What do you guys think of dividing German Prussian into Lower and Upper Prussian cultures? They come from 2 different branches (Low Saxon and Central German).
- 7
- 3
- 2
- 2
- 2
-
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.
Considering on how precise you guys were in this review I have some nitpicking to do about the Teutonic and Livonian states:
1- The diocese of Samaland should have some land they hold east of Konigsberg
2- The location of Marienburg in Livonia should be connected to the location of Wolmar
3- The location of Keinis should belong to the bishopric of Ösel-Wiek and be divided in two with the other half of the island belonging to the Livonian Order
4- The location of Arensburg should cut in two the location of Worlde(which should also be renamed) and those two new locations should belong to the Livonian Order.
1- The diocese of Samaland should have some land they hold east of Konigsberg
2- The location of Marienburg in Livonia should be connected to the location of Wolmar
3- The location of Keinis should belong to the bishopric of Ösel-Wiek and be divided in two with the other half of the island belonging to the Livonian Order
4- The location of Arensburg should cut in two the location of Worlde(which should also be renamed) and those two new locations should belong to the Livonian Order.
- 2
- 1
I mean it's the same, it's a synonym. Which is also why I don't think any Pole would be bothered, so I guess up to the devs.
- 3
It may be because you consider Bukovyna to be part of the Carpathia/Balkan region, but I'd like to repost my feedback about this region, as Pavia reacted twice to my postings as Informative, but there are no changes.
https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...-poland-ruthenia-baltic.1683125/post-29666003
I want to provide some feedback on Bukovyna while the game is still in development. As this region is very often overlooked and simplified but seeing your extensive work on the maps I think my suggestions won't be lost.
I'll start with some general stuff like terrain. Bukovyna and the whole west of Ukraine are quite hilly, with Berda Mount in northern Bukovyna being the highest point of flatland Ukraine. Right now on your map, it seems like the whole region is flatland with a sudden wall of mountains in the west being the Carpathians. That's not accurate and the slope from the flatlands in the West of Zbruch river up to the Carpathians themselves is quite gradual.
Now to the history. To be honest, I was one of the people who were against the 1337 start date, and now with this start date explaining the history of the region is a bit harder as well. Let's start with that:
In 1337 Bukovyna, or, rather a Shypyntsi land at that time, was part of the Kingdom of Ruthenia up to its demise in 1349 with an extensive Ruthenian population. On the map now you depict it as already part of the Kingdom of Moldova with a Vlach majority. That is not entirely correct. After Ruthenia collapsed, and Bukovina passed to Hungary. King Louis I appointed Dragoș, Voivode of Moldavia as his deputy, facilitating the migration of the Romanians from Maramureș and Transylvania. While I believe this may be modeled as an In-game event, the start date should see the region being completely different, with may be a 50-50 split in terms of ethnicity after the event.
And since we are talking about ethnicity, there is no way Vlach culture should be extended way up to the Pokuttia as you show on your map with Kosiv. - It is a part of Halychyna which is part of the Ruthenia and Poland region, the main topic of this forum thread. Yet there are no changes yet.
Next, let's talk about the geography and names. I already mentioned an alternative name for the region "Shypyntsi land" The name region was known from the first written record in 1359 (pretty obvious that it was probably called like that a few decades earlier as well, which corresponds with our tart date) up to 1444 where Bukovyna gradually replaced it. In your map, you suggest the whole region to be called Sucheava. I agree, the province may and should be called Sucheava, but under a condition when it is held by the Moldavians and maybe after the event that moves the capital to the city as happened in 1385-1388.
Also, I think that the province should be split into Shypyntsi or Chern (Northern Bukovyna) and Sucheava (Southern Bukovyna) as they are quite different. For example, Shypynsti was ruled by the Ruthenian law and had autonomy up to 1457.
And here are my suggestions for the locations:
The entirety of Shypyntsi land was divided into 3 Volost:
Khotyn - nothing to change here
Chern (Under Moldavian rule can be renamed Tetina or Cernăuți (New Chern)) - Right now, Chernivtsi lies way too west, while it should govern the basin of the Prut River. Historically Chernivtsi (New Chern) was rebuilt on the higher right bank of the Prut, so one more argument for the hills. Note that I gave some land to the Dorohoi. That is Hertsa Highland, and it was never part of Bukovyna until 1944 and has an overwhelming Romanian majority. Hence it should belong to Dorohoi.
Khmeliv - the region from the Kmelif to the village Karpachiv, governed between the Carpathians and Cheremosh.
These three locations should constitute Northern Bukovyna, or Shypyntsi, while Sucheava, Dorohoi and Campulung should constitute Southern Bukovyna.
