Tinto Maps #20 The Steppes Feedback

[nyetflix2]

You mean the Siberian Tatars? Then couldn't it just be renamed to Sibir/Sibiri, like the Khanate?

No, Siberian Turkic is one of the four main branches of the Turkic family and includes languages like Tuvan, Khakas and Sakha/Yakut.

The name definitely is non optimal but I can't think of a better alternative unfortunately, as you said Sibir/Siberian would imply the Kipchak-speaking Tatar group.

 

[Slime99]

Is mishary unhistoral?

All Tatar cultures are debatably premature since they were shaped by the upheavals caused by the plague, Timur and most importantly the emerging khanates from the Golden Horde, not to mention the importance of Islam in shaping these new identities.

 

[Kaspar Osraige]

Is mishary unhistoral?

Weird plural presumably stemming from Russian. Could be Mishar or Mishari

 

[Pavía]

Here are links to my and @ibvfteh suggestions on locations summarised and highly accepted by others.

Caucasus:


Volga Bulgaria:


Volga-Don:


Ukrainian Steppe:


The Great Meadow:



Siberia 1:
View attachment 1311293


Siberia 2:
View attachment 1311294

1. Cultures, Ture must be much more Erzya and Moksha people, much more Mari people, Slavic people in the Golden Horde, and non-Slavic Mari in Muscovy
2. Historical areas of Volga Bulgaria, Chervleny Yar, Lower Don (incorrectly located, currently named Azov area) should be represented
3. Development changes
4. Naming changes

Thanks to both, appreciated!

 

[LordThanatos]

The Not-Changed Log:

• No mention of changes to Italian holdings around the Black sea and sea of Azov. There were several good posts about this, such as @matfer13's posts or @DOURIOS's post. Some non-visible changes might have been made here, such as with extraterritorial holdings, but have not been mentioned.
• Location names are still using plenty of names which had feedback to correct them. Some locations still use explicitly Soviet names, which were pointed out in posts such as this one. The names of the two provinces of the Mangyshlak Peninsula still mean the same thing, according to this feedback.
• Almost none of the changes to cultures were mentioned, despite very thorough posts on the matter, such as @Slime99's great post.
• The terrain did not take into account a lot of feedback.
  • @Sulphurologist's changes, which can be viewed here
  • The climate of Kazakhstan does not take into account the feedback of the local @Neversa, here
  • The Urals are still hills, despite being mountains, as pointed out in posts like this.
  • The Southern Mangyshlak Peninsula is still wasteland, despite feedback to the contrary by @Aramenian
  • No changes around the Aral sea despite detailed feedback by @Ekyman
• Few if any changes were made to the overall political situation, such as those suggested by @SuperLexxe in posts such as these. (Edit: The small tags in these specific changes are no longer supported by the author, but the larger ones are)
• Development still looks like a nuke just went off and wiped out all of the Golden Horde's cities at a time when they should be at their most prosperous.
  • @Kotyk-durkotyk has a great post on development among a million other issues, most of which have not been addressed.
  • The capital is similarly afflicted, something pointed out by @ibvfteh here and @Ispil here.
• No farmland in Ukraine. Something that has baffled most of us for ages. This was called for in this post for one example, but farmlands in general are something most in the community seem not to like the implementation of given that they're human made, but the terrain is non-dynamic.
• I suppose we'll have to give a pass for not having minorities changed per posts like this, though my opinion is still that most of the major changes should have been made before scheduling this feedback post, because now our feedback is mostly what we've already mentioned in the last thread.
• Many, many more, though I'll try to keep adding to this if anything else stands out.

Now - to be clear, I don't think the team should thoughtlessly include every change here, and some of these even disagree. I understand that the team is not large enough to take every post and respond to it - but these are among those on the first few pages or those with the most reactions, so if the team sorted by either to find a few posts to prioritize addressing, these are them.

To not even address that these are some well reasoned arguments and some of the community's top-rated changes makes this feedback post look sloppy, as well as others before it, like those for West Africa or the Horn of Africa, which had similar issues of feeling rushed, ignoring detailed feedback and really not changing much at all.

