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.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly. You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Hello, and welcome to a Special Edition of our Tinto Maps series! Today, as a Three Wise Men present (a quite important tradition here in Spain), we'll be taking a look at how the different map modes look like throughout the entire world. Without further ado, maps!
Countries:
Building-based Countries:
SoPs:
Dynasties:
Country Governments:
Court Languages:
Locations:
Provinces:
Areas:
Terrain:
Johan will talk this Wednesday about the effects of each terrain type.
Development:
Harbors:
We're also showing the map of European harbors, as that was not shown previously. Feel free to give your feedback!
Cultures:
Languages:
Religions:
The Animism split was completed, and the grouping into bigger families is almost finished (there's some pending work on Western and Eastern Africa, but that's it).
Raw Materials:
Markets:
Population: There is a total of 421M pops worldwide, distributed this way (and pending review, as we have identified some duplicates and errors that we have yet to fix, as in Germany, plus some additions in other places, as discussed in the different Tinto Maps threads):
99.203M in Europe
262.270M in Asia
37.204M in Africa
20.499M in America
1.885M in Oceania
And that's it for today! Although there's pending work yet to be done in the new year, we think that the progress since we started the Tinto Maps series last spring is noticeable, something that we wouldn't have achieved without your feedback. We will keep gathering, processing, and implementing it in the Tinto Maps Feedback posts, continuing with the Maghreb review, which will be shown tomorrow.
And this Friday 10th we will start a new series, Tinto Flavour, in which I will show and talk about the content that we have been creating for Project Caesar. We hope that you will enjoy this new series and that you can keep helping us make this a fun and engaging game. Cheers!
PS: Today is a bank holiday in Spain, so I will reply to the comments tomorrow.
Is feedback still open for vegetation and wasteland geography?
I didn’t understand why the Nile flood plain cut off at the first cataract and when I looked into it I got this from here:
Geographically. Nubia was like Egypt—a fertile, narrow oasis running through arid deserts. OnIv in Southern Nubia could nomads survive east and west of the Nile. Other nomadic groups roamed the Bed Sea hills far to the east of Nubia.
Nubia was a very large country. Measured along thre twisting coursed of the Nile, it was 1700 kilometers long 1054 miles), Egypt only 1100 kilometers. Most Bronze Age Nubians lived on the fertile flood plain. which was concentrated in three relatively well settled regions: Lower or northern Nubia. Upper or central Nubia. and Southern Nubia. Each was separated from the other by long stretches of fertile, thinly occupied land.
I have no idea if the desiccation spreading out from the Sahara significantly expanded in Nubia’s direction, so I may be wrong about this, but those population centers were still clearly present in much of the same form as they were in Meroitic times, as illustrated by the divisions of Kush into the kingdoms of Nobatia, Makuria, and Alodia.
This continued subsistence of Pakhoras (Faras), Tungul (Old Dongola), and Soba would suggest that similar pattern of vegetation existed 1337.
Similarly, I do not see the reason for the almost complete cut off of development after the first cataract. Nubia is a civilization nearly as ancient as Egypt, and should benefit from the continuity of that development.
Instead of this ‘clean’ decline in vegetation (and development) as you move further south, it seems fit to have the 180 miles of Nubian Nile represented by a clumping of grasslands vegetation around these three population centers, interrupted by an alternating pattern of grasslands, sparse, and desert vegetation. It seems an exception to development and vegetation going hand in hand would be Silimi (Qasr Ibrim).
Other than Nubia, the only other area I feel confident enough to suggest something is the Sahel and Sudan regions, particularly the western section and around Lake Chad (which is where I believe the most desertification has been in the past few centuries compared to 1337).
Firstly, the inland Niger delta was (and—to a lesser extent as its shed some of its watershed—is today) an agricultural powerhouse. There’s good reason for it to have attracted the expanse of urbanization out from where Mali’s capital (or “capital”, if it was itinerant) may have been at the time it was attested.
The three-settlement mound complex of Dia, located at the western edge of the Inland Niger Delta of Mali, is known for rich oral and written resources, and predates the much better-known cities of nearby Djenne and Timbuktu.[3]According to Levtzion, the Diakhanke "remember Dia in Massina as the town of their ancestor, Suware, a great marabout, and a saint."[4] This vast site thus offers the possibility of studying the beginning of urbanization in this part of Africa and the structure of an early West African city.[5]
Favorable climate and water supply have favored human settlement for centuries, and the history of the region is linked to that of former western Sudan with the successive empires of Ghana, Maliand Songhay. The water system provided a favorable route for trade between the southern and northern Sahara, making Dia as one of the key trade sites in the region.[6]
I see that there’s some minor representation of wetlands there, but for how much more it feeds into (and if we were to account for desiccation over the centuries), especially seeing how minor wetlands elsewhere in the region are a comparable size despite not being as far-reaching, I strongly recommend expanding it some amount. If only I were a climate historian I’d be able to be more specific than that.
Secondly (and much bigger than that one delta) is the border between arid and tropical climate and desert, sparse, and grasslands vegetation in general.
These two regions make up the modern Sudan (the latter is split by the unnavigable Sudd):
This region is the modern Sahel:
Assuming that tropical, grasslands is supposed to represent the Sudan, both the climate and vegetation could use a little expansion north in a lot of parts, particularly along the Niger Bend and between it and the Senegal River Valley.
Assuming that arid, sparse is how the Sahel (being a transitional zone) is modeled, the northern reaches of the Sahel might be significantly underestimated for most of PC’s timeframe. I say “might” as I do not have even an idea of what the full extent of that would be.