North should be Ruthenian majority up no the Resettlement event, after the event Chern should be split, while Hotin and Khmeliv should be affected less.
In the south, Campulung should have a significant Ruthenian minority. Kosiv should not have a Moldavian Majority but a small minority.
Religion is correct. Everyone is orthodox.
Forests seem good as well.
Population-wise I see there are placeholders but I guess that Chern should be at least populated as Hotin if not more. The prominent trade city of Vasyliv on Dniester used to Have 20-40k people alone in the Rus period. So to add up Chern, Hotin, Kmeliv, and villages in the region it can all add up to 80-100k pops. But if that's a balance factor you can tune it down.
Khmeliv is a mountainous region with bad soils where people used to herd sheep, so it should not be very populated and have livestock as a trade good.
Chern's trade goods can also be either sheep or fruits.
This is the third time I'm posting my feedback and I really hope that at least in the Balkan feedback thread you will pay more attention to such a small region of Bukovyna, which is unfortunately very often overlooked in strategy games.
Thank you for your attention.
https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...-poland-ruthenia-baltic.1683125/post-29666003
I want to provide some feedback on Bukovyna while the game is still in development. As this region is very often overlooked and simplified but seeing your extensive work on the maps I think my suggestions won't be lost.
I'll start with some general stuff like terrain. Bukovyna and the whole west of Ukraine are quite hilly, with Berda Mount in northern Bukovyna being the highest point of flatland Ukraine. Right now on your map, it seems like the whole region is flatland with a sudden wall of mountains in the west being the Carpathians. That's not accurate and the slope from the flatlands in the West of Zbruch river up to the Carpathians themselves is quite gradual.
Now to the history. To be honest, I was one of the people who were against the 1337 start date, and now with this start date explaining the history of the region is a bit harder as well. Let's start with that:
In 1337 Bukovyna, or, rather a Shypyntsi land at that time, was part of the Kingdom of Ruthenia up to its demise in 1349 with an extensive Ruthenian population. On the map now you depict it as already part of the Kingdom of Moldova with a Vlach majority. That is not entirely correct. After Ruthenia collapsed, and Bukovina passed to Hungary. King Louis I appointed Dragoș, Voivode of Moldavia as his deputy, facilitating the migration of the Romanians from Maramureș and Transylvania. While I believe this may be modeled as an In-game event, the start date should see the region being completely different, with may be a 50-50 split in terms of ethnicity after the event.
And since we are talking about ethnicity, there is no way Vlach culture should be extended way up to the Pokuttia as you show on your map with Kosiv. - It is a part of Halychyna which is part of the Ruthenia and Poland region, the main topic of this forum thread. Yet there are no changes yet.
Next, let's talk about the geography and names. I already mentioned an alternative name for the region "Shypyntsi land" The name region was known from the first written record in 1359 (pretty obvious that it was probably called like that a few decades earlier as well, which corresponds with our tart date) up to 1444 where Bukovyna gradually replaced it. In your map, you suggest the whole region to be called Sucheava. I agree, the province may and should be called Sucheava, but under a condition when it is held by the Moldavians and maybe after the event that moves the capital to the city as happened in 1385-1388.
Also, I think that the province should be split into Shypyntsi or Chern (Northern Bukovyna) and Sucheava (Southern Bukovyna) as they are quite different. For example, Shypynsti was ruled by the Ruthenian law and had autonomy up to 1457.
And here are my suggestions for the locations:
The entirety of Shypyntsi land was divided into 3 Volost:
Khotyn - nothing to change here
Chern (Under Moldavian rule can be renamed Tetina or Cernăuți (New Chern)) - Right now, Chernivtsi lies way too west, while it should govern the basin of the Prut River. Historically Chernivtsi (New Chern) was rebuilt on the higher right bank of the Prut, so one more argument for the hills. Note that I gave some land to the Dorohoi. That is Hertsa Highland, and it was never part of Bukovyna until 1944 and has an overwhelming Romanian majority. Hence it should belong to Dorohoi.
Khmeliv - the region from the Kmelif to the village Karpachiv, governed between the Carpathians and Cheremosh.
These three locations should constitute Northern Bukovyna, or Shypyntsi, while Sucheava, Dorohoi and Campulung should constitute Southern Bukovyna.
North should be Ruthenian majority up no the Resettlement event, after the event Chern should be split, while Hotin and Khmeliv should be affected less.
In the south, Campulung should have a significant Ruthenian minority. Kosiv should not have a Moldavian Majority but a small minority.
Religion is correct. Everyone is orthodox.
Forests seem good as well.
