Tinto Maps #12 - 26th of July 2024 - Germany

[Mef]

I really don't understand what you are trying to achieve here. You condescendingly argue that only Ansbach has the right to be represented and that no one else even has the remotest claim to it. Your argument about territorial extent would lead to the removal of most Free City's all over the HRE, as they mostly only 'projected', how you call it, power over a minuscle area. So will you also argue to remove Ulm, Donauwörth, Weißenburg, Kaufbeuren, Memmingen, Augsburg, Ravensburg and so many more because they didn't fill up the map?

The hell? Free Cities are a completely different topic. Fürth was a village with no more than 1000 inhabitants and had no significant territory attached to it.

I find it fascinating that you really want to remove Fürth when there are two possibilities and the devs decided on including it. I don't think they need to change anything here and should rather focus on other places. At least now everyone can fight for Fürth and get claims on it to sour the relations in that area like it historically did.

I want to remove it because it's a perfect candidate for a place that should not be included. It was small, unimportant, controlled no significant territory and its ownership was dubious throughout the centuries. There are SO many random towns exactly like that all over which are rightfully ignored, the only reason that Fürth is on the map is because it's a big city today. And that's not a good enough reason to include it in Project Caesar.

 

[Wenceslaus II.]

Also rename Posázavsko to Posázaví, as that is an actual term.

 

[Palando]

The hell? Free Cities are a completely different topic. Fürth was a village with no more than 1000 inhabitants and had no significant territory attached to it.

I want to remove it because it's a perfect candidate for a place that should not be included. It was small, unimportant, controlled no significant territory and its ownership was dubious throughout the centuries. There are SO many random towns exactly like that all over which are rightfully ignored, the only reason that Fürth is on the map is because it's a big city today. And that's not a good enough reason to include it in Project Caesar.

The area had no major settlements in general. Even Cadolzburg was just a castle with a handful of peasants surrounding it. It's not like Cadolzburg was a thriving metropolis which somehow unrightfully got overshadowed by Fürth. The ownership wasn't that dubious in the 14th century and I don't see why it matters what happened a century after the game starts, as EUV is a sandbox game that will turn and twist in many different ways. There were a thousand border disputes in the HRE all the time which shouldn't come as a surpise to anyone.

There are two options for the devs:

1. Leave Fürth in as a Bamberger territory to represent a town of 1000-2000 people and the surrounding territories owned by Bamberg.
2. Rename Fürth to Cadolzburg to represent a castle with maybe 100-200 people living in it or the village below it to represent the Hohenzollern territories.

EUV also includes the Napoleonic era so I understand their reasoning for why they have included Fürth also from this point of view. It's also a much more flavourful option that will allow them to represent the rivalry between the three parties on the map. Cadolzburg would not allow this, as it was firmly in the hands of the Hohenzollern.

 

[Deutscher Kaiser]

Why is Straßburg part of the Hochstift? The city kicked out the Bishop after the Battle of Hausbergen in 1262 and became an independent municipiality, but Imperial City only under Karl IV.

 

[Mef]

The area had no major settlements in general. Even Cadolzburg was just a castle with a handful of peasants surrounding it. It's not like Cadolzburg was a thriving metropolis which somehow unrightfully got overshadowed by Fürth. The ownership wasn't that dubious in the 14th century and I don't see why it matters what happened a century after the game starts, as EUV is a sandbox game that will turn and twist in many different ways. There were a thousand border disputes in the HRE all the time which shouldn't come as a surpise to anyone.

There are two options for the devs:

1. Leave Fürth in as a Bamberger territory to represent a town of 1000-2000 people and the surrounding territories owned by Bamberg.
2. Rename Fürth to Cadolzburg to represent a castle with maybe 100-200 people living in it or the village below it to represent the Hohenzollern territories.