But what I do have an idea of is how far south the inhospitable desert should go. As it stands, Walata is an island in the sea of sand. This does not account for the Aoukar basin both it and Aoudaghost are located in, as:
Formerly more fertile, it is now largely a barren waste.[15]
Ibn Battuta’s account of Walata described the following:
"My stay at Iwalatan (Oualata) lasted about fifty days; and I was shown honour and entertained by its inhabitants. It is an excessively hot place, and boasts a few small date-palms, in the shade of which they sow watermelons. Its water comes from underground waterbeds at that point, and there is plenty of mutton to be had."[7]
The capacity to grow watermelons under sparse date palms and the existence of major underground water sufficient to sustain a major trading hub sounds much more like arid, sparse than arid, desert. (On an unrelated note, Walata’s localized name would be either Biru or Iwalatan depending on whether its Mandé or Massufa (a Sanhaja group) majority in 1337, respectively. Ibn Battuta did not mention Tuaregs.)
I’m not finding much else (that I can actually access), but any source I come across with climate suggestions is always “it was (likely) more fertile”. Koumbi Saleh is argued to have been in a comparable environment, and its most probable location (or its Muslim section’s most probable location) is in that exact same basin.
It is interesting that the site of Koumbi Saleh in the extreme south of present-day Mauritania, the probable location of Ghâna City – or rather, the Islamic component of Ghâna City – is found in the region of Aoukar, an arid environment in the southern Sahara52. It is likely that the climate change over the last millennium has made the region less hospitable than it used to be; in any case, Koumbi Saleh never enjoyed a fertile, densely populated environment in the same way as “capitals” in other parts of the world. Rather, like the capitals of other medieval African polities – whether situated along the mangrove coastal ribbon of East Africa, or at mid-height of the escarpment of the Rift in Ethiopia –, the capital of Ghâna was a unique commercial “hub”: it filled this role not despite, but because it was situated on an ecological threshold, at a point of juncture between different physical environments, methods of transportation (camels versus donkeys), and ethnic, linguistic and religious faultlines53.
TL;DR Based on modern climatological maps of the tropical Sudanian savannah and the (semi)arid/transitional Sahelian savannah, the general consensus pointing to less desertification and less desiccation around the Sahara for most of the 1337-1836 timeframe, and contemporary accounts noting greater water availability, there’s probably enough to say at least a strip of the Saharan wasteland should be made habitable as arid, sparse (particularly the two westernmost “bites” between the Senegal River and Niger Bend), the vegetation of the Inner Niger Delta should be more significant, and the Nubian Nile should be a mix of arid grassland, sparse, and desert with grassland around its three population centers.
For development; my impression from Arab descriptions is that the locations in the Inner Niger Delta should be on a similar level to Timbuktu before it replaced Walata as the principal southern terminus of trans-Saharan trade in the latter half of this century. The cities of Dia and Old Jenne in particular should stand out. Walata maybe should start as the most developed, but stand to be overtaken by Timbuktu’s prosperity and renown surging after Mansa Musa’s hajj. Aoudaghost could start off with a (comparatively to the rest of Mali) high development as well simply due to having been what Walata is now for centuries longer (and, AFAIK, being more resilient to fading away). For intermediate oasis cities along the routes, I’d imagine they’d mark considerably below the entrepôts at either end.
The Mema area, Mali, situated climatologically within the Sahel zone, carries extensive traces of ancient settlements. Material from the author's 1978 excavation indicates environmental conditions similar to the present day inland Niger delta during the old Kingdom of Ghana (A.D. 800–1150). This centralized political power controlled gold trade from the south and salt from the north. The iron smelting in Mema was too extensive to be explained as local supply alone. It probably constituted an important basis for political centralization. The iron production seems to have caused deforestation, and the Kingdom may therefor have been weakened by ecological detonation connected with iron production.
The Akumbu Mound Complex (Méma Region, Mali): Culture Change, Complexity and the Pulse Model The Méma experienced both progressive desiccation and episodic climatic oscillations in the Late Holocene, offering exceptional opportunities for assessing human response to climate change in the region. This paper contributes new archaeological data on the Akumbu mound complex, one of the numerous clusters of settlement mounds in the Méma. Analysis of the pottery recovered from excavations led by R. J. McIntosh at Akumbu in 2000, plus new 14 C dates, provide details on material culture during the early first millennium CE and the occupation sequence at Akumbu mound B. The new data raise questions about the presumed contemporaneity and continuous occupation of Akumbu mounds A and B and invite critical consideration of the data supporting the Pulse Model for specialization and urbanization in the Méma during the first millennium CE.
<p>Egypt and Nubia—immediately upstream of Egypt developed the two earliest known of Africa’s many civilizations. Yet Nubia is not found on modern […]</p>
Introduction At its height in the 14th century, the fame of the empire of Mâli spread throughout the Islamicate and Christian worlds. Representing the furthest reaches of the world known to a Jewis...
Hello world! Here is some feedback regarding natural harbours in Sweden and Finland from your local swede. In summary, the mentioned locations should have some status of natural harbours as their natural geography is well suited for developing harbours, but it would also be historical accurate as there either has been or still is important harbours within the mentioned locations today. The following locations should have natural harbours:
(1) Brekne (Karlskrona):
Today Karlskrona is mostly famous for being the largest military harbour in Sweden. It is the Swedish navy’s home base and has been since the 1600s. It was decided to relocate the Swedish naval home base to Karlskrona from mainly three perspectives. 1) The navy would be closer to the continent, which would decrease the time for the navy to act in case of hostile states (*cough* Denmark *cough*). 2) The location is (mostly) ice-free during the winter months. 3) The location of the harbour is surrounded by natural defence by the Karlskrona archipelago.
