Remove ads

Nations of Steel and Sabre

Reader mode
My question is why isn't France spitting fire, given the whole "Must parition Isles to ensure they're never ever ever powerful enough to threaten the glory of le Ancien Regime?"
 
To be fair, there hasn't really been time for a mod response yet, which probably explains the lack of faction responses.
 
ChineseDrone said:
I'm sorry but, like

Why is Charles II, an absolute monarch with explicitly revenchanistic intentions, willing to subject himself to the limitation of an English Parliament and accept the continued reign of the very person the OP said he wanted to depose?

Why is the Presbyterian Taliban OK with the idea of a union with the episcopal Anglican English announced for the explicit purpose of reinforcing the Catholic French domination of the Isles? They revolted against the Commonwealth over Cromwell not being willing to impose Presbyterianism on literally everyone else, and now they're OK with tolerance of Anglicanism being imposed on them?

Why is the English faction that's entire MO, for which it was brought into government, was "not having to deal with the Scots" OK with a union with Scotland, and why did the Scots look at an England that was bringing into government a faction whose entire MO was "fuck the Scots" and say "those look like great chaps to share a country with"?

How did this ever pass a vote in Scotland and why is it not leading to everyone involved being gibbetted by spontaneous mobs of angry Presbyterians and Anglophobes?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Have I not been doing huge amounts of pro English and Scottish propaganda? Have I not been doing tons of propaganda insinuating that no matter what Scotland is Protestant?
I have seen nothing about England saying "Fuck the Scots" Their king was in a god damn TV show with Charles II. And Charles II is, get this





English. Funny, right? And the OP says nothing about me wanting to depose Charles, it says I would need to be sneaky if he wanted to get the isles back, which is a tad difficult when your ruler is a WOMANIZING DRUNK. Not that I'm complaining, I've had a grand old time playing Charles II, and I hope it never ends. And what is this Presbyterian Taliban? You mean the one that doesn't exist? Most people in Scotland have accepted french rule, and like the English. The Covenanters aren't Anglophobes, and if they were IRL, they sure as hell aren't in TTL, because IRL, Charles II denounced them. I have not. The only reason they didn't like Charles in real life, was because of his denunciation of them. They are also not independents, they are religious, and mystics, so the union shouldn't pose any problems with them, especially since their religion is not directly threatened in any way. Also, all the French bullshit is so France doesn't straight up go "Fuck you, we're gonna beat the shit out of you guys, and then install someone new" Which they may still do
 
Last edited:
Bismarck said:
Have I not been doing huge amounts of pro English and Scottish propaganda? Have I not been doing tons of propaganda insinuating that no matter what Scotland is Protestant?
I have seen nothing about England saying "Fuck the Scots" Their king was in a god damn TV show with Charles II. And Charles II is, get this

English. Funny, right? And the OP says nothing about me wanting to depose Charles, it says I would need to be sneaky if he wanted to get the isles back, which is a tad difficult when your ruler is a WOMANIZING DRUNK. Not that I'm complaining, I've had a grand old time playing Charles II, and I hope it never ends. And what is this Presbyterian Taliban? You mean the one that doesn't exist? Most people in Scotland have accepted french rule, and like the English. The Covenanters aren't Anglophobes, and if they were IRL, they sure as hell aren't in TTL, because IRL, Charles II denounced them. I have not. The only reason they didn't like Charles in real life, was because of his denunciation of them. They are also not independents, they are religious, and mystics, so the union shouldn't pose any problems with them, especially since their religion is not directly threatened in any way. Also, all the French bullshit is so France doesn't straight up go "Fuck you, we're gonna beat the shit out of you guys, and then install someone new" Which they may still do
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Dude, you realize that the Covenanters are the same people who caused the entire War of Three Kingdoms when Charles tried to get them to use the Book of Common Prayer, and rebelled against Cromwell for refusing to impose Presbyterianism on everyone, right? Like, if you've ever heard the Cromwell quote "I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible you may be mistaken", they're the people he's talking to. These are people who were too extreme about Calvinist religiosity for Cromwell and now they're... ok with being asked to tolerate Anglicans and Catholics? They're not independents or Anglophobes, they're fundamentalist Presbyterians, and they're not going to be for an Act of Union that does anything less than wipe out the Anglican Church.

Like, keep in mind, when the Engagers made a deal with Charles II to restore him to the throne, that was the deal they made. "We will support you for the crown if you impose Presbyterianism on England and get rid of the Independents (the religious faction)". Why have they gone from trying to impose Presbyterianism on England to being OK with tolerance for English Anglicanism being forced on Scotland?

