• 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.

Naranjito

Second Lieutenant
Mar 26, 2018
199
0
In this thread, I will try to give ideas (with historical basis) so that developers understand a little better about the Kingdom of Castilla and Spain.

I think there are several errors, both globally and Spain, that is, at the macro level, as errors at the micro level, that is, between the Spanish provinces.

I'm going to divide it into several phases:

1 - On the development of Spain at a global level, in relation to Western Europe.
2- On the development of Castilla and its provinces (Adjustment at the micro level, equilibrium)
3- Missions, Ideas for the game and new characters


With the aim of adjusting a little to the reality of historical events, always knowing that it does not have to be 100% identical to the facts.

1 - On the development of Spain at a global level

It is not my intention to create a monster, or want an oversized and antihistorical Spain, but I think the level of development is not fair.

Kingdom of Castile. 277 points
Kingdom of Aragon (only Spain), 117
Kingdom of Portugal, 114

Poland-Lithuania, 488
United Kingdom, in total between England, Scotland and Ireland, over 400

France, should be around 750
Italy, about 681

All right:

Population levels.

05.jpg


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_population_in_1500

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_population_in_1600

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medieval_demography

Estimated levels of GDP per capita:

main-qimg-3557b58f7979c9d0c915cbfb146fcf51


That is, the levels of development of Pib per capita Spain between 1450 and 1600 are similar to France and Germany, so it was not particularly underdeveloped, in the first half of the game.

We have several scandalous comparisons:

1- Spain with more population and GDP than Poland-Lithuania, has less development, 382 vs 488
2- The comparison between Portugal and Spain is not adjusted either. 382 vs 114. When between population and more gdp, it could be between 6 and 9 times, between 1450 and 1600.
3- The comparison between Spain and the Nordic countries, I will not even enter
4- The comparison between Spain and the United Kingdom, also does not fit during the first half of the game. 382 vs 400. In 1500 Spain could have 40% more development and in 1600 20%. I am not against more love for the state that grew the most during the game, the United Kingdom, as more provinces, good grounds and favorable events between 1650-1800.
5- However, the comparison between Spain and France and Spain and Italy, if it fits well to reality, which is striking. Is not the small ones favored for the game? Then, why is Spain half the size of France?

This figure is unfair, it is striking how Spain is the only country well represented in relation to France or Italy. Something that does not happen with Portugal, the United Kingdom, Poland-Lithuania, the Nordic countries and practically nobody.

It is more Castilla should be the only nation underrepresented in relation to France, at least in Europe.

From the analysis of these data, for my Spain should be at the level of Poland-Lithuania, about 480-490.
It would be 20% that the United Kingdom, which seems fair if we take into account that Spain will have fewer provinces and less farmland and grassland.
And about 4 times Portugal, something that would be more realistic, and similar to what it would be at the end of the game period, 1820.
In addition, the Kingdom of Naples, its 100 points, should be won in the war and not given away (Italian Wars, I'll talk about this later).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italian_Wars

I also believe that France and Italy could receive 100-150 points of development separately, for balance and reality issues.


2- On the development of Castile and its provinces

If globally, Spain is poorly represented, at the micro level, there are many failures: provinces, Castilla vs. Aragon, climate, land, shortage of provinces in Castilla ...

I will try to solve issues like this:
Is la mancha the richest province in Spain with its gold mine?
Is there no winter in Spain? Is the north the coldest?
Is Rosellon or Murcia richer than Leon, Burgos or Valladolid?
Is Salamanca the richest province?
Does Catalonia have 5 times the population of Galicia?

a) Kingdom of Castilla vs Kingdom of Aragon

According to the game, the Crown of Aragon was richer than the Crown of Castile, it is reflected in the number of provinces, the density per km2, the density of development ... This is an ABERRATION, as Rosellon has more development than historical provinces from Spain as Leon, Burgos or Valladolid.

It is the most unfortunate mistake of the game, Castilla should have more density of provinces than Aragon. According to the game:
Castilla: 400,000 km2 - 26 provinces - 277 points
Aragon: 100,000 km2 - 11 provinces - 117 points.

Reality:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_population_in_1500

Castilla had around 6 times the number of inhabitants that Aragon. Even in 1820 it still has about 4 times the population.