EUV also includes the Napoleonic era so I understand their reasoning for why they have included Fürth also from this point of view. It's also a much more flavourful option that will allow them to represent the rivalry between the three parties on the map. Cadolzburg would not allow this, as it was firmly in the hands of the Hohenzollern.

Or more accurately:
1. Have a location named after an unimportant town of 1000 people with barely any territory attached to it, meaning that almost the entire location will inaccurately belong to the wrong nation.
2. Have a location named after a castle and the seat of the Burgrave, which was also an administrative division that included most of this location's territory.

I promise you, had this location been named Cadolzburg, there would not be a single person asking for Fürth to be added, just like there is nobody asking for the thousands of irrelevant towns throughout the HRE that aren't represented.

Oh and by the way, it's not like wars were fought over Fürth. It just had sections of the town under different jurisdictions. This can't be represented in the game at all.

 

[PartizaniTetovar]

The saxon culture in nowaday saxony shall be called thuringian and is not related to the the saxons of northern Germany. Just check how the kingdom of Saxony got his name.
Actually the northern german dialects (the lower german dialects) can be called saxon dialects.

I agree with your content designer: the design of the areas too much orientated on nowaday administrative objects. Northrhine westphalia was formed by british after ww2…
Similair thoughts are valid also to other regions especially the balkans where borders and areas are mostly formed by occupiers for centuries long- so far the natural areas tend to be even „unknown“.

 

[Palando]

Or more accurately:
1. Have a location named after an unimportant town of 1000 people with barely any territory attached to it, meaning that almost the entire location will inaccurately belong to the wrong nation.
2. Have a location named after a castle and the seat of the Burgrave, which was also an administrative division that included most of this location's territory.

I promise you, had this location been named Cadolzburg, there would not be a single person asking for Fürth to be added, just like there is nobody asking for the thousands of irrelevant towns throughout the HRE that aren't represented.

You're now again arguing based on how much colour that given overlord had in that given territory but this is not how it works. We don't have a census of that area so it's hard to tell of whom the majority of the inhabitants were subjects of. That territory was literally a swiss cheese and the Hohenzollern had to consolidate many small lordships over the course of time and even then there were major gaps. In the case of the free cities they also went with the major population owners which obviously were those very free cities, so it's not only about area but also about population.

It's also not like the Hohenzollern owned 90% of the territory and Bamberg just 10%.

And no, it's not more accurately. There are many different ways of how to look at it. I understand that you somehow are on a crusade against your own home town (maybe because you don't want your old rival Nürnberg to ever conquer it? I'm joking but that's the only explanation I have for this adamant persistence). You just can't accept that there are two ways of doing this.

 

[foodrig]

Hello!

I want to raise your attention to the Württemberg Area, the Stuttgart location specifically.
During the early 14th century, this area was certainly not all controlled by the counts of Württemberg, in fact many of their biggest adversaries at this time, the swabian free cities.
Arguably, these were more influential at the time than the count of Württemberg, especially the city of Esslingen.
Esslingen was on the winning side of an imperial war fought against Eberhard I. of Württemberg and subsequently administrated the entire Stuttgart area for a few years. The counts of Württemberg only proved more dominant in the following 100 years after the game's start date.

While I understand that the size of locations might not be able to portray Esslingen and Stuttgart as two separate entities due to their geographical vicinity, I think that the game should represent the city of Esslingen (For example through naming the location Esslingen rather than Stuttgart, which Württemberg could later change through an event?) since they are by far the most influential and populous city in the location.

Comparison of population levels of Stuttgart and Esslingen (Tables from Wikipedia):

As you can see, the population of Stuttgart only surpassed that of Esslingen around 1500 (This is an estimate due to lack of further data, of course), which means that for ~150 years from game start, Esslingen is bigger and probably more important than Stuttgart.


The second point I want to make about this region is the name of the Province / Area (I'm still unsure what's what): Strohgäu
The Strohgäu is a comparatively small area to the north of Stuttgart, and the Area it encompasses here is not only much larger than the actual Strohgäu, this actual region of Strohgäu is also just barely inside the Area. I believe a name that describes more of the general area would be better-suited, like "Mittelneckar" or "Neckarbecken".