Meanwhile, Charles II's whole thing from the OP was " King Charles II rules Scotland uneasily. While he was restored to the throne of Scotland, the perfidious French have split his birthright into four...". He wants England back, and this deal means that he's never getting England back because he just pledged himself to support the Bourbon Monarchy on the throne of England. That's completely contrary to his whole established MO in the game.

Finally the English Brittanics are in government for the Kingdom of England--their whole thing is "not wanting to deal with the Scots". IDK why Scotland thought they would be good partners in government to have.

The "anglophobes" are just... most people in Scotland. Who don't appreciate being subjugated to England. The Act of Union was only passed IOTL after Scotland bankrupted itself and had basically no choice, and even then it was tremendously unpopular among many-why would it be any less so here, when it's coming out of the blue for little to no reason?
 
Last edited:
ChineseDrone said:
Dude, you realize that the Covenanters are the same people who caused the entire War of Three Kingdoms when Charles tried to get them to use the Book of Common Prayer, and rebelled against Cromwell for refusing to impose Presbyterianism on everyone, right? Like, if you've ever heard the Cromwell quote "I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible you may be mistaken", they're the people he's talking to. These are people who were too extreme about Calvinist religiosity for Cromwell and now they're... ok with being asked to tolerate Anglicans and Catholics? They're not independents or Anglophobes, they're fundamentalist Presbyterians, and they're not going to be for an Act of Union that does anything less than wipe out the Anglican Church.

Like, keep in mind, when the Engagers made a deal with Charles II to restore him to the throne, that was the deal they made. "We will support you for the crown if you impose Presbyterianism on England and get rid of the Independents (the religious faction)". Why have they gone from trying to impose Presbyterianism on England to being OK with tolerance for English Anglicanism being forced on Scotland?

Meanwhile, Charles II's whole thing from the OP was " King Charles II rules Scotland uneasily. While he was restored to the throne of Scotland, the perfidious French have split his birthright into four...". He wants England back, and this deal means that he's never getting England back because he just pledged himself to support the Bourbon Monarchy on the throne of England. That's completely contrary to his whole established MO in the game.

Finally the English Brittanics are in government for the Kingdom of England--their whole thing is "not wanting to deal with the Scots". IDK why Scotland thought those would be good partners in government to have.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
My propaganda hasn't changed though. A single faction, the description of which is: Religious [Covenanters], Mystics [Christian Mysticism]. The majority of the people in Scotland, Covenanters or not, like English people, or are at least fine with them. Also the, yeah the OP said " King Charles II rules Scotland uneasily. While he was restored to the throne of Scotland, the perfidious French have split his birthright into four..." it says nothing about him being an alcoholic. It's a little obvious from his behavior, that he's given up taking England. I would have to change the nation, and the ruler completely, in a very short period of time, to do what you seem to want. And the Covenanters did not go from hating English people, to having to deal with them. Organizations don't have these set beliefs that can't be changed ever, the Brittanics are supposed to hate Charles, and they love him. it was a gradual change to accepting English people. They don't necessarily love him, but they are fine with them, (AFAIK, ultimately it is up to the mods). While you weren't here a bunch of stuff happened in Scotland, a lot of it leading to the majority if people accepting French rule. Also, I don't know anything about the Brittanics not liking Scotland. I understand they are independents, but this union is literally looser than the Kalmar union. We are still independent nations, we are not becoming one single nation. Think of it as an semi-intimate alliance, with economical benefits. Plus England is a Monarchy, and uh, Charles is my Nephew.
 
Bismarck said:
My propaganda hasn't changed though. A single faction, the description of which is: Religious [Covenanters], Mystics [Christian Mysticism]. The majority of the people in Scotland, Covenanters or not, like English people, or are at least fine with them. Also the, yeah the OP said " King Charles II rules Scotland uneasily. While he was restored to the throne of Scotland, the perfidious French have split his birthright into four..." it says nothing about him being an alcoholic. It's a little obvious from his behavior, that he's given up taking England. I would have to change the nation, and the ruler completely, in a very short period of time, to do what you seem to want. And the Covenanters did not go from hating English people, to having to deal with them. Organizations don't have these set beliefs that can't be changed ever, the Brittanics are supposed to hate Charles, and they love him. it was a gradual change to accepting English people. They don't necessarily love him, but they are fine with them, (AFAIK, ultimately it is up to the mods). While you weren't here a bunch of stuff happened in Scotland, a lot of it leading to the majority if people accepting French rule. Also, I don't know anything about the Brittanics not liking Scotland. I understand they are independents, but this union is literally looser than the Kalmar union. We are still independent nations, we are not becoming one single nation. Think of it as an semi-intimate alliance, with economical benefits. Plus England is a Monarchy, and uh, Charles is my Nephew.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Dude, the Covenanters are a real, historical faction of real, historical people. You literally just have to google them to see the full description of what they believe in, and what they believe in is, again, being the Presbyterian Taliban. They're fine with English people, they're not fine with the Church of England for being episcopal and generally not Reformed. Any arrangement that involves combining the English and Scottish Parliaments and creating a unified state, even loosely, is going to involve extending toleration for the Church of England in Scotland, and this is not something the Covenanters would be OK with.