Most of the most populated cities were in Castile:

http://exponente1.blogspot.com.es/2016/08/las-20-ciudades-mas-pobladas-del.html

More reality (pages 14 and up are the most populated cities in Europe starting from 1400):

https://books.google.es/books?id=Xi...Fell to Spain and was treated harshly&f=false

And finally, this documentation that we will use later to observe the provincial balance of Spain (page 400 onwards). This is fundamental to analyze how Spain was developed.

https://castellavetula.files.wordpress.com/2012/07/1829-libro-de-los-millones.pdf

In short, Castilla should be between 380-390 and Aragon between 105-110, and being very generous with Aragon.


b) How the Crown of Castile and Spain should be established:


OK, I hope to have convinced you about the rise in Castilla's level of development.

But how to establish the development of Castile?

Were there important cities?

We will use these 3 documents:

https://castellavetula.files.wordpress.com/2012/07/1829-libro-de-los-millones.pdf

Basic to understand it:
-Leon + Ponferrada = Leon
- Burgos + Tierras del Condestable = Burgos
- Trasmiera = Cantabria
-Valladolid + Conde de Benavente = Valladolid
- Asturias = Asturias
-Zamora + Toro = Zamora
-Palencia, Avila, Segovia, Toledo, Guadalajara ...
Archbishop's Office of Toledo = Toledo + Madrid + Guadalajara
- Sevilla: Sevilla + Cadiz + Huelva
-Cuenca + Huete = Cuenca
-Trujillo = Extremadura
-Ciudad Real + Campo de Calatrava = Ciudad Real or La Mancha
- Alcaraz + Campo de Montiel = Albacete
-Castilla Orden Santiago = Toledo + Ciudad Real + Albacete + Jaen
- Order of Santiago de Leon = Extremadura + Salamanca
-Murcia = Murcia + part of Albacete

Inb6jay.png


Euro-Cities_1500-1800.jpg


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_European_cities_in_history

That is, Granada was the most populated city in Europe in 1450, Seville was one of the most populated in Europe in almost all the development of the game, Valencia and Barcelona also remained almost always.

But not everything is the subject of the cities, since provinces such as Leon or Burgos were very populated, with a high density and did not have large cities. Galicia without large cities was also very densely populated.

For me in Castilla the highest level should be: Granada, Sevilla, Toledo, Burgos, Leon and Valladolid.
Granada is certain that it lost population, and if the Muslims of Spain are expelled, they should lose development.

Provinces that would eliminate:

La Rioja, does not appear in ancient history. Belongs to Burgos and Soria
Galicia, to divide it into 4 provinces.

New provinces:

Galicia: Santiago, Pontevedra, Lugo and orense
Castilla La Vieja: Palencia, Avila and Segovia
Leon: Zamora
Extremadura: Merida
Castilla La Nueva: Guadalajara and Albacete
Andalucia: Huelva and Malaga

Total 13-2 = 11 new provinces.

This would be approximately the map:

4821A396AE442B9D84B4C2E4C3A3C94F20A477BD


My Balance: (adjusting the size, Cantabria could be densely populated like Burgos but it is 3 times smaller)

NORTH: 34
ASTURIAS: 9
CANTABRIA: 6 (this is a miniprovince already established by the game)
VIZCAYA: 10
NAVARRA: 9 (I would put a strong)

GALICIA: 39
SANTIAGO: 11
PONTEVEDRA: 6
LUGO: 10
ORENSE: 9

CASTILLA: 72
BURGOS: 17 (very populated)
VALLADOLID: 15 (Valladolid and Medina del Campo, I would give you an expensive resource, it was almost capital)
SORIA: 10
AVILA: 10
SEGOVIA: 10
PALENCIA: 10

TOLEDO: 56
TOLEDO: 17
MADRID: 10 (would have a mission to make capital)
GUADALAJARA: 10
CUENCA: 13
CIUDAD REAL: 6 (THERE IS NO GOLD MINE, THERE IS NO, YOU MUST CREATE A CASTILLA THAT DOES NOT DEPEND ON AN NON-EXISTING GOLD MINE)

ANDALUCIA: 47
SEVILLA: 20
HUELVA: 7
CADIZ: 10
CORDOBA: 10

GRANADA: 51
GRANADA: 25 (with loss if the Muslims are cast)
MALAGA: 13
GIBRALTAR: 3
JAEN: 10

