Tinto Maps #6 Great Britain & Ireland Feedback

[AntarcticRanger]

I think the game would represent this fine by having the new protestant Anglo-Irish settlers just be English pops, who aren't in the Irish culture group.

I think while better than nothing, this isn't a great fit. The Anglo-Irish, the "New English", were very much their own thing. They often self identified as Irish for example, in a way that's reminiscent of Germans identifying as Prussian. This identification went pretty far.

For an anecdotal example, I am descended from Anglo-Irish that settled in the USA, but at some point they forgot about the "Anglo" part of that. When my grandfather went digging to learn more about his family history, it was a rude awakening to find out that we "weren't actually Irish". But I do still have an Irish last name.

The Anglo-Irish also were just not at home in England, feeling culture shock visiting and just generally being far more at home in Ireland. They sound to me exactly like a colonial culture, like Canadian or Australian or whatever.

I would prefer either they are simulated by an new emergent colonial culture, or they are simulated by Protestant Anglo-Irish pops in game. In this case the "Old English" Norman Irish are represented by Catholic Anglo-Irish pops, when they aren't assimilated into Gaelic Irish entirely.

 

[riadach]

And Dynasties:
View attachment 1296947

Just one thing. There's no reason why dynasty names shouldn't be capitalised when beginning with Mac, in the same way they are with Ó.

 

[SaintDaveUK]

Just one thing. There's no reason why dynasty names shouldn't be capitalised when beginning with Mac, in the same way they are with Ó.

Noted, it seems about 50:50 whether "mac" is shown upper or lowercase in articles about historical Gaelic people, so I went for the style which I think is a bit easier to read.

 

[natevandrake]

I think the problem would come out that Lyme or Bridport had declined in prominence from their earlier positions under the Anglo-Saxons by this period, whereas Weymouth and Dorchester became the two principal Areas of South Dorset in this period, especially under the Plantagenets and Tudors where Dorchester became (and remains) the County's central economic hub/ administrative centre and Weymouth its principal port (until Poole rose to prominence). So geography aside I would much rather see Weymouth and Dorchester as the two named locations as it much better represents the power structure of the county, particularly if any are to be represented as towns as opposed to settlements.

The naming of Dorchester as the location also represents the traditional and current parliamentary and political divisions where Dorchester remains the centre of the west Dorset constituency (if only economically and politically rather than geographically),that also encompasses the Lyme and Bridport areas. Dorchester was also historically the principal market town for the County, as well as the primary location of the County's weaving industries up to the 1900s.

Though of course Dorset could be split into five regions with Dorchester forming a central region, to bring the county up to a total of five, which is inline with Devon's size to the west and Somerset to the North. As Dorset currently despite being geographically similar in size is only given 4 locations.

I can't fault your argument of historical and economical importance. Functionally speaking they should both be represented over towns like Wareham Wool Bridport etc. I think my argument just boils down to aesthetic opinion, I don't think it's possible on the current map scale to divide the county up visually accurately - like following the modern parliamentary lines without moving Dorchester 20 miles west. And in my head canon I would rather see a Dorchester in the south whose population also included Weymouth. But that's just my opinion I don't think there's a right answer.

And I kind of based my suggestion on Bridport/Lyme on the fact that Shaftesbury exists as it's own area and it's not relatively more important in modern times (smaller population than Bridport).

Either way I guess I can just rename it when I start a game.

 

[dw70676]

Was that beyond the pale comment a double entendre given the pale of Ireland?

Glad someone noticed

 

[riadach]

Noted, it seems about 50:50 whether "mac" is shown upper or lowercase in articles about historical Gaelic people, so I went for the style which I think is a bit easier to read.

There's a historical style where the immediate patronymic is listed as mac but the family name is listed as Mac, which probably accounts for the confusion.


So Eoghan mac Carthaigh is Eoghan whose father's name is Carthach. But Eoghan Mac Carthaigh is Eoghan of the Mac Carthaigh family.

So a Domhnall who is son of Eoghan Mac Carthaigh would be Domhnall mac Eoghain Mhic Carthaigh.

 

[riadach]

I think the game would represent this fine by having the new protestant Anglo-Irish settlers just be English pops, who aren't in the Irish culture group. On this topic, too: I really want to push back against the Gaelic Irish, Norse-Gaels Highlanders sharing any "British" cultural group with the English. These groups were culturally extremely different and constant headaches to administer through the entire timeline, and an England/Great Britain player SHOULD be forced to make the decision to either integrate them, go out of their way to accept them, or even (as ended up happening with the Irish plantations and Highland clearances) displace and disempower them entirely. Giving them any measure of acceptance from the start is a huge mistake, and frankly there should be significant animosity between the groups at the game start.

