A1y0sh4 wrote:

kremlin/soviet propaganda

Prime example on why Ukrainian history should never be learned from russian sources. russians always skew and lie about it.

https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/lseih/2020/07/01/there-is-no-ukraine-fact-checking-the-kremlins-version-of-ukrainian-history/

Better refer to Canadian Institute of Ukrainian Studies (Toronto)

or watch a brief course on Udemy

Sublustris wrote:

Cure_off wrote:
You seem to look at it with the eyes of today, at a time where an independant Ukraine is a fact but there was none then.

Manipulative bullcrap. Cossack Hetmanate was independant at the beginning. Note that even after it fell under Tsardom protectorate, it still maintained independance, as the union was signed as purely military, not a political alliance. Ukraine was reffered as Ukraine, or State of Ukraine by Poles, Ottomans and Arabs. This is a map by Johann Homann, german cartographer, circa 1720:

I don't understand how my curious inquiries and questions could be thought to be manipulative. I am not Ukrainian, that much is obvious, but am trying, ingenuously, to have an exchange about the justified or not use of the Cossacks as Russian EU during the industrial era. I believe to have stayed polite and open to your answers. I haven't had the time to look at all your links for now and will try to do it later, as them seem interesting.

That said, I see »RUSSIA« written above »UKRAINA« on the map from Homann. 
EDIT: DNLH wisely stated, this expresses well my lack of knowledge on the topic (but it should not serve to discredit my state of mind when looking at the subject).
On this other one, there's also a small »UCRANIA«, on the West.
On this other one, theres' also a small »UCRANIA«, but much more on the West, putting most of the »Cossacks regions« outside of »UCRANIA«, as does the map you provided first.

What about this one, where there is a »TERRITORIUM COSACORUM« but no »UKRAINA« or »UCRAINA«?

But back to the topic:

Cure_off wrote:
The encyclopedia seems to provide a decent description for the Cossacks as a unit. No mention of Ukraine as it would be anachronic.

Sublutris wrote:

I think foreigners should STFU and stop telling Ukrainians about their history learned through russian anb soviet historians, that slot is already occupied by russians. 

The era concerned is the industrial one. Starting point for it may differ but the beginning of the XIX century seems adequat, although it could be placed a bit earlier, if it's Katharina II. on the card, who did incorporate the Hetmanate into Russia. I don't know until when the era is supposed to last, WW2 seems a good bet (Zero). That lives a small window of few years (3?, from the end of 1917 to 1920, or 1923 if the exiled WUPR is your reference) during which there was an independant an even partially recognized Ukraine. The window seems too narrow to add an Ukrainian culture into the game. That leaves the Cossacks to the Russian one.

I'm not trying to »tell the Ukrainians« anything about their history. I'm curious, asking questions, presenting thoughts and open to have them contradict, as I'm trying to learn more about the subject as it progresses.

Could you pinpoint what is so wrong with Humankind's encyclopedia text about the Cossacks?
You also replied partially here:

Cure_off wrote:
some of them clearly not in Ukrainian location [(Kuban, Terek, Astrakahn, Ural, Siberia, Baikal, etc. » This part was missing in your reply]

Sublutris wrote:

Kuban was historical and ethnical land of Ukrainians. Here's French map of Ukraine circa 1919:

And here you forgot to answer:

Sublustris wrote:

Your source is translated russian history book. Just saying. After Golden Horde dissipated, Kuban was part of Crimean Khanate and later part of Ottoman empire. When russian empire conquered that patch of land, they resettled Zaporozhian Cossacks there after Zaporozhian Host liquidation. As a result, up until Holodomor (man-made Great Famine of 1933-1934), major part of population consisted of Ukranians. 

I wrote:

Is it false?

Once again, it is all tied to the simple question: is it ok to give the Cossack as a EU for Russia. It doesn't say anything against Ukraine, Ukrainian Cossacks, Russia or the size of a banana. Which culture would you tie the Hamburger to? Most people would link it to the USA and I'd not blame them for it, although it stems from Germany.

Alyosha wrote:

There were some cossacks, like  Yemelyan Pugachev

From a Cossack host coming from the Ural, so a bit far from Ukraine.

DNLH wrote:

Cure_off wrote:
Agreed on the rework.
I fear however that this bonus could be a bit too low or too high in many cases.

Right, + x for every XYZ bonuses are what we're already trying to fight against, no idea what I was thinking. Maybe keep them as they are, only slightly better than Dragoons, and then give them +3/4 CS if any IP were assimilated/conquered? Just a simple yes/no, rather than checking how many.

One possible solution to this involves Veterancy! (    sorry, DLNH ^^;   )

What if instead of getting a bonus +CS per IP assimilated/conquered -- a value remains open-ended and could grow pretty high -- the unit instead received +1 Veterancy per IP assimilated/conquered?  Then it would cap out at 3 in the current system.  It's a bit boring, but similar to your original proposal but with a built-in cap.

What you history experts are missing is that cultural heritage as a substance doesn't really care about your claims. It doesn't matter if Borsch is Russian or Ukrainian, it is simply effing tasty. Ukranian Borsch? Who cares? Russian Borsch? LOL, who cares? Just Borsch?! Freaking tasty and loved by half the world!

Same goes for cossacks. You just are sort of people who can't enjoy culture. You can enjoy quarell and pointing fingers though, articulating favorable sources written by people willing to paint the world in black and white. It doesn't matter in the slightest which culture has Cossacks unit, Russian, Ukrainian or both. What matters is the Cossacks themselves and their martial prodigy and adventurous spirit. Cheers.

You can't cincerely admire a culture without acknowledging what makes it and where it came from. And by your own admition from the start - you don't.