EXTREMADURA: 28 (three provinces because I do not want provinces of 20,000 km2)
CACERES: 9
BADAJOZ: 11
MERIDA: 8

LEON: 39
LEON_ 16
ZAMORA: 8
SALAMANCA: 15

MURCIA: 19
MURCIA: 8
ALMERIA: 6
ALBACETE: 5

CANARY ISLANDS: 4

KINGDOM OF CASTILLA: 386

KINGDOM OF ARAGON: 106


CATALONIA: 39
BARCELONA: 16 (with a commercial node instead of Tarragona)
GERONA: 7
URGEL: 6
TARRAGONA: 6
ROSELLON: 4 (mini-province)

VALENCIA: 35
VALENCIA: 18
CASTELLON: 6
ALICANTE: 6
BALEARIC: 5

ARAGON: 32
ZARAGOZA: 14
PYRENEES: 8
TERUEL: 10


c) Physical geography:

Spain is one of the highest regions in Europe.

https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anexo:Capitales_de_provincia_españolas_por_altitud

And in addition most of Spain is the Plateau, with average heights of 650 meters. It is not exactly the highlands of Scotland, I do not know if creating a new land or how to do it, but the land in Spain should be detrimental to development.
There should be few meadows, maybe only in Barcelona and Valencia. Avila and Segovia should be mountains, most of Spain would be plateau, dry land, forests and hills.

OXEeJQja8bz8tsa8K9Y1zjMAdPgemy_gEzh7DKm20spIB3HMdv7YVyCcBZaGvs59B0sZbMgk5306HD--2wZuKSWiZAKah_JjTS8yz9fVRMqsbAwfZChx15QrGzePKJUUQlxYJQ=w1200-h630-p-k-no-nu


As the field must play in favor of England, must play against Spain. The Plateau are meadows but meadows at 600, 700 and 800 meters high.

d) climate

The climate according to Paradox is that in Spain there is no winter except the north, this is a mistake that implies ignorance.

argonautas-2014-grupo-3-presentacin-clima-2-638.jpg


That is, there is no winter in Andalucia, Valencia, Catalonia, Galicia, Asturias, Cantabria and Vizcaya.

In almost all the peninsula if there is winter, in Burgos, Avila, Salamanca, Leon, Madrid, Toledo ... They would be mild winters.

It's silly but you have to change the map, it would be more like Turkey, the areas next to the Sea without winter, the interior with mild winter.

3- Missions, Ideas for the game and new characters

1. Kingdom of Naples

Alfonso V King of Aragon conquered Naples in 1442. In 1458 he died. And the Kingdom is divided among its children, Ferrante the Kingdom of Sicily and John the Kingdom of Aragon.

This is not established in the game, in 1450 the Renaissance appears in Italy, in 1490 most of Italy leaves the Empire, from 1580 the wars of religion in the Empire can explode ...

For me, this fact should be established, Aragon should not stay with Naples, which in turn should not go to the Kingdom of Castile / Spain.

And a mechanism of Italian Wars should be established,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italian_Wars

In short, enough to inherit the Kingdom of Naples, whoever wants to fight it.

In addition, the Kingdom of Naples is badly developed, in that rise of points to Italy, enough should go here. Naples had more population than the kingdom of Aragon as a whole (with Sicily)

2. Kingdom of Granada

Apart from the new province of Malaga and everything already spoken.

Culture should be mudejar.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mudéjar

The expulsion or not of Muslims, should be a choice between the bad and worse. If they stay, more pirates from the north of Africa, less relation with Rome, less prestige (in Europe it was criticized that in Spain there were Jews and Muslims). And if they leave, less development in Granada and economic and / or commercial loss.

Also the ideas of Pomegranates should be very defensive. The war was not easy, the whole territory was very walled, the conquest of Malaga was a very hard siege and to take Granada it was necessary the cannons (powder)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Granada_War

Likewise the conquest instead of improving the army as a reward, should give prestige and relationship with Rome (until the expulsion is requested that a few years may pass). What happened, something similar to the Conquest of Constantinople in the opposite direction.

3. Wedding Iberica

I think it should be a mission.

And from Castile, choose Portugal or Aragon.

From 1250 that remained in the peninsula 4 Kingdoms, Castile, Aragon, Portugal and Granada, always tried by real marriages the unification. The wars that were usually there were for dynastic rights, since the borders really did not touch.
I am not clear about the requirements and others for the mission, which would obviously provoke the war of Castilian succession.