The Welsh should probably also be heavily discriminated against initially too – Wales had only been properly conquered in the last 50-60 years, and was subject to massive repression and restriction. Both the Marcher Lordships and the Principality of Wales saw themselves as controlling the rebellious and alien Welsh to protect the English, rather than governing them. Policies such as the "Ring of Iron" - fortress-cities across Northern Wales populated with English, Norman, and Flemish settlers with the express purpose of restricting Welsh power, and parts of Southern Wales – from Little England in Pembrokeshire, to Gower and the Vale of Glamorgan in Glamorgan, to much of Monmouthshire – were deliberately settled en masse with the purpose taking fertile lowlands from the Welsh and setting up outposts of natural support from the Marcher Lords. There would be regular mass rebellions by the Welsh against English rule, and the Crown responded not with increased tolerance, but by making the Welsh second-class citizens, banning them from owning weapons, living in cities, and holding office. It would only be under a Welsh dynasty that these restrictions would be lifted with the Laws in Wales Acts 1535 and 1542, integrating Wales into the English legal system. At the same time, this banned the Welsh language from legal and official settings entirely: it was an attempt at assimilation, rather than tolerance. Perhaps a decision that would inherit the Principality of Wales and abolish the Marcher Lordships (regardless of how they're modelled - they do need to be modelled, though) could add the Welsh culture to the British culture group, if possible.

The relations between England and her Celtic subjects in the late medieval and early modern eras were very unusual within Europe at the time, and bear more similarity to colonial dynamics. This only makes sense once you understand the English saw themselves as far more distinct from the Welsh and Gaels than they did from the French, Flemish and Dutch, or even Germans and Scandinavians. I think if you give the English and Welsh/Gaels any measure of initial tolerance or cultural similarity, you miss out on a lot of history.

Another option could be called the Old English settlers Hiberno-Normans and the New English settlers Anglo-Irish.

 

[phantasmAgaric]

Wales - Feedback and Suggestions Thread: View attachment 1299137View attachment 1299138
I'm sorry if this thread is a bit late or a bit long, but I just want to say that I am loving the changes so far, they are absolutely amazing and have added loads in the way of flavour. I 100% feel this may be the best representation of the UK and Ireland in a map game, so thank you to the devs.

I have a few more suggestions on this update like I had with the previous one last year, mainly in terms of locations, the shape of the Principality and impassables which I'll post below. Any comments within is no critique at all, just a few views I believe may help as feedback for any developer reading!

On a side note, I also feel that the Marcher Lords should still 100% be added for Wales. It should be noted that the Bohemians have their marches in Silesia, France has their vassal swarm also. These islands have their equivalent by way of the Welsh and Scottish Marches and I feel these should be added as they were with both examples above. If the decision is made that the vassals should not be a map based entity such as the Principality, then I believe they should at least be Extraterritorial Countries such as the clans of the Japanese Shogunate, potentially with an International organisation for the Council of Wales and the Marches at some point later in the game.

Number of Locations and Proposed Changes:
The entire Ulster region (including Cavan, Monaghan and Donegal) and Wales are approximately the same size both in real life and ingame. Whereas ulster contains some 27 locations, Wales only contains 19, the most sparsely populated of which are in the South, home to the historically significant grouping of populations, even prior to the transfer of populations to the Valleys for work purposes during the industrial revolution (though primarily focused around Carmarthen, Pembroke, Monmouth, Abergavenny, Grosmont, Caldicot, Neath, Newport, Caerleon, Swansea and Cardiff rather than the valleys).
View attachment 1299066
Ulster vs Wales locations

It has been noted by Dave however that this has been upped to 22 so far with additions in Powys and Carmarthenshire. There should therefore be room to expand on south Wales further even if slightly, to maintain a similar balance of locations, as the divide between North and South Wales is somewhat stark too, with the North having 6 locations to the South’s 4. I would therefore suggest the separation of Swansea into Swansea and Neath, with Swansea representing more the Lordship of Gower than the borders of the modern county.
View attachment 1299067
Newer location map as of this thread shown by Dave

I would suggest 4 locations to even the playing field somewhat, add more flavour to South Wales and enable more interesting movements, these locations would interact with impassables which would be delved into in another section of this post.

South Wales - Swansea/Neath Split and a Newport Location
Firstly, as South Wales is seemingly the least populated, I would suggest a split of Swansea into Swansea and Neath, following the borders of the Lordship of Gower and remnants of the location being assigned to Neath, representing the density of the South better.

View attachment 1299072
Swansea Neath Split

Secondly, I would suggest once again the creation of a location for Newport which eats into the current locations of Caerphilly, Monmouth and Cardiff, representing in part not only the historic nature of the city but also the Stafford Lordship of Gwynllwg and the Mortimer Lordship of Caerleon as well as once again representing the density of South Wales better.

View attachment 1299073
New Location of Newport/Caerleon

The newly proposed South Wales therefore would look somewhat like this, with the Brecon Beacons subject to further discussion in the impassables section.

