EU4 - Development Diary - 9th of October 2018

[AlphaSonic]

Catalonia and Valencia should start lower in development but get events to increase development or at least NI with -% Development cost.

 

[Blobhemian]

For most of 15-18th centuries Aragon was the most remote and backwards region in Iberia, how come it gets so much flavor?

It certainly was not. Until early 16th century it was Castile (including its subject kingdoms) that was more isolated, whereas Aragon (again, including its subjects) was engaged in Europan politics and trade. After the personal union Aragon retained much of it's fueros (rights) and continued its presence in Mediterranean trade, though it suffered from the shift of the European core from Italy to the Low Countries. What you probably mean when talking about backwardness is Aragon proper, which is landlocked and indeed was backwater, but that's just a few provinces. It's no conincidence that Catalonia became one of the first Spanish industrial cores with support to secularism and republicanism, whereas Castile remained rural and traditionalist.

 

[navaluiki]

I must say that I am not convinced by such a province in Aragon, nor the Islands, I hope that the islands are at least 1-1-1 each.

Because that is another issue, I hope that it is resolved that Rosellon (minor miniprovince) or Cantabria (miniprovince) have more development than Burgos, Leon or Valladolid / Castilla.
Rosellon should be a 4/5. Cantabria 6

In short, based on the basis of this document https://castellavetula.files.wordpress.com/2012/07/1829-libro-de-los-millones.pdf

The friend BalticM did some calculations, here https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...stilla-spain-with-data-and-documents.1091877/ I'm going to copy them:

1594:
1. Toledo - 1.415k
2. Andalusia - 1.083k
3. Leon - 962k
4. Valladolid - 877k
5. Burgos - 672k
6. Galicia - 629k
7. Extramadura - 562k
8. Granada - 502k
9. Valencia - 487k (without Balearic Islands)
10. Aragon - 355k
11. Basque - 341k (2 provinces only)
12. Catalonia - 323k (all 5 provinces including Roussillon, though data is a bit older for Catalonia)

1787

1. Galicia - 1.346k
2. Andalusia - 1.167k
3. Toledo - 1.137k
4. Granada - 999k
5. Leon - 975k
6. Catalonia - 814k (without Roussillon)
7. Valencia - 783k (without Balearic Islands)
8. Burgos - 636k
9. Aragon - 623k
10. Valladolid - 602k
11. Basque - 536k (2 provinces only)
12. Extramadura - 417k

1594

1. Valladolid - 28 (persons / km2)
2. Valencia - 21
3. Galicia - 21
4. Leon - 20
5. Burgos - 19
6. Basque - 19
7. Andalusia - 18
8. Toledo - 18
9. Extramadura - 13
10. Granada - 11
11. Catalonia - 9
12. Aragon - 7

1787

1. Galicia - 45 (persons / km2)
2. Valencia - 34
3. Basque - 30
4. Catalonia - 25
5. Granada - 21
6. Leon - 20
7. Andalusia - 20
8. Valladolid - 19
9. Burgos - 18
10. Toledo - 14
11. Aragon - 13
12.Extramadura - 10

I hope you keep in mind, I already said that in provinces like Segovia or Avila you can put mountains (real), that most of Castile can be made plateaus, hills, forests ... that is, land that harms development . Talk about Castilian / Spanish (real) disasters as Hispanic bankruptcies (which affect income and development as it happened) or add an inflation mechanism for gold, silver and tariffs with the colonies.

But it is a fact that Castilla and Extremadura should have some more province, that Extremadura has 2 provinces per area (40,000 km2) and development between 1450-1600 is an absurdity.
How absurd is the importance given to Catalonia and Valencia, if Valencia 3 provinces but not 4.

Please, analyze the data, I understand that England was from less to more, and Spain from more to less. But with a harmful terrain and some disaster (if you meet the requirements logically) can be solved.

Yesterday I made a map for suggestion thread (that I also posted here a few pages ago) where I added a few provinces in Central Spain, as I think it is still very ignored, even after the patch

 

[McOmghall]

Galicia has never been conquered by Spain, Castile or any other Spanish kingdom. It's been ruled by whoever was ruling the kingdoms of Asturias, Leon and Spain, successively, since the 8th century until this day.