Thereby, from mainly geographical aspects, the location of Brekne should have some status of natural harbour. Just look at satellite maps of Karlskrona municipality and one can easily see that it’s a perfect location for a harbour.
(It would also be cool if one plays as Sweden and directly controls Brekne (or all of Blekinge/Skåneland) could get or trigger an event that allows one to easier build a large harbour in the location).
Kalmar was one of the most important and richest harbour towns in Sweden during the Middle Ages and all the way until today (though it is not as important or dominant today as it was historically). The city is perfectly located within the Kalmar Straits where Öland naturally shields the city from the Baltics wrath and waves. The Hanseatic league had very large influence over the city historically. It is also the epicentre for the formation of the Kalmar union. So from a historic and natural geographic perspective Kalmar should have some status as a natural harbour.
Söderköping which no longer has a large or important harbour due to land rise, was a very important trading hub and harbour during the Middle Ages. Located at the end of Slätbaken (Söderköpings bay) makes the city geographically protected from the rough seas of the Baltic. It is understandable if Söderköping is not included or upgraded to a natural harbour since the city has been and still is affected by land rise. But from a geographic and historical perspective it should be a trading hub with a good natural harbour.
Norrtälje have been a centre of trade for a very long time. Local historians have pinpointed that a harbour and a trading hub have existed in Norrtälje since the Viking age. But the game location of Norrtälje is larger than only the modern city, it also includes the area where the harbour town of Grisslehamn is located. Since the 1600s Grisslehamn (or more accurate, old Grisslehamn) became a very important postal harbour within the Kingdom of Sweden. It was the main postal harbour and way of communication between Stockholm and the eastern parts of the Kingdom (especially for Åland, Åbo/Turku and all the way to Viborg/Viipuri). This is today remembered locally via the event of “Postrodden” where local sailors row and sail from Grisslehamn to Åland once a year.
The Norrtälje location should have some status of natural harbour, which both is historically accurate as mentioned above, but also geographically accurate. Just look at a geography map of Norrtälje municipality’s coastline and you see that there are plenty of good natural spots to build a harbour with deepwater access. Today the municipality alone has three international harbours: Kapellskär, Grisslehamn and Hallstavik as well as a bonus of Norrtälje City’s harbour (no longer in use). This should be reflected in the game, both from a historic and a natural geographic perspective, by giving the Norrtälje location some form of natural harbour status.
Åland's numerous bays provides excellent shelter for ships. The archipelago consists of several thousand islands and the geography offers a variety of natural harbours and anchorages. This should be reflected in the game by giving the location of Kastelholm (Åland) status of having a natural harbour of some sorts. As mentioned above with Norrtälje/Grisslehamn, Åland was also part of the very important postal service between Stockholm and the eastern parts of the Swedish Kingdom.
Åbo (Turku) is located at the mouth of the Aura River on the southwestern coast of Finland, making it a prime location for natural harbours. The region’s jagged coastline, complemented by numerous nearby islands and sheltered bays, creates ideal conditions for anchorage and maritime activities. Historically, this geography has supported Åbo’s role as a significant port and trade hub in Finland. It was known far and wide during the Middle Ages even appearing in 1153 on an Arabic world map as a place for trading! Åbo was also heavily influenced by the Hanseatic league.
Additionally, its natural features have facilitated navigation and protection for vessels. It is still one of Finlands largest harbours and just next door in Naantali (Nådendal) is another large harbour (in game it would be the same location). Both are well protected from the storms of the Baltic Sea by a large archipelago. As mentioned earlier, Åbo was one of the main important postal hubs in Finland/Österland when it was part of the Swedish kingdom, completing the Norrtälje/Grisslehamn – Åland – Åbo postal network, which allowed important communication between Stockholm and the eastern parts of the kingdom. From both geographical and historical citations, the Åbo location should definitely have status as a natural harbour.
The city of Vaasa (in the same place as Korsholm) was founded in 1606 by the Swedish King Charles IX and chartered in 1611. Its coastal location offers favourable conditions for seafaring, leading to the establishment of port facilities to support trade and maritime activities in the 1600s. Gamla Vasa (old Vasa) was also a centre of trade in the region from the 1300s. The natural geography is also perfect for the location of a natural harbour, which also is a reason why Vaasa today also has a large harbour. The Korsholm location should therefore have some sort of natural harbour status.
This is mostly an overview over these seven mentioned places and from my perspective, some of the most important locations (in the Baltic) that currently does not have a natural harbour but should be designated with a level of natural harbour. Can go into even more detail if somebody wants
Are there any outside of Japan and Europe? From the looks of things the Daimyo, Hansa, Italian banks, and Catholic orders are all the BBCs in the world.
Hello world! Here is some feedback regarding natural harbours in Sweden and Finland from your local swede. In summary, the mentioned locations should have some status of natural harbours as their natural geography is well suited for developing harbours, but it would also be historical accurate as there either has been or still is important harbours within the mentioned locations today. The following locations should have natural harbours:
Today Karlskrona is mostly famous for being the largest military harbour in Sweden. It is the Swedish navy’s home base and has been since the 1600s. It was decided to relocate the Swedish naval home base to Karlskrona from mainly three perspectives. 1) The navy would be closer to the continent, which would decrease the time for the navy to act in case of hostile states (*cough* Denmark *cough*). 2) The location is (mostly) ice-free during the winter months. 3) The location of the harbour is surrounded by natural defence by the Karlskrona archipelago.
