Cultural traditions are all situational. Just because you consider it sub optimal doesnt make the system of picking terrain types arbitrary.
For the purpose of this list, farmland includes floodplains.
The Anglo-Saxon culture has seven farmland spots and no agrarian tradition.
The Dutch culture has two farmland spots and the agrarian tradition.
The Galician culture has no farmland spots and the agrarian tradition.
Out of the four Indian subcontinent cultures that have farmland in their borders, one does not have the agrarian tradition.
The Hungarian culture has four farmland spots and the agrarian tradition.
The Czech culture has eight farmland spots and no agrarian tradition.
It's arbitrary, especially since spreading a culture takes forever and hybrid/divergent cultures seem to pick traditions at random without a player's guidance; assuming they pop up that is.
Anglo-Saxons were not know as farmers.
Dutch were.
Dont know about Galacians.
Hungarian is interesting, but not unreasonable.
Czech was a developed population center, but also were better known for thing other than farming.
Just because you dont understand the system doesnt mean its arbitrary. Devs made choices based in history for the starting situations. Were there compromises made? Sure. Do these traditions represent the gameplay optimal for the area involved? No. Should they? No.
That's not the point. The point is the location and the amount of farmland is arbitrary when looking at which cultures have the tradition that related to them.
If a culture was historically known for farming, one would think there would be land cultivated for farming in that cultural region.
Irregardless of everything else, you can't point to the Galacians culture in the game and say giving them the Agrarian Tradition makes any sense with the way it works in game since there is no farmland there for it to affect.
Both farmland and floodplains have geographic and historical reasons to be placed where they are. Floodplains being along rivers known for there floodplains. Farmland however is more an indication of intensity of use.
Traditions are assigned to cultures that best match them historically. A dispersed agrarian culture would not have the impact on the natural environment to create a county of predominately farmland. It doesnt mean they are not agrarian. Just as a culture might occupy intensively farmed counties and have far more defining cultural traditions than agrarian.
Neither of these selections are arbitrary. They may be sub optimal or undesirable for the player but the beauty of cultural traditions are you can change them to fit whatever environment or situation you find yourself in.
No I cannot but as I've said above it has nothing to do with the presence or lack counties that are predominately floodplain or farmland.
I cannot say if agrarian is appropriate for Galacians because I am not familiar enough with Galacian culture during the time period.
No! In the 200 years between the two launch options alone, nothing changes geographically. Forests are not cut down, settlements are created, etc. Let's take Magdeburg. The province is not even a capital province. Hardly any other area in the north was so fertile. Magdeburg quickly became the largest economic center in northern Germany and was the largest city of the HRE before it was almost completely destroyed in the 30-year war.
Bohemia, on the other hand, was of little relevance in the Early and High Middle Ages. Through the ore finds in the Ore Mountains (today's Saxony, then Margraviate of Meissen), Bohemian wage workers gained the know-how that allowed them to use their own resources and become rich and important, not least because Prague temporarily became the capital of the empire. The Devs want a rich strong Bohemia so it will be with Farmland plastered
Nordic cultures roam around in tribal groups, although Haitabu in northern Germany, a Nordic settlement, was not only the largest trading city of the empire, but also spread many achievements of Nordic craftsmen and artists in northern Germany. The fact that a culture is not feudally structured does not mean that there were no cities, castles or research.
And briefly to the Anglo-Saxon England you mentioned. Hardly any other culture has been so proudly and multifacetedly linked to its long agricultural tradition. Free peasants, as opposed to the serf of the continent.
It is fair to say that paradox forces history that they bless some areas with special "gifts" that were not so historically present. In my opinion, that is fine, but we should please stick to the truth. Since trade does not play a role in the game, you have just distributed bonuses over terrain, such as around Paris, Prague and Cologne the farmland and important resources such as forests simply unatractive.
Buildings were built by unpaid workers from existing materials, not with or from gold coins. Duties were delivered in kind. Historically correct is different.