In history a daughter of king and sister of the king looked for allies to reign, one with Portugal and another one with Aragon.

4. Merino sheep

Castilla had no gold mines, no gold (the colonies in South America had more silver than gold), but the best wool in the world.

A wool with which he monopolized at least until 1600. This does not appear in the game, the wool is the same as a normal one of Germany than the merino race. Something that is not true.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merino
https://www.sheepandgoat.com/merinosheep

"So, what's so special about Merinos and their wool? Where do I begin? Merino sheep originated in Spain during the Middle Ages. Spain's wealth was based on fine-wooled Merino sheep. Merinos were a protected resource, so valuable that it was a capital offense to export to single sheep. It was not until Napoleon invaded Spain that the world gained access to these incredible sheep. "

5. Pirates of North Africa

They should come back in another DLC or expansion. And markets of slaves in North Africa and Ottomans.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbary_pirates

At least Spain, Portugal, Italy and France would have to have facts and missions related to this.

6. Hispanic bankruptcy

It would create a new disaster for Spain, related to a historical event such as the suspension of payments in Spain.
It could be related to wars, rebels and loans (since bankruptcy is almost impossible in the game).

From 1560 and until 1700, if you have X numbers of loans and you are at war or there are rebels, this conflict breaks out that would cause:

Less income from taxes, production and commercial. A negative for development. All this for X years.

I do not know, something like that. This happened and you can get into the game.

7. The tercios

I would put this character,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gonzalo_Fernández_de_Córdoba

He was the father of the thirds.
It could be a general who contributed 1 point of monthly splendor only applicable to the thirds, in Mandate of Heaven.

8. Madrid capital

It should be a mission, if Spain has been formed, 5 or more colonies, Madrid can be capital:

+3 development, good textile (which should not have in principle for being a non-rich province) and a development modifier during X years. If you do not have common sense, then +6 or 7 of development.

9. Fleet of the Indies

I would touch this theme, making it global. That is, Holland, France, England wanted to participate in trade and Spain that was their monopoly.

There should be pirates, corsairs, Spain assigning galleons to defend the Indian fleet ... Maybe give countries like England licenses for pirates in provinces where they could shelter.

I do not know, touch this, establish a global mechanism.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galeón_de_Manila
https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flota_de_Indias

10. The courts of Castilla y Aragon

Here also I accept ideas to put this system of Government, where until 1700, the different parts of the Crown of Spain: Kingdom of Castile, Kingdom of Aragon, Kingdom of Sicily and Kingdom of Naples, had their own laws and courts (parliaments).
 
Upvote 0
I agree it should be split, but it should be split based on cities that were important at the time and using the province boundaries shown in the maps provided. Huelva basically didn't exist then, wheras Antequerra from my research was a pretty important fort at the time.

Huelva was where Christopher Columbus began his journey, so I would not say it was unimportant. :confused:
 
Huelva was where Christopher Columbus began his journey, so I would not say it was unimportant. :confused:
Is it important enough to warrant a whole province though when literally that is the only thing of importance to occur there (or in a town nextdoor according to Gheryon). I think it needs splitting but I'm pretty sure Huelva isn't the right city to name the new province after
 
Also I think the gold mining in ciudad real is related to the mining in Alamden, which I guess would be more accurately gems now?
Just wanted to say the same. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Almadén
The mine seemed to play a bigger role in history, thus should in my opinion stay. But as you propose, maybe as a gem mine - then with a special modifier like the Swedish Darlana copper mine in Falun? Or are there any other examples for mercury mines in game? if yes, what resource are they represented with?
 
4. Merino sheep

Castilla had no gold mines, no gold (the colonies in South America had more silver than gold), but the best wool in the world.

A wool with which he monopolized at least until 1600. This does not appear in the game, the wool is the same as a normal one of Germany than the merino race. Something that is not true.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merino
https://www.sheepandgoat.com/merinosheep

"So, what's so special about Merinos and their wool? Where do I begin? Merino sheep originated in Spain during the Middle Ages. Spain's wealth was based on fine-wooled Merino sheep. Merinos were a protected resource, so valuable that it was a capital offense to export to single sheep. It was not until Napoleon invaded Spain that the world gained access to these incredible sheep. "
Very interesting, I didn't knew about that.
Maybe all spanish wool provinces could receive a bonus to the good produced (like the grain provinces in Egypt) and if another country take one of these province an event could fire after some time increasing the global price of wool and cancelling the spanish provinces' bonus (like the "selective breeding" event increasing the value of cattle). This event would represent the spread of the merino sheep around the world by the foreign country owning the province hence destroying the spanish monopoly on it.
 