Thereby, from mainly geographical aspects, the location of Brekne should have some status of natural harbour. Just look at satellite maps of Karlskrona municipality and one can easily see that it’s a perfect location for a harbour.
(It would also be cool if one plays as Sweden and directly controls Brekne (or all of Blekinge/Skåneland) could get or trigger an event that allows one to easier build a large harbour in the location).
Kalmar was one of the most important and richest harbour towns in Sweden during the Middle Ages and all the way until today (though it is not as important or dominant today as it was historically). The city is perfectly located within the Kalmar Straits where Öland naturally shields the city from the Baltics wrath and waves. The Hanseatic league had very large influence over the city historically. It is also the epicentre for the formation of the Kalmar union. So from a historic and natural geographic perspective Kalmar should have some status as a natural harbour.
Söderköping which no longer has a large or important harbour due to land rise, was a very important trading hub and harbour during the Middle Ages. Located at the end of Slätbaken (Söderköpings bay) makes the city geographically protected from the rough seas of the Baltic. It is understandable if Söderköping is not included or upgraded to a natural harbour since the city has been and still is affected by land rise. But from a geographic and historical perspective it should be a trading hub with a good natural harbour.
Norrtälje have been a centre of trade for a very long time. Local historians have pinpointed that a harbour and a trading hub have existed in Norrtälje since the Viking age. But the game location of Norrtälje is larger than only the modern city, it also includes the area where the harbour town of Grisslehamn is located. Since the 1600s Grisslehamn (or more accurate, old Grisslehamn) became a very important postal harbour within the Kingdom of Sweden. It was the main postal harbour and way of communication between Stockholm and the eastern parts of the Kingdom (especially for Åland, Åbo/Turku and all the way to Viborg/Viipuri). This is today remembered locally via the event of “Postrodden” where local sailors row and sail from Grisslehamn to Åland once a year.
The Norrtälje location should have some status of natural harbour, which both is historically accurate as mentioned above, but also geographically accurate. Just look at a geography map of Norrtälje municipality’s coastline and you see that there are plenty of good natural spots to build a harbour with deepwater access. Today the municipality alone has three international harbours: Kapellskär, Grisslehamn and Hallstavik as well as a bonus of Norrtälje City’s harbour (no longer in use). This should be reflected in the game, both from a historic and a natural geographic perspective, by giving the Norrtälje location some form of natural harbour status.
Åland's numerous bays provides excellent shelter for ships. The archipelago consists of several thousand islands and the geography offers a variety of natural harbours and anchorages. This should be reflected in the game by giving the location of Kastelholm (Åland) status of having a natural harbour of some sorts. As mentioned above with Norrtälje/Grisslehamn, Åland was also part of the very important postal service between Stockholm and the eastern parts of the Swedish Kingdom.
Åbo (Turku) is located at the mouth of the Aura River on the southwestern coast of Finland, making it a prime location for natural harbours. The region’s jagged coastline, complemented by numerous nearby islands and sheltered bays, creates ideal conditions for anchorage and maritime activities. Historically, this geography has supported Åbo’s role as a significant port and trade hub in Finland. It was known far and wide during the Middle Ages even appearing in 1153 on an Arabic world map as a place for trading! Åbo was also heavily influenced by the Hanseatic league.
Additionally, its natural features have facilitated navigation and protection for vessels. It is still one of Finlands largest harbours and just next door in Naantali (Nådendal) is another large harbour (in game it would be the same location). Both are well protected from the storms of the Baltic Sea by a large archipelago. As mentioned earlier, Åbo was one of the main important postal hubs in Finland/Österland when it was part of the Swedish kingdom, completing the Norrtälje/Grisslehamn – Åland – Åbo postal network, which allowed important communication between Stockholm and the eastern parts of the kingdom. From both geographical and historical citations, the Åbo location should definitely have status as a natural harbour.
The city of Vaasa (in the same place as Korsholm) was founded in 1606 by the Swedish King Charles IX and chartered in 1611. Its coastal location offers favourable conditions for seafaring, leading to the establishment of port facilities to support trade and maritime activities in the 1600s. Gamla Vasa (old Vasa) was also a centre of trade in the region from the 1300s. The natural geography is also perfect for the location of a natural harbour, which also is a reason why Vaasa today also has a large harbour. The Korsholm location should therefore have some sort of natural harbour status.
This is mostly an overview over these seven mentioned places and from my perspective, some of the most important locations (in the Baltic) that currently does not have a natural harbour but should be designated with a level of natural harbour. Can go into even more detail if somebody wants
Me trying to figure out why Southern Nigeria is a black void when it was historically extremely urbanized, and described quite flatteringly by the first travellers to encounter the region. Did they undergo an economic revolution in the 150 years from game start, to first Portuguese contact?
(This also applies to Kongo and its environs, and probably Sudan, neither of which should not be that developed, but still... Soba is understood archaeologically to have been a quite large site, as with Dongola, and Ayn Fara (in modern Darfur iirc)).
Low-ish development for Ethiopia, however, does make sense. The country was not particular urban during the medieval period (or, even today).
Is feedback still open for vegetation and wasteland geography?