Here's a map that shows the Strohgäu in its geographical context which I found relatively accurate:

 

[JSU]

Yes.

I hope you have a good macrobuilder mechanic for buildings

 

[FloFX77]

Thank you for the great work Team Tinto!
I am also new to the forum for two small suggestions for my home region.

It's about the Saxe-Wittenberg area between Brandenburg and Meissen.
First of all, Schweinitz is the perfect choice as a location. All alternatives were too insignificant at this time (Annaburg and Seyda).

I would give the location of "Torgau" to Saxe-Wittenberg:

Here are several sources:

Map from 1200
Green: Duchy of Saxe-Wittenberg
Pink: Margravate of Meissen / Lausitz

Map of the 15th century

Map from 1554
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

The second is the raw material in Schweinitz

Sand is an acceptable option.
Alternatively, lumber or wild game can be used for Schweinitz. The name Schweinitz is derived from wild boar.
Over time, the Schweinitz region developed into a regional fruit and wine-growing area. Today it is the easternmost wine-growing region in Germany.

Thank you again for the great work. I look forward to viewing the region.
Best regards from Germany.

Edit: Sorry for the English. I used a translator for better understanding.

 

[MasterPaw]

After some other Tinto Maps, and before some other Tinto Maps.

So it won't be the last one

 

[ibvfteh]

Dynasties:
View attachment 1167613
The dynastical map of the HRE gives a nice picture of the situation explained in the previous one. The von Wittelsbach, de Luxembourg (John of Bohemia is considered of French culture, therefore it uses the French toponymic article ‘de’; if he would change to the German culture, then it would be the ‘von Luxembourg’ dynasty), and von Habsburg cover much of the map; you may note that the Wittelsbach rule over five different countries (Upper Bavaria, Lower Bavaria, the Palatinate of the Rhine, and Brandenburg); while the House of Luxembourg also control the Archbishopric of Trier through Balduin, uncle of King John. Other important dynasties, although in a secondary position, are the Welfen, von Mecklenburg, and Gryf, present in multiple countries to the north; the Askanier, who happen to control half of Upper Saxony, while the rest is in the hands of the von Wettin; and the von Görz, who rule over the Duchy of Tirol and the County of Gorizia.

Gryf - I think "von" should be added as it is a nickname house "of Griffin"

Lippe - "zur" (of in English and de in French) can be added

d' Alsace ' - I think the should be de Lorraine

Welfen - it's a plural form

Askanier - also sounds plural to me, in English it is "of Askania" but I can't found were there any variations with von in German

 

[Mef]

You're now again arguing based on how much colour that given overlord had in that given territory but this is not how it works. We don't have a census of that area so it's hard to tell of whom the majority of the inhabitants were subjects of. That territory was literally a swiss cheese and the Hohenzollern had to consolidate many small lordships over the course of time and even then there were major gaps. In the case of the free cities they also went with the major population owners which obviously were those very free cities, so it's not only about area but also about population.

And how do you represent a territory that is swiss cheese? Not by giving it to those who only ruled a small fraction of it, while ignoring the ones that ruled most of it.

It's also not like the Hohenzollern owned 90% of the territory and Bamberg just 10%.

If we ignore the small parts that belong to Nürnberg or other independent territories (since these obviously can't be represented in detail) and only look at Hohenzollern vs. Bamberg, then it looks pretty close to 90-10:

This is a map you posted earlier with the current location borders overlayed. As you can see, the pink area of Fürth is a much smaller fraction than blue Hohenzollern territory. It really is Nürnberg that gets shafted the most, with the city itself not even being in its location.
If Nürnberg was extended a bit to the west, the renamed Cadolzburg location would represent Ansbach territory perfectly, while Fürth itself is so small that it can be ignored like all the other yellow independent villages.