Population-wise I see there are placeholders but I guess that Chern should be at least populated as Hotin if not more. The prominent trade city of Vasyliv on Dniester used to Have 20-40k people alone in the Rus period. So to add up Chern, Hotin, Kmeliv, and villages in the region it can all add up to 80-100k pops. But if that's a balance factor you can tune it down.
Khmeliv is a mountainous region with bad soils where people used to herd sheep, so it should not be very populated and have livestock as a trade good.
Chern's trade goods can also be either sheep or fruits.
This is the third time I'm posting my feedback and I really hope that at least in the Balkan feedback thread you will pay more attention to such a small region of Bukovyna, which is unfortunately very often overlooked in strategy games.
Thank you for your attention.
Last edited:
- 6
- 1
- 1
@ADV. S. SEPVLCHRI That's indeed part of the Carpathian/Balkans-thread, hence why it hasn't been covered yet (and why the devs bookmarked it as 'helpful'). IF work has started on this region, than it may very well be made in another build of the game. So, we won't see the results for a while to come. Probably after Anatolia and Russia.
I wouldn't worry about it, and posting about it 3 times doesn't work, either.
I wouldn't worry about it, and posting about it 3 times doesn't work, either.
- 1
Good to know, thank you!@ADV. S. SEPVLCHRI That's indeed part of the Carpathian/Balkans-thread, hence why it hasn't been covered yet (and why the devs bookmarked it as 'helpful'). IF work has started on this region, than it may very well be made in another build of the game. So, we won't see the results for a while to come. Probably after Anatolia and Russia.
I wouldn't worry about it, and posting about it 3 times doesn't work, either.
Also, one location I mentioned - Kosiv is part of the Halychyna, It hasn't changed. I really hope that they just want to fix it with Bukovyna. But it's kinda weird that the location from the dedicated region of Ruthenia wasn't redone in the feedback thread of, well, Ruthenia and instead will be worked on with different regions.
But anyway. thanks for confirming, that they do consider it to be part of Carpathia/Balkans once more.
- 1
Maybe because the feedback on Romanian culture hasn't been processed yet. We also don't know if the regional variants (Transylvanian, Wallachian, Moldavian) will be kept or united into a singular 'Vlach' culture (which honestly has my preference) or something else.
But, I digress. That's for the Balkans/Carpathians-thread.
Last edited:
Lechitic is a wider term than Polish, it includes Kashubian, Polabian and a number of other extinct languages. Polish includes only dialects of Polish (here: Greater Polish, Lesser Polish, Mazovian, Silesian).
- 3
- 2
- 2
This is a great piece of work! Quite a lot of changes. Kudos to everyone in Tinto who was involved. And to forum contributors, too.
I'm very pleased to see that you took our feedback seriously and applied it. Even more so since a couple proposals of my own actually made the cut.
Sifting through all of the suggestions must've taken ages...Before I take a closer look, one question immediately comes to mind: Is Warsaw on the right bank of the Vistula? It kinda looks like that (I can't tell from the map), but the location definitely should cover at least some land west of the river, as that's where the city of Warsaw was back then. It only expaned into the right bank in the 1790's.
Other than that, from what I can tell now, I am a little disappointed that Łódź was anachronistically retained, and that the Świętokrzyskie / Holy Cross range between Lesser Poland and Mazovia was omitted from the terrain map. Its landscape is similar to places designated as hills in Western Europe, such as the Ardennes and the Chilterns, and having these hills in otherwise flat Poland would add much-needed tactical variety. Could this still change if the idea put forward by @Sulphurologist (redefinition of terrain types) is considered for adoption?
And now let me dive into the details. See you on the other side!
Last edited:
- 7
- 2
I would also suggest splitting Chern into two locations: actually Chern in the south and Onut in the north. It was a trade settlement on the Dnister river founded by the Galician duke in the XII century and it still exists. So that Shypyntsi//Bukovyna province has at least 4 locations.It may be because you consider Bukovyna to be part of the Carpathia/Balkan region, but I'd like to repost my feedback about this region, as Pavia reacted twice to my postings as Informative, but there are no changes.
https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...-poland-ruthenia-baltic.1683125/post-29666003
I want to provide some feedback on Bukovyna while the game is still in development. As this region is very often overlooked and simplified but seeing your extensive work on the maps I think my suggestions won't be lost.
I'll start with some general stuff like terrain. Bukovyna and the whole west of Ukraine are quite hilly, with Berda Mount in northern Bukovyna being the highest point of flatland Ukraine. Right now on your map, it seems like the whole region is flatland with a sudden wall of mountains in the west being the Carpathians. That's not accurate and the slope from the flatlands in the West of Zbruch river up to the Carpathians themselves is quite gradual.
