Tinto Maps #27 - 22nd of November 2024 - Oceania

[Goran42069]

Tonga imo fits all the criteria for being a settled country except writing while rapa nui famously did have some kind of record keeping but when they started doing it is unknow. I hope you do considering atleast having 1 playable country in this region at launch.

Adding to this, in Tinto Maps #16 we can see that both Kitara and Zimbabwe are playable despite neither having recordkeeping/writing(as far as i can tell) therefore i wouldn't say that having Tonga be a settled country would be that out of place.

 

[Sirbab]

I seriously hope you guys add in dynamic raw goods, as things like the triangle trade were pivotal in the economic changes that happen in the time period of this game, and stuff like bringing old world crops to the new world and vice versa would be really cool to see in game. It would also eliminate issues like anachronistic goods being present in 1337 before concentrated exploitation of the land.

 

[Javilos Septim]

I think you forgot about the screenshot about the Cultures of Aotearoa.

About your request for feedback on grouping minor non-organized religions... Oof, that's a difficult one for sure. You could 1) simply add "geographic tags", meaning, like how you did with the branching tree of language group>language>culture, simply group, for example, all Philippine religions in a "Philippine native religion" supergroup, another for Australia, Another for Continental SE Asia... But IDK if that's specifically what you're looking for. You could also 2) directly merge all those "cultural religions" into groups in the same vein I have said before, but as full religions. That would be kind of a step-back from what you have done now, but it was what I originally expected you would do. Grouping them together "thematically", in the sense of grouped together, like the organized religions, by certain characteristics or tenets of the religions... I think, it's impossible. We are dealing with incredibly atomized belief systems in some cases, with no self-identity or written creed. They're not even religions in the sense we are accustomed to, just collections of cultural beliefs that show a very granular geographical transformation. The problem is made even worse because the vast majority of those religions don't even have a name for themselves, and if they do, most times it is a very recent name linked with modern revivals, and totally anachronistic (like with Romuva and Suomensuko, for example).

What I would suggest, for maximum entertainment, would be to group unorganized religions into "religious continuums", cultural/geographic supra-categories (like Philippine, West African, Bantu, Indian, Siberian... Big categories) which grant a minor diplomatic with countries of the same Continuum, and pops of others religions of the same Continuum give NO maluses whatsoever, BUT also make so all of those religions have NO CONVERSION CAPACITY OUTSIDE THEIR OWN CULTURE (this makes sense, as those religions did not proselytize, even if influences were common). But also add a decision where, if you have one of these religions as your state religions, once you reach a certain set of goals, mainly a certain population number of own culture and development, you can Reform your religion (yeah, like in Crusader Kings), which would essentially create a new "regular" religion, make it your state religion, and automatically convert a % of own culture pops determined by your total Control.

 

[ArVass]

Other notes:
1. Polynesian should definitely be a language, with subdivisions like Tongan, Tahitian, Samoan, Maori, Hawai'ian/Maoli, Rapa Nui etc. being its dialects.
2. You could do the same with religion, making one Polynesian religion, with maybe some functionality of specific local varieties
3. as I and dozens of people said before, the Hawaiian realms, Samoa, and especially Tonga should be settled countries, why New Zealand is fine as different iwis being different SoPs

 

[Zenthree]

The Kaurna people as a culture should probably just be called 'Kaurna' and not 'Kaurna-Pangkarra'. Pangkarra is a word in the Kaurna language for a kind of family-inherited land (src pg. 125)

On a more general note: I agree with the statement that the Australian interior should be accessible, even if it's just passageways with some of the more hospitable interior locations (e.g. Mparntwe/Alice Springs)

 

[Paulatim]

As of now, yes, but we might have to make them an island wasteland in the map review, as being too small in size.

They are not (>100km²), unless you moved away from the standards you set (40 km²).

P.S: Still Venice + lagoon islands reach beyond your standard. I remember...

 

[Hoia]

Ok, so, it's currently 2:30 am here in Australia as I'm writing this, so forgive me for being relatively brief here, but I'm honestly kind of shocked that there aren't any societies of pops in Australia.

To go over the criteria listed out, point by point:

• Chiefdomly authority

In terms of this, although first nations groups in Australia general operated as egalitarian horizontal authorities (though there are some examples of powerful individual rulers in the north), what first nations Australians DID display in great deal was a sophisticated legal system based on precedent, not dissimilar to English-style legal systems today, including in the Lower Murray, where councils of clan leaders would arbitrate disputes not just between people, but entire nations, based on legal precedence, as opposed to resorting to warfare.

• Permanent settlements

As I'll go into detail in the Agriculture section, although first nations Australians generally would live nomadic lives, they would establish permenant settlements in several cases that would be variously inhabited on a semi-annual schedule, including permanent fishing installations made of stone and grass, as well as diplomatic meeting places like the Yarra, where the city of Melbourne now is.

