Here´s the place to discuss all province related issues (owner changes, religion, population etc.) to be addressed in the IMPROVED GRAND CAMPAIGN. 
Hartmann
Hartmann
-
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.
Okay, I'll start off then:
Is it possible tp change the type of trade goods a province produces? If so, there are a lot of changes that should be done, IMHO. If it isn't I'll guess we'll have to wait for EU2.
Vandelay
Is it possible tp change the type of trade goods a province produces? If so, there are a lot of changes that should be done, IMHO. If it isn't I'll guess we'll have to wait for EU2.
Vandelay
I think we can do this by editing province.csv (quite a drag, though). Any suggestions yet?
Hartmann
Salve wrote:
'About Ingermanland - I looked at four different map sources for the period and there is no agreement. That is, one indicates that the area was part of Novgorod, but that would be just prior to the game era (1478). A second indicates it was inhabited by an advanced 'Finnish' culture (preliterate). A third has it controlled by Sweden (which as
a vassal of Denmark). A fourth also indicates that the southern half was Russian and the northern half was Swedish territory.
I think there is sufficient doubt as to real 'ownership' to justify allocating it to the Teutonic Order on game balance interests. Also, all the maps indicate that the Order
did control land at least as far east as Narva and clearly the area was heavily contested as well as difficult to settle and exploit until the advent of more advanced technology and better social organization.
Hartmann wrote:
'I tend to agree with Savant here. Generally I think that the game designers reached a quite good compromise between historical accuracy and gameplay concerning the Baltic region - they were not so lucky with other areas.'
No matter, if there are play balance reasons for it belonging to the Teutonic Order. I don't want to introduce changes against designer's intent.
OTOH, the area belonged to the Novgorites since early Middle Ages. Battle of Neva 241? was a Novgorod victory and so was the siege of the Swedish fortress where S:t Petersburg is now.
Rgds,
Johan
'About Ingermanland - I looked at four different map sources for the period and there is no agreement. That is, one indicates that the area was part of Novgorod, but that would be just prior to the game era (1478). A second indicates it was inhabited by an advanced 'Finnish' culture (preliterate). A third has it controlled by Sweden (which as
a vassal of Denmark). A fourth also indicates that the southern half was Russian and the northern half was Swedish territory.
I think there is sufficient doubt as to real 'ownership' to justify allocating it to the Teutonic Order on game balance interests. Also, all the maps indicate that the Order
did control land at least as far east as Narva and clearly the area was heavily contested as well as difficult to settle and exploit until the advent of more advanced technology and better social organization.
Hartmann wrote:
'I tend to agree with Savant here. Generally I think that the game designers reached a quite good compromise between historical accuracy and gameplay concerning the Baltic region - they were not so lucky with other areas.'
No matter, if there are play balance reasons for it belonging to the Teutonic Order. I don't want to introduce changes against designer's intent.
OTOH, the area belonged to the Novgorites since early Middle Ages. Battle of Neva 241? was a Novgorod victory and so was the siege of the Swedish fortress where S:t Petersburg is now.
Rgds,
Johan
I think the balance issue involved here are
- Russia shouldn´t get to the sea too early (and I also think they weren´t in 1492, I may be wrong, though).
- The order is stuck between a rock and a hard place anyway and it shouldn´t go too early (but weren´t they also present in the region? Again I´m not sure)
Nothing prevents us from discussing this (and other things) further, though! We (at least me) always learned something by doing that in the past.
Regards, Hartmann
[This message has been edited by Hartmann (edited 19-02-2001).]
- Russia shouldn´t get to the sea too early (and I also think they weren´t in 1492, I may be wrong, though).
- The order is stuck between a rock and a hard place anyway and it shouldn´t go too early (but weren´t they also present in the region? Again I´m not sure)
Nothing prevents us from discussing this (and other things) further, though! We (at least me) always learned something by doing that in the past.
Regards, Hartmann
[This message has been edited by Hartmann (edited 19-02-2001).]
As just an aside here.. 'Salve' is a contemporary Italian greeting.
------------------
~ Salve ~
------------------
~ Salve ~
I tried to get an opinion from the spanish forum members about the aragonese issue but they took it as a personal offense or something.
My point is that if sweden appears as a vassal of denmark in 1492 when they were two(three if we count in norway?) separate countries with one monarch why shouldnt the other countries countries in europe be treated the same way? At least those countries big enough and that already have a tag assigned to'em. Or would this make france & spain & co. too powerless(?)?
Please explain , I just dont get it. And dont get upset like in the spanish thread, my intention isnt to get ya on the nerves, Im trying to understand and stuff
pcongre da pole
My point is that if sweden appears as a vassal of denmark in 1492 when they were two(three if we count in norway?) separate countries with one monarch why shouldnt the other countries countries in europe be treated the same way? At least those countries big enough and that already have a tag assigned to'em. Or would this make france & spain & co. too powerless(?)?
Please explain , I just dont get it. And dont get upset like in the spanish thread, my intention isnt to get ya on the nerves, Im trying to understand and stuff
pcongre da pole
'Salve' also means 'Hail' in Portuguese. Does it mean the same thing in Italian or is it like 'Hello' or 'Hi'? Or is that 'Ciao'?
Originally posted by pcongre:
I tried to get an opinion from the spanish forum members about the aragonese issue but they took it as a personal offense or something.
My point is that if sweden appears as a vassal of denmark in 1492 when they were two(three if we count in norway?) separate countries with one monarch why shouldnt the other countries countries in europe be treated the same way? At least those countries big enough and that already have a tag assigned to'em. Or would this make france & spain & co. too powerless(?)?
Please explain , I just dont get it. And dont get upset like in the spanish thread, my intention isnt to get ya on the nerves, Im trying to understand and stuff
pcongre da pole
Indeed gameplay issues have to be taken into account, too. Spain and France shouldn´t be too weak. But from a historical viewpoint I would seriously consider to implement Aragon and Bretagne as Spanish/French vassals with good relations already close to annexation point. Should maybe do the job - but would have to be tested of course. Another advantage of this would be, that a human player could actually choose Bretagne or Aragon and REFUSE to be annexed. I´m all for trying it out, but Western and Northern Europe falls into Doomie´s area of competence, so we will have to wait for his return befor e any decision will be made.
Hartmann
Hi all,
I don't know anywhere near enough about Ingermanland in 1492 to really comment on this but i do agree from my source books that it was very contested at this period. I almost feel it should be neutral with a population of natives. The port in the province was not there in 1492. Neither Russia nor Sweden had the infrastructure to drain enough of the swamps to create a dry enough patch of ground for a port at the beginning of this game.
Maybe a population of 2-3000 natives at '3' aggresiveness? that way if you colonize it when it reaches city status the population will rise significantly.
Now, I am working on my Doctorate in Cretan History albeit focusing on an earlier period.
So i can say with some authority that sugar should NOT be the resource for Crete. The Venetians did attempt to grow various new world crops on their island possesions but it never really took off and the Portugese and Dutch were very secretive about the growing of Sugar cane. Probably a more realistic resource would be wool. Maybe fish, but Crete really did not produce enough fish to export on a signifacant level.
Another province that is incorrect would be Lebanon; the famed cedars used in ship building that the province was named for are already gone. The last great harvest of the cedars was for the Arab fleet built in 672.
Again, a closer to accurate resource would be wool or wine, although i do not think that there was much of a wine export business in Lebanon at that time.
I kind of