What formable nations would you like to see?

[Matt Way]

I've always liked formables, felt like they gave me a goal to pursue. I know there will be a couple at launch, but they're generally focused on Europe while I like playing elsewhere.

Long story short, I'll make a unification/imperialism mod to add more, I'm not excluding Europe, but keep in mind that most formables are in-game already.

What nations/empires would you like to see?

Current list:
- Benelux (Belgium/Netherlands/Luxembourg)
- Tamazgha (Morocco/Algiers/Tunis/Tripolitania)
- Zapadoslavia (Yugoslavia of Western Slavic people, Poland/Czechia/Slovakia)
- Aztlan (Mexico/US states: New Mexico, Arizona, California, Nevada, Utah, Colorado)
- Oceania (Australia/New Zealand/Papua New Guinea + claims on surrounding islands)
- Aotearoa (Maori culture New Zealand)
- Greater Somalia (Geledi/Hoboyo/Majeteen/Warasangali/Isaaq/parts of Harar[Ethiopia])
- Bantu Nation (South African Union)
- Malaya (Greater Sunda Islands + claims on lesser Sunda islands)
- Carribean Union (Cuba/Haiti/Jamaica/Puerto Rico/Bahamas + claims on all smaller islands)
- Indochina (Vietnam/Cambodia/Laos)
- United States of Austria (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_of_Greater_Austria#/media/File:Greater_austria_ethnic.svg)

Yes, some of these are a stretch so they will be under the "fantasy" category, same as Rome and Byzantium are in-game. Then again, most of these were at some point suggested by one imperialist or another, so we never know what might have happened in an alternate history.

EDIT: I should've also mentioned that one of the reasons why I'd go with more formables is because your country rank is set per-country at the start of the game and is unchangeable, unless you form a new country. I feel like in a lot of areas you'll be stuck as a "city-state/"principality" as a result even after conquering all of your neighbours, as it won't change automatically.

(Unless this dev diary is out of date: https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/developer-diary/victoria-3-dev-diary-18-rank-prestige.1493822/)

[silly goof]

Zapadoslavia?? Zapad means west not east

[Matt Way]

Originally posted by AVANTI SAVOIA!!!:

Zapadoslavia?? Zapad means west not east

Yeah, my bad, it's meant to be "West slavic union", in relation to East slavic which would be Russia and adjecent territories, thats a typo on my part. It was a post WW1 proposal, similar to Intermarium.

[Toblm]

Why would Aztlan need to be a form-able nation?
This (Mexico/US states: New Mexico, Arizona, California, Nevada, Utah, Colorado) is Mexico's start state. The nation IS Mexico. Just dont lose it.

[MinatoWantae]

Indochina (Vietnam/Cambodia/Laos)

[Matt Way]

Originally posted by Toblm:

Why would Aztlan need to be a form-able nation?
This (Mexico/US states: New Mexico, Arizona, California, Nevada, Utah, Colorado) is Mexico's start state. The nation IS Mexico. Just dont lose it.

Good point, I didn't think of that - I guess it could be a nationalist/revanchist state after/if you lose those? At least that's the historical origin, it was originally a goal of the Chicano movement in the 20th century who believed they had "a legal and primordial right to the land."

Originally posted by MinatoWantae:

Indochina (Vietnam/Cambodia/Laos)

Missed that one, added!

[MarVerine]

The Guac Empire of Jeb!

[Toblm]

Carthage and Babylon are not realistic.
There reason why "Rome" and "Byzantine" formable works is because they were a source of nationalism for the Italians and Greeks.

Carthage has no population seeking to reclaim former glories. Neither does Babylon. Could there be a formable for native control of the Maghreb? Sure, maybe.

Should their be a formable for native control of much of the Middle East? Sure, though it would just be called Arabia. (Territories of: Iraq/Syria/Lebanon/Israel/Jordan/Kuwait) this plus what is now Saudi Arabia is the Arab State that was promised at the end of WWI for Arab support against the Ottomans.

