The way I see a Scandinavian Expansion working is essentially this:
- Keeping the Vikings to represent Norway and Sweden, renaming them to Norse.
Yes, pretty much all 3 of the Scandinavian cultures participated in Viking/Raiding culture, but Norway and Sweden were better known for it (Norway being literally named for the Northmen/Norse whom were the ones raiding foreign shores, Sweden because Varangians were literally Eastern Vikings who originated there) One could (and judging from the other comments here, several have) argue that, with the name change, they could also now more accurately represent the broader Germanic Pagan circle, including Saxons (and later Anglo-Saxons), Early Frisians (though I still think Frisians are better represented in their own civ), and other Early Northern Germanic cultures.
- Adding the Danes.
While also viable as being represented under the Vikings, the Danes differed quite a lot compared to the other Norsemen in the sense that they not only spearheaded the syncreticism and later adoption of Christianity in Scandinavia, they also were much more centrally focused as a kingdom earlier than the other two Scandinavian realms, really leaning into a '“part of the group, separate in approach” theme for them. Like others have said, they could represent the High-Late Medieval Kingdom period, which arguably was the zenith of their influence given the rise of the Kalmar Union towards the end of the timeline.
- Adding a (Finno-) Ugric civ(s)
While people are really not keen on having more umbrella civs, there also is not a lot of good conversation surrounding even more Euro civs. So, an Ugric civ might be able to bridge the divide between the Finnish, the Sami, the Karelians, and can cover the eastern Uralic people as well if need be. This could be a very versatile way to represent the Finno-Ugric people.
Alternatively, if the consensus is that a wholly umbrellafied civ like the Ugrics is unwarranted, I guess choosing the most prominent group amongst them would be fine, but that specificity ends up causing more European bloat. Either way, this addition is the toughest to cinch.
- Full 5-6 Scenario Campaigns for the civs above + Slavs.
For the (now) Norse, I could see something along the lines of Harold Hardraada would be an amazing campaign to see, and it would have so much to offer during the scope of his span of time.
For the Danes, I could see either Cnut the Great (Rise of the North Sea Empire, Spread of Christianity) or Valdemar I the Great (expanded the Medieval Kingdom of Denmark to its zenith) as amazing picks for a campaign. I really can’t pick between the two personally.
For the Ugrics/Finns, I’m not entirely sure… if the civ tends more towards a specific Finnish Identity, then perhaps a campaign centered around resisting Norse expansion from Sweden and centralizing the tribes could work. I admit, I have next to no knowledge about anything to do with the Finno-Ugric peoples, so this part is the hardest for me to theorycraft.
And Lastly, the Slavs. Why Slavs in a Scandinavian DLC? Because, I feel it would be the best time to rename them to the Rus. Their campaign should follow the Nordic Rurikid Dynasty as they conquer the local Slavs, Balts, and Finno-Ugrics and, as they assimilate with one another, become the Rus.
Of course, this could conflict with a more Dynasties of India-esque approach for the Slav split, but I’d think that it would be worth it in the end. The Rus were essentially a cultural mix of Norse, Slavic, Baltic and Finnic cultures, and they have more ties to Scandinavia than they do to the rest of the wider distribution of Slavic Cultures. To me, this is the more appropriate approach to renaming the Slavs, and possibly, if necessary, they could release the rest of the (South) Slavs (Serbians, Croatians, Romanians) in a different DLC.