View attachment 1299120View attachment 1299121
Existing vs proposed South Wales


West Wales (1) - Location of Narberth/Laugharne/Llansteffan
Firstly in West Wales, I would propose once again a location representing either Narberth or Laugharne or Llansteffan as a means to better reflect the nature of the Landsker line as well as a more accurate version of the borders of the Principality of Wales, eating into the Pembroke location somewhat as well as Fishguard (to which Carmarthen should also gain land in). The addition of this location should ideally be alongside the better representation of the three river confluence of the Towy estuary. Carmarthen had ample access to the ocean at the time, being a flourishing port town with access to the ocean via the Towy river, guarded upstream by Llansteffan Castle

View attachment 1299078View attachment 1299081
1) Carmarthen Port located to the bottom of the above image, 2) The View of the Towy estuary from Llansteffan Castle

View attachment 1299087View attachment 1299088
Existing as shown by Dave via this thread vs Proposed
(Note that the new location of Narberth/Laugharne/Llansteffan eats into Fishguard slightly in the top right, whilst the location of Carmarthen likewise eats into the Fishguard location, representing the Newcastle Emlyn region of the Teifi Valley controlled by Carmarthenshire for quite some time and redistributing location size more evenly)

In adding this location, the boundary of the invading Flemish/English settlers becomes clearer, as the Landsker line formed as a clear and stark contrast between the communities located either side for many centuries. Such an inclusion would also enable a more dynamic movement in the region, as with a clearer Tywi estuary, the importance of Carmarthen is exemplified, any access west or east would first require travelling through Carmarthen, elongating walking distance slightly between Pembroke and Carmarthen as well as forming more coherent traditional boundaries of both Pembrokeshire and Carmarthenshire respectively.

I also note that Carmarthen is no longer shown as being part of the principality of Wales via the latest update, the redesign of the borders should enable a more accurate depiction of the principality, with the Carmarthen location being a critical location to the southern regions.


West Wales (2) - Correction of the Ceredigion/Carmarthenshire border
This one may be somewhat small, but necessary to accurately depict the region. The shape of the Carmarthen-Cardigan boundary is rather off, with Carmarthen eating into much of the Ceredigion portion of the upper Teifi valley, likewise, Ceredigion has eaten much of the Carmarthenshire side of the middle Teifi valley, forming an elongated Ceredigion border, merging into an oddly shaped impassable state (to be raised later)

View attachment 1299075View attachment 1299076
Existing vs Proposed

View attachment 1299077
Proposed + terrain map overlay.


North Wales - Penllyn Location and correction to Flintshire boundary
Now that Dave has confirmed that Harlech has expanded to represent the Penllyn area of the Principality better, I believe it necessary to split the historic area/cantref of Penllyn from Harlech to highlight the importance of the area as a crossroads in the region. The inclusion of this location makes movement in North Wales more accurate, depicting the Glacial Valley to which the town of Bala is central. Bounded to the North-west by the Migneint Uplands and to the south by the Berwyn Mountain range.

This region was an important military route travelled by Glyndwr on his way South during the lead up to the Battle of Hyddgen, as he was perused by the Justiciar of North Wales. It is also said that the eastern portion of this location is where Glyndwr was attacked by a force led by his Cousin Hywel Sele at Nannau.

The existing impassable through the region is somewhat puzzling, as the locations representing Corwen and Llangollen cannot interact with Denbigh (which contains Ruthin). This cuts off the naturally low laying terrain linking the upper Dee Valley and Clywedog valley. The cause of the War of Independence was border disputes in the area between Glyndŵr and the Lord of Ruthin who illegally seized land, Glyndŵr then marched through what would be impassables ingame up from Corwen to Ruthin on his march of 1400.

View attachment 1299094View attachment 1299095
Existing vs Proposed.

View attachment 1299097
Glyndŵr's 1400 campaign through the area.

The Flintshire boundary at current is anachronistic, representing the modern boundary. The traditional boundary of Flintshire extended further north-west than the current boundary which was formed only in 1996. The current location is also too large to the east, seemingly containing the city of Chester, I believe the cause of this is the lack of representation for the canalisation of the river Dee in the 1700s, which eventually caused a reclamation of land which currently forms the portion of Wales North of the River, something which I had mentioned previously.
View attachment 1299107View attachment 1299108
Traditional boundary vs modern 1996 boundary of Flintshire.

The proposal therefore is for an increase in size for Flint, with Denbigh consuming much of the reduntant impassable. This has the unintended benefit of accurately reflecting the historic county of Denbighshire to a certain extent also.
View attachment 1299148View attachment 1299149
Existing vs Proposed

View attachment 1299110


Impassables:
South Wales (Afan Forest and the Beacons)
I understand that the impassable currently formed within South Wales is a means to highlight the undulating nature of the Afan forest and portions of the Brecon Beacon, however the extent is a little too much in my opinion and cuts across major logistic routes of the period.

Subjected to this impassable range are the locations listed as Kidwelly and Brecknock. Whilst it’s true that the area is heavily undulated, the stretch between Llandovery and Brecon remained one of the most crucial military passages for both the Roman period as well as during the conquest of Wales, especially around Trecastle, remaining the frontier between much of the marcher lords and the native princes and later forming a Turnpike Road.
View attachment 1299063
Llandovery-Brecon path

During the last war of Independence (Glyndŵrs revolt) it was noted that the second royal expedition into Glyndŵr held Wales in 1402 utilised this route to attack Carmarthenshire under the lords Stafford, Warwick and Arundel), both ways by the expedition of 1403 (there and back), Glyndŵr's 1403 offensive, as well as by the army of Rhys Ap Thomas in the lead up to the Battle of Bosworth.
View attachment 1299060View attachment 1299061View attachment 1299068View attachment 1299062
Military campaigns utilising the path, namely the royal expeditions of 1402 and 1403, Glyndŵrs use of the path and the march of the Tudor forces to the Battle of Bosworth

Furthermore, a Roman Road ran through the Vale of Neath to the Roman fort of Nidum (Modern day Neath) towards Brecon which was also utilised throughout the Middle Ages and the length of the game’s timeframe, forming part of what is known as Sarn Helen.
View attachment 1299064

Both areas can be seen in the following map highlighting Roman Roads in Wales:
View attachment 1299065

I would suggest rather than this large area, an impassable range reflecting the black mountains instead, which though smaller, would represent the impassability of this part of the Brecon Beacons. I would suggest that the entirety of the Beacons be made impossible, however the route from Cardiff, through Caerphilly to Brecon was well established and the representation of eastern portions of the Beacons would prove a bit pointless as without the inclusion of further locations in the south, all existing locations would connect regardless of the impassable.....though of course one could be there for aesthetic purposes.