[Diglosgr]

Ulm

[MarVerine]

Originally posted by Toblm:

Carthage has no population seeking to reclaim former glories. Neither does Babylon. Could there be a formable for native control of the Maghreb? Sure, maybe.

Then how about you create Lebanon and colonize Tunesia and Spain?

[Toblm]

Originally posted by MarVerine:

Originally posted by Toblm:

Carthage has no population seeking to reclaim former glories. Neither does Babylon. Could there be a formable for native control of the Maghreb? Sure, maybe.

Then how about you create Lebanon and colonize Tunesia and Spain?

Lebanon just never had the same revanchist connection to their Carthaginian past. Its closer, but fits better in say a CK timeline as a RP character start. Victoria is just too late.

Now if you wanted to reform the Barbary Pirates as a global power... that could fit for the Maghreb. Timeline works. Mechanics... might not, but it'd be fun to try.

[MarVerine]

Originally posted by Toblm:

Originally posted by MarVerine:

Then how about you create Lebanon and colonize Tunesia and Spain?

Lebanon just never had the same revanchist connection to their Carthaginian past. Its closer, but fits better in say a CK timeline as a RP character start. Victoria is just too late.

Now if you wanted to reform the Barbary Pirates as a global power... that could fit for the Maghreb. Timeline works. Mechanics... might not, but it'd be fun to try.

Since when do empires rise of only revanchism, you are thinking way too into WW2!

[Matt Way]

Originally posted by Toblm:

Carthage and Babylon are not realistic.
There reason why "Rome" and "Byzantine" formable works is because they were a source of nationalism for the Italians and Greeks.

Carthage has no population seeking to reclaim former glories. Neither does Babylon. Could there be a formable for native control of the Maghreb? Sure, maybe.

Should their be a formable for native control of much of the Middle East? Sure, though it would just be called Arabia. (Territories of: Iraq/Syria/Lebanon/Israel/Jordan/Kuwait) this plus what is now Saudi Arabia is the Arab State that was promised at the end of WWI for Arab support against the Ottomans.

Yeah, Carthage was definitely ahistoric now that I think of it. Replaced it with "Tamazgha" which seems to be the pan-nationalist equivalent for the Barbary Coast.

Babylon was likewise a stretch to place something in that area - Arabia could work (it's in the base game), but I don't think it stretches as far north, we'll see on release.

[Matt Way]

Now that I think of it, maybe "Greater Iran" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_Iran) could work for that "Babylonian" area? The name's less marketable, but it's somewhat historic.

[Toblm]

Originally posted by MarVerine:

Originally posted by Toblm:

Lebanon just never had the same revanchist connection to their Carthaginian past. Its closer, but fits better in say a CK timeline as a RP character start. Victoria is just too late.

Now if you wanted to reform the Barbary Pirates as a global power... that could fit for the Maghreb. Timeline works. Mechanics... might not, but it'd be fun to try.

Since when do empires rise of only revanchism, you are thinking way too into WW2!

Reforming lost empires? That's classic revanchism or I suppose Irredentism if you prefer.
Reforming a Byzantine state, empire or not, is a Greek (or Orthodox, looking at you Russia...) revanchist dream.

Reforming a Roman Empire? Same thing except for the Italians. Does it sound WWII-y? Sure, because thats exactly what Mussolini was trying for. However, Mussolini's politics came directly from the last 30 years of the Victoria timeline.

[MarVerine]

Originally posted by Toblm:

Originally posted by MarVerine:

Since when do empires rise of only revanchism, you are thinking way too into WW2!

Reforming lost empires? That's classic revanchism or I suppose Irredentism if you prefer.
Reforming a Byzantine state, empire or not, is a Greek (or Orthodox, looking at you Russia...) revanchist dream.

Reforming a Roman Empire? Same thing except for the Italians. Does it sound WWII-y? Sure, because thats exactly what Mussolini was trying for. However, Mussolini's politics came directly from the last 30 years of the Victoria timeline.

What i meant was forming empires "again" and not reforming one! Austro Hungarian Empire was also never a thing before the Habsburgs influence and marriage pollitics!
Was there a Mughal empire before they formed it or Mongolia?