• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.

Tinto Maps #6 - 14th of June 2024 - Great Britain & Ireland

Hello everyone. @Pavía and the rest of the Content Design team are busy working on the feedback for the previous Tinto Maps, so I'm standing in for this week.

I'm @SaintDaveUK, some of you might have seen me here and there on the forums, but the long story short is that I work on a very secret game whose name I am contractually obligated to redact. That's right, it's ███████ ██████!

This week you get a double-whammy, mostly because it’s really hard to show Britain on its own on a screenshot. Partly to side-step the “British Isles” naming controversy, but mainly because the gameplay of them both is so different, this part of Europa is divided into 2 distinct regions: Great Britain and Ireland.

Climate​

The mild Oceanic climate (Köppen Cfb) dominates the isles. Where it cools towards the inland Pennines and the Scottish Highlands (Köppen Cfc), we represent it with the wintry and dreich Continental climate.

climate.jpg




Topography​

The isles are dominated by green and pleasant flatlands and low rolling hills, the peripheries punctuated by rocky mountains and craggy highlands.

We would like to add some more impassable locations in northern England and the Scottish borders to make manoeuvres a little more interesting and strategic, but would like suggestions from people more familiar with the Pennines.

[Edit: 16 June added the missing map]

topography.JPG


Vegetation​

The great moors, bogs, and fens are represented by Sparse vegetation, meanwhile much of the land is still wooded.

vegetation.jpg




Raw Materials​

The raw goods situation aims to reflect the economic reality of medieval Britain. Shepherding was common on every corner of the islands, a lot of the wool produced was sold to the industrial hub of the Low Countries to be manufactured into cloth, which was in turn sold back to British markets.

The further north-west we go, the less fertile the terrain, and as such the greater reliance on pastoral farming such as livestock over wheat. The western hills and valleys also expose a greater number of mineral delights, including the historic stannary mines of Devon and Cornwall.

raw_materials.jpg




Markets​

As you can see the two starting markets are London and Dublin. Aside from London we could have chosen almost any town, from Aberdeen to Bristol. We chose Dublin as it was the main trade centre in Ireland, and also because it handsomely splits the isles to the East and West of the Pennines, demonstrating the impact that terrain can have on dynamic Market attraction.

They are both shades of red because they are coloured after the market centre’s top overlord country – market control is a viable playstyle and we like to think of it as a form of map painting for countries not focused on traditional conquest routes.

market.jpg




Culture​

We have decided to go with a monolithic English culture. We could have forced the introduction of a second Northumbrian or even third Mercian culture, but typically they were not really considered separate peoples. The English, though diverse in origin and with a variety of dialects, had already begun to coalesce in the face of the Viking invasions hundreds of years before.

Scotland, conversely, is a real porridge of cultures. The Lowland Scots (who speak a dialect of Northumbrian English that later develops into the Scots language) dominate their kingdom from their wealthy burghs, and are gradually encroaching onto the pastoral lands of the Gaelic Highlanders. The Norse-Gaelic clansmen watch from the Western Isles, with some old settlements remaining around Galloway. The far north, ironically called Sutherland, retains some Norse presence.

Wales, conquered for around a century by this point, plays host to English burghers looking to make a few quid, as well as the descendants of Norman adventurer knights in the marcher lordships, but is still majority Welsh-speaking from Anglesey to Cardiff.

The Anglo-Irish (representing the spectrum from Cambro-Norman knights to the so-called ‘Old English’ settlers) live in great numbers in the south-eastern trading towns from Dublin to Cork, as well as in smaller numbers in frontier outposts.

The cosmopolitan towns across the isles are also home to people from elsewhere in Europe, most notably Flemish weavers from the Low Countries, though their numbers are too small to impact the mapmode.

The Norman ███████ dominates as the ██████████████ for both of the kingdoms and their subjects. The conquest of 1066 is no longer fresh, but the continuing bonds between the aristocratic classes of England, Scotland, and France have kept the French language alive and strong.

culture.jpg






Religion​

I decided that it's not even worth taking a screenshot of the Religion map mode. There are tiny minorities of Jewish people in some Scottish and Irish towns (they had been expelled from England), but they are so small in number they don't even register on the map mode

Other than that, it's all Catholic. But not for long.