• Agricultural development

In my opinion by far the most cut and dry here. First nations Australians have been practicing Aquaculture on a large scale for, at MINIMUM, 20,000 years, and potentially up to 40,000. These involve large fish and eel traps made of large nets set up at rivers and lakes across the continent, where various groups would build them, allowing them to build up large catchments of fish and eels, to be harvested on a regular basis.
Additionally, there is the long, LONG record of custodianship of the land, involving controlled forest fires and culling of animal popualtions to maintain ideal grounds for human habitation, and sowing seeds of various trees, plants, and bushes, dating back 50,000 years.
All of this may not be agriculture in the traditional western sense, but required organization of large amounts of people, coordination on extremely large scales, and resulted in an environment that was able to sustain a population that is estimated to be somewhere between 1.2 million and 6.5 million before colonization.

• Some kind of taxation

In this, I will agree that, as a series of societies that did not use currency or have central control of agriculture, there was no taxation system per se. However, I feel strongly that at minimum the Agricultural Development requirement, as well as both Chiefdomly Authority and Permanent Settlements, warrent the existence of at least a few societies of pops in Australia.
In addition, on the geographic front, please see the attatched image: the Murray-Darling Basin, some of the most agriculturally fertile and productive land on the continent, almost all of the Darling Basin is currently categorized as wasteland, which is honestly quite surprising to me. The terrain there is arid, yes, but was populated, has large amounts of water from the river systems flowing from the Great Dividing Range, and is certainly not deserving of classification as wasteland.

Please note that, again, it is late here, and I have gathered these sources mostly informally. In the morning if necessary, I can also see about gathering plenty of proper scholarly sources.

Also, please note that I am writing with knowledge and perspectives deeply shaped in the context of South-Eastern Australia, and first nations groups will of course vary significantly across the country. In addition, though I have studied First Nations Australian History, I am NOT first nations myself, and do not presume to speak on their behalf.

Finally, as I have a low post count, I currently can't share links, so for my hastily-gathered sources, please enjoy the attatched screenshot of those links on a word doc.

 

[ArVass]

2. They're mostly done, but we will be open to review, as usual.

I would argue that the number of languages can even be decreased in Nuclear Polynesia to one or two, even; their linguistic differences would be wiser to be represented as dialects of one language

 

[Pescavelho]

Similarly, I'm sad to see no SoPs in Australia. While obviously less advanced, many nations there seem to have practice some form of agriculture and diplomacy, in addition to a highly complex shared faith- so perhaps some like the Kulin Nation tribes could be SoPs. Torres Strait islanders on the other hand definitely practiced agriculture and traded with the Indonesians, and it seems obvious to me that they should be a SoP (and be added! It's odd that the islands aren't separate locations at the moment)

Was there any evidence of chiefdom societies in pre-colonial Australia? Even in the north, where there was trade with Southeast Asia? Even if so, I doubt they were as big as the culture blobs seemingly tied to SoPs would imply. I'm fine with the current arrangement, though I agree with other people in the thread that Tonga, the Hawaiian kingdoms, Pohnpei and maybe even the iwi of New Zealand should be state societies.

btw, while we don't know and can't know what language the indigenous Tasmanians spoke because they died without leaving any comprehensive records of it, the devs seem to be using Palawa kani (conlang based on what little we know about pre-colonial Tasmanian languages, think modern Hebrew except instead of it living for centuries as a 2nd language all knowledge of it had become lost) for the indigenous toponyms in Tasmania, in which case the name of the island should be "Lutruwita" (the name "Tasmania" itself was only applied to Tasmania after 1856, before that it was Van Diemen's Land).

 

[MasterPaw]

The NZ wild game represents the moa. They were essential to the Maori diet in 1337.

Will there be events about the moa disparition, changing rgo?

 

[fredrikslicer]

T

I feel like if you made some aboriginal australian SoP's it'd essentially mean every single tile across the world would have to have SoP's and there'd be no "horizontal societies".

Fair though I think at least a few SoPs is feasible

 

[Thorum]

The provinces drawn in New Guinea are mostly based on "where colonisation happened irl", rather than where the population was beforehand. For example, around the lake in the western wasteland just north of Kamoro, there was a concentration of indigenous people - same with the Highland region south of Melpa.

Is that on purpose? Will the same be done for, for example, the Amazon region (middle Xingu river, to give the clearest example)?

 

[donbg]

Ok, so, it's currently 2:30 am here in Australia as I'm writing this, so forgive me for being relatively brief here, but I'm honestly kind of shocked that there aren't any societies of pops in Australia.

To go over the criteria listed out, point by point:

• Chiefdomly authority

In terms of this, although first nations groups in Australia general operated as egalitarian horizontal authorities (though there are some examples of powerful individual rulers in the north), what first nations Australians DID display in great deal was a sophisticated legal system based on precedent, not dissimilar to English-style legal systems today, including in the Lower Murray, where councils of clan leaders would arbitrate disputes not just between people, but entire nations, based on legal precedence, as opposed to resorting to warfare.