The Brittanics are independents who don't want England to have to deal with the Scots--it's in the Discord. And yeah, it's a loose union, but it's still one where you've joined the English and Scottish Parliaments--Scotland's independence is gone, and England's inevitably doing to dominate this union by virtue of having a much larger population. Yeah, sure, maybe its powers look loose now--but once this unified government is already established, there's nothing preventing the English from just expanding its powers until Scotland's autonomy is totally crushed.
 
Last edited:
ChineseDrone said:
Dude, the Covenanters are a real, historical faction of real, historical people. You literally just have to google them to see the full description of what they believe in, and what they believe in is, again, being the Presbyterian Taliban. They're fine with English people, they're not fine with the Church of England for being episcopal and generally not Reformed. Any arrangement that involves combining the English and Scottish Parliaments are creating a unified state, even loosely, is going to involve extending toleration for the Church of England in Scotland, and this is not something the Covenanters would be OK with.

The Brittanics are independents who don't want England to have to deal with the Scots--it's in the Discord. And yeah, it's a loose union, but it's still one where you've joined the English and Scottish Parliaments--Scotland's independence is gone, and England's inevitably doing to dominate this union by virtue of having a much larger population. Yeah, sure, maybe its powers look loose now--but once this unified government is already established, there's nothing preventing the English from just expanding its powers until Scotland's autonomy is totally crushed.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
This is why wales is standing here gesturing madly at France to do something.
 
ChineseDrone said:
Dude, the Covenanters are a real, historical faction of real, historical people. You literally just have to google them to see the full description of what they believe in, and what they believe in is, again, being the Presbyterian Taliban. They're fine with English people, they're not fine with the Church of England for being episcopal and generally not Reformed. Any arrangement that involves combining the English and Scottish Parliaments and creating a unified state, even loosely, is going to involve extending toleration for the Church of England in Scotland, and this is not something the Covenanters would be OK with.

The Brittanics are independents who don't want England to have to deal with the Scots--it's in the Discord. And yeah, it's a loose union, but it's still one where you've joined the English and Scottish Parliaments--Scotland's independence is gone, and England's inevitably doing to dominate this union by virtue of having a much larger population. Yeah, sure, maybe its powers look loose now--but once this unified government is already established, there's nothing preventing the English from just expanding its powers until Scotland's autonomy is totally crushed.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
At first I thought you were trying to tell me this didn't make sense at first, now it seems like you're trying to turn me against England (I could be reading in to this wrong though, which is most likely) I know the Covenanters were real, I read the Wikipedia article too. they are not the same Covenanters though. I will say this one more time, let me spell it out for you. Peoples opinions change, especially after 4 years of propaganda, and they are not the same Covenanters. Go back and look at what happened while you were gone. I have been friendly with England for a while now, if the Covenanters were to impose themselves on Charles II for that, they would have done it, WHEN HE MADE THIS TL'S LITERAL VERSION OF DINERS DRIVE INS AND DIVES, STARRING CHARLES II, AND MADE THE ENTIRE SECOND SEASON WITH CHARLES BOURBON! (The people loved it by the way)
 
Last edited:
Bismarck said:
At first I thought you were trying to tell me this didn't make sense at first, now it seems like you're trying to turn me against England (I could be reading in to this wrong though, which is most likely) I know the Covenanters were real, I read the Wikipedia article too. they are not the same Covenanters though. I will say this one more time, let me spell it out for you. Peoples opinions change, especially after 4 years of propaganda, and they are not the same Covenanters. Go back and look at what happened while you were gone. I have been friendly with England for a while now, if the Covenanters were to impose themselves on Charles II for that, they would have done it, WHEN HE MADE THIS TL'S LITERAL VERSION OF DINERS DRIVE INS AND DIVES, STARRING CHARLES II, AND MADE THE ENTIRE SECOND SEASON WITH CHARLES BOURBON! (The people loved it by the way)
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Dude:

4 years of diners

A century of bloody religious conflict

Which do you think is going to hold more weight here?
 
ChineseDrone said:
Dude:

4 years of diners

A century of bloody religious conflict

Which do you think is going to hold more weight here?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Hey, I'm just saying what has happened thus far. Charles also isn't part of the Covenanters. They are literally the only group that maybe won't be happy with this. Also, again, there will be no religious conflict. We are not becoming one nation. the changes to them will be minor to non-existent. If anything, they will have an easier time trying to convert England.
 
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top