> John Wycliffe has entered the chat.


Areas​

Based on the 4 provinces of Ireland (sorry Meath) and splitting England roughly into the larger Anglo-Saxon earldoms which have some similarity with the modern Regions (sorry Yorkshire).

areas.jpg





Provinces​

We have fixed the colours of the Provinces mapmode so you can see the individual provinces a bit more clearly. These are largely based on the historic counties, which have remained fairly constant throughout history, while merging some of those that are too small.

We’ve almost certainly offended someone.

The ancient Scottish shires are pretty messy and difficult to coalesce into neat provinces, so any suggestions for better arrangement there would be very welcome.

provinces.jpg




Locations​


You might notice that the locations in Ireland are varyingly written in both English and in Irish. This is because we have the new system up-and-running where we can name Locations by the primary culture of the country they are owned by.

This means that for example London might be called Londres if it was ruled by a Catalan country. It’s currently a WIP feature and we might add more elements, such as a game setting to base the name on dominant culture of the location instead, or to just use default (English) names.

locations.jpg




Government Types​

As with most of Europe, most of the countries are under some monarchy or another, but the Irish tuathas begin with the Tribe government type. This, among other mechanics such as [redacted] helps to give them a very unique playing style in Europe.

government.jpg


Countries​

England

England of course stands as the dominant kingdom in the isles. Despite having a lot of power resting on the barons, the country is fairly unitary even at this point, with very little practical separation between the crown’s power in somewhere like Kent versus Yorkshire. However there are notable exceptions.

The powerful Burgesses estate in the City of London enjoys ancient freedoms from royal power, while the king peers in from the Crown’s seat of power in neighbouring Westminster.

The County Palatine of Durham is not represented by a country, but buildings that give the Clergy Estate a huge amount of power in the locations it is present in. This also ties into political gameplay as a ██████████ ██████.

The newly created Duchy of Cornwall—the only duchy in England at the time—would also not be represented well by the Cornwall country, being a disparate set of manorial holdings that are ironically mostly in Devon. Cornwall of course exists as a releasable country though.

The Isle of Man is a little less certain. For now we have it as a subject of England. On paper it was a ‘kingdom’ awarded to William Montagu, the king’s favourite, however we aren’t sure if he actually wielded any real power on the isle. It changed hands between England and Scotland numerous times in this period, but in practice it appears to have been governed by a local council of barons. Any more details on exactly what was going on here in this period would be greatly appreciated.

These decisions have been made because as England heaves itself out of the feudal system, we thought it would be best if the small-fry inward-looking internal politicking is handled through the Estates and [redacted] systems, and then the diplomacy tracks are freed up for the English player to behave more outwardly against other major countries.

Wales

Though subjugated by conquest, Wales was not formally annexed into the Kingdom of England until the mid 1500s. As such the principality begins as a Dominion subject under England.

Those familiar with Welsh history will note that historically the Principality of Wales didn’t extend much beyond the old kingdom of Gywnedd. Much of the country to the southeast was in fact ruled by marcher lords, which we represent with a powerful Nobility estate in the valleys and beyond.

There is an alternative vision of Wales that I would like to gauge opinion on, and that is expanding it to include the Earldom of Chester and the marches on the English side of the modern border. If you are an Englishman familiar with modern borders this might look alarming, but these lands were also constitutionally ambiguous parts of the “Welsh Marches” until the 1500s. This will hand over to the Wales player the full responsibility of dealing with the marcher lords, allowing England to focus on bigger picture issues like beating France.

Ireland

Ireland is going through a moment of change. English royal power is centred on the Lordship of the Pale, the king’s Dominion ruling out of Dublin Castle. However, it struggles to keep a grasp on the rebellious Hiberno-Norman earls scattered around the island - some of whom remain as vassals, some of whom have managed to slip free of royal control.

The Tanistry system of succession endemic to the Gaelic Irish has its advantages, but it can also lead to chaotic feuds between rival branches. The so-called Burke Civil War has fractured the powerful Earldom of Ulster into rival Burke cousins who jealously feud over their shrinking lordships in Connaught. Native Irish princes of the north have reconquered most of their own lands from the de Burghs, but there are also two rival O’Neill cousins who style themselves King of Tyrone either side of the River Bann.