Last edited:
As above, the divisions in game imo aren't that huge compared to France. All the provinces in the map I made are the same of Auvergne or smaller (Cuenca is about the same size but I dunno how to split it down more tbh).
The density is indeed high in France, to high in my optinion. I hope it will change someday.
 
I like a lot of your suggestions.

One of the great problems that Spain had going into the 1700s was an inability to make efficient use of its population. In 1707, it was still negotiating lump-sum taxes with the burgers of each city, and by 1780 it was making less than a third the taxes Britian was per head of population. A big reason for this was the separate crowns, cortes, etc., the huge mass of privileges and exemptions which successive monarchs failed to consolidate into a coherent system.

It's been stated several times that development is a kind of average through the game's time period; and in the context of the game what development is is the state's ability to mobilise its resources for building buildings, armies, fleets etc. Taken together, that's at least a prima facie case for a smaller development buff to Spain than the one you've suggested.


A more delicious solution would obviously be to have some concrete dynamic of either growing more (comparatively) inefficient over time, or doing internal work (and fighting rebels) as you struggle to reform the system against local opposition. (This would be a nice dynamic for everyone tbh but Spain had these problems a lot more than most.) But I at least don't have time to flesh such a suggestion out.
I think that this so called inability to raise money should not be represented directly as development, but rather as provincial autonomy; and also use the potential of the new Government Reforms (I.e, having to pass laws to centralize the kingdom, reduce the Cortes influence and the separate Crown privileges).

Any country could have followed a similar course even with a high pop and GDP per capita; if it was unable to impose centralization to its local provinces, governors and vassals
 
I would like to see an immersion pack for Spain focused more on their European "adventures" rather than also split time focusing on the colonial world, i would save that for another DLC to properly flesh out South America and Mexico.
I would like no more Immersion Pack; but instead a DLC focused on expanding not only Iberia but also its subservient territories, I.e Italy, Burgundy and the New world colonization... in which Spain doesn’t really make miracles so far (when did it ever conquer Inca, maya or Aztec provinces before Great Britain did, unless player-managed ?)

I do totally agree that Central America deserves a deep overhaul (maya city states are inexistant, although there are enough provinces to represent it; and Aztec provinces and rival kingdoms are really lacking )
 
I would like no more Immersion Pack; but instead a DLC focused on expanding not only Iberia but also its subservient territories, I.e Italy, Burgundy and the New world colonization... in which Spain doesn’t really make miracles so far (when did it ever conquer Inca, maya or Aztec provinces before Great Britain did, unless player-managed ?)

I do totally agree that Central America deserves a deep overhaul (maya city states are inexistant, although there are enough provinces to represent it; and Aztec provinces and rival kingdoms are really lacking )


Well, that would be ideal, maybe Immersion for Iberia and an expansion focused on colonization would be best?

I have a lot to say on how the game handles the "colonization" of Mexico and the Inca, i understand the myths that exist and how they are expressed in the game. But if you want "historical" expansion of colonial holdings then war-making is not really the way to represent it. I think a key change should be that colonization doesn't requiere Ideas, this unbalances the game in my opinion, colonization should be a more integral part of the game, anyone (who can afford it) should be able to do it, it improves with tech and anyone who funds voyages of exploration (should be very expensive but Spain and Portugal should have early discounts) it would also open up space for further reforms of idea sets.

The goal for me would be to add more flexibility to the game, countries can and will focus on exploration and colonization but not be locked in to that path and will get out of colonization as much as they invest in it, but they can pivot and focus on continental matters at any time (as Spain and France did) without sacrificing idea groups to exploration and colonization that can be achieved.


What happened historically in the Americas is that the Spanish formed a core that lead revolts against the Aztecs and the Inca. In the case of the Inca they even installed their own puppet emperors and established alliances with the nobility both of the Inca and the important nations that formed the empire it was the only way to "conquer" the Empire that expands millions of km2 and millions of people.