Alternatively, if accepting the slight redesigning south Wales to include the Swansea/Neath split and the addition of Newport, it would be feasible to add an eastern portion of the beacons that would have a meaningful impact ingame, preventing access from Newport to Brecon, but still enabling access from Caerphilly to represent the old Roman Road. This would broadly correspond with the entire Brecon Beacons with a connection between Caerphilly and Brecon via what is now the A470 at Storey Arms and Nant-ddu.
View attachment 1299057View attachment 1299058
Current Impassable set up vs proposed with 2 Brecon beacon Impassable and 2 new locations as noted prior:


Mid Wales - Desert of Wales
Only a small one, the Desert of Wales at current is shown as being quite thin and hooked like, not really representing the accurate shape of the highland area visible by terrain and satellite imagery. The proposed in this instance works in conjunction with the redesign of the Ceredigion/Carmarthenshire border to form a more realistic looking Desert of Wales.

View attachment 1299131View attachment 1299132

North Wales - Berwyn Mountains and the Migneint Uplands

I note that the Berwyn mountain range is now in-game in Dave's latest posts, but also note that some impassable to the North has been added, this seemingly corresponds to a slight degree to the undulating terrain surrounding the Tryweryn reservoir, however, extends almost 16.5 miles beyond. The area seemingly cuts across the Upper Dee and Upper Conwy valley areas, low lying terrain which has been settled for centuries.

Should devs wish to keep this impassable to an extent, I would suggest that this be broadly represented by the zoning of the Migneint-Arenig-Dduallt Special Area of Conservation as well as the Moelwynion mountain range north of Blaenau Ffestiniog. Depicted below is the Migneint SAC, as well as the Berwyn and South Clwyd Mountains SAC, mapping of the Berwyn Impassable could also follow this Special Area of Conservation should Devs find it handy and wish to replicate.
View attachment 1299136
Migneint-Arenig-Dduallt and Berwyn and South Clwyd Mountains Special Areas of Conservation

Conclusion:
In adding the 4 suggested locations, the location density in Wales would match that of other regions depicted via this Tinto Talks EUV Dev Diary, notably Ulster and other regions of Ireland. South Wales at current is greatly under-populated in terms of locations and the inclusion of the proposed allows for a more accurate depiction of impassable's within the region, notably the Brecon Beacons.

In altering Pembrokeshire, Ceredigion and Carmarthenshire as proposed, the area would be much more capable of representing the Principality of Wales in an accurate way, whilst the pivotal importance of Carmarthen as a logistical and military hub for the region would be amplified.

Alterations to North Wales via the splitting of Harlech into Harlech/Penllyn (or Bala, makers pick I guess) as bounded by the more accurate impassable regions would enable a more historically accurate depiction of unit movements through North Wales in conjunction with the slight redesign of the Denbigh and Flint locations to represent the Historic areas of Flintshire and the northern portion of Denbighshire more accurately.

Lastly, find below the existing as depicted via this dev diary and updates found within compared to proposed alterations in this thread as well as what the Principality would look like were these updates included (Wastelands controlled slightly coloured also):
View attachment 1299141View attachment 1299142View attachment 1299145

I was wondering when you'd show up! Your contributions to the original thread last year were great and I really appreciate you building on my less deeply informed proposal, particularly with regards to the impassable areas.

I agree with basically everything you've said - I was very tempted to add a Newport and Bala (The rule for location names seems to be settlements rather than geographical locations, though this seems to be applied inconsistently, particularly in Scotland. I'll post some feedback for settlement names for highland provinces in a bit) as well as a Gower/Swansea-Neath split in the quick feedback comment SaintDave ended up implemented. I thought it was probably more likely to get implemented the fewer changes I asked for, though.



The one change I'm not sure about is the Llansteffan location, which I'd be genuinely curious to hear your reasoning for, as your knowledge of the history definitely surpasses mine. The way I see it is that representing locations at the Towy estuary is always going to run into the problem of either failing to simultaneously represent the Principality's boundaries, the county boundaries, and the Landsker line.

The thought behind my hastily-drawn boundaries was that giving the Carmarthen location the tiny Llansteffan and Oysterlow lordships wouldn't change the Principality borders much, but would give Carmarthen a more obvious coastline to players. From here, after giving Pembroke Laugharne to represent the part of Little England in Carmarthenshire, you're left with St Clears not having an obvious home - giving it to Fishguard (Pembrokeshire north of Landsker) creates an awkward protrusion south of the Preseli mountains. Personally, in small cases like these I fudge it by splitting the difference, as shown here:

Llansteffan itself from my research seems to be the combination of geographically small, of middling relevance and interdependent with Carmarthen that makes me lean against adding it, particularly when the borders you've drawn remove bits of the Principality to make space! Would happy to be corrected here though.