Now to the history. To be honest, I was one of the people who were against the 1337 start date, and now with this start date explaining the history of the region is a bit harder as well. Let's start with that:
In 1337 Bukovyna, or, rather a Shypyntsi land at that time, was part of the Kingdom of Ruthenia up to its demise in 1349 with an extensive Ruthenian population. On the map now you depict it as already part of the Kingdom of Moldova with a Vlach majority. That is not entirely correct. After Ruthenia collapsed, and Bukovina passed to Hungary. King Louis I appointed Dragoș, Voivode of Moldavia as his deputy, facilitating the migration of the Romanians from Maramureș and Transylvania. While I believe this may be modeled as an In-game event, the start date should see the region being completely different, with may be a 50-50 split in terms of ethnicity after the event.
And since we are talking about ethnicity, there is no way Vlach culture should be extended way up to the Pokuttia as you show on your map with Kosiv. - It is a part of Halychyna which is part of the Ruthenia and Poland region, the main topic of this forum thread. Yet there are no changes yet.
Next, let's talk about the geography and names. I already mentioned an alternative name for the region "Shypyntsi land" The name region was known from the first written record in 1359 (pretty obvious that it was probably called like that a few decades earlier as well, which corresponds with our tart date) up to 1444 where Bukovyna gradually replaced it. In your map, you suggest the whole region to be called Sucheava. I agree, the province may and should be called Sucheava, but under a condition when it is held by the Moldavians and maybe after the event that moves the capital to the city as happened in 1385-1388.
Also, I think that the province should be split into Shypyntsi or Chern (Northern Bukovyna) and Sucheava (Southern Bukovyna) as they are quite different. For example, Shypynsti was ruled by the Ruthenian law and had autonomy up to 1457.
And here are my suggestions for the locations:
The entirety of Shypyntsi land was divided into 3 Volost:
Khotyn - nothing to change here
Chern (Under Moldavian rule can be renamed Tetina or Cernăuți (New Chern)) - Right now, Chernivtsi lies way too west, while it should govern the basin of the Prut River. Historically Chernivtsi (New Chern) was rebuilt on the higher right bank of the Prut, so one more argument for the hills. Not that I gave some land to the Dorohoi. That is Hertsa Highland, and it was never part of Bukovyna until 1944 and has an overwhelming Romanian majority. Hence it should belong to Dorohoi.
Khmeliv - the region from the Kmelif to the village Karpachiv, governed between the Carpathians and Cheremosh.
These three locations should constitute Northern Bukovyna, or Shypyntsi, while Sucheava, Dorohoi and Campulung should constitute Southern Bukovyna.
North should be Ruthenian majority up no the Resettlement event, after the event Chern should be split, while Hotin and Khmeliv should be affected less.
In the south, Campulung should have a significant Ruthenian minority. Kosiv should not have a Moldavian Majority but a small minority.
Religion is correct. Everyone is orthodox.
Forests seem good as well.
Population-wise I see there are placeholders but I guess that Chern should be at least populated as Hotin if not more. The prominent trade city of Vasyliv on Dniester used to Have 20-40k people alone in the Rus period. So to add up Chern, Hotin, Kmeliv, and villages in the region it can all add up to 80-100k pops. But if that's a balance factor you can tune it down.
Khmeliv is a mountainous region with bad soils where people used to herd sheep, so it should not be very populated and have livestock as a trade good.
Chern's trade goods can also be either sheep or fruits.
This is the third time I'm posting my feedback and I really hope that at least in the Balkan feedback thread you will pay more attention to such a small region of Bukovyna, which is unfortunately very often overlooked in strategy games.
Thank you for your attention.
I've actually suggested that in the respective Carpathian thread
- 4
Yeah, maybe they are refining the cultures one after another. The point is Kosiv is not a matter of whether it is Vlach, Moldovan or etc. it is a matter of it being Halychian culture. You see, the river Cheremosh was always a natural border that separated cultures. And while in Bukovyna the population ratio was changing and fluctuating between Vlach and Ruthenian, on the other side of the river, in Pokuttia, it was always stable Ruthenian.
It is true that Moldavia administered Pokuttia briefly in the period of 1388-1498, but neither the time they started administering it fit the start date (it should be the part of Halych Princedom, after which it should as the rest of the princedom get inherited by Poland. After which it was briefly pawned by Polish king to Moldavian prince Peter) nor the span of time it was administered by Moldovans was enough to justify it having Vlach (Moldovan) culture.
That was my point.