As an example there were many battles and the Spanish were never more than 5% or less of the fighting force, how they managed to consolidate their holdings? in the subsequent 50 years, 90% of the population died due to waves of diseases and only then did the Spanish managed to finalize their "conquest" and slowly discarded their allied nobility or converted them, now as mestizos, into "American Spanish" the descendants of this now mixed native nobility ruled their Haciendas even unto the 1970's in Peru. It is notable that the Inca Empire territory was "quickly" integrated, but the tribal land south, what is now Chile and Argentina which was a patchwork of endless amounts of villages and nomad tribes without any coherent form of government took until the XIX century to be conquered by the independent republics, not even the Spanish. The myths alluding to absolute military superiority of the Spanish vs the Natives is just that, a myth.

I want an expansion focused on colonization and separated from Iberia expansion, so that all of this subtleties are implemented into the game and of course they can be used in other regions of the world to also flesh them out. Honestly the best way to represent it in the game would be more similar to an HRE-like empire that the Spanish become the emperors and then consolidate their rule, not as it is now, were the Europeans are some sort of supermen who can defeat the Aztecs and the Inca on the field of battle easily.
 
Well, that would be ideal, maybe Immersion for Iberia and an expansion focused on colonization would be best?

I have a lot to say on how the game handles the "colonization" of Mexico and the Inca, i understand the myths that exist and how they are expressed in the game. But if you want "historical" expansion of colonial holdings then war-making is not really the way to represent it. I think a key change should be that colonization doesn't requiere Ideas, this unbalances the game in my opinion, colonization should be a more integral part of the game, anyone (who can afford it) should be able to do it, it improves with tech and anyone who funds voyages of exploration (should be very expensive but Spain and Portugal should have early discounts) it would also open up space for further reforms of idea sets.

The goal for me would be to add more flexibility to the game, countries can and will focus on exploration and colonization but not be locked in to that path and will get out of colonization as much as they invest in it, but they can pivot and focus on continental matters at any time (as Spain and France did) without sacrificing idea groups to exploration and colonization that can be achieved.


What happened historically in the Americas is that the Spanish formed a core that lead revolts against the Aztecs and the Inca. In the case of the Inca they even installed their own puppet emperors and established alliances with the nobility both of the Inca and the important nations that formed the empire it was the only way to "conquer" the Empire that expands millions of km2 and millions of people.

As an example there were many battles and the Spanish were never more than 5% or less of the fighting force, how they managed to consolidate their holdings? in the subsequent 50 years, 90% of the population died due to waves of diseases and only then did the Spanish managed to finalize their "conquest" and slowly discarded their allied nobility or converted them, now as mestizos, into "American Spanish" the descendants of this now mixed native nobility ruled their Haciendas even unto the 1970's in Peru. It is notable that the Inca Empire territory was "quickly" integrated, but the tribal land south, what is now Chile and Argentina which was a patchwork of endless amounts of villages and nomad tribes without any coherent form of government took until the XIX century to be conquered by the independent republics, not even the Spanish. The myths alluding to absolute military superiority of the Spanish vs the Natives is just that, a myth.

I want an expansion focused on colonization and separated from Iberia expansion, so that all of this subtleties are implemented into the game and of course they can be used in other regions of the world to also flesh them out. Honestly the best way to represent it in the game would be more similar to an HRE-like empire that the Spanish become the emperors and then consolidate their rule, not as it is now, were the Europeans are some sort of supermen who can defeat the Aztecs and the Inca on the field of battle easily.
How does any of this disprove that the Spanish were militarily superior?
 
How does any of this disprove that the Spanish were militarily superior?
well, the spanish had better tactics and equipment than americans, but lacked the number to take advantage of them, the spanish armies that conquered america were formed basically of indigenous, plus some spanish with them. i guess he was refering to that.
Hernan Cortes in the final siege of tenochtitlan had an army around of 200.000, of which only around 1000 were spanish, ingame you cant do something like this.
 
well, the spanish had better tactics and equipment than americans, but lacked the number to take advantage of them, the spanish armies that conquered america were formed basically of indigenous, plus some spanish with them. i guess he was refering to that.
Hernan Cortes in the final siege of tenochtitlan had an army around of 200.000, of which only around 1000 were spanish, ingame you cant do something like this.

For that you'd need to implement a system where natives have armies that size that cannot be defeated by european normal sized armies and then a mechanic so you can use their own armies to fight your enemies and conquer. That' be cool to be honest.
 