From the late middle ages and up until the 19th century, having an education in Galicia meant for the most part being educated in Spanish, because this was the language of the administration, centred in Castile. Nobody had an evil plan to eradicate Galician, which was the collection of popular romances spoken by most people, with Spanish being increasingly spoken in the cities. People who spoke Spanish whether inside or outside Galicia would use traditional Spanish names such as Orense and La Coruña for places in Galicia, and would use whatever Galician name it had when referring to a place that didn't have a Spanish name.

With 19th century Romantic literary movements, Galician was standardised and promoted as an appropriate language for literature and education. With no one suppressing anything.

During Franco's dictatorship the state tried to get everyone to speak Spanish, it didn't use Galician in education or in dealings with the administration and it promoted Spanish as the proper language as opposed to what it saw as backward Galician. At this time many local place names were crudely adapted to Spanish, such as the famous case of Sanjenjo.

This is most definitely not the case since the transformations of the late 70s and early 80s. The regional administration today works mostly in Galician, it promotes its use and calls places by their Galician names. Also people have been educated either both in Galician and Spanish or only in Galician, when nationalists were in power.

I struggle to see any imposition today or at any time other than the four decades of dictatorship. Both Galician and Spanish have been spoken in Galicia to varying degrees before, during and after the only period of repression and imposition there has been.

A different matter is that of those that want to make everyone in Galicia speak one language, of which there are many more in power that want only Galician than only Spanish. In general, most people seem to be fine with letting people choose what they want to speak and they use Spanish or Galician place names when speaking Spanish on a case by case basis. So many say Orense while viewing Sanjenjo as a ridiculous adaptation.

You're saying Galician was discriminated against (something that still happens today) while claiming the suppresion of Galician language and culture had no ulterior motives (like uniformization of culture across the kingdom). This is absurd.

Galicians were NEVER able to be educated only in Galician, Spanish Law (the Spanish constitution) imposes learning Spanish on every citizen. The fact that you're trying to mask these facts tells me you have a nationalist agenda against Galician culture. Stop spreading myths.

 

[Live Fast Die Young]

I´m very happy with the progress made. I like that the developers take into consideration the player´s requests. Kudos on that!
You´ve already said there are some surprises coming about Portugal so I´ll skip that.

I would be 100% satisfied with the following:
1- Add one or two of the provinces in Castile suggested several times in this thread. Also fix some of the names and provinces shapes/locations.
2- Raise the development in some castile provinces, specialliy Galicia and Extremadura because the current development is not historical. Actually in my games I always (unnecessarily) waste monarch points myself because it makes me feel itchy to see it so low.
3- Add mountain terrain specially in the north and the central system. Granada area already has mountain terrain. Spain is one of the most mountainous countries in Europe. OR you could leave it as hills/grassland but add a few wasteland areas similar like the Atlas system in Morocco with bottlenecks. This is also a new tool to rework the shapes of block provinces that some people is complaining about.

Finally I really look forward for surprises in ambitions and mission tree!

Thanks a lot to the developers. I´m excited to see what´s coming

 

[Live Fast Die Young]

Firts, the you can do it argument is the lamest justification for a bad job ever, it's like: you see a poorly made bridge and you can't cross safely and you don't ask to fix that right? You build it yourself. And second: i see no disrespect he does no attack the devs personally or something like that: HE CRITISIZES THEIR WORK and if they really care about that work they sure will want to hear where they fail to fix it and don' t make the mistake again. But hey your do it yourself filosofy is much better.

Well this is not a bridge it´s a game. And you can´t accuse somebody of being lazy if you have not seen them work and you don´t know how many factors they took into consideration for their first draft.
He didn´t just criticize their work but call them lazy and I´ve also read the sentence "this map is crap".

Also don´t oversimplify my message. I didn´t say don´t criticize, I said that if you are going to do that you should do it respectfully like everyone else is doing. And if you can´t agree to that then we have nothing else to discuss.

I really see no need to keep talking about this as the team already settled this matter but yesterday I didn´t have time to reply you to this message so I do it now.