As an aside, if these locations do get redrawn, I hope Fishguard gets the Emlyn region along the Tefin valley too.

Also, if Bala/Penllyn is added, then a province setup based on historic Welsh kingdoms would give it to Powys rather than Gwynedd.

 

[MTGian]

Wales - Feedback and Suggestions Thread: View attachment 1299137View attachment 1299138
I'm sorry if this thread is a bit late or a bit long, but I just want to say that I am loving the changes so far, they are absolutely amazing and have added loads in the way of flavour. I 100% feel this may be the best representation of the UK and Ireland in a map game, so thank you to the devs.

I have a few more suggestions on this update like I had with the previous one last year, mainly in terms of locations, the shape of the Principality and impassables which I'll post below. Any comments within is no critique at all, just a few views I believe may help as feedback for any developer reading!

On a side note, I also feel that the Marcher Lords should still 100% be added for Wales. It should be noted that the Bohemians have their marches in Silesia, France has their vassal swarm also. These islands have their equivalent by way of the Welsh and Scottish Marches and I feel these should be added as they were with both examples above. If the decision is made that the vassals should not be a map based entity such as the Principality, then I believe they should at least be Extraterritorial Countries such as the clans of the Japanese Shogunate, potentially with an International organisation for the Council of Wales and the Marches at some point later in the game.

Number of Locations and Proposed Changes:
The entire Ulster region (including Cavan, Monaghan and Donegal) and Wales are approximately the same size both in real life and ingame. Whereas ulster contains some 27 locations, Wales only contains 19, the most sparsely populated of which are in the South, home to the historically significant grouping of populations, even prior to the transfer of populations to the Valleys for work purposes during the industrial revolution (though primarily focused around Carmarthen, Pembroke, Monmouth, Abergavenny, Grosmont, Caldicot, Neath, Newport, Caerleon, Swansea and Cardiff rather than the valleys).
View attachment 1299066
Ulster vs Wales locations

It has been noted by Dave however that this has been upped to 22 so far with additions in Powys and Carmarthenshire. There should therefore be room to expand on south Wales further even if slightly, to maintain a similar balance of locations, as the divide between North and South Wales is somewhat stark too, with the North having 6 locations to the South’s 4. I would therefore suggest the separation of Swansea into Swansea and Neath, with Swansea representing more the Lordship of Gower than the borders of the modern county.
View attachment 1299067
Newer location map as of this thread shown by Dave

I would suggest 4 locations to even the playing field somewhat, add more flavour to South Wales and enable more interesting movements, these locations would interact with impassables which would be delved into in another section of this post.

South Wales - Swansea/Neath Split and a Newport Location
Firstly, as South Wales is seemingly the least populated, I would suggest a split of Swansea into Swansea and Neath, following the borders of the Lordship of Gower and remnants of the location being assigned to Neath, representing the density of the South better.

View attachment 1299072
Swansea Neath Split

Secondly, I would suggest once again the creation of a location for Newport which eats into the current locations of Caerphilly, Monmouth and Cardiff, representing in part not only the historic nature of the city but also the Stafford Lordship of Gwynllwg and the Mortimer Lordship of Caerleon as well as once again representing the density of South Wales better.

View attachment 1299073
New Location of Newport/Caerleon

The newly proposed South Wales therefore would look somewhat like this, with the Brecon Beacons subject to further discussion in the impassables section.

View attachment 1299120View attachment 1299121
Existing vs proposed South Wales


West Wales (1) - Location of Narberth/Laugharne/Llansteffan
Firstly in West Wales, I would propose once again a location representing either Narberth or Laugharne or Llansteffan as a means to better reflect the nature of the Landsker line as well as a more accurate version of the borders of the Principality of Wales, eating into the Pembroke location somewhat as well as Fishguard (to which Carmarthen should also gain land in). The addition of this location should ideally be alongside the better representation of the three river confluence of the Towy estuary. Carmarthen had ample access to the ocean at the time, being a flourishing port town with access to the ocean via the Towy river, guarded upstream by Llansteffan Castle

View attachment 1299078View attachment 1299081
1) Carmarthen Port located to the bottom of the above image, 2) The View of the Towy estuary from Llansteffan Castle

View attachment 1299087View attachment 1299088
Existing as shown by Dave via this thread vs Proposed
(Note that the new location of Narberth/Laugharne/Llansteffan eats into Fishguard slightly in the top right, whilst the location of Carmarthen likewise eats into the Fishguard location, representing the Newcastle Emlyn region of the Teifi Valley controlled by Carmarthenshire for quite some time and redistributing location size more evenly)

In adding this location, the boundary of the invading Flemish/English settlers becomes clearer, as the Landsker line formed as a clear and stark contrast between the communities located either side for many centuries. Such an inclusion would also enable a more dynamic movement in the region, as with a clearer Tywi estuary, the importance of Carmarthen is exemplified, any access west or east would first require travelling through Carmarthen, elongating walking distance slightly between Pembroke and Carmarthen as well as forming more coherent traditional boundaries of both Pembrokeshire and Carmarthenshire respectively.