The feuding Irish lack a unifying figure, but anyone powerful enough could theoretically claim the title of High King. The former provincial kingdoms, such as Meath and Connacht, enjoy the elevated rank of Duchy, giving them a slight edge in the High Kingship selection.

Scotland

The chancer Edward Balliol continues his attempt for the Scottish throne, with England’s tacit permission. It’s hard to determine the exact lands held by Balliol in 1337, but we know his disinherited loyalists hold the castle of Perth while his English allies had seized large tracts of the lowlands from Bruce. Balliol has also bought the loyalty of the MacDonald and the other Hebridean galley lords by granting them remote land on the west coast of the mainland.

Meanwhile, Scotland’s canny regent Sir Andrew de Moray launches his decisive counterattack as his true king, David II de Bruce, waits in exile in France.

political.jpg


Dynasties​

We know about Plantagenet, Balliol, and Bruce, so I've zoomed in on Ireland to show the ruling dynasties of the various chieftains and earls.

dynasty.jpg


Population​

Excuse the seams and the greyscale mapmode. We have something better in the pipeline...

population_country.jpg
population_location.jpg




Well, thats it for now!

As always the team is eagerly awaiting your feedback and looking forward to the discussions. We’ll try to keep on top of the thread, but we have a teambuilding activity this afternoon so it might be a little more sporadic than usual!

Next week: Anatolia!
 
Last edited:
  • 218Like
  • 99Love
  • 7
  • 7
  • 1
Reactions:
While technically Southwark was in surrey at the time (and remained so until 1888 if I remember correctly), it was already part of the metropolitan area at the game start. As I have argued in another post, imposing historical county borders on the London area would not make sense in terms of how London developed as a city. I would however, fully support creating a seperate Surrey province using the modern borders of that county.
An intriguing point well made. I am loathe to propose the modern borders of counties, but certainly see the benefits of better representing the metropolitan area. I would suggest that the location of Southwark be redrawn. Whilst Southwark might fit within Middlesex, I think that the more southern areas, such as Kingston upon Thames, would be more at home in the sort of Surrey province which you propose.
 
I'm not sure I like the way Glasgow is depicted on the map. I understand the need to merge a few shires together for size purposes but the province labelled as "Glasgow" is Dumbartonshire and Renfrewshire and while it just about contains the city of Glasgow, the city is on the very eastern border of the province and was historically a part of Lanarkshire which is already on the map.

I'm guessing this might have been done to make Glasgow a port city since it's technically upriver but the Clyde was deep enough to accomodate ocean vessels of this period, but I think you really need to have the Firth of Clyde on the map to have the west of Scotland look right (even if you need to marginally exaggerate it).

Also I don't know if this is just me but it feels weird as hell seeing Lothian extend out to Loch Lomond on the province view, putting the western edge of Lothian east of Glasgow's geographic location. I think it would look better if perhaps Irvine was transferred to Galloway and Stirling transferred to Strathclyde? I'd also maybe suggest renaming that province to just Lanarkshire, since at this point it would have been centuries since the Kingdom of Strathclyde was incorporated into Scotland and I think the name would have fallen out of use.

So a map of those changes:
P7hMs72.png
 
  • 2Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Just my two cents that I think the English culture being monolithic and united is not very accurate. I am reminded of the Canterbury Tales where merchants trying to buy eggs are having trouble understanding what the other is trying to buy (the eggs/egges/eyren story). Chaucer (1343-1400) was a contemporary to this time period and he’s writing about how supposed “Englishmen” can’t understand each other! I think it’s clear that there should at least be some north/south divide.

Secondly, I am no expert on British geography or cartography but the one thing I noticed by precursory glance at the locations was that “Owestry” should be corrected to “Oswestry”.
 
  • 3Like
  • 3
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
I would argue that if you're going to give Wales the Marches on the English side of the border, you should probably just break up Wales entirely.
 