I didn’t understand why the Nile flood plain cut off at the first cataract and when I looked into it I got this from here:
I have no idea if the desiccation spreading out from the Sahara significantly expanded in Nubia’s direction, so I may be wrong about this, but those population centers were still clearly present in much of the same form as they were in Meroitic times, as illustrated by the divisions of Kush into the kingdoms of Nobatia, Makuria, and Alodia.
This continued subsistence of Pakhoras (Faras), Tungul (Old Dongola), and Soba would suggest that similar pattern of vegetation existed 1337.
Similarly, I do not see the reason for the almost complete cut off of development after the first cataract. Nubia is a civilization nearly as ancient as Egypt, and should benefit from the continuity of that development.
Instead of this ‘clean’ decline in vegetation (and development) as you move further south, it seems fit to have the 180 miles of Nubian Nile represented by a clumping of grasslands vegetation around these three population centers, interrupted by an alternating pattern of grasslands, sparse, and desert vegetation. It seems an exception to development and vegetation going hand in hand would be Silimi (Qasr Ibrim).
Other than Nubia, the only other area I feel confident enough to suggest something is the Sahel and Sudan regions, particularly the western section and around Lake Chad (which is where I believe the most desertification has been in the past few centuries compared to 1337).
Firstly, the inland Niger delta was (and—to a lesser extent as its shed some of its watershed—is today) an agricultural powerhouse. There’s good reason for it to have attracted the expanse of urbanization out from where Mali’s capital (or “capital”, if it was itinerant) may have been at the time it was attested.
I see that there’s some minor representation of wetlands there, but for how much more it feeds into (and if we were to account for desiccation over the centuries), especially seeing how minor wetlands elsewhere in the region are a comparable size despite not being as far-reaching, I strongly recommend expanding it some amount. If only I were a climate historian I’d be able to be more specific than that.
Secondly (and much bigger than that one delta) is the border between arid and tropical climate and desert, sparse, and grasslands vegetation in general.
These two regions make up the modern Sudan (the latter is split by the unnavigable Sudd):
This region is the modern Sahel:
Assuming that tropical, grasslands is supposed to represent the Sudan, both the climate and vegetation could use a little expansion north in a lot of parts, particularly along the Niger Bend and between it and the Senegal River Valley.
Assuming that arid, sparse is how the Sahel (being a transitional zone) is modeled, the northern reaches of the Sahel might be significantly underestimated for most of PC’s timeframe. I say “might” as I do not have even an idea of what the full extent of that would be.
But what I do have an idea of is how far south the inhospitable desert should go. As it stands, Walata is an island in the sea of sand. This does not account for the Aoukar basin both it and Aoudaghost are located in, as:
Ibn Battuta’s account of Walata described the following:
The capacity to grow watermelons under sparse date palms and the existence of major underground water sufficient to sustain a major trading hub sounds much more like arid, sparse than arid, desert. (On an unrelated note, Walata’s localized name would be either Biru or Iwalatan depending on whether its Mandé or Massufa (a Sanhaja group) majority in 1337, respectively. Ibn Battuta did not mention Tuaregs.)
I’m not finding much else (that I can actually access), but any source I come across with climate suggestions is always “it was (likely) more fertile”. Koumbi Saleh is argued to have been in a comparable environment, and its most probable location (or its Muslim section’s most probable location) is in that exact same basin.
TL;DR Based on modern climatological maps of the tropical Sudanian savannah and the (semi)arid/transitional Sahelian savannah, the general consensus pointing to less desertification and less desiccation around the Sahara for most of the 1337-1836 timeframe, and contemporary accounts noting greater water availability, there’s probably enough to say at least a strip of the Saharan wasteland should be made habitable as arid, sparse (particularly the two westernmost “bites” between the Senegal River and Niger Bend), the vegetation of the Inner Niger Delta should be more significant, and the Nubian Nile should be a mix of arid grassland, sparse, and desert with grassland around its three population centers.
For development; my impression from Arab descriptions is that the locations in the Inner Niger Delta should be on a similar level to Timbuktu before it replaced Walata as the principal southern terminus of trans-Saharan trade in the latter half of this century. The cities of Dia and Old Jenne in particular should stand out. Walata maybe should start as the most developed, but stand to be overtaken by Timbuktu’s prosperity and renown surging after Mansa Musa’s hajj. Aoudaghost could start off with a (comparatively to the rest of Mali) high development as well simply due to having been what Walata is now for centuries longer (and, AFAIK, being more resilient to fading away). For intermediate oasis cities along the routes, I’d imagine they’d mark considerably below the entrepôts at either end.
<p>Egypt and Nubia—immediately upstream of Egypt developed the two earliest known of Africa’s many civilizations. Yet Nubia is not found on modern […]</p>
Introduction At its height in the 14th century, the fame of the empire of Mâli spread throughout the Islamicate and Christian worlds. Representing the furthest reaches of the world known to a Jewis...
Great stuff, from what I'm gathering though maybe post this stuff on the regional threads. I'm still deciding if I want to spend time on an African population post, simply because the 5 million West Africa figure drives me mad.
Hello, and welcome to a Special Edition of our Tinto Maps series! Today, as a Three Wise Men present (a quite important tradition here in Spain), we'll be taking a look at how the different map modes look like throughout the entire world. Without further ado, maps!
Religions: View attachment 1239003 The Animism split was completed, and the grouping into bigger families is almost finished (there's some pending work on Western and Eastern Africa, but that's it).