For that you'd need to implement a system where natives have armies that size that cannot be defeated by european normal sized armies and then a mechanic so you can use their own armies to fight your enemies and conquer. That' be cool to be honest.
It’s all quite pointless with the current ease of transporting troops accross the oceans.
 
@DDRJake

NEW IBERIA PROVINCES SUGGESTION

zivnk5.jpg


I've made modified the actual provinces map taking into account: population, relevance, wealth and troop paths.

Now historic areas are much more accurate than before. I've respected the 3-5 provinces by area "rule".

OLD PROVINCE -> NEW PROVINCES
- Lisboa -> Lisboa, Leiria
- Galicia -> Coruña, Lugo, Pontevedra
- León -> León, Zamora
- Castilla La Vieja -> Valladolid, Ávila
- Cuenca -> Cuenca, Albacete
- Navarra -> Navarra, Labort
- Valencia -> Valencia, Castelló
- Granada -> Granada, Málaga
- Sevilla -> Sevilla, Huelva

Madrid shouldn't be 2 moves away from the coast as it is, so I've changed near provinces to make it harder (longer) to get to Madrid.

Labort (Labourd) has been fixed. A new name should be given to the new upper French province. I think Landes could be the right name. What I don't know, though, is if Navarre should start owning this new Labort province. I think in 1444 (new) Labort was owned by England, but I'm not sure though.
 
How does any of this disprove that the Spanish were militarily superior?


Because the pop version of the history is that 100 spaniards conquiered empires of millions of people alone.

And so in the game native empires, nations organizing millions of people and in the case of the Inca dozens of millions across millions of km2 have 1/1/1 tech... and its almost impossible to keep up until the Europeans arrive and you... reform your religion? which the AI never does. While both the Aztec and the Inca could both field huge armies and in the case of the Inca they could actually raise several of them, the amount of provinces and development in the game right now is far too restrictive to allow that. Maybe they could have a malus on military tech because they didn't had Iron weapons or horses and so that needs to be reformed after contact with the outside world, but that's not required out of any other civilization in the game like the African tribes so its strange that they would put a limiter on tech development on advanced developed urban empires, that actually did adopt all the new weapons and tactics very quickly, its just that the heavely biased, Spanish version of the story they told the world elected to avoid mentioning things like that. But the records exist, they still are there in the Archivo de Indias in Seville, 80 million pages and over 8000 maps concerning the administration of the American territories, but there is extensive documentation in Lima and i'm sure in Mexico City aswell, for example, trials where the indigenous allies demanded payment from the "conquistadores" for hiring out their armies to help them defeat the Inca or the many revolts that came after, Lima was attacked several times by nearby rulers but where repelled by other "Caciques" allied to the Spanish, usually by marriage, while the "official" history simply portrayed the "indigenous hordes" as stupid, indisciplined, ineffective, etc and there was no mention of native allies and that the Spanish did all the fighting and winning, even through it made no sense on a tactical level. And then, since the plagues reduced the population by 90% and in some more rural areas by 100%, absolute control was eventually imposed by the Spanish authorities the native nobles and conquistadors intermarried and became the new elite and so it now was in their best interest that the Spanish point of view was maintained and promulgated, there was a "foreignization" of the native ruling class that, as i said before, in Perú it did not end until the 1970's, and in Mexico it lasted until the Mexican Revolution in the 1910's, but i'm as familiar with their history to be 100% sure about that.
 
@DDRJake

NEW IBERIA PROVINCES SUGGESTION

zivnk5.jpg


I've made modified the actual provinces map taking into account: population, relevance, wealth and troop paths.

Now historic areas are much more accurate than before. I've respected the 3-5 provinces by area "rule".

OLD PROVINCE -> NEW PROVINCES
- Lisboa -> Lisboa, Leiria
- Galicia -> Coruña, Lugo, Pontevedra
- León -> León, Zamora
- Castilla La Vieja -> Valladolid, Ávila
- Cuenca -> Cuenca, Albacete
- Navarra -> Navarra, Labort
- Valencia -> Valencia, Castelló
- Granada -> Granada, Málaga
- Sevilla -> Sevilla, Huelva

Madrid shouldn't be 2 moves away from the coast as it is, so I've changed near provinces to make it harder (longer) to get to Madrid.

