It's also quite ironic that the person giving out grammar advice misses quite a big grammar fail in his first paragraph, but such is life. I'm glad you enjoyed the 'action sequences', I was worried that I may have trivialised warfare a little too much. That is part of the reason I avoided another major battle at Rennes. The other reason is that the central focus of the story (perhaps I should have left in the 200 word summary) was how a seemingly insignificant event that occurs during the EU4 timeframe, i.e. the British landing in Quiberon (compared to say, the fall of Constantinople, discovery of the new world, reformation, enlightenment, Waterloo, etc) could have drastic differences on Europe as we know it today. I hypothesise that a successful Quiberon and a Kingdom of Brittany opposed to the French on their eastern border, and Prussia/Germany on the western border, may have changed the result of the Franco-Prussian war, in favour of Prussian militarists leading to much harsher territorial concessions instead of Bismarck's more constrained demands. The existence of an independent Brittany may have also changed the views of Ernst Renan (French historian and political theorist), who suddenly threw out his anti-semitism, racism and devout religion (his earlier works were related to the language of Christian texts) and wrote about French Unity, fired up by French nationalism following French defeat in 1871. This is perhaps even more surprising as Renan was also a reader of German theorists on the nation, such as Fitch and Herder. Born in Brittany, and therefore not French in this alternate timeline, Renan would therefore be unlikely to be inspired by French national ideals and instead be devoted to the 'ethnic' nationalist cause, continuing to follow German and religious theory on the nation and applying it to Brittany.

Although you are right, it is too much to expect the reader to have the exact same library of knowledge that I have. But I didn't want to write 'just another Michael Bay film', full of action, fun, but not really much substance. Again I should have taken my own advice and probably expanded this into some form of novel, where the serious ideas of European Nationalism can be more thoroughly explored, and justice given to this subject. Perhaps I could also have tried harder to explore the varying types of nationalism within the EU4 timeframe, akin to your suggestion, although considering nationalism as a modern concept was still in its infancy I probably would have struggled to find a legitimate reason for a sudden display of pan-European patriotic fervour.

I hope by 'flabbergasted' you mean surprised or shocked, and not disgusted or offended! The alternate Europe of course is different from real Europe, and I was particularly careful to avoid mentioning any specific countries. If anyone should be offended by the conclusion it should be the (few) socially-aware Australians. As Australia is a country so far away from basically everything, we are shielded from many troubles that even developed parts of the world face, for example, tensions between migrants and locals in (real life) Europe. In a world where ethnic (German, and by extention, Breton) nationalism triumphed instead of civic (French) nationalism, I can only logically conclude that this tension would even be worse. In this round-about way, in a world where such a small change in history can trigger such a massive change in modernity, this is a fictitous-thesis arguing for greater integration of history in the education system. But again, you are right in that I should have accounted for the fact that my readers don't get access to my brain through telepathy, and might get lost wading through many sudden time jumps.

Rules: I. Grammar
II. Racism
III. No Nsfw
IV. No Supporting Israel

Also look r/paradoxplaza or r/totalwar etc

<div class="md"><p>It&#39;s also quite ironic that the person giving out grammar advice misses quite a big grammar fail in his first paragraph, but such is life. I&#39;m glad you enjoyed the &#39;action sequences&#39;, I was worried that I may have trivialised warfare a little too much. That is part of the reason I avoided another major battle at Rennes. The other reason is that the central focus of the story (perhaps I should have left in the 200 word summary) was how a seemingly insignificant event that occurs during the EU4 timeframe, i.e. the British landing in Quiberon (compared to say, the fall of Constantinople, discovery of the new world, reformation, enlightenment, Waterloo, etc) could have drastic differences on Europe as we know it today. I hypothesise that a successful Quiberon and a Kingdom of Brittany opposed to the French on their eastern border, and Prussia/Germany on the western border, may have changed the result of the Franco-Prussian war, in favour of Prussian militarists leading to much harsher territorial concessions instead of Bismarck&#39;s more constrained demands. The existence of an independent Brittany may have also changed the views of Ernst Renan (French historian and political theorist), who suddenly threw out his anti-semitism, racism and devout religion (his earlier works were related to the language of Christian texts) and wrote about French Unity, fired up by French nationalism following French defeat in 1871. This is perhaps even more surprising as Renan was also a reader of German theorists on the nation, such as Fitch and Herder. Born in Brittany, and therefore not French in this alternate timeline, Renan would therefore be unlikely to be inspired by French national ideals and instead be devoted to the &#39;ethnic&#39; nationalist cause, continuing to follow German and religious theory on the nation and applying it to Brittany.</p>

<p>Although you are right, it is too much to expect the reader to have the exact same library of knowledge that I have. But I didn&#39;t want to write &#39;just another Michael Bay film&#39;, full of action, fun, but not really much substance. Again I should have taken my own advice and probably expanded this into some form of novel, where the serious ideas of European Nationalism can be more thoroughly explored, and justice given to this subject. Perhaps I could also have tried harder to explore the varying types of nationalism within the EU4 timeframe, akin to your suggestion, although considering nationalism as a modern concept was still in its infancy I probably would have struggled to find a legitimate reason for a sudden display of pan-European patriotic fervour.</p>

<p>I hope by &#39;flabbergasted&#39; you mean surprised or shocked, and not disgusted or offended! The alternate Europe of course is different from real Europe, and I was particularly careful to avoid mentioning any specific countries. If anyone should be offended by the conclusion it should be the (few) socially-aware Australians. As Australia is a country so far away from basically everything, we are shielded from many troubles that even developed parts of the world face, for example, tensions between migrants and locals in (real life) Europe. In a world where ethnic (German, and by extention, Breton) nationalism triumphed instead of civic (French) nationalism, I can only logically conclude that this tension would even be worse. In this round-about way, in a world where such a small change in history can trigger such a massive change in modernity, this is a fictitous-thesis arguing for greater integration of history in the education system. But again, you are right in that I should have accounted for the fact that my readers don&#39;t get access to my brain through telepathy, and might get lost wading through many sudden time jumps.</p>

<p>Rules: I. Grammar
II. Racism
III. No Nsfw
IV. No Supporting Israel</p>

<p>Also look <a href="/r/paradoxplaza">r/paradoxplaza</a> or <a href="/r/totalwar">r/totalwar</a> etc</p>
</div>

t5_33t59

The other reason is that the central focus of the story (perhaps I should have left in the 200 word summary) was how a seemingly insignificant event that occurs during the EU4 timeframe, i.e. the British landing in Quiberon (compared to say, the fall of Constantinople, discovery of the new world, reformation, enlightenment, Waterloo, etc) could have drastic differences on Europe as we know it today.

<div class="md"><p>The other reason is that the central focus of the story (perhaps I should have left in the 200 word summary) was how a seemingly insignificant event that occurs during the EU4 timeframe, i.e. the British landing in Quiberon (compared to say, the fall of Constantinople, discovery of the new world, reformation, enlightenment, Waterloo, etc) could have drastic differences on Europe as we know it today.</p>
</div>

Can I get a person from every country? (Day 1)