  • 5Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Skye should be grouped with the Inner Hebrides rather than the Outer Hebrides.
Kintyre should be part of Argyll, and Arran should include other isles in the Firth of Clyde.
The Isle of Man and the Islands of the Firth of Clyde can be grouped together with the Inner Hebrides for simplicity. But the entire Area of the Hebrides+Islands of the Clyde+Isle of Man should probably be renamed to "Southern Isles" (in contrast with the Northern Isles) or "Sodor" (after Thomas the Tank Engine the diocese of the same name).

1718383031528.png


Also, unless there's space concerns I don't get why it's just "Highlands" and "Lowlands" instead of Scottish Highlands and Scottish Lowlands.
 
Last edited:
  • 8Like
Reactions:
Unbelievable.
Gonna make a time travel machine so the region is named after q celts not p celts so "british isles" is not a sorepoint among irish nationalists
Just my two cents that I think the English culture being monolithic and united is not very accurate. I am reminded of the Canterbury Tales where merchants trying to buy eggs are having trouble understanding what the other is trying to buy (the eggs/egges/eyren story). Chaucer (1343-1400) was a contemporary to this time period and he’s writing about how supposed “Englishmen” can’t understand each other! I think it’s clear that there should at least be some north/south divide.

Secondly, I am no expert on British geography or cartography but the one thing I noticed by precursory glance at the locations was that “Owestry” should be corrected to “Oswestry”.
Prior to language standardisation and widespread literacy such pronounciation variations are natural. If we follow the story to its literal extent, England will have 101 flavours of English culture
 
  • 4
  • 1Like
  • 1Haha
  • 1
Reactions:
What is the reasoning for Leicestershire (and the location of Rutland) protruding into modern day Lincolnshire? It’s ok if it’s historical and I’m merely ignorant but it seems like an odd choice since it looks so unlike the real borders of Rutland.

Furthermore, the borders of Nottinghamshire (in particular the Newark location) are very jagged and stretch into Lincolnshire, again I may just be ignorant of the borders in 1337 but the border seems off and unlike today’s border.

The same is true for the Nottinghamshire Leicestershire border with a very straight line encroaching into Nottinghamshire and looking unlike the current border.

All these complaints may just be my ignorance but I’d like to see why the borders are like this. Hopefully this is an opportunity for me to learn!

(Also I’d like if the Loughborough location was split into Loughborough in the west and Melton Mowbray in the east but I understand if this division is too small.)
IMG_0745.jpeg
 
  • 2
Reactions:
Wow I can't believe no Warwick in Warwickshire and West Midlands has to share space with those foreign East Midlands devils.

But I do appreciate the sacrifices that have to be made to ensure space enough for granular locations in the Pacific :D
 
  • 1Haha
Reactions:
English counties were divided into hundreds, which I have used to redesign the locations for Staffordshire and Warwickshire. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_hundreds_of_England

Staffordshire had 5 hundreds, called Pirehill, Totmonslow, Cuttlestone, Offlow and Seisdon, which would make good locations. Firstly, Pirehill in the northwest should not be called Stoke but Newcastle-under-Lyme, which was much more significant than Stoke for most of History. In the northeast, Totmonslow would best be called Leek. In the centre, Cuttlestone should be named after Stafford, even though it was technically on the edge of Pirehill. Seisdon corresponds mainly with the black country and should probably be named after Wolverhampton. Offlow should be called Lichfield and not Tamworth as it was a city with a Cathedral. I would suggest moving parts of southern Offlow (around Walsall) into Seisdon as Walsall is part of the black country.

Warwickshire had 4 hundreds, called Hemlingford, Knightlow, Barlichway and Kington, which again can be used to make locations. Barlichway in the southwest should again be called Stratford (Upon Avon). Kington in the southeast should be called Warwick. Knightlow in the east should again be called Coventry. I propose that Hemlingford in the north be split between Birmingham and Tamworth (which is given north Knightlow). Tamworth was divided between Warwickshire and Staffordshire at the time, so would be an accurate name for this location, if not, Nuneaton could be used instead.

1718383732742.png
 
  • 3Like
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
Posting this for u/onehellaconfusedboi on Reddit, who says they can't sign up for the forums.
r/EU5 ✔u/onehellaconfusedboi - 1h
Tinto Forums aren't taking in new registrations so I'm posting my suggestions here, if anyone with an account can repost it?