I also note that Carmarthen is no longer shown as being part of the principality of Wales via the latest update, the redesign of the borders should enable a more accurate depiction of the principality, with the Carmarthen location being a critical location to the southern regions.


West Wales (2) - Correction of the Ceredigion/Carmarthenshire border
This one may be somewhat small, but necessary to accurately depict the region. The shape of the Carmarthen-Cardigan boundary is rather off, with Carmarthen eating into much of the Ceredigion portion of the upper Teifi valley, likewise, Ceredigion has eaten much of the Carmarthenshire side of the middle Teifi valley, forming an elongated Ceredigion border, merging into an oddly shaped impassable state (to be raised later)

View attachment 1299075View attachment 1299076
Existing vs Proposed

View attachment 1299077
Proposed + terrain map overlay.


North Wales - Penllyn Location and correction to Flintshire boundary
Now that Dave has confirmed that Harlech has expanded to represent the Penllyn area of the Principality better, I believe it necessary to split the historic area/cantref of Penllyn from Harlech to highlight the importance of the area as a crossroads in the region. The inclusion of this location makes movement in North Wales more accurate, depicting the Glacial Valley to which the town of Bala is central. Bounded to the North-west by the Migneint Uplands and to the south by the Berwyn Mountain range.

This region was an important military route travelled by Glyndwr on his way South during the lead up to the Battle of Hyddgen, as he was perused by the Justiciar of North Wales. It is also said that the eastern portion of this location is where Glyndwr was attacked by a force led by his Cousin Hywel Sele at Nannau.

The existing impassable through the region is somewhat puzzling, as the locations representing Corwen and Llangollen cannot interact with Denbigh (which contains Ruthin). This cuts off the naturally low laying terrain linking the upper Dee Valley and Clywedog valley. The cause of the War of Independence was border disputes in the area between Glyndŵr and the Lord of Ruthin who illegally seized land, Glyndŵr then marched through what would be impassables ingame up from Corwen to Ruthin on his march of 1400.

View attachment 1299094View attachment 1299095
Existing vs Proposed.

View attachment 1299097
Glyndŵr's 1400 campaign through the area.

The Flintshire boundary at current is anachronistic, representing the modern boundary. The traditional boundary of Flintshire extended further north-west than the current boundary which was formed only in 1996. The current location is also too large to the east, seemingly containing the city of Chester, I believe the cause of this is the lack of representation for the canalisation of the river Dee in the 1700s, which eventually caused a reclamation of land which currently forms the portion of Wales North of the River, something which I had mentioned previously.
View attachment 1299107View attachment 1299108
Traditional boundary vs modern 1996 boundary of Flintshire.

The proposal therefore is for an increase in size for Flint, with Denbigh consuming much of the reduntant impassable. This has the unintended benefit of accurately reflecting the historic county of Denbighshire to a certain extent also.
View attachment 1299148View attachment 1299149
Existing vs Proposed

View attachment 1299110


Impassables:
South Wales (Afan Forest and the Beacons)
I understand that the impassable currently formed within South Wales is a means to highlight the undulating nature of the Afan forest and portions of the Brecon Beacon, however the extent is a little too much in my opinion and cuts across major logistic routes of the period.

Subjected to this impassable range are the locations listed as Kidwelly and Brecknock. Whilst it’s true that the area is heavily undulated, the stretch between Llandovery and Brecon remained one of the most crucial military passages for both the Roman period as well as during the conquest of Wales, especially around Trecastle, remaining the frontier between much of the marcher lords and the native princes and later forming a Turnpike Road.
View attachment 1299063
Llandovery-Brecon path

During the last war of Independence (Glyndŵrs revolt) it was noted that the second royal expedition into Glyndŵr held Wales in 1402 utilised this route to attack Carmarthenshire under the lords Stafford, Warwick and Arundel), both ways by the expedition of 1403 (there and back), Glyndŵr's 1403 offensive, as well as by the army of Rhys Ap Thomas in the lead up to the Battle of Bosworth.
View attachment 1299060View attachment 1299061View attachment 1299068View attachment 1299062
Military campaigns utilising the path, namely the royal expeditions of 1402 and 1403, Glyndŵrs use of the path and the march of the Tudor forces to the Battle of Bosworth

Furthermore, a Roman Road ran through the Vale of Neath to the Roman fort of Nidum (Modern day Neath) towards Brecon which was also utilised throughout the Middle Ages and the length of the game’s timeframe, forming part of what is known as Sarn Helen.
View attachment 1299064

Both areas can be seen in the following map highlighting Roman Roads in Wales:
View attachment 1299065

I would suggest rather than this large area, an impassable range reflecting the black mountains instead, which though smaller, would represent the impassability of this part of the Brecon Beacons. I would suggest that the entirety of the Beacons be made impossible, however the route from Cardiff, through Caerphilly to Brecon was well established and the representation of eastern portions of the Beacons would prove a bit pointless as without the inclusion of further locations in the south, all existing locations would connect regardless of the impassable.....though of course one could be there for aesthetic purposes.