- 2
- 1
Yeah, that is nice suggestion as well, even though I'd argue that Vasyliv was more prominent trade location on Dniester river.I would also suggest splitting Chern into two locations: actually Chern in the south and Onut in the north. It was a trade settlement on the Dnister river founded by the Galician duke in the XII century and it still exists. So that Shypyntsi//Bukovyna province has at least 4 locations.
I've actually suggested that in the respective Carpathian thread
P.s. your feedback on Ruthenia is really insightful and detailed, something i couldn't make myself do, appreciate it!
- 2
Inowrocław was similarly occupied, except that it's owned by the Polish king while the Kuyavians go on to have a separate ruler, which does come back after the war (and whose heir gets involved in the power vacuum after Casimir the Great's death). Either way, the current Kuyavia split has 5 provinces, while 14th century Kuyavia had only 4 (looking only west of the Vistula), so the province density could be kept the same just by shifting a province.
- 2
Firstly, superb job and updating the map. I have noticed however some differences in province names and locations i.e. some provinces are named after locations which do not exist. Idk if it is all of them but here is a list with my suggestions for change + some other easy fixes:
- Chęciny to Kielce (or add Chęciny location)
- Szczyrzyc to Oświęcim (or add Szczyrzyca location)
- Częstochowa to Lelów (it was the capital of powiat)
- move Siewierz location from Tesin province to either Kraków or Częstochowa/Lelów province
- Wschowa location should be transfered from Poland to Głogów, Casimir III only took it in 1343
- Włocławek location should be renamed to Brześć Kujawski since it served as the capital of a duchy and later both powiat and voivodeship
- Płock, Rawa and Czersk should be either independent or (if the have to) vassals of Bohemia rather than Poland, Masovian dukes were famously stubborn to recognize Polish king's authority - going back and forth between Poland, Bohemia and Teutonic Order (TO)
- if you will revise the starting war between Poland and TO then Kuyavia and Dobrzyń provinces should be owned directly or as vassals by TO with 'Surrender of Maine' type event for Poland to get them back (when I have some time I will draft a possible event regarding the 1343 Treaty of Kalisz which ended the 'phony war' between Poland and TO)
P.s. Feels good to have some much work put into your homeland. Waiting for what you'll do with Scandinavia feedback, hoping for some Skåne love!
- Chęciny to Kielce (or add Chęciny location)
- Szczyrzyc to Oświęcim (or add Szczyrzyca location)
- Częstochowa to Lelów (it was the capital of powiat)
- move Siewierz location from Tesin province to either Kraków or Częstochowa/Lelów province
- Wschowa location should be transfered from Poland to Głogów, Casimir III only took it in 1343
- Włocławek location should be renamed to Brześć Kujawski since it served as the capital of a duchy and later both powiat and voivodeship
- Płock, Rawa and Czersk should be either independent or (if the have to) vassals of Bohemia rather than Poland, Masovian dukes were famously stubborn to recognize Polish king's authority - going back and forth between Poland, Bohemia and Teutonic Order (TO)
- if you will revise the starting war between Poland and TO then Kuyavia and Dobrzyń provinces should be owned directly or as vassals by TO with 'Surrender of Maine' type event for Poland to get them back (when I have some time I will draft a possible event regarding the 1343 Treaty of Kalisz which ended the 'phony war' between Poland and TO)
P.s. Feels good to have some much work put into your homeland. Waiting for what you'll do with Scandinavia feedback, hoping for some Skåne love!
- 2
- 1
I disagree. Lithuania was once a kingdom when Mindaugas was baptized and crowned. Vytautas later sought to be crowned as well, aiming to elevate Lithuania from a Grand Duchy to a Kingdom, which would have asserted Lithuania’s independence rather than being seen as a junior partner to Poland. After all, a Grand Duchy is often considered a lesser title than a Kingdom.
If Lithuania were to convert to Catholicism on their own terms (without entering a personal union under another power), they should become a Kingdom. If they remain pagan, they can still retain the title of Grand Duchy, or ‘Didžioji Kunigaikštystė,’ as this title was considered equivalent to a kingdom, at least by the locals, before Christianization.
- 3
- 1
I definitely think the areas should be changed to look like this. Pomerelia is optional. The province changes are on the other hand for the most part very good.
Last edited:
- 11
- 3
- 1
- 1
Pomerelia might also include duchies of Słupsk and Sławno, which, since 1307, had been part of Duchy of Pomerelia, which belonged to Poland as a vassal (and, since 1294, directly).
Check this map:
Duchy of Eastern Pomerania - Wikipedia
- 3
- 1
I agree that Baltic should be renamed to Livonia, at least.
- 2