Caesar - Tinto Maps

Been really enjoying the Tinto Maps, they look very cool, however now that it's come to an area I'm more familiar with I would like to submit some suggestions.

I'm going to focus on roughly the London-Surrey area, as its the area I've studied most, with some interlinked discussion of Kent and the Sussex coast.

London is a difficult one, I understand. Presumably, the aim is to avoid a London that is either too large to be accurate to the time period, whilst also avoiding a London province that is too small to meaningfully work within the systems and mechanics of the game. The current iteration seems to be an awkward Frankenstein of these two aims.

Addresing the inclusion of Tilbury in the London location, this I presume is a gameplay concession to allow London to be a port city. Tilbury has never been a part of London, even under the most wide-reaching interpretation of the Herbert Commision. I've got no problem with this, it makes sense to fudge the borders a little bit to allow for stronger gameplay. However, this creates inconsistencies when compared to the inclusion and exclusion of other places around London.

The border with Kent keeps to the historic pre-1889 borders, keeping the 7 easternmost boroughs of the County of London within Kent. This would make sense if the aim was to constrain London to just the pre-1889 County of Middlesex, maintaining the Thames as the southern boundary for the location. However, all of the trans-riverine boroughs of modern Greater London are included within Southwark, despite the majority of this area only being annexed in the 1960s. Another nitpick is the choice to vertically divide London and Westminster into separate locations. This is wholly ahistorical. As early as 1593, John Speer is depicting Westminster as being less westerly than other areas of London like St lames [sic]. Westminster wasn't even appearing on maps of Middlesex as a separate entity from London at all, merely a noteworthy area within.

Westminster, throughout this game's time period, is a fairly central location within London rather than any kind of separate settlement/ economy. It simply doesn't make sense to divide it in this way.

The massive Guildford location is also an oddity. In my opinion, seeing the granularity in other areas of the map shown thus far, it isn't unreasonable to suggest this location be split. With some alterations to Southwark, Westminster, and Guildford, a third location could be conjured to more accurately depict Surrey as it existed throughout the era portrayed. As I see it, the goal with the Southwark-Guildford split is to characterise two distinct economies present in the region. Southwark is the urban lowlands region, economically and demographically inseparable from London. Guildford is the more rural Surrey of the South Downs, the one more commonly depicted in the public imagination.

I'd like to posit the existence of a distinct third socio-economic unit within Surrey history, one which I also think Guildford more accurately sits within. This is the western Surrey. For convenience's sake, I'll refer to this potential location as "New Guildford" to distinguish it from the South Downs location currently represented by Guildford. New Guildford comprises the hundreds of Woking, Godley, Elmbridge, and Effingham. This is the part of the Surrey lowlands that is economically and culturally linked to London via the Thames, however is just far enough out to not be wholly subsumed by it as was the case for towns like Lambeth and Southwark.

This area is linked economically to the Downs via towns like Guildford at the very edge, but also more distantly to the ports of the Solent due to its close connection with the towns of northern Hampshire. It is the middle ground between the rural idyll of Godalming, and bustling trade of Kingston. The rest of the Old Guildford can remain as the rural horse-rearing backwater lodged away in the hills.

Finally, I'd like to address the inclusion of Guildford within the province of Sussex. This makes no sense within any time period, let alone the one depicted ingame. Sussex is famously known as "Sussex by the Sea". It is well and truly a coastal entity. Maps created to demonstrate manorial estates in the county largely orient themselves towards the sea, rather than towards the north or Jerusalem as is more typical.

The geology of Sussex makes northerly connections less strong than any other direction, as it requires crossing the difficult hills of the Downs or the forests of the Weald rather than the many riverine and coastal trade routes that flourished across the county. The inclusion of Guildford simply doesn't work economically, the towns in Surrey across the Downs would be isolated from the markets of the coastal seaports. Either all of Surrey ought to be connected to London, or all of it ought to be a singular entity.

