Another thread about Brazilian locations

[FleetingRain]

Know what, you're right. I did put Ponta Porã in Corumbá province after all, I'll edit the map later.

EDIT-- just saw in Indochina TM that Yunnan area has 28 provinces lmao, I'll be doing some area consolidation here...

 

[FleetingRain]

Ok, doubleposting to say treaties are very stupid and I hate them. I also think I'm going to just focus on 1839 here, as in, if it was Brazilian territory by then, it's part of this map now. I may redraw the border locations to account for prior border changes, however.

This means that: Roraima and Amapá will be fully Brazilian; I might redraw the Acre wasteland; Upper Japurá, Maraã (Tefé) and the westernmost part of Rio Negro province will not be Brazilian anymore; and Ponta Porã (Corumbá) will go to Paraguay. I will still need to research what to do with southernmost third of Vila Bela province (Cuiabá) and whatever the hell is going on in the South (my 1750 understanding of the map really doesn't make sense lmao...). Stupid country, why did I not hyperfixate on Japan?

EDIT-- oh I completely misunderstood the treaty lmao, it was the Peperi-Guaçu River, not Piquiri River. The Southern borders make perfect sense now, it's just a matter of how accurate I want to be with the location borders considering the hydrography of the region. No need to split Rio Grande do Sul area either, as everything is under is territory by 1839 anyway. So I guess only Vila Bela is left.

 

[POD012]

Oh, this is wonderful stuff, my guy!

And her I was playing at something like this just for my state...

Location density is obviously low, but there's not much getting around that, alas - much of the interior was barely settled before the late 1800s-mid 1900s. The effort of getting them back to time-appropriate names will be a mess, but this is real good work.

 

[Braziler]

View attachment Capitanias-02.png
Interpretação literal dos tratados, excluindo a questão de Roraima. Gall projection.

 

[VectorialZombie]

As it happened already in the other thread for Brazil, this map of yours does not treat wastelands as game objects. For example all the wastelands you drew in Ceará fail to actually block anything, all locations still have access to all their neighboring locations unobstructed and therefore the wastelands are simply cosmetic and have no use being drawn at all. The only 'wastelands' allowed to be only cosmetic are lakes and such afaik.

 

[Edungeon]

Remember that to have a location be colonized you need at least 1.000 pops in it, so there is no use to have lots of locations in reagions that have never had a big density of population because in that way you are encouraging ahistorical populations

 

[FleetingRain]

View attachment 1215711
Interpretação literal dos tratados, excluindo a questão de Roraima. Gall projection.

I think I'm just gonna steal this for the locations, thank you.

As it happened already in the other thread for Brazil, this map of yours does not treat wastelands as game objects. For example all the wastelands you drew in Ceará fail to actually block anything, all locations still have access to all their neighboring locations unobstructed and therefore the wastelands are simply cosmetic and have no use being drawn at all. The only 'wastelands' allowed to be only cosmetic are lakes and such afaik.

I recall always seeing some smallish wastelands in Tinto Maps (example in the Steppes), which is why I thought cosmetic wastelands were fair game. If they're all lakes, then that's an issue. I'll have a second look at them, in that case.

Remember that to have a location be colonized you need at least 1.000 pops in it, so there is no use to have lots of locations in reagions that have never had a big density of population because in that way you are encouraging ahistorical populations

I had this in mind, yes. Still, considering how dense Hokkaido is (and how they utterly ignored everyone complaining about it...), I think the location map also accounts for "alt-history" development. Sure, Hokkaido had only 50k-ish people by the 1870s, but what if the Japanese colonized it earlier/heavier? The land had potential. Same thing here, I did make later locations bigger than the coast, but I could not just make them a gigantic blob or act like, say, Oeste Paulista was uninhabitable, even the Steppes have some decent density. That, and the west of Brazil is actually smack in the middle of the continent, it gets hard keeping size differences acceptable when you have to account for Bolivia/Peru/etc.

 

[FleetingRain]

Quick update:

I added a couple provinces in Rio Grande do Sul and Mato Grosso to help with the old treaty borders, and also tried to take into account the borders in Amazon (impossible to do 100% right because of the actual location of the settlements, but at least the borders are there). For now I'm keeping the cosmetic wastelands, but I might just extend a couple of them when the Brazil TM drops, if only to justify them a bit better.

Rio Negro province now has a bunch more provinces and got, uh, thinner. I might try to get the provinces in west Grão-Pará thinner too; my initial idea was that locations covered by the Amazon River should be allowed to be chonkier, but who knows. I think Santarém and Monte Alegre will get split, even if ahistorically, to favor gameplay/thinner locations (so Faro and Aveiro can get smaller). Might do something to Porto de Moz too, to save Altamira.

Speaking of Altamira/Aveiro, have you noticed how weird the Brazilian map is with dead-ends? It seems to me that South America, specially Brazil, is the only continent with those snaking provinces which lead nowhere. I wonder why that happens.

 

[FleetingRain]

Another update:

Lol. Lmao, even.

I've tried to do a very rough approximation with this area calculator and it seems it covers almost half Australia:

This leaves us with 4 million sq km for 437 locations. Brazil is roughly 8.5 sq km but there's that enormous Amazon in the way. If we pretend it's about one-third of the country then a same-density Brazil would have uhhhh 619 locations. So Braziler will be closer to their desired density than I will. However, Brazil will probably have one or two or three SoPs, and I'm positively sure it had more people than Australia in the colonial period, so that would justify even more locations.

Regardless, we now finally know how dense they want colonial regions to be.

 

[KarlosGeek]

Very glad to see the brazilian community getting together to discuss the topic of our region in detail. The Tinto Maps of South America posted today was such a nightmare I couldn't believe my eyes, no care was put into the history of major trade and population centers in the South, Southeast and Northeast regions of Brazil. So much rich history of São Paulo, Minas Gerais, Rio de Janeiro, etc, were NOT kept in mind when making the entire Mata Atlântica a wasteland.

I'd love to see feedback like this really be taken to heart by the folks at Paradox Interactive because it's a disservice to a game that aims to represent history to so throughly ignore and brush aside centuries of history of the colonization and exploitation of Brazil by the Portuguese by simply painting over large chunks of our borders as uninhabitable wastelands when they very clearly weren't. Brazilian history is not covered at all internationally and it shows, that this even needs to be said feels like a joke - the 5th largest and 7th most populous country in the world needs to beg for its colonial history be shown with accuracy, because "who cares about South America?".

We do, damn it. We, the people that live here, that known our own history, that know our language draws so much from the indigenous languages, that know what was happened to our Mata Atlântica and to our gold and precious mineral. One quick google search of brazilian population density would show them that the Mata Atlântica is and has always been habitable - by the natives, by the portuguese colonizers, by conquistadors. Thank God that the brazilian community has spoken in unison on the matter, now I pray that we are heard.

 

[pepsibassman]

I'd love to see feedback like this really be taken to heart by the folks at Paradox Interactive because it's a disservice to a game that aims to represent history to so throughly ignore and brush aside centuries of history of the colonization and exploitation of Brazil by the Portuguese by simply painting over large chunks of our borders as uninhabitable wastelands when they very clearly weren't. Brazilian history is not covered at all internationally and it shows, that this even needs to be said feels like a joke - the 5th largest and 7th most populous country in the world needs to beg for its colonial history be shown with accuracy, because "who cares about South America?".

We do, damn it. We, the people that live here, that known our own history, that know our language draws so much from the indigenous languages, that know what was happened to our Mata Atlântica and to our gold and precious mineral. One quick google search of brazilian population density would show them that the Mata Atlântica is and has always been habitable - by the natives, by the portuguese colonizers, by conquistadors. Thank God that the brazilian community has spoken in unison on the matter, now I pray that we are heard.

It's honestly astounding how little care was put into the region on Project Cesar. And the worst part is that i'm not even a little bit surprised. they did something similar in EU4 in late 2020/early 2021. Mostly noone care then. Glad to see more people (that I'm assuming are also brazilians) being more vocal this time.

 

[Pavía]

It's honestly astounding how little care was put into the region on Project Cesar. And the worst part is that i'm not even a little bit surprised. they did something similar in EU4 in late 2020/early 2021. Mostly noone care then. Glad to see more people (that I'm assuming are also brazilians) being more vocal this time.

I'm sorry to say, but this is not true. All the locations that we've put in Brazil have native names, there are up to 87 different cultures in the region, and there are several religions portraying native beliefs. We've really put a lot of effort into portraying the rich diversity of Pre-Colonial Brazil.

That said, our design of Mata Atlàntica was a proposal to portray that Pre-Colonial situation as better as possible. We may have had to think a bit more about the situation in the Colonial period, so the Brazilian community would find the region way more recognizable, and closer to what they think that it should play like in Project Caesar. It's something that has been clearly communicated to us, and we will do our best to review the region, with the help, feedback, and support that the Brazilian community gives us.

Thank God that the brazilian community has spoken in unison on the matter, now I pray that we are heard.

Of course! That's the reason why we've been doing Tinto Maps, in the first place. And we've already shown how we're applying the feedback we receive for the game, in the Tinto Maps Feedback posts.

 

[FleetingRain]

I'm sorry to say, but this is not true. All the locations that we've put in Brazil have native names, there are up to 87 different cultures in the region, and there are several religions portraying native beliefs. We've really put a lot of effort into portraying the rich diversity of Pre-Colonial Brazil.

That said, our design of Mata Atlàntica was a proposal to portray it as better as possible the Pre-Colonial situation. We may have had to think a bit more about the colonial situation, so the Brazilian community would find the region way more recognizable than what they think that it should play like in Project Caesar. It's something that has been clearly communicated to us, and we will do our best to review the region, with the help, feedback, and support that the Brazilian community gives us.


Of course! That's the reason why we've been doing Tinto Maps, in the first place. And we've already shown how we're applying the feedback we receive for the game, in the Tinto Maps Feedback posts.

Yeah, kudos for getting all those native names for the locations, I know how hard it can get for so many places.

 

[pepsibassman]

I'm sorry to say, but this is not true. All the locations that we've put in Brazil have native names, there are up to 87 different cultures in the region, and there are several religions portraying native beliefs. We've really put a lot of effort into portraying the rich diversity of Pre-Colonial Brazil.

That said, our design of Mata Atlàntica was a proposal to portray that Pre-Colonial situation as better as possible. We may have had to think a bit more about the situation in the Colonial period, so the Brazilian community would find the region way more recognizable, and closer to what they think that it should play like in Project Caesar. It's something that has been clearly communicated to us, and we will do our best to review the region, with the help, feedback, and support that the Brazilian community gives us.

I apreciate native names, but, at the end of the day, they're meaningless if the map is overall a bad representation.

I mean, I know there was A design philosophy in place when the team made the map this way, but let's be real, most of the setup for the region (not considering the wastelands in the Mata Atlântica, as that is a can of worms on its own) is literally the same as EU4. just four tags somewhat spread around the brazilian coast, while some regions with far fewer population that had just been colonized (new zealand, for example) have more than double the entirety of the brazilian region.

It's the same critique I had 4 years ago on EU4, bias and anglocentrism. I just hope this time said criticisms aren't dismissed.

 

[Pavía]

I apreciate native names, but, at the end of the day, they're meaningless if the map is overall a bad representation.

I mean, I know there was A design philosophy in place when the team made the map this way, but let's be real, most of the setup for the region (not considering the wastelands in the Mata Atlântica, as that is a can of worms on its own) is literally the same as EU4. just four tags somewhat spread around the brazilian coast, while some regions with far fewer population that had just been colonized (new zealand, for example) have more than double the entirety of the brazilian region.

It's the same critique I had 4 years ago on EU4, bias and anglocentrism. I just hope this time said criticisms aren't dismissed.

1. The people that has worked in Brazil for Project Caesar was not part of the EU4 team, 4 years ago.
2. It's difficult to be Anglo-centric, when none of the devs that worked on the region are natives to the Anglosphere.

We may had had other design flaws, for sure, but not the ones you're pointing to.

 

[Braziler]

I don't think it's sloppiness, and a lack of data. I would venture to say that of all colonial countries, Brazil is the one that least studies original peoples.

From what I understand, the interpretation is that there were no native people living in the Atlantic Forest areas at the beginning of the game. Right? But that's not true, at least most of the cities founded already had indigenous villages before.

Look this map of this site.

I don't know, but much of thr names show at the TM aren't natives, for example "Telha" is portuguese and mean "tile".

 

[Hippolyta1]

There's already a thread on Brazil, but I was doing my own thing before Braziler posted his thread and I wouldn't want to derail it, so here it is.

I started doing this map because I very much disliked the few bits we'd seen of Brazil (the religion mapmode with the sprawling wastelands and the area map with the... peculiar setups), so I decided to start one from scratch: I took the 2022 Brazilian Map of Municipalities from IBGE (Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics, in English) and began color-coding every single municipality, one by one, by its date of creation/foundation/settlement/partition/etc. I'd then organize them more or less on how they would be like in the time period (I chose 1839 as the end date for this), and from this I properly split them by origin and gameplay purposes.

It was a very stupid job. But is there a more powerful feeling than being correct on the internet?

Spoiler: Locations

Spoiler: Provinces

Spoiler: Areas

Dude, you did that within a day?? You maps look very good! You are the real MVP!

O Brasil lhe agradece!

 

[FleetingRain]

Dude, you did that within a day?? You maps look very good! You are the real MVP!

O Brasil lhe agradece!

Thank you but absolutely not, it took me 4ish months, it was before today's Tinto Maps dropped.

Speaking of which:

"Bro this is illegible" yes, but this is just to show I got to overlay my map over Tinto's, which means I can properly draw over it now.

Overall, I'm seeing a weird imbalance. Pará and Rio Negro have a bit more locations than I expected, and then there's Rondônia with 27!!! Like, this is a region far from the main political/economic centers which was mostly colonized following rivers. There's a lot of natives here, yes, but if there are no tags nor SoPs here, do we need that many locations? I don't think so.