If highly called for changes are not going to be implemented, they should be addressed, such as to say that @Pavía's research disagrees, or that there are gameplay or performance reasons not to make some changes. If these lackluster feedback posts are - as many forumites have been suspecting - a rushed job to get the game ready for release, at least admit that it's not perfect and that it's all that can be done before the game is out and that feedback is being saved for improvements post-release. The goal of these posts seemed to be about transparency as much as feedback, and this is opaque and clearly frustrating.

Right now, it seems like feedback is being ignored and the whole process - which was once so impressive at taking in feedback and responding - is being rushed, with no acknowledgement that the community feels that there was a lot wrong with the first map that was expected to be addressed. It's very discouraging to anyone considering putting similar effort into giving feedback.

 

[SuperLexxe]

The Not-Changed Log:

• No mention of changes to Italian holdings around the Black sea and sea of Azov. There were several good posts about this, such as @matfer13's posts or @DOURIOS's post. Some non-visible changes might have been made here, such as with extraterritorial holdings, but have not been mentioned.
• Some locations still use explicitly Soviet names, which were pointed out in posts such as this one.
• Almost none of the changes to cultures were mentioned, despite great posts on the matter, such as @Slime99 's great post.
• The terrain did not take into account @Sulphurologist's changes, which can be viewed here
• Few if any changes were made to the overall political situation, such as those suggested by @SuperLexxe in posts such as these.
• Development still looks like a nuke just went off and wiped out all of the Golden Horde's cities at a time when they should be at their most prosperous. Again, there are many posts mentioning this, but @Kotyk-durkotyk has a great post on development among a million other issues, most of which have not been addressed.

More to come.

Now - to be clear, I don't think the team should thoughtlessly include every change here, and some of these even disagree, but to not even address that these are some well reasoned arguments and some of the community's top-rated changes makes this feedback post (As well as others before it, like those for West Africa or The Horn of Africa, which had similar issues) look sloppy. If highly called for changes are not going to be implemented, they should be addressed, such as to say that @Pavía's research disagrees, or that there are gameplay or performance reasons not to make some changes.

Right now, it seems like changes are being ignored and the whole process - which was once so impressive - is being rushed, with no acknowledgement that the community feels the map is wrong. It's very discouraging to anyone considering putting similar effort into giving feedback.

---

Honestly for my post, I've chosen to abandon the small tags due to contradictory claims with no clear evidence. Although I would still prefer the different Ulus' & Khwarazm to be represented, for they do have more concrete basis.

---

 

[matfer13]

As I explained in my post in the original TM Tana was already under Genoese administration in 1337, so they should directly own the location

 

[Daniel the Finlander]

That's not going to be useful. What would be acceptable is, if you want, a summary post on what you consider most relevant to prioritize.

Sulphurologist’s terrain suggestions
Cultures (tho you said its WIP so thats fair)
More location/area/province renames to remove as many immersion-breaking anarchonistic names as possible

just a few that come to mind

 

[nyetflix2]

All Tatar cultures are debatably premature since they were shaped by the upheavals caused by the plague, Timur and most importantly the emerging khanates from the Golden Horde, not to mention the importance of Islam in shaping these new identities.

To play devil's advocate, what is the alternative? A big Cuman/Tatar blob, and then script these new cultures to appear a few decades into the game based on regions/areas? That might have worked okay in EU4, but with the granularity and complexity of the pop system I can only see that creating map gore rivaling the Mexican and Brazilian cultures appearing all over the Americas. I don't think pdx's track record with dynamically appearing cultures has been very well received. Probably best to focus on providing sources for your culture suggestions elsewhere, as they looked quite promising.

Maybe it could be more practical to leave it as is and give the Golden Horde a privilege/advance/something to accept all of these cultures from the start?

 

[Dennis [UA]]

A note on this: we just consider resources that were already exploited before 1836. Mentioning it because a lot of the mineral resources of Ukraine only started to be extracted after the Industrialization of the region started.