Population: There is a total of 421M pops worldwide, distributed this way (and pending review, as we have identified some duplicates and errors that we have yet to fix, as in Germany, plus some additions in other places, as discussed in the different Tinto Maps threads):
99.203M in Europe
262.270M in Asia
37.204M in Africa
20.499M in America
1.885M in Oceania
And that's it for today! Although there's pending work yet to be done in the new year, we think that the progress since we started the Tinto Maps series last spring is noticeable, something that we wouldn't have achieved without your feedback. We will keep gathering, processing, and implementing it in the Tinto Maps Feedback posts, continuing with the Maghreb review, which will be shown tomorrow.
And this Friday 10th we will start a new series, Tinto Flavour, in which I will show and talk about the content that we have been creating for Project Caesar. We hope that you will enjoy this new series and that you can keep helping us make this a fun and engaging game. Cheers!
PS: Today is a bank holiday in Spain, so I will reply to the comments tomorrow.
What if culture map, when you are highly zoomed out, used not location based minorities but province or even area based. It will make stripes look prettier as there will no longer be jagged edges and skipped locations because of the stripes.
Do you even read my posts before hitting downvote and replying with something else that's only tangentially related to what I'm saying?
You claimed Inner Mongolia is all developed. No it isn't true and you can see that in the map provided.
You claimed places like Hulun Buir is supposed to be barely populated, and I showed you it indeed has very low dev.
You claimed Chifeng is not next to the Gobi desert, I showed you it is per Wikipedia's definition.
And THEN you brought up Syrian desert. It is as if you only actually checked which parts of the map has those development discrepancy now. Good but I've never argued that they don't have inconsistencies in what constitutes as "development". I'm saying that your claim that
If it was certain areas in inner Mongolai: Sure, but it is the entirety of inner Mongolia that is high dev. The area around Hulun Buir is barely populated.
makes no sense, because it really IS certain areas in Inner Mongolia (arable parts bordering Shanxi and Hebei like I said) that have high dev. The rest ranges from literal Gobi to Kuban-tier, including Hulun Buir you specifically singled out.
Am I the only one to believe that a large part of Norway’s coastline should be listed as better ports?
The fjords provide remarkable protection from direct sea exposure, with the mountains serving as natural windbreaks and provide natural protection from the elements. Inside the fjords, wind is dramatically reduced, and the ocean can at times be mirror-flat. Additionally, the fjords provide nearly universal access to deep-draft coastline given that the inlets were carved out by heavy glaciers.
Even if not appearing to be in bays, many Norwegian wharfs and fishing villages are so naturally protected that wooden wharf buildings (not just quays or docks) can be constructed directly over the water, unlike places like the Mediterranean where one first needs to construct protective port infrastructure. Places like Svolvaer, Alesund, or Tromso might not appear to be protected bays from satellite imagery, but they are in reality very protected because they are enclosed by protective mountains.
This is not to say that all of Norway's coastline must be bright green, nor that fjords provide 100% protection from the elements. But these protected coastal waters are perhaps Norway’s greatest geographic advantage, while its fjords are not recognized as such in the harbor map.
edit: Sweden and Washington state both have coastlines carved in a similar process to Norway's, but their natural harbors are labeled as superior to Norway's in this map. Meanwhile, by geographic measurement, Norway has far more protected coastline than either place (considering how deep these protected fjords can extend inland).
edit 2: The tinto team may have penalized Norway for "steepness of the shore," but to use that metric is flawed and applied unevenly in this case. Fjord formation can create steep cliffs adjacent to the ocean, but that process can also dump sediment in a manner that creates low-lying areas adjacent to the water. Virtually all Norwegian coastal towns and villages are built on these low-lying areas, where it is relatively easy to build and to sustain local agriculture, and not into steep mountainsides.
Note Trondelag below:
Now note the Levanger area, which is northeast of Nidaros/Trondheim.
Those settlements are in the same fjord as Nidaros and are also low-lying with incredible natural protection from the sea. These never grew as nearby Nidaros/Trondheim served as the region's urban nexus, but there's negligible qualitative difference between the harbor at Nidaros and other potential locations on that fjord..
My general point is that steep slopes were not significant natural obstacles to port construction where Norwegian fjord settlements are actually located, because Norwegians generally settled in the flatter areas where it was easier to build.
Am I the only one to believe that a large part of Norway’s coastline should be listed as better ports?
The fjords provide remarkable protection from direct sea exposure, with the mountains serving as natural windbreaks and provide natural protection from the elements. Inside the fjords, wind is dramatically reduced, and the ocean can at times be mirror-flat. Additionally, the fjords provide nearly universal access to deep-draft coastline given that the inlets were carved out by heavy glaciers.
Even if not appearing to be in bays, many Norwegian wharfs and fishing villages are so naturally protected that wooden wharf buildings (not just quays or docks) can be constructed directly over the water, unlike places like the Mediterranean where one first needs to construct protective port infrastructure. Places like Svolvaer, Alesund, or Tromso might not appear to be protected bays from satellite imagery, but they are in reality very protected because they are enclosed by protective mountains.
This is not to say that all of Norway's coastline must be bright green, nor that fjords provide 100% protection from the elements. But these protected coastal waters are perhaps Norway’s greatest geographic advantage, while its fjords are not recognized as such in the harbor map.
edit: Sweden has many good natural ports (the coastline carved in a similar process to Norway's), but that Sweden's coastline is so much better than Norway does not make sense to me. Simply put, Norway has far more naturally protected coastline, but far fewer listed good ports
Well it's even less consistent than development the other guy is complaining about.
Orkney is bright green but Shetland and Faroe Islands are black.
Kherson is black, but the two locations south of it are moderately green. Sure there are some sand banks protecting them, but similar locations on the Azov Sea side received no such treatment.