Then, on the other hand, you have the Northeast. It's not, like, *bad*, but it's pretty light in density. I'd expect it, specially its coast, to have a lot more locations than the Amazon lands.

Midwest has a "fair" amount of locations (I'd add a bit more tbh), so it's more of a matter of defining its wastelands. I don't think the entire Pantanal should be a wasteland, in example, and I'm not sure the north of Mato Grosso should have all those locations (same issue as Rondônia imo). Also, I can tell you already the locations of Para, Apyawa and Tapirape should probably be wastelands; the Portuguese settlers did not cross the Araguaia River for a reason. Not sure what to do with the Xingu River: imo it should cross wastelands, but I understand there are people who believe Kuhikugu should make contact with the Lower Amazon people.

Southeast and South are a mess because of wastelands and should be completely revamped. In fact, the fact they're less dense than the Amazon is frankly ridiculous. This is the area that should get the most attention in the feedback.

I unfortunately think I'll have to redraw lines over a map at 3AM for days *again*, so I'm not doing it today. But I really hope devs will see my (and everyone else's) future feedback with an open mind, because I think Brazil/South America will need a lot of work.

 

[LordOfAnts]

Regarding the Xingu River, it's a tough call, considering how isolated the Kuikuro were when compared to the European settlers (first contact was only made in the 18th century).

I would argue in favor of drawing proper locations around the Xingu River though, mainly for gameplay and representation reasons. Though the Europeans themselves wouldn't reach the Xingu valley through the north, the Kuikuro would have had much more contact with the people of the Amazon, and I think it's only fair we give them that option in game as well.
Considering gameplay, I am strongly in favor of making the Kuikuro into a proper tag - current studies indicate they were even more centralized and socially organized than the Marajó people (which I argue should also be settled tags). Adding the Xingu as a traversible river would then make their gameplay ever so slightly more interesting for whoever is insane enough to play in such a remote region ^^

The arguments in favor of not adding the Xingu River make more sense to me if the Kuikuro are kept as a SoP, though this would depress me.

 

[Hippolyta1]

Thank you but absolutely not, it took me 4ish months, it was before today's Tinto Maps dropped.

Speaking of which:

"Bro this is illegible" yes, but this is just to show I got to overlay my map over Tinto's, which means I can properly draw over it now.

Overall, I'm seeing a weird imbalance. Pará and Rio Negro have a bit more locations than I expected, and then there's Rondônia with 27!!! Like, this is a region far from the main political/economic centers which was mostly colonized following rivers. There's a lot of natives here, yes, but if there are no tags nor SoPs here, do we need that many locations? I don't think so.

Then, on the other hand, you have the Northeast. It's not, like, *bad*, but it's pretty light in density. I'd expect it, specially its coast, to have a lot more locations than the Amazon lands.

Midwest has a "fair" amount of locations (I'd add a bit more tbh), so it's more of a matter of defining its wastelands. I don't think the entire Pantanal should be a wasteland, in example, and I'm not sure the north of Mato Grosso should have all those locations (same issue as Rondônia imo). Also, I can tell you already the locations of Para, Apyawa and Tapirape should probably be wastelands; the Portuguese settlers did not cross the Araguaia River for a reason. Not sure what to do with the Xingu River: imo it should cross wastelands, but I understand there are people who believe Kuhikugu should make contact with the Lower Amazon people.

Southeast and South are a mess because of wastelands and should be completely revamped. In fact, the fact they're less dense than the Amazon is frankly ridiculous. This is the area that should get the most attention in the feedback.

I unfortunately think I'll have to redraw lines over a map at 3AM for days *again*, so I'm not doing it today. But I really hope devs will see my (and everyone else's) future feedback with an open mind, because I think Brazil/South America will need a lot of work.

You really did some great work there! I think Paradox should outright use your map, or at the very least heavily base their rework on it.

Now, the South and the Southeast are the main problem the official map currently has and that's definitely where Paradox should focus the most. It makes no sense at all to make wastelands there! Okay, at 1337 it was all Mata Atlantica, but it wasn't impassable. The Portuguese and the Bandeirantes did cross it often and a lot of natives did live there before it. Then throughout a mere couple of centuries, the Portuguese chop most of the Mata Atlantica down while selling the exotic wood (Pau Brasil, a wood from which the name of our country comes from) to Europe for a hefty profit and then settle on the fertile deforested lands.

The Southeast and the South should be the most fertile and location-dense regions of Brazil.
In Minas Gerais there should be a lot of Gold. After all, we had a big Gold Rush in the area, which greatly contributed for the colonization efforts.
In Rio Grande do Sul there should be lots of livestock and wheat (or perhaps locations that turn into those resources once the Europeans arrive and bring European crops and animals)

For any Brazilian person, seeing the Southeast of Brazil being depicted as a wasteland sounds just as stupid as it would be for an European to see France as a huge freaking desert!