That is correct but even if speaking about pre 1836 a major Coal mine Lyssytchansk is missing
Source

Imperial era​

In 1721, coal was discovered in the Donets basin near Lisya Balka, a Cossack village established in 1710.[5] In 1795, Lysychansk was the first coal-mining settlement of the Donets basin.[5]

 

[Polesie Admiral]

are there Karaite and Krymchak pops in Crimea? and if Karaites aren't present in the game, are there Jewish pops in Crimea overall?

 

[APlayerInMC]

A note on this: we just consider resources that were already exploited before 1836. Mentioning it because a lot of the mineral resources of Ukraine only started to be extracted after the Industrialization of the region started.

Players or AI should have a chance to exploit some of the mines ahead of time, taking into account that they may industrialize their country earlier.

 

[Baphomet enjoyer]

Will tomorrow's Tinto flavor include info on cossacks?

 

[King_Potat]

Yeah, I'm not gonna lie. You guys did not cook with this one, and it seems like so much that needed fixing was overlooked.

I’m fairly certain most people were happy with the number of locations, but not with the localizations for them. As many have already mentioned; Proletarsk, Kominternivske, Engels, and likely others should be replaced with historical counterparts that at least existed with a given name for the time period. Additionally, oddly shaped locations like Usivka should have either been split or redrawn. Iirc Kotyk-durkotyk had many proposals to fix most of these issues and it seems as though they have been entirely overlooked. Moncastro not being added is also a bit odd, but somewhat understandable if it is going to be represented by a building. Terrain, Vegetation, RGOs, and Development also seem largely unchanged, which is a shame.

Another big issue is regarding the culture setup of the first map, and the fact that it was not adequate. The only thing that I can see has changed is that a few minorities have been added around and north-east of Astrakhan and that Pomor has been expanded. But still no Moksha culture? Using the term “Uzbek” for Kipchaks? Why? It is bad because it causes confusion between the modern Uzbeks (Karluk) and Kipchaks groups like the Kazakhs. I understand the desire to be less Anachronistic, but here it just causes confusion. Instead Uzbek -> Kipchak and Khwarazmian -> Karluk.

Simply put, there are a lot of issues that have persisted when they really should not have. It gives the impression that many of the recent map reviews are being rushed or under prioritized. I just hope that TM reviews like this one and the one for the Horn of Africa do not become a trend for future TM reviews, and are also not the final product of what we will see.

As always, we do appreciate what work has been done, but this is not up to the standard of other TM reviews.

Also, post the damn location map mode in smaller areas on the main post, it's hard to read anything here.

Edit: Also add the old flow route (existed until 1575) of the Uzboy river into the Caspian Sea (specifically the part between Sarykamysh lake and the Turkmenbashi gulf), as there were quite a few proposals (here, here, here, and here) that should have been implemented in some way to have this old flow route represented with the pops that lived there.

 

[Freshplayer]

No, Siberian Turkic is one of the four main branches of the Turkic family and includes languages like Tuvan, Khakas and Sakha/Yakut.

The name definitely is non optimal but I can't think of a better alternative unfortunately, as you said Sibir or Siberian imply the Kipchak-speaking Tatar group.

Don't miss Yugur.

I think the dev mistake it as Mongolic as they also learned a Mongolic language.

 

[Pavía]

Players or AI should have a chance to exploit some of the mines ahead of time, taking into account that they may industrialize their country earlier.

This is not the design we're following, as we already mentioned several times.

 

[matfer13]

In 1337 the court language of the Golden Horde should still be Mongolian, from wikipedia:

a is about Mongolian, b is about Kipchak

 

[Pavía]

Will tomorrow's Tinto flavor include info on cossacks?

No, that will be in a future Tinto Flavour; but there's Cossack-related flavour content in the game.

 

[ibvfteh]

Hello, and welcome one more week to another Tinto Maps Feedback post! Today, we will be reviewing the region of the Steppes, before tomorrow's look at the Golden Horde and Horde-related content in Tinto Flavour. Let's start with the list of changes, as usual:

Spoiler: List of Changes

ADDITIONS

Added the following:

• Locations (13)
  • Adalaga
  • Chuhuiv
  • Hovtva
  • Kolomak
  • Lutava
  • Opishnya
  • Perekop
  • Solkhat
  • Ternivka
  • Vilshana
  • Yahotyn
  • Yaroslavka
  • Zmiiv
• Provinces
  • Donetsk
  • Nizhyn
• Areas
  • Kursk
• Religions
  • Čimarii Jüla (mari_paganism)
  • Inmarism (udmurt_paganism)
  • Važesköm (komi_paganism)
  • Samoyedic Shamanism (samoyedic_paganism)
• Dynamic Names
  • Added some Dynamic Names

CORRECTIONS

Renamed the following:

• Locations (only corrections. Additionally renamed all location to standardized form):
  • Ak-Mechet to Aqmecit
  • Aqmescit to Qarasuvbazar
  • Berezivka to Aqmecit
  • Brovary to Desnyanskyi Horodok
  • Chaplynka to Qalançaq
  • Chervonyi Mayak to Tavan
  • Henichesk to Enice
  • Holyi Pereviz to Ordu Bazar
  • Hornostaivka to Rohat Kermen
  • Kherson to Oleshia
  • Lykhivka to Myshuryn Rih
  • Nova Odesa to Argamakli Sarai
  • Ochakov to Dashev
  • Orzhytsya to Horoshino
  • Primorsko-Akhtarsk to Akhtar
  • Pyatigorsk to Yessentuq
  • Ripky to Liubech
  • Romny to Romen
  • Shevelivka to Vovchansk
  • Starogorodskaya to Oster
  • Unenezh to Nizhyn
  • Vasylivka to Kinskie
  • Velyka Bilozerka to Kuchugur
  • Veselynove to Balikley
  • Voznesensk to Sokolyts
• Provinces - only corrections. Additionally, renamed all of them to a standardized form:
  • Chaplynka to Qalançaq
  • Kalay to Or Qapi
  • Kherson to Oleshia
  • Krasnohrad to Karlivka
  • Luhansk to Luhan
  • Melitopol to Berda
  • Novgorod Seversky to Novhorod Siverskyi
  • Ochakov to Boh
  • Odessa to Khadjibey
  • Posad to Kalmius
  • Primorsko Akhtarsk to Akhtar
  • Starodub Seversky to Starodub Siverskyi
  • Zvenigorod Seversky to Zvenihorod Siverskyi
• Areas - only corrections. Additionally, renamed all of them to a standardized form:
  • Eastern Ukraine to Left Bank Ukraine
  • Posad to Pryazovia
  • Western Ukraine to Right Bank Ukraine

Raw Goods

• Changed some Raw Goods as suggested

Terrain and Vegetation

• Total Review

Pops

• Completely reviewed population numbers
• Added some minorities, currently WIP

In this review, we focused a lot on pops, as they were not in line with the usual benchmark we have for most of the regions. You might notice a lot of changes in the cultural and religious maps, therefore. However, there are still some loose ends, so we're currently working towards adding some more minorities here and there. Thus, any additional feedback on this matter will be appreciated, as we will be able to implement stuff quickly from this feedback review.

And here you have the maps:

Countries:
View attachment 1311104
View attachment 1311105
View attachment 1311106

Dynasties:
View attachment 1311110

Country Ranks & Government Types:
View attachment 1311111
View attachment 1311112

Societies of Pops:
View attachment 1311118

Locations:
View attachment 1311121
View attachment 1311122

Provinces:
View attachment 1311123
View attachment 1311128

Areas:
View attachment 1311129

Terrain:
View attachment 1311131
View attachment 1311132
View attachment 1311133

Development:
View attachment 1311139

Harbors:
View attachment 1311145

Cultures:
View attachment 1311147
Some cultural minorities have already been added and present here and there, and more work is ongoing here.

Languages:
View attachment 1311149
View attachment 1311150
Common language and court language.

Religions:
View attachment 1311152
This now looks much nicer, with a Tengrist majority in most of the Horde, some more Folk religions added, minorities here and there, etc.

Raw Materials:
View attachment 1311159

Markets:
View attachment 1311161

And that's all for today! Remember that this is this week's schedule:

• Tuesday -> Tinto Flavour about the Golden Horde
• Wednesday -> Tinto Talks about Islam
• Thursday -> Fourth ‘Behind the Scenes’ video!
• Friday -> Tinto Flavour about the Ottomans and the Rise of the Turks situation!

And also remember, you can wishlist Europa Universalis V now! Cheers!

One of my pieces of feedback on the areas.

So, I wanted to look into what was Chervleny Yar - to make Area out of it - for better depiction, then I remembered those posts from our colleague





So I kinda merged all of that with ideas of mine,

and got this
View attachment 1276391

Double names for Golden Horde/ Russian naming and sometimes just alternatives.

So I ask everyone and developers( @Pavía @Aldaron ) to look into how this representation performs

The main point of it is a representation of historically important areas: Volga Bulgaria, Chervleny Yar- they all were extremely relevant in the 12th-14th centuries (with the downfall)
Areas like Zaporizhzhia, Sloboda, Don Host, Kuban or Yedisan became relevant much later, but still within the game span, nearly all talks about Cossacks involve those general areas

And the area of Sloboda-Ukraine is now correctly located!

I believe this is the best depiction for the current game start, because the area in general was not fragmented yet. Also, all areas do make at least a small geographic sense, where Zaporizhzhia and Sloboda are divided by the Siversky Donets river, Chervleny Yar is between the Khoper and Don rivers.

The size of the areas is more or less uniform. I believe there is no need to make areas here smaller, as areas were not populated until the late game

Few locations like Krasnohrad (near Kharkiv), Aksay and Stepanevka(near Sarrai), Botkul and Zhanybek (between Astrakhan and Lower Yaik) need to be redrawn

And possible location swaps are marked with blue

How I got there + all data:

Spoiler

Oka, Severia and Ukraine are fully taken from the current proposals or borders
View attachment 1276212

I have expanded Severia to include Homel and Oka to include Elets, as the Oka principalities (Karachev principality) had control over it
View attachment 1276213

Then I started outlining the Sloboda and Chervleny Yar areas

Sloboda Ukraine area includes Sumy, Kharkiv, upper Luhansk, Belgorod, and usually areas up to the Don river

View attachment 1276214
Here I run into a problem that Kursk was a small area left out; however, in the terms used to me, it can be called a part of the Sloboda region
Even as far as Voronezh and Kursk, people talk about their lands being part of Sloboda (Donskaja Sloboda is usually used), so I decided to go with the general Sloboda area.
I think it is much better to add it here, as Kursk has not been a large or important city during the timeframe

Chervleny Yar was used for the areas with red stripes, and a road was deemed to be in the area of Chervleny Yar
View attachment 1276215View attachment 1276216
Here is a great paper with its history
What we care about is that the first mention was around the 13th century and the last in the 15th, so it's at the start of the game, but fell off after the conquests of the Great Horde by Russia, where the area was reorganised and people resettled

I went with a bit bigger portrayal of that area, to connect it with the Ryazan area
View attachment 1276217
As the areas in between Rayzan and Chervleny Yar got the unique name only at the time of the Russian Empire (Voronezh and Tambov governorates)
I was not really keen on adding Tambov to it, but other cases were much worse

I was also not a fan of calling the entire Black and Azov Seas beaches of Ukraine - Yedisan, so I think it is better to use a double name, for the second part I used Taurida, but other suggestions are welcome. Taurida is a governorate in the Russian Empire

For Zaporizhzhia, I went with the definition, the only thing that bothers me is Luhansk (so maybe it can be added to other areas)
View attachment 1276221

With the Lower Don area, I wanted to follow the Don Host borders, but it is quite anachronic, and wrecked Chervleny Yar at the most important areas(Urupin location), so I just edited the current Azov area, but named it Lower Don because this name is now free

Next, I have added Volga Bulgaria - the most essential area for modern Kazan Tatars
View attachment 1276238View attachment 1276239

And Yelabuga should be part of it, as it was part of Volga Bulgaria and therefore part of the Golden Horde