Alternatively, if accepting the slight redesigning south Wales to include the Swansea/Neath split and the addition of Newport, it would be feasible to add an eastern portion of the beacons that would have a meaningful impact ingame, preventing access from Newport to Brecon, but still enabling access from Caerphilly to represent the old Roman Road. This would broadly correspond with the entire Brecon Beacons with a connection between Caerphilly and Brecon via what is now the A470 at Storey Arms and Nant-ddu.
View attachment 1299057View attachment 1299058
Current Impassable set up vs proposed with 2 Brecon beacon Impassable and 2 new locations as noted prior:


Mid Wales - Desert of Wales
Only a small one, the Desert of Wales at current is shown as being quite thin and hooked like, not really representing the accurate shape of the highland area visible by terrain and satellite imagery. The proposed in this instance works in conjunction with the redesign of the Ceredigion/Carmarthenshire border to form a more realistic looking Desert of Wales.

View attachment 1299131View attachment 1299132

North Wales - Berwyn Mountains and the Migneint Uplands

I note that the Berwyn mountain range is now in-game in Dave's latest posts, but also note that some impassable to the North has been added, this seemingly corresponds to a slight degree to the undulating terrain surrounding the Tryweryn reservoir, however, extends almost 16.5 miles beyond. The area seemingly cuts across the Upper Dee and Upper Conwy valley areas, low lying terrain which has been settled for centuries.

Should devs wish to keep this impassable to an extent, I would suggest that this be broadly represented by the zoning of the Migneint-Arenig-Dduallt Special Area of Conservation as well as the Moelwynion mountain range north of Blaenau Ffestiniog. Depicted below is the Migneint SAC, as well as the Berwyn and South Clwyd Mountains SAC, mapping of the Berwyn Impassable could also follow this Special Area of Conservation should Devs find it handy and wish to replicate.
View attachment 1299136
Migneint-Arenig-Dduallt and Berwyn and South Clwyd Mountains Special Areas of Conservation

Conclusion:
In adding the 4 suggested locations, the location density in Wales would match that of other regions depicted via this Tinto Talks EUV Dev Diary, notably Ulster and other regions of Ireland. South Wales at current is greatly under-populated in terms of locations and the inclusion of the proposed allows for a more accurate depiction of impassable's within the region, notably the Brecon Beacons.

In altering Pembrokeshire, Ceredigion and Carmarthenshire as proposed, the area would be much more capable of representing the Principality of Wales in an accurate way, whilst the pivotal importance of Carmarthen as a logistical and military hub for the region would be amplified.

Alterations to North Wales via the splitting of Harlech into Harlech/Penllyn (or Bala, makers pick I guess) as bounded by the more accurate impassable regions would enable a more historically accurate depiction of unit movements through North Wales in conjunction with the slight redesign of the Denbigh and Flint locations to represent the Historic areas of Flintshire and the northern portion of Denbighshire more accurately.

Lastly, find below the existing as depicted via this dev diary and updates found within compared to proposed alterations in this thread as well as what the Principality would look like were these updates included (Wastelands controlled slightly coloured also):
View attachment 1299141View attachment 1299142View attachment 1299145

Amazing job. Well done!

I find it interesting that you ended up with the exact same number of locations as I did (https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...ritain-ireland-feedback.1745696/post-30356150) and the regional distribution was similar (the shapes are different with some different connections between locations, but the regional distribution is the same). You are clearly much more knowledgeable on the region and did far more thorough research and your map is clearly better as a result, but I came up with something kinda similar just by looking at historical maps, geography, and using some logic (more locations where Wales was more heavily populated).

Personally, I find that very supportive of your proposal. I hope Paradox seriously consider it.

Edit: On closer look, the south is a bit different. If it's helpful, I tried to match locations with this map of population centers from 1550.

I was much more focused on raw materials than specific shape of regions or which locations should connect for realistic movement.

Spoiler

 

[phantasmAgaric]

There's a historical style where the immediate patronymic is listed as mac but the family name is listed as Mac, which probably accounts for the confusion.

So a Domhnall who is son of Eoghan Mac Carthaigh would be Domhnall mac Eoghain Mac Carthaigh.

On the topic of Irish names: Gaelic surnames – like Slavic ones – change by gender, with separate patterns for Ó and Mac surnames. Married women take a different form to unmarried ones, too.

In all cases, the stem at the end stays the same, but the preposition(?) changes, and the initial consonant is lenited (this part might be dropped if too tricky). So the wife of an Ó Domhnaill would have the surname (Bean) Uí Dhomhnaill, and their daughter's surname would be Ní Dhomhnaill – until she married a Mac Uidhir, at which point her surname would become (Bean) Mhic Uidhir, and any daughter she has would be Nic Uidhir.

Gaelicised Norman names starting with "de" don't change – mostly notably here the thoroughly gaelicised Clanricarde and Mayo should have their dynasties display as de Búrca.

 

[riadach]

On the topic of Irish names: Gaelic surnames – like Slavic ones – change by gender, with separate patterns for Ó and Mac surnames. Married women take a different form to unmarried ones, too.