Labort (Labourd) has been fixed. A new name should be given to the new upper French province. I think Landes could be the right name. What I don't know, though, is if Navarre should start owning this new Labort province. I think in 1444 (new) Labort was owned by England, but I'm not sure though.
This is even worse than the original imo. You have lleida and Tarragona flipped (and Lledia was really unimportant during the time frame). Heulva again, I get that it is part of modern day spain but why is it so popular? Same issue with Albacete. Dunno why you would choose Pontevedra over Santiago either.
 
Because the pop version of the history is that 100 spaniards conquiered empires of millions of people alone.

And so in the game native empires, nations organizing millions of people and in the case of the Inca dozens of millions across millions of km2 have 1/1/1 tech... and its almost impossible to keep up until the Europeans arrive and you... reform your religion? which the AI never does. While both the Aztec and the Inca could both field huge armies and in the case of the Inca they could actually raise several of them, the amount of provinces and development in the game right now is far too restrictive to allow that. Maybe they could have a malus on military tech because they didn't had Iron weapons or horses and so that needs to be reformed after contact with the outside world, but that's not required out of any other civilization in the game like the African tribes so its strange that they would put a limiter on tech development on advanced developed urban empires, that actually did adopt all the new weapons and tactics very quickly, its just that the heavely biased, Spanish version of the story they told the world elected to avoid mentioning things like that. But the records exist, they still are there in the Archivo de Indias in Seville, 80 million pages and over 8000 maps concerning the administration of the American territories, but there is extensive documentation in Lima and i'm sure in Mexico City aswell, for example, trials where the indigenous allies demanded payment from the "conquistadores" for hiring out their armies to help them defeat the Inca or the many revolts that came after, Lima was attacked several times by nearby rulers but where repelled by other "Caciques" allied to the Spanish, usually by marriage, while the "official" history simply portrayed the "indigenous hordes" as stupid, indisciplined, ineffective, etc and there was no mention of native allies and that the Spanish did all the fighting and winning, even through it made no sense on a tactical level. And then, since the plagues reduced the population by 90% and in some more rural areas by 100%, absolute control was eventually imposed by the Spanish authorities the native nobles and conquistadors intermarried and became the new elite and so it now was in their best interest that the Spanish point of view was maintained and promulgated, there was a "foreignization" of the native ruling class that, as i said before, in Perú it did not end until the 1970's, and in Mexico it lasted until the Mexican Revolution in the 1910's, but i'm as familiar with their history to be 100% sure about that.
I agree that the in many ways advanced Mexican and Inca civilisations having level 1 admin tech is inaccurate. I think it’s because all nations accross all start dates have equal tech numbers between adm/dip/mil, and mil is rightly used as reference, as it is the most important one.

Yes, the Spanish had help from large numbers of native allies. I agree, a few hundred conquistadors could not have conquered the empires without these allies. HOWEVER, this does not disprove Spanish miIitary superiority. Just think of the morale impact these foreigners, whose weapons made the sound of thunder, whose armour glittered in the sun and who on their mounts were far taller than any man, would have had on the native armies! I don’t think the Spanish role was insignificant, even if often exaggerated. With the tens of thousands of European troops that are needed to accomplish the same thing in the game, it is only justified that native allies aren’t used. Although I would totally support a mechanic that represents them so colonisers don’t need to send a quarter of their army.

You mention plagues. What do these plagues do in the game? Do they reduce development, cause massive devastation and attrition, change the culture of conquered land, render empires unable to fight back? No. The Incan and Mexican empires in the game are abhorringly overpowered, and regularly persist until the very late game. You actually want the AI to reform their religion and become militarily advanced, for the sake of historical accuracy? This will only lead to less accurate results. The natives need a nerf, not a buff.
 
This is even worse than the original imo. You have lleida and Tarragona flipped (and Lledia was really unimportant during the time frame). Heulva again, I get that it is part of modern day spain but why is it so popular? Same issue with Albacete. Dunno why you would choose Pontevedra over Santiago either.
Ups, true about Tarragona, I obviously know where Lleida and Tarragona are, it's just that I did it fast and flipped them.

About province "popularity": for example, a Huelva province shoud be added not because Huelva was popular, but because Seville was popular, so it is unfair to have Seville be represented in a huge province. Seville deserves it's own province, not sharing a huge enourmous province that borders with Portugal. Do you follow what I'm saying?