Southeastern China is full of natural harbors, but Taiwan has none. How is this NOT a natural harbor:
And Paradox's official definition for a natural harbor is:
A natural harbor determines the benefits that the natural geography of the place to serve as a harbor. So, it has nothing to do with how well it functions as an actual port or how developed it is. For example, an awful coast as natural harbor could have very good port infrastructure built in it and thus actually be a good port, while the best place in the world to moor a vessel would do almost nothing unless a proper infrastructure is built there. So, only natural geographical elements affect our qualification of natural harbor, things like the steepness of the shore, the protection from the elements due to bays or nearby mountains, how strong is the current, etc.
Me trying to figure out why Southern Nigeria is a black void when it was historically extremely urbanized, and described quite flatteringly by the first travellers to encounter the region. Did they undergo an economic revolution in the 150 years from game start, to first Portuguese contact?
(This also applies to Kongo and its environs, and probably Sudan, neither of which should not be that developed, but still... Soba is understood archaeologically to have been a quite large site, as with Dongola, and Ayn Fara (in modern Darfur iirc)).
Low-ish development for Ethiopia, however, does make sense. The country was not particular urban during the medieval period (or, even today).
Great stuff, from what I'm gathering though maybe post this stuff on the regional threads. I'm still deciding if I want to spend time on an African population post, simply because the 5 million West Africa figure drives me mad.
You should, the population of West Africa is estimated at the lowest possible extreme, it's like they expect the population to balloon by 1600, or to nerf the power and influence of African states. I wonder what world they are trying to construct where southern Nigeria, and parts of Senegal, Kongo have the same and lower development than parts of Siberia.
I'll be focusing on the area which has been the object of my study.
Some things about Eastern Canada:
These are not one language, and they're not even mutually intelligible. This seems to roughly represent the Wabanaki Confederacy; however, these languages are not really that closely tied as to warrant being one language in game. These are also living languages, so imo, this is quite disrespectful. I understand Paradox has taken the approach of language minimalism in Project Caeser. However, I cannot overstate how important language is in the process of colonization.
This is appalling, but perhaps the work has not been done here yet? I hope the myth of Terra Nullius is not alive and well at Paradox :/
Cape Breton absolutely should have a port. Unama'kik (Lnuismk name for Cape Breton) was the center of Mi'kmaq political life and where the Grand Chief resided. The Sydney Harbour - generally, the Bras'dor lake - is the location specifically. I would also consider Port Hawkesbury, i.e., the canso strait, as it was a very important location as well. Source: Truth and Conviction: Donald Marshall Jr. and the Mi'kmaw Quest for Justice an anthropological work by Dr. Jane McMillan.
On that topic, I hope there is some inclusion of the seven districts of Mi'kma'ki, even if it's just as province boundaries. Could seperate Piktuk (Pictou/Antigonish) and modern-day P.E.I, but still.
Source is random bit from google. Just a demonstration.
(English interpretations here are a bit faulty; Unama'kik means the land of the fog. Blame the Canadian government.)
Source is Canadian government website.
Source is CBC.
Also, as other commentors have said, the inclusion of U.S. states is ridiculous. The only way to achieve a system which respects both Indigenous peoples history and allows you to advertise to your America Fuk Yah customer base at the same time is to have some sort of dynamic province/state system, imo.
You should, the population of West Africa is estimated at the lowest possible extreme, it's like they expect the population to balloon by 1600, or to nerf the power and influence of African states. I wonder what world they are trying to construct where southern Nigeria, and parts of Senegal, Kongo have the same and lower development than parts of Siberia.
I'd love to, but I only have so much time -- and I'd like to spend that on other things, too!
That said, I don't even see 5 million as a "lowest possible extreme". West Africa is significantly larger than the Horn of Africa, was significantly more urbanized, was far more densely populated by farmers, and arguably has better farmland. The "lowest possible extreme" would see West Africa's population matching the Horn of Africa's population, and even that would require what I consider an impossible-to-fill burden of proof. 5 million is less than half what was assigned to the Horn of Africa. So yeah, not even in consideration for me.
To really ground this point in something I think we all know, between 1600 and 1800, some 10 million slaves were displaced and either exported onto America-bound ships, never to see their homes again, or killed before they even reached the coasts.
If West Africa had a population of 5 million people in 1337, then it would've taken a genuine miracle for its population to have reached even 15 million by 1600. As far as I can tell, an increase less than 10% that size (over ~150 years) was seen as a significant event in post-Black Death Europe. Even with this ridiculous 300% growth rate, how does a region with just 15 million people experience anything but a complete population collapse when it completely loses 10 million able-bodied adults over the course of just 200 years? That's about 50,000 people literally gone, every year, for 200 consecutive years: unable to farm, unable to produce goods, unable to organize politically, unable to bear children, because their labor is being used on what might as well be the other side of the galaxy. Oh, and I haven't even factored in the additional ~1-2 million people who were trafficked across the Sahara during the same time period (also lost potential labor...), nor have I brought up the unknown number who were trafficked across the Sahel.
It just doesn't add up.
And as for "how to stop West Africa from dominating the world" -- honestly, seems pretty easy to me.
1) Sahara Desert and Tropical Rainforest on either side
2) Literally no maritime technology beyond river craft
3) Boxed in by powerful states.
(This is my first paradox forum post - With how much of a frustration the representation of West Africa in EU5 has been for me, I'd never forgive myself if I didn't comment on the situation).