 

[Bobby Shaftoe]

Wouldn't the mountain be an issue when trying to pass troops in Asturias? I'll talk to the team about that (and also about the coal element following industrial revolution, but that might be out of the scope of the game, right?)

As far as I remember, romans had some problems conquering the province (and its neighbouring region, Cantabria,) due to the mountainous landscape (well, and the fact that the locals weren't actually interested in being conquered, so they put a hell of a fight ). By the way, you might want to pass this to the guys working on Imperator: Rome, as this should be interesting for them.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_conquest_of_the_Iberian_peninsula

The Cantabrian Wars (29–19 BC) were fought between the Romans and the Cantabrians and Astures of northern Hispania. It was a long and bloody war because it was fought on the mountains of Cantabria and Asturia (mountains are difficult to conquer) and because the rebels used guerrilla tactics effectively. The war dragged on for ten years and it ended with the subjugation of these two peoples. When these wars ended Augustus annexed the whole of Hispania to the Roman Empire and reorganised its provinces. These wars were also the end of resistance against the Romans in Hispania.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cantabrian_Wars

The two extracts:

According to the Roman historian Dio Cassius, the tactics of the Cantabri were of guerrilla warfare, avoiding direct attacks on the Roman forces because of their inferior numbers. Their better knowledge of the difficult and mountainous terrain allowed them to conduct quick surprise strikes with ranged weapons, with ambushes followed by quick retreats, causing great damage to the Roman columns and supply lines.

The Astures joined the Cantabri in a common defense. In spring 25 BC, there were three Roman legions established near the Astura River (modern Esla River), with troops from the Tarraconensis. According to contemporary Roman historian Florus in his Epitome of Roman History,[7] the armies of the Astures Transmontani came down from their snow-covered mountains (which is perfectly possible in the Picos de Europa in spring) and settled near the Astura River, getting ready to take the three Roman winter camps.

Romans were interested in those two regions because, at that time, they were rich in gold.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0375674200001473

Even nowadays there's people trying to find gold nuggets in some rivers in Asturias, and there was a serious attempt by a north american company to try and mine some gold again not so long ago (5 or 10 years), but I would say that it's unlikely to find any gold nowadays (and as I said, once Industrial Revolution started, probably one of the most known products, if not the most, from Asturias was coal).

Anyway, back to the topic. I don't know if the logistics and transport technology in the Modern era was more effective that what the romans used, but I suspect they were similar enough to think that, if romans had problems due to the mountainous nature of the region, armies in the modern era are going to have the same problems, more or less.

Edit -> Just found this: https://www.fbbva.es/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/dat/dt10_2010.pdf

it's an analytical study of the surface roughness using SRTM. In short, Asturias (shown as Oviedo in the document, unfortunately in Spanish) has the biggest mean disparity between the average altitude and the heightest mountains. I don't know if this might qualify as the most mountainous region, but it's a strong hint in that direction. The study has a couple of height color maps that might be useful when deciding which provinces in Spain should be mountainous and which shouldn't.

 

[Gunthah]

You're saying Galician was discriminated against (something that still happens today) while claiming the suppresion of Galician language and culture had no ulterior motives (like uniformization of culture across the kingdom). This is absurd.

Galicians were NEVER able to be educated only in Galician, Spanish Law (the Spanish constitution) imposes learning Spanish on every citizen. The fact that you're trying to mask these facts tells me you have a nationalist agenda against Galician culture. Stop spreading myths.

From the late middle ages until the 19th century most European countries saw the language of the administration become the language of the educated people across its territory. This wasn't by active suppression and punishment of those that didn't speak it, but because dealing with the administration or with having any high education required the use of that language.

Education in Galicia since 1981 makes Galician compulsory for at least half of the subjects. And yes. The Spanish Constitution says every Spanish citizen must be able to speak Spanish, which is already the case for everyone who grows up in Spain. I don't see what's wrong with making sure everyone in Galicia is able to speak both Galician and Spanish. I can't see the nationalism in teaching the two majority languages of Galician society.