And no, it's not more accurately. There are many different ways of how to look at it. I understand that you somehow are on a crusade against your own home town (maybe because you don't want your old rival Nürnberg to ever conquer it? I'm joking but that's the only explanation I have for this adamant persistence). You just can't accept that there are two ways of doing this.

I am not on a crusade, I just want the game to represent history accurately. Fürth is foremost a city of the 19th century and just didn't have any relevance that would justify its inclusion in a region that already has so many different territories that could be represented.

I certainly did not expect to be arguing about Fürth in relation to Project Caesar, but here we are I guess.

 

[Jiří IV.]

Hello, I have a few comments on the map of Moravia:
1. The name of the location Přeřov should be Přerov.
2. Maybe consider adding the location of Kroměříž (roughly between Přerov and Hradiště), as it was an important town not only as the second seat of the Olomouc bishops, but also important location for the military later in the timeline.

 

[Palando]

Thank you for the great work Team Tinto!
I am also new to the forum for two small suggestions for my home region.

It's about the Saxe-Wittenberg area between Brandenburg and Meissen.
First of all, Schweinitz is the perfect choice as a location. All alternatives were too insignificant at the time (Annaburg and Seyda).

I would give the location of "Torgau" to Saxe-Wittenberg:
View attachment 1168517

View attachment 1168518

Here are several sources:
View attachment 1168519

View attachment 1168521
Map from 1200
Green: Duchy of Saxe-Wittenberg
Pink: Margravate of Meissen / Lausitz

View attachment 1168522
Map of the 15th century

View attachment 1168520
Map from 1554
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

The second is the raw material in Schweinitz
View attachment 1168524

Sand is an acceptable option.
Alternatively, wood or wild game can be used for Schweinitz. The name Schweinitz is derived from wild boar.
Over time, the Schweinitz region developed into a regional fruit and wine-growing area. Today it is the easternmost wine-growing region in Germany.

Thank you again for the great work. I look forward to viewing the region.
Best regards from Germany.

The County of Torgau was ruled by the Counts of Torgau (Bodo of Torgau in 1337) until the mid of the 15th century. They held all of the territory around the city of Torgau. They died out in the early 15th century.

This is why I have made the following map proposal (for original see here: https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...h-of-july-2024-germany.1696699/#post-29791531 )

 

[Coolerfratz]

Askanier - also sounds plural to me, in English it is "of Askania" but I can't found were there any variations with von in German

I think Askanier is the right choice here and not something with von (der Askanier --> die Askanier)

 

[Em Ay Ef]

Their problem is they seem to base topography off how many meters above sea level something is, which is the wrong way to view it. How an locaiton is compared to what's around it is what should matter.

And even this is inconsistently applied, as Johan mentioned a cap of 500 m above sea level for flatlands, while the Chilterns don't even reach 300 m.

Hopefully this will be remedied with community feedback such as @SulphurAeron's impressive solution, and maybe Tinto can be convinced to introduce rolling terrain as a softer tier between flatlands and hills.

 

[Em Ay Ef]

Noticed that there's no Mannheim on the map. Which kind of makes sense at the start of the game, but I hope for an event describing its founding as the Palatinate's glorious new capital!

 

[Mef]

So I tried making a province and area map of Germany. I'll post it, but I'm not really happy with it.

While some provinces are no brainers, there are many that are questionable and sometimes you basically have to make something up, because the historical province (e.g. Oberbayern) is just way too big.
I'm certainly not 100% familiar with all the regions in Germany so there are probably better options for a lot of these names.
I've also opted to replace the modern Oberfranken and Mittelfranken with the contemporary Hohenzollern naming scheme, but I'm not sure if that's appropriate for generic provinces.

 

[Em Ay Ef]

Basically from this
View attachment 1168259
to this:
View attachment 1168260

Yeah, bring back the Cologne Bay!