Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

Announcing Clio : A new map for Victoria : Revolutions

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Palisadoes said:
China map: is "Taibei" a typo?? I thought it was "Taipei" ???
Click to expand...

I think that Taipei is the Wade-Giles romanisation, Taibei is the Pinyin. Taipei is one of the cases where despite Pinyin being the official romanisation in China and Taiwan, the Wade-Giles has been kept in most instances.
 
Hi

Sorry I have already posted this a few pages ago, but haven't got any replies.

So, please at least take a minute to reply.


molace said:
Hi, I just like to inform you that in Hungary, the province name "Bekescsab" is incorrect. It should be named "Bekescsaba". I see that you ran out of space for the name, but try to squeze that "a" in it, please.

In Transylvania the province of "Oradea". Every province around it is named by its hungarian name, and this area had a hungarian majority during most of the game period so this should be called by that too. It's hungarian name is "Nagyvarad".
The other is "Targu Mures", this area even now has a hungarian(szekely) majority. It should be called "Marosvasarhely".
And both areas were under Austrian/Hungarian control until 1920.(So most of the game period)

And in my opinion the province "Banska Bystrica" should be called "Žilina" as Žilina is the biggest city in that region.

And the eastern part of the province of "Gyor" should be included in "Budapest", because that area even may include parts of the city of Budapest.



If you don't believe me look in wikipedia. If you don't believe wikipedia go to a library.
(Sorry for my bad grammar)
Click to expand...
 
whats the current progress on the mod? For thre purposes of a home made EU3 to Ricky converter, is it done enough to grab the provinces and map mod and do conversion our self? Also whats the status on getting a 1836 scenario?

Thanks for the efforts.
 
Have you done the country files yet? If so, can I see them? If not, can I help you make them? :)
 
Suggestion for the Caribbean:

Around the Bahamas islands there are three sea zones. There is one to the right, one to the left and one above the islands. I suggest making the one on the left go around the Bahamas islands in the third sea zone, since they are a complete island chain. It would make for more realistic sea invasion.
 
I'll understand if you can't change it at this point, because I literally should have noticed it years ago and its not a very big issue, but the Lubbock province in Texas should extend a bit further south at the expense of El Paso. To around the corner of New Mexico. That area is geographically and culturally more Great Plains than Southwest, not to mention it's iffy whether the current Lubbock province actually includes Lubbock. Considering I'm the who suggested that province be called Lubbock, I feel pretty stupid.
 
Thanks for all the comments on errors/problems, I am currently working through them or at least giving them consideration.

One question I have is regarding seazones. In EU2-engine based games the seazone names did not appear on the map, only via a pop-up text when you hover your mouse over a sea province. In the EU3-engine based games the names of the sea provinces are depicted in game just as the land ones are. Now, we could add the sea province names to be depicted directly on the map here for Clio if so desired, or we could leave them off and have the names only appear via hovering your mouse over the sea province.

Both approaches have pluses and minuses - it would make it easier to find a seazone to have its name appear directly on the map, but at the same time it also means more names on the map, which might to some make the map seem "cluttered" and over-texted.

Which do you think would be better - to have the names of the seazones on the map or not?
 
Last edited:
I wouldn't like to have the names of seazones on the map. I think it would be too cluttered - especially considering how some island chains have the one sea zone around them (the letters could be too close??).

EDIT: I also see PW's point about the Bahamas. Perhaps it would be nice to have it all in one sea zone.

Also, would renaming "Tasmania" as "Hobart" cause any conflicts with any other names on map??
 
Last edited:
I'd prefer to have clean nameless oceans, myself.

I also agree with the Tasmania -> Hobart thing. I suppose that it wasn't worth finding space to make Tassie 2 provinces?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back