• Permanent settlements

As I'll go into detail in the Agriculture section, although first nations Australians generally would live nomadic lives, they would establish permenant settlements in several cases that would be variously inhabited on a semi-annual schedule, including permanent fishing installations made of stone and grass, as well as diplomatic meeting places like the Yarra, where the city of Melbourne now is.

• Agricultural development

In my opinion by far the most cut and dry here. First nations Australians have been practicing Aquaculture on a large scale for, at MINIMUM, 20,000 years, and potentially up to 40,000. These involve large fish and eel traps made of large nets set up at rivers and lakes across the continent, where various groups would build them, allowing them to build up large catchments of fish and eels, to be harvested on a regular basis.
Additionally, there is the long, LONG record of custodianship of the land, involving controlled forest fires and culling of animal popualtions to maintain ideal grounds for human habitation, and sowing seeds of various trees, plants, and bushes, dating back 50,000 years.
All of this may not be agriculture in the traditional western sense, but required organization of large amounts of people, coordination on extremely large scales, and resulted in an environment that was able to sustain a population that is estimated to be somewhere between 1.2 million and 6.5 million before colonization.

• Some kind of taxation

In this, I will agree that, as a series of societies that did not use currency or have central control of agriculture, there was no taxation system per se. However, I feel strongly that at minimum the Agricultural Development requirement, as well as both Chiefdomly Authority and Permanent Settlements, warrent the existence of at least a few societies of pops in Australia.
In addition, on the geographic front, please see the attatched image: the Murray-Darling Basin, some of the most agriculturally fertile and productive land on the continent, almost all of the Darling Basin is currently categorized as wasteland, which is honestly quite surprising to me. The terrain there is arid, yes, but was populated, has large amounts of water from the river systems flowing from the Great Dividing Range, and is certainly not deserving of classification as wasteland.

Please note that, again, it is late here, and I have gathered these sources mostly informally. In the morning if necessary, I can also see about gathering plenty of proper scholarly sources.

Also, please note that I am writing with knowledge and perspectives deeply shaped in the context of South-Eastern Australia, and first nations groups will of course vary significantly across the country. In addition, though I have studied First Nations Australian History, I am NOT first nations myself, and do not presume to speak on their behalf.

Finally, as I have a low post count, I currently can't share links, so for my hastily-gathered sources, please enjoy the attatched screenshot of those links on a word doc.

A good portion of hunter-gatherers that aren't covered by SoPs in other parts of the world also exhibited very similar things to what you are describing. So it's a question of precedent- if Australian aboriginals are given SoPs, there is an argument to give SoPs to most other cultures in the world (which I wouldn't be opposed to but does not seem to be Tinto's current design policy in this regard).

 

[Pondar]

We have plenty of ideas, but the feasibility of them is very low at this stage, to be brutally honest. We'll confirm it in due time, but we prefer to be honest with the community, and not create non-realistic expectations.

I hope you implement this and thalassocracy at least in the DLC.

 

[squid_whisperer]

It would be great to include the Moriori people of New Zealand (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moriori) who in this time period would have been found on Chatham Island and Stewart Island. In the context of New Zealand history, these are among the earliest documented people to settle the land.

 

[ingenieux]

Que d'eau, que d'eau...

 

[Rycestealer]

Finally! New New Zealand!
View attachment 1219968

No that's Mu

 

[Hoia]

A good portion of hunter-gatherers that aren't covered by SoPs in other parts of the world also exhibited very similar things to what you are describing. So it's a question of precedent- if Australian aboriginals are given SoPs, there is an argument to give SoPs to most other cultures in the world (which I wouldn't be opposed to but does not seem to be Tinto's current design policy in this regard).

As I've said, it's late, but I'll add on a couple clarifications; first nations Australians had MULTIPLE villages, farms, and plantations, of crops like bananas, mostly concentrated in northern Australia around the Torres Strait. the modern state of Victoria, as I mentioned, had multiple fixed, permenant settlements around the Yarra river.

Please note that much of this evidence was actively destroyed by Colonial authorities as part of Terra Nullius narratives, but it is there; I'd highly reccomend the book Dark Emu on the topic, but for an overview, please read the article

The enduring myth of the hunter-gatherer​

from the University of Tasmania on the topic.

 

[Explode]

For the New Zealand locations, I'd split both Tāmaki and Te Whanganui-a-Tarain half. Feels really weird to have Wellington and Manawatū in the same location.

Additionally, New Zealand should have a some more harbours. Akaroa (Lyttelton) and especially Te Whanganui-a-Tarain (Wellington) should both have good ports. On the other hand, I'm not sure why Tauwhare has such a good port. I submit these links for further reading:

https://teara.govt.nz/en/ports-and-harbours/page-1

Geographical Factors

In 1966 the first encyclopedia of New Zealand was published in three thick volumes. An Encyclopaedia of New Zealand was a critical and publishing success at the time, and has been used as a basic reference work about the country since then. We are proud to make it available online.

teara.govt.nz

 

[ArVass]

JUSTICE FOR TONGA!