Sources: "What is London?" A collection of presentations at a seminar at City Hall on 2 April 2004, organised by the Commission on London Governance (https://web.archive .org/web/20080409101915/http://www.london.gov.uk /assembly/reports/londongov/whatislondon.pdf) Wikimedia map of the County of London (https://commons.wikimedia org/wiki/File:County_of_London, 1961.svg#mw-jump-to -license) Contemporary maps of the Counties of Surrey and Middlesex, from the 16th, 18th, and 19th Centuries (https://www.londonpicturearchive.org.uk/view-item?i= 328520) (https://www.londonpicturearchive.org.uk/view -item?i=27622) (https://www.londonpicturearchive.org.uk view-item?i=328597) (https://www.londonpicturearchive / org.uk/view-item?i=328633) Domesday Hundreds of England map (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File: EnglandAdminstrative Map1086.png#mw-jump-to-license) Wikipedia article on the Sussex Rapes (https://en.wikipedia org/wiki/Rape(county_subdivision)) Article on East Sussex by local archive (https://www.thekeep.info/places /eastsussex/)
 
  • 6Like
  • 1
Reactions:
British Isles is a term coined in the 16th century, the comparison with the Greek/Latin Pretannic Isles which fell out of use long before English ever reached these Islands is purely coincidental.
Greeks said the coastal people were pritons, in latin this became britons and so the land became brittania. P to B is common language shift
 
  • 2Like
  • 2
Reactions:
It also settles the debate about Polish culture. If English and Irish are monolithic, you should also have one Polish culture rather than various dialect groups.
Same goes for French to some extent, you could accurately represent the French region with maybe as few as half the existing cultures.
 
  • 7
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Great Work, it's looking good!

Just two things,

Is there a way to alter the location borders in Devon to have Tin be produced on Dartmoor?

And is there a way to swap the goods in the two Cornwall locations?

Both is more due to current knowledge rather than any historical one (I'm from Plymouth with Cornish family).

Dartmoor is the area near here known for tin mining, whereas fishing is obviously bigger around the coast (but I get that due to the scale that locations with fish will reach inland) I get that you might not want to do this though, as it'll leave an awkward location shape. Maybe an Okehampton location or something?

And again this is more heresy, but the big tin mining towns in Cornwall are in the west (Camborne, Redruth, Geevor), whereas the East of Cornwall is more Clay Pitts and fishing, although Bodmin Moor may tip it towards tin.

Also out of interest, are you using the location name to decided the trade good rather than the area as a whole? If you are than I fully understand why you chose the goods.


Just some of my local thoughts, but the games shaping up very well! Keep on doing what you're doing!
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
An intriguing point well made. I am loathe to propose the modern borders of counties, but certainly see the benefits of better representing the metropolitan area. I would suggest that the location of Southwark be redrawn. Whilst Southwark might fit within Middlesex, I think that the more southern areas, such as Kingston upon Thames, would be more at home in the sort of Surrey province which you propose.
I think we have come to an amenable compromise sir, now we just need Johan et al to agree
 
  • 1
Reactions:
I feel like Bedfordshire should be Berkshire, as it's probably the more "significant" county in that area (it contains Windsor, and therefore Windsor Castle).

Possible I'm slightly biased as it's where I live.
Tagging onto this hoping to provide some historical context. The historical county of Berkshire consisted of most of southern modern day Oxfordshire even including Western Oxford (Botley/North Hinksey) and the important market towns of Abingdon (Formerly the main county town of Berkshire until 1867 and one of the most notable Abbey's in early England) and Faringdon. This layout existed until the county lines were redrawn in 1974 after a government act 2 years prior.

A detailed map source for this area can be found in Christopher Saxton's "Atlas of England and Wales 1579" I tried to post links and an image to this source but I was having issues with the forum (I haven't posted here much before).

That source also contains other maps that may be of use?

While Oxford itself has a huge historical significance due to its University, Berkshire has been home to the monarchy for centuries, both I feel highlight and represent the area more accurately than the name of Bedfordshire which in the province outline the game currently has, is only the extreme top right corner. The area is also known as the "Thames Valley" which could be another but I guess more unusual name..

I hope this helps and fully appreciate the work @SaintDaveUK @Pavía and the team do. I am very excited for this game. :)

From another local resident.
 
  • 4Like
Reactions: