Tinto Maps #24 Korea and Japan Feedback

[King_Potat]

If Korea is 2.83 times larger than the Czech Republic, and the Czech Republic has 57 locations, that means the Korean Peninsula should have 161 locations, not 150 as someone claimed.
Let's not even talk about China...

It should be noted that Czechia is supposed to be an outlier in terms of density as it is in the HRE, which was explicitly given a higher density of locations alongside Northern Italy to show the fragmented political situation.

If you want to claim the devs as Eurocentric, then go ahead, but use examples that do actually apply.

 

[Friedrich von Deutschland]

You only focused on what you wanted, but you didn't even consider the areas of Bohemia and Korea, because otherwise you'd agree with me, hahaha.
Check out the surfaces and then we'll talk.
Eurocentrism at its finest, hahaha.

I did compare areas I literally did the math. I didn’t count the number of Korean areas (though it doesn’t seem like you did either). And could you please give an argument other than crying “eurocentrism” repeatedly? China isn’t getting 2k more locations so acting like everywhere should have European densities is delusional. Give a case for why Japan and Korea specifically should get a significantly increased location count, given they’re already an extreme outlier compared to the rest of Asia.

 

[slupie]

Another thought about religion in Japan - there were lots of schools of Buddhism which specifically owned temples and participated directly in the Sengoku.

With the various noble clans represented, it would be interesting to also add BBCs for the major schools of Buddhism. They could provide religious bonuses to their sponsors in exchange for money - this could lead into events where you eventually get the founding of the Ikko Ikki.

Japan in 1337 has at least five major groupings of Buddhist schools - the oldest schools are the Hossō, Kegon, Sanron, and Risshū, based in Nara. Some of the largest and most powerful schools are the Kogi Shingon based at Mt Koya, the Shigi Shingon based at Mt Negoro, the Sanmon Tendai on the peak of Mt Hiei, and the Jimon Tendai based at the foot of Mt Hiei. Both Tendai sects as well as the Hossō and Kegon were known for their sōhei warrior-monks who fought internecine skirmishes as well as participating in the Southern and Northern Court conflicts.

Then comes the groupings established within the last few centuries of the Kamakura Shogunate: Pure Land Buddhism, Zen Buddhism, and Nichiren Buddhism.

Pure Land Buddhism was divided into the Chinzei Jōdo-shū, the Seizan Jōdo-shū, the Yūzū-nenbutsu-shū, the Ji-shū, and the Jōdo-shinshū. Pure Land Buddhism was often outlawed, and the famous Ikkō Ikki rebellions started as a branch of the Ji-shū known as the Ikkō-shū, something which could spawn in the 15th century by event.

Zen Buddhism was divided into the Rinzai-shū and the Sōtō-shū, both which were widespread due to the patronage of the samurai, with the Rinzai-shū being patronized by the shoguns themselves.

Nichiren Buddhism is based on the teachings of Nichiren, who preached during the 13th century - he was exiled by the government twice and had a wide variety of lay followers, but his death and attempt to appoint six senior priests as successors led to fracturing of the school. These divisions in 1337 are the Minobu monryū, the Fuji monryū, the Hama monryū, the Hikigayatsu monryū, the Mobara monryū, and the Nakayama monryū.

These various schools of Buddhism fought between themselves not just in scholarly settings but also in direct combat by their warrior-monks and lay followers, owned significant land themselves, and came into conflict with noble landowners and the government as well. All of these factors I think make a strong argument for the schools existing as BBCs.

 

[Sizvahstar]

I literally ran the numbers, Korea is 2.83 times the size of Czechia and has around that many times the locations.

Then why don't these numbers agree with those below?

For Czechia, I counted 57, with Czechia being ~79,000 km in area, having a 1.39 factor.

For Korea, I counted 137 with it being ~223,000 km in area and having a 1.63 factor.

And I did say they are not far from comparable, but no, they are not equally saturated with Locations.

It already has more locations, the question is: why should it have a higher density of locations given it’s already comparable to a country smack in the middle if Europe? I’ve not heard an actual case for that, just cries of “eurocentrism!” under a region which already has a comparable density of locations to Europe.

Don't lump me in with the others, I have said no such thing.

 

[Sizvahstar]

Give a case for why Japan and Korea specifically should get a significantly increased location count, given they’re already an extreme outlier compared to the rest of Asia.

Why should "the rest of Asia" be the benchmark and not Europe?
I think it's fair to want similar density, especially when the pop count is that saturated(!) and people should speak up.

Will PDX do a third round? I doubt it, I think we'll see more granularity in future region-specific DLCs (maps being the free update that goes with them) like we have these past years.
It would be nice if the map was actually done and the DLCs could be stuffed with more interesting things, though.

 

[Friedrich von Deutschland]

Then why don't these numbers agree with those below?

And I did say they are not far from comparable, but no, they are not equally saturated with Locations.


Don't lump me in with the others, I have said no such thing.

Sorry, I didn't mean to conflate posters but it happens. I was mostly annoyed because showing a side by side comparison of size is less useful than me giving the actual ratio of land area. As for the exact count not matching up it's because I didn't count Korea's locations, and neither did anyone else until King_Potat. It's pretty close though, and the south is denser so really it's the density tapering off in the north (likely because Korean density is meant to form a gradient between China/Manchuria and Japan) that causes this.

Why should "the rest of Asia" be the benchmark and not Europe?

Because Japan and Korea are in Asia and there's no good reason for them to be held to a different standard. If the location density of Asia is largely unacceptable, as I think it is in the case of India and China, then fine, but Korea and Japan are already in a really good place as is. They are the last place outside of Europe which should be getting a surge of locations. It's very strange for people to be complaining about a lack of new locations here of all reviews.

 

[zeruosi]

인구 지도를 볼 수 있나요?

This is an English forum, so please communicate in English. Alternatively, a bilingual format is acceptable.

 

[zeruosi]

location in Liaodong is equal to seven Korean locations or ten Japanese locations.Any normal person would not consider this reasonable.China needs more locations.View attachment 1315840

I'm genuinely curious about the perspective of those who disagree respectfully—how do they justify that a region with a population density comparable to North Korea or Japan has only one-tenth the number of tiles???

 

[Friedrich von Deutschland]

I'm genuinely curious about the perspective of those who disagree respectfully—how do they justify that a region with a population density comparable to North Korea or Japan has only one-tenth the number of tiles???

While I agree that China is underpopulated in terms of locations, especially in this panhandle, Japan genuinely has to be this dense. There are a lot of tags crammed in there which will become settled countries eventually, so I think that justifies a much higher density than the rest of Asia. You also picked a rather unrepresentative location. Dingliao is very large compared not just to korean or japanese locations, but other chinese locations. Eyeballing it it's actually comparable to the size of many provinces, so comparing with South Korea it's less like 1:7, and more like 6:7 or even 7:7. Now I agree that's a problem for Dingliao and its surrounding locations, this area between China Proper and Korea shouldn't have such a dip in location density, but it's not representative of China at large.

Edit: to be clear I'm not one of the people who disagreed, I'm just giving my opinion and speculating why others may have reacted negatively. I'd also add that your making the "Japan and Korea" review about China, which might rub some the wrong way, though it doesn't bother me personally.

 

[zeruosi]

View attachment 1315877
Dandong's name wasn't Dandong in 14th century. Its former name was Jiulian. It was abandoned when qing conquered the liaodong, and was rebuilt by Qing dynasty in 1874 as Andong county. After communists won the chinese civil war, they considered its name too imperialistic and changed it to Dandong, which means 'red east'.
Or, were there any maoists in yuan dynasty who wanted to change Andong to Dandong? LOL

This kind of issue has occurred multiple times before.
For example, in CK3, there was 'Aerospace Town' in Gansu—a medieval spacefaring nomad settlement.
The new DLC included an incorrect course for the Yi River; that waterway was actually a flood control channel dug by the Communists after 1949, yet the medieval geography team mapped it as historical.
There was also the case of 'Zuoquan Town' on the previous Chinese map.

 

[zeruosi]

While I agree that China is underpopulated in terms of locations, especially in this panhandle, Japan genuinely has to be this dense. There are a lot of tags crammed in there which will become settled countries eventually, so I think that justifies a much higher density than the rest of Asia. You also picked a rather unrepresentative location. Dingliao is very large compared not just to korean or japanese locations, but other chinese locations. Eyeballing it it's actually comparable to the size of many provinces, so comparing with South Korea it's less like 1:7, and more like 6:7 or even 7:7. Now I agree that's a problem for Dingliao and its surrounding locations, this area between China Proper and Korea shouldn't have such a dip in location density, but it's not representative of China at large.

Edit: to be clear I'm not one of the people who disagreed, I'm just giving my opinion and speculating why others may have reacted negatively. I'd also add that your making the "Japan and Korea" review about China, which might rub some the wrong way, though it doesn't bother me personally.

The person who made that comment wasn't me—I'm just a passerby. Though I might be the most active Chinese player on this forum.

 

[Friedrich von Deutschland]

The person who made that comment wasn't me—I'm just a passerby. Though I might be the most active Chinese player on this forum.

Ah, I should've double checked lol. But yeah I put it down to people being annoyed that someone made review X about region Y, and people recognizing that the location chosen isn't representative of China.

 

[aentrch]

This is an English forum, so please communicate in English. Alternatively, a bilingual format is acceptable.

I used a translator, but the copying was wrong.

 

[zeruosi]

I used a translator, but the copying was wrong.

I've encountered this issue too—the webpage's auto-translation feature keeps re-translating my already-translated English back into Chinese. It's quite awkward.

 

[zeruosi]

Can someone please explain why Tamna is producing horses (albeit being a small island)

The Yuan Dynasty designated Jeju Island as a horse-breeding ground, supplying a significant number of warhorses. Later, the Ming Dynasty also demanded warhorse tributes from Jeju Island—though they primarily sourced warhorses from Ryukyu.

 

[zeruosi]

Ah, I should've double checked lol. But yeah I put it down to people being annoyed that someone made review X about region Y, and people recognizing that the location chosen isn't representative of China.

Chinese provinces were spesifically big in eu4 too, and after seeing India feedback, I am not expecting to see China granular after feedback

Here's some concerning news—I found identical maps created by the same user on Chinese forums. The two circles here represent the Yuan Dynasty's capital (Dadu) and Pudong, Shanghai. When compared to Hokkaido, it's evident that China's most populous and densely populated regions were three times larger than Hokkaido's territory.

Dadu alone had nearly one million residents. During the Ming Dynasty's peak, this area housed 2.49 million people—second only to Suzhou (3 million) and Nanjing (2.8 million). Meanwhile, Hokkaido had merely 30,000 inhabitants until the Meiji era.

The contrast is staggering！

Disclaimer: I don’t intend to derail this thread, but the scale difference is so extreme that it inevitably evokes comparisons to EU4's absurdly simplified Ming Dynasty—where regions were as sparsely populated as the Sahara Desert or Siberian permafrost."

 

[Lakigigar]

I'm not sure what you expected...View attachment 1315845

Why is Mount Paektu not included?

Paektu Mountain - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The mountain's caldera was formed by an eruption in 946 that released about 100–120 km3 (24–29 cu mi) of tephra. The eruption was among the largest and most powerful eruptions on Earth in the last 5,000 years. The volcano last erupted in 1903, and is expected to erupt around every hundred years. In the 2010s, concerns over an upcoming eruption prompted several countries to commission research into when the volcano might next erupt.

The mountain is considered culturally important to multiple groups in the area, including Korean, Chinese, and Manchu people. The mountain is a major national symbol for both North and South Korea, and is mentioned in both national anthems and depicted on the national emblem of North Korea. The Manchu people also consider the mountain their ancestral homeland, and the Chinese Qing dynasty saw it as a symbol of imperial power and the mountain had been subject to territorial disputes over the past few centuries.

 

[Balovanka_from]

It seems to me that a new product has appeared - beeswax. It's great.

 

[Maki97]

Seems like Korea and Japan are gonna be pretty strong. Will definitely do a Korea run when it comes out. Wondering how much custom content are they gonna get.

 

[Freshplayer]

Why is Mount Paektu not included?

Paektu Mountain - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I have talked about this.

No volcano in the Mountain Changbai/ Paektu Mountain?

View attachment 1316095
View attachment 1316098

Fuji Mountain vacalnic activies recorded in 1435, 1436, 1511, 1707, 1708, and 1854. 6 years in the timeframe.

Changbai/Paektu Mountain vacalnic activies in 1373, 1401, 1403, 1405, 1406, 1573, 1597, 1654, 1668, 1673, and 1702. 11 years in the timeframe.