In all cases, the stem at the end stays the same, but the preposition(?) changes, and the initial consonant is lenited (this part might be dropped if too tricky). So the wife of an Ó Domhnaill would have the surname (Bean) Uí Dhomhnaill, and their daughter's surname would be Ní Dhomhnaill – until she married a Mac Uidhir, at which point her surname would become (Bean) Mhic Uidhir, and any daughter she has would be Nic Uidhir.

Gaelicised Norman names starting with "de" don't change – mostly notably here the thoroughly gaelicised Clanricarde and Mayo should have their dynasties display as de Búrca.

View attachment 1299280

Women didn't take their husbands names when they got married at this stage. Inghean Ní Dhomhnaill would remain Inghean Dubh Ní Dhomhnaill till she died. In fact adoption of husband names only became common in Irish speaking areas after the game's timeframe. So SaintDaveUK can breathe a sigh of relief on that one.

 

[matfer13]

If you end up renaming Irish and English cultures to something like Gaelic-Irish and Southern English then I suggest creating an Irish culture group with the two cultures and an English one too(with Cornish too) so that they have additional relation bonuses like Scottish culture and in the case of the English group it will allow to unify it in the late game.
Also Norn cultures should belong in the Scottish group as well for geographical reasons

 

[UNAMigos]

I am pretty sure that London as well as the two other provinces in Middlesex are all considered coastal provinces meaning that you can build up naval infrastructure there. We have certainly previously seen London having some harbour suitability, so I would be very surprised if that has changed, especially since the map suggests that they are all coastal.

Ah yh I see it now sorry my mistake.

Although as a general point it would be nice to see a navigable river Thames on the map.

 

[UNAMigos]

I'm pretty sure it is already, even though they won't add navigable rivers there are some pseudo ones.

Sorry you're correct. But it would be nice to see a navigable river Thames up to at least Henley next to Reading which I do see on the map.

 

[SaintDaveUK]

The state of Britain....
(not the first time I've said that)



At this point I'm mostly looking for feedback on attributes of the locations more than shape or number of them.

 

[Vispian]

I think these are a pretty sensible basis for English areas

ate for the time period in this reduced state), the Western Circuit can become either "Wessex" or the "West Country",

Wessex does not correlate strongly to the identity of the South West. Particularly in Devon and Cornwall. Both historically and culturally. Wessex was a much more central southern conglomerate and as time went on South Eastern influenced. Whilst Devon and Cornwall would eventually be under Wessex it was a rather laissez faire approach with little control. Even Somerset you could argue doesnt have much in common with the Wessex denomination often not fully under Wessex's control either.

The other issue is that if you use West Country as the name then it is abominable you consider Hampshire a part of the West Country and not Gloucester. I should not even need to explain why. Both on a modern cultural understanding and a historical perspective.

My suggestion would be to keep it to 4-6 states per an area. So:

Cornwall, Devon, Somerset, Dorset, Gloucester are West Country

So to solve your Hampshire issue of it being alone. You add Essex to East Anglia an area with only 3 states. This Evens out the areas to states. But from a contextual point north Essex has been considered part of East Anglia and culturally has a lot of connections. There is a lot of overlap, especially during this time period before London would start to merge into greater London and as a result Essex would be pulled into that direction. In return you add Hampshire to the Home Counties.

I wouldnt rename it to Wessex and keep it as Home Counties, just due to the fact its the best name for it. This new conglomeration would be acceptable if it was termed Wessex too.

 

[dw70676]

The state of Britain....
(not the first time I've said that)



At this point I'm mostly looking for feedback on attributes of the locations more than shape or number of them.

I don't know enough to give feedback on the details, but I at least like the colors here better.

 

[Vispian]

At this point I'm mostly looking for feedback on attributes of the locations more than shape or number of them.

Please follow Sulphur's advice on the topography in the South West. It is not nearly as hilly, most is rather rolling until you get to the moors which are rather limited and not always hilly or rugged themselves. In particular please remove the hills from Exeter, Taunton and Plymouth. These dont make any sense to someone who lives here and is where all the major cities and towns would develop in part because its more flat.

The dartmoor wasteland I would also remove. It doesn't really impact troops movement much. Also as someone who lives where the wasteland is, I can confirm there are many medieval settlements, roads, footpaths and old mining outposts here. Its not that isolated or hard to traverse. Especially when you consider your wasteland doesnt even cover the most rugged part of the moors. However, If it remains I could live with it.

I would add woods to the Plymouth location as South Devon which is like 2/3rd the location had and still has lots of historical forests. Gives it a bit more variety and is accurate.

Im not sure what rivers you are including for the whole of the Britain/Ireland region, would it be possible to know and/or see them?

 

[Vispian]

Worcester should be Salt not Lumber
J. D. Hurst, 'The Extent and Development of the Worcestershire Medieval Salt Industry, and its impact on the Regional Economy', Exchange and Trade in Medieval Europe - Papers of the Medieval Brugge 1997 Conference, 3 (1997), 139-202

 

[matfer13]

The state of Britain....
(not the first time I've said that)



At this point I'm mostly looking for feedback on attributes of the locations more than shape or number of them.


View attachment 1299485



View attachment 1299487

View attachment 1299488

View attachment 1299489

View attachment 1299490
View attachment 1299491

Grat job! Can you still squeeze in Warwick as a location in Warwickshire? I'm farely certain it was the biggest settlement(and the administrative center) in the shire in 1337