 

[Blobhemian]

Ah, nothing like a cultured discussion on the topic of Spanish nationalism and regionalism. Rivalled only in the Balcans.

 

[tommassi]

Ah, nothing like a cultured discussion on the topic of Spanish nationalism and regionalism. Rivaled only in the Balcans.

Not sure in the Balcans anyone would resort to maps that are not even fake, but actually JOKES, as has happened in this thread.

 

[HottestRod]

For history,for culture,for language,for traditions,Valencia deserves his own culture

pfff what a joke, portuguese are south galician and so call catalan culture is just north valencian, pls don't mess with them only serious criticism

We never stated that, we are just reivindicating that ,while being similar to catalans, we aren't them. We have and had our own institutions, culture, traditions, way of thinking and history differenciated from catalans. Hell, we are recognised as an "Historical Nationality" by the Spanish Constitution, along with Catalans, Basques, Galicians, Aragonese and Andalusians. U have the right of not liking it, but we think that now that the Iberian DLC is being developed, its our best chance to get our claims.

Is really that bad that we want our culture being represented in the game? its not like we are harming someone, we just want to be represented.

Yes, they are imposed exonyms. Noone in Galicia would use them if Castillian wasn't imposed. That's why it's a touchy point.

You're saying Galician was discriminated against (something that still happens today) while claiming the suppresion of Galician language and culture had no ulterior motives (like uniformization of culture across the kingdom). This is absurd.

Galicians were NEVER able to be educated only in Galician, Spanish Law (the Spanish constitution) imposes learning Spanish on every citizen. The fact that you're trying to mask these facts tells me you have a nationalist agenda against Galician culture. Stop spreading myths.

Quick reminder, the goal of the development diary is to share information with the fans and gather feedback from the community. Let's not delve into regional politics and semantics. As long as it is constructive, civil and aimed at the development diary, no problem. Keep this discussion out of the forums.

 

[regne_valencia]

I think they buffed aragon too much,3 provinces for each state is enough

3 provinces aragon,3 provinces for valencia,4 provinces catalonia (when they lose rosellon then they will have 3 provinces) and 3 provinces for mallorca i think is enough for aragon

Another province to Portugal like Setubal can be ok

Also for castille redrawing madrid and put it in the center will be nice

Asturias tag is ok for ck2,here is anachronistic

 

[Mingmung]

Quick reminder, the goal of the development diary is to share information with the fans and gather feedback from the community. Let's not delve into regional politics and semantics. As long as it is constructive, civil and aimed at the development diary, no problem. Keep this discussion out of the forums.

When can we expect another view of Iberia with the feedback taken into consideration?

Don't get me wrong, we really appreciate you guys listening to us, but map-fans (me included) are still wary from the last update (Poland) and were very shocked when they saw such a poor Iberia/Maghreb in terms of quality, not province-quantity.

Lots and lots of quality feedback had already been given on the suggestion forums. Suggestions which seem to have been overlooked in the design-process of this patch and the one before, because those suggestions clearly warned the devs from making these mistakes. I just get an itchy feeling that something went wrong somewhere. We really need some form of consolation.

 

[Live Fast Die Young]

I think they buffed aragon too much,3 provinces for each state is enough

3 provinces aragon,3 provinces for valencia,4 provinces catalonia (when they lose rosellon then they will have 3 provinces) and 3 provinces for mallorca i think is enough for aragon

Another province to Portugal like Setubal can be ok

Also for castille redrawing madrid and put it in the center will be nice

Don´t forget Sicily and Cerdeña yeah I think it´s kinda unfair. If the development is not very high it should be within the realms of OK, though. Besides the historical point of view, I also like having lots of provinces to conquer and manage. For me it´s more important than the historical accuracy although having both would be ideal of course.

 

[Aizer3115]

Please, add more flavour into Andalusia and properly represent the cultural melpot it was!
It was an important region at the crossroads of Africa and Europe, should be properly represented

 

[mikumiku14]

Mistake, the correct name is La Haya after double checking.

Most cities and regions in the spanish netherlands (and many in the world) had spanish versions of their names, if something defines a castillian is its inability to learn any language )) For example, Utrecht was Utrique, Leiden was Leida, Maatricht was Mastrique, Brujas, Gante, Güeldres, Bolduque, and a long etc.