Astrakhan got more locations with the capital cities of the Golden Horde to represent the main activity area, as well as the general Lower Volga, giving Elista to the Majar Area

The Ryazan principality never controlled areas around Pensa, so it definitely should not include those locations and provinces into itself

The Matrega area is now aligned with the Kuban River and the Kuban area
View attachment 1276286

The Majar area has got a few locations from the Astrakhan area, and now is close to the Stavropol governorate
View attachment 1276291

Now, areas that are not based on anything solid in particular

Mokshi / Pensa is based somewhat around the Moksha River. The Idea is to be a region of the Mokshi / Narovchat Ulus. Some areas can be given to the Nizhny Novgorod area to present the historical control of that region by the principality

Ukek (Saratov) represents the middle Volga area - a combination of Samara and Saratov governorates + leftovers here and there, probably the least historically accurate, but geographically connected area.

added more areas, I can at least speculate about (in Asia)
View attachment 1279493
View attachment 1279494

Changes

Spoiler

Mukhsha now fully contains the river Mukhsha

The Lower Volga area is split into two areas because it is too large. Names can be changed

Lower Yaik - now closer represents the Nogai horde territory

Ukraine and Polesia switched lands back

Bashkiria represents Ufimskoye namestnichestvo
View attachment 1279407
Extreme anachronism, I just feel like having it, I accept suggestions about it
Can be divided into two, upper and lower, to not be this big. (resembling Orenburg governorate)

Middle Ural - part of the Perm governorate that did not go into the Perm area

Sibir / Chimgi Tura - I tried drawing where the Sibir khanate mainland was.

Yugra is whatever is left + Mangaseya proposed by developers. Can be changed

The Desht-i Kipchak just moved according to other areas

Samara and Ukek can be merged back if area is of acceptable size

To be honest, the more I went into the steppes, the more lost I was; I couldn't find any real usable data. I will not go further east. For those areas, the geographic approach should be used (like with the Americas).

Perhaps areas over the Urals proposed by me can also be more geographic.

Spoiler: Full image of Areas

View attachment 1279491

 

[SuperLexxe]

---

I made a post on Circassia before based on contemporary Genovese accounts. This is how it turned out:

---

Decided to have a try at mapping them out:

• Principality of Hytuk - ruled by the Hytuk/Ghetik
  • Trebizond held the city of Matrega on the Taman peninsula, later taken by the Genoese. How could this be represented, as Trebizond doesn't have a trade post mechanic? Perhaps Hytuk was a Trebizondian vassal?
• Principality of Copa - ruled by ?
• Principality of Sobay/Hatukay - ruled by the Hatukay
• Principality of Kremuk/Temirgoy - ruled by the Temirgoy
• Principality of Kabardia - ruled by the Kabardians
• Principality of Kipike - ruled by the Chupako

---

The document says that apparently the Copa would have held influence over the entire Eastern Coast of the Sea of Azov, up to Tana. However, that seems a little suspect, though I have nothing to say otherwise. Still, I decided to keep Copa as a smaller entity.

The Genoese would not gain control of the Taman peninsula until 1419, when the de Guizolfi family married a Hytuk princess and took control of the region on behalf of Gazaria.

Tuapse and Costa as mentioned before would have been under Georgian dominion.

---

---

Also on the former Alania, based on Russian accounts:

https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...er-2024-persia-caucasus.1703150/post-30223602

I'll try making a map later, but for now it seems that the lowland areas and the old capital of Alania were lost to the Golden Horde for good, while the highlands were allowed to govern as subjects.

Two specific principalities are mentioned by name:

• Saeristavo of Ksani in modern North Ossetia/Georgia - ruled by the Georgian Bibiluri dynasty
• Principality of Digor in modern West Ossetia - ruled by the Alanian Acharkatag dynasty

It is said that Digor was captured by the Kabardians in the following centuries, so it would make sense to give everything south of Tatartup to Georgia, and the western highlands to Digor.

There is also mentions of independent groups in the Alanian mountains, and a family called Fidarov, but it seems they were simply notables and not organized in a significant way.

---