I'm quite disappointed by the near-zero development in southern Western Africa (especially in Benin city (sort of understandable considering EU5's start date is still quite a bit before the zenith of the Kingdom of Benin, but development in the region should still definitely be higher)). I thought we'd moved away from the "there was nothing in West Africa before the Europeans arrived" ideology after Victoria 2?
On a more positive note, it's nice to see West Africa get actual distinct religions instead of just "animism". That's been haunting my dreams for many years now.
"Nigerian" as a single cultural group is quite shaky, but I'll assume it's for balance reasons.
This was mentioned previously by another user, but you seem to have used the very lowest estimates for the population of Africa in the early 14th century. Definitely not my greatest problem with Africa's representation in this game, but I just felt to point it out.
On a more general note, will there be any debuffs to cavalry when fighting in tropical areas - or at least in the tropics of Central Africa as to simulate the massive impact the tsetse fly and the associated sleeping sickness had on warfare in the region? I imagine this would also help with keeping Mali from painting the entire region when it didn't do so historically (almost definitely due to the prevalence of the tsetse fly in the tropical regions of West Africa greatly hampering the effectiveness of the heavily cavalry-reliant armies of the Sahel nations).
Again, I appreciate the increasing effort put into improving the representation of West Africa in paradox titles; but there very clearly is some sort of pro euro-centrist historical revisionism going on here.
If West Africa had a population of 5 million people in 1337, then it would've taken a genuine miracle for its population to have reached even 15 million by 1600. As far as I can tell, an increase less than 10% that size (over ~150 years) was seen as a significant event in post-Black Death Europe. Even with this ridiculous 300% growth rate, how does a region with just 15 million people experience anything but a complete population collapse when it completely loses 10 million able-bodied adults over the course of just 200 years? That's about 50,000 people literally gone, every year, for 200 consecutive years:
Small correction, the amount of slaves coming from West Africa specifically(excluding Congo and East Africa) is 6.3 million from 1500 to 1850. Though 95% of it was concentrated between 1650 and 1850, about 6 million. So 30k a year. Estimates that put the population of West Africa at 50 million say the region declined to about 40 million by 1900.
Small correction, the amount of slaves coming from West Africa specifically(excluding Congo and East Africa) is 6.3 million from 1500 to 1850. Though 95% of it was concentrated between 1650 and 1850, about 6 million. So 30k a year. Estimates that put the population of West Africa at 50 million say the region declined to about 40 million by 1900.
Thanks. In my initial revision, I had written "West and West-Central Africa" to account for this, but I modified my comment multiple times for clarity of reading, and this information seems to have been lost in the revisions. That said, you also do have to add at least half a million to that figure, to account for the 15-25% who would've died before even getting onto a ship, so the number from West Africa specifically, due to the TAST, is closer to 7-7.6 million with your downward revision.
Personally, I do not believe 50 million would be an appropriate figure for any period prior to the past century and a half, because I am not convinced the slave trade led to noticeable population decline (in fact, I'd be willing to believe West African populations grew in spite of the slave trade, just much more slowly than it would have. However, the point broadly remains -- a population as low as 15 million could not have sustained a loss as large as that inflicted by the TAST without far more significant ramifications than those for which we have current evidence, and to even reach that population of 15 million people, it would have required a ridiculously high growth rate between 1337 and 1600.
Thanks. In my initial revision, I had written "West and West-Central Africa" to account for this, but I modified my comment multiple times for clarity of reading, and this information seems to have been lost in the revisions. That said, you also do have to add at least half a million to that figure, to account for the 15-25% who would've died before even getting onto a ship, so the number from West Africa specifically, due to the TAST, is closer to 7-7.6 million with your downward revision.
Personally, I do not believe 50 million would be an appropriate figure for any period prior to the past century and a half, because I am not convinced the slave trade led to noticeable population decline (in fact, I'd be willing to believe West African populations grew in spite of the slave trade, just much more slowly than it would have. However, the point broadly remains -- a population as low as 15 million could not have sustained a loss as large as that inflicted by the TAST without far more significant ramifications than those for which we have current evidence, and to even reach that population of 15 million people, it would have required a ridiculously high growth rate between 1337 and 1600.
Comments on the Current Sea Tiles:
I am pretty sure these are being worked on, and are not high priority, but I'd still like to note issues with them anyways in the current setup.
1. The bay of Bengal should be filled in as real life trade routes routinely went through it in various ways (without having to go around the coasts or south of it to traverse it).
Trade Routes in Bay of Bengal circa 1580-1600 (Subrahmanyam, 1990, p. 150):
2. The sea of Okhotsk should be more filled in given its relatively low ocean depth and its fishing and whaling industries being able to not-unsafely operate and traverse the insides of the sea of Okhotsk. Not saying the whole thing should be navigable, just more of it, particularly the sharp edges which make no sense to include.
3. Should probably be navigable, or else it would look quite odd.
4. Sea tiles should be extended to access Disko bay locations, hopefully to be added when the Greenland review is implemented because it would not make sense to not have the most habitable land in Greenland represented in some way. Maxipuchi's (in coordination with YashaCarry and Sulphurologist) posts on the matter of new greenland locations in Disko bay (found here, and their RGOs and Terrain found here) being the benchmark for this extention of sea tiles north.
Also, while not seen in the main screenshot, there should probably be a sea lane between Hawaii and Micronesia, or else you have to use the sea lanes either north or south of them, which doesn't make much sense.
Edit: The Volta do Mar should also be added given its importance for early colonization.
.png){kind=avatar}
.png "Screenshot (143).png")