 

[pauletx]

You're saying Galician was discriminated against (something that still happens today) while claiming the suppresion of Galician language and culture had no ulterior motives (like uniformization of culture across the kingdom). This is absurd.

Galicians were NEVER able to be educated only in Galician, Spanish Law (the Spanish constitution) imposes learning Spanish on every citizen. The fact that you're trying to mask these facts tells me you have a nationalist agenda against Galician culture. Stop spreading myths.

Isn't that what happens in every country, tough? It is not logical that u have to learn the main language that is spoken by almost every citizen and administration of the country?

 

[ngppgn]

That Asturias releasable is hilarious. The bad kind of hilarious. If you are for more equally sized nations with cores in spain, give Granada cores on all andalusian-cultured provinces instead.

 

[Ma Birla]

In the start of the game all Catalonia, Valencia and Majorca will belong to Aragon, they've just shown the releasable nations. Lleida (Urgel province) and Tortosa (Tarragona) have Catalan culture and they should belong to Catalonia still.

Tortosa was in real world aragonese culture as Lleida was very after in time when they changed to catalonia cultures
i refer to the kingdom of aragon inside the crown of aragon

 

[tommassi]

There is a reason why Christians only resisted the muslim invasion in the 8th century in Asturias, Cantabria and a few other places: that it was a big issue to pass troops through those mountains. Any Galician province should be hilly, as well as any basque province that is close to the sea. Asturias and Cantabria should be mountains, both of them.

As for Aragón, Calatayud should be at least highlands, Zaragoza I would probably make it grasslands and not drylands (it´s true that most of the land is dry, but the lands by the river are extremely fertile), Teruel same kind of terrain as Calatayud. Having Urgell as just one province poses a problem when choosing terrain: north is mountains, south is flat. If you were to divide that province in two, the northern one should be mountains just the same as Huesca, the southern one probably the same terrain you choose for Zaragoza (lots of dry lands surrounding very fertile river banks). Tarragona is quite hilly, but you have it as flat, just the same as Barcelona. Gerona should be mountains, not hills. And last but not least, Navarre... though one. Mountains to the east, but just hills to the west of it. If it has no access to sea, I´d keep it to mountains.

Just to make it easier for devs, here goes a quick, dirty and simplified map of mountains and big valleys in Spain, which should make it easier to decide on provinces and terrain. Limits of provinces today might seem random, but mostly they aren't and there are some pretty good "physical" reasons for them being that they are. Again, keep in mind that this is extremely simplified.

So, the red lines: mountains. Pyrenees and the ones close to the northern coast, mostly over 2k metres and as such quite impassable. Same goes for the red line down south: it's not a coincidence that the frontier line for Granada was what it was: that´s where the mountains more or less started.

As for the brown line: Sierra Morena. Funny one: if you look at it from the south (Andalucia), it looks quite impressive. Highest summit being between 1.300 and 1.400, while Seville and Cordoba are 7 and 106 metres respectively. But if you look at it from the north, from Ciudad Real, it's barely a bunch of rolling hills: Ciudad Real is in the "meseta" and 628 metres high. It would´ve been a problem to attack from the south, but merely a nuisance to attack from the north (and it did not stop at all the reconquering efforts of the christians merely 200 years prior to the start of the game (it took less than 50 years for Castille to make it from Calatrava, in what today is Ciudad Real province, to Seville, for example).

As for the blue lines: main rivers (from north to south: Ebro, Duero, Tajo, Guadiana, Guadalquivir), which are the flat areas through which movement should be wuick and without any problem.

This map explains why so many people are complaining about the shape of Madrid: a flat province near Valladolid, which should be another flat province, would fail to take into account that Madrid was indeed protected by mountains if attached from the north or the east.

There are other smaller ranges of mountains not reflected (between Salamanca and Cáceres, also within Barcelona and Tarragona, between the Tajo and the Guadiana) but, again, this was supposed to be a simplified map and you would need probably double the number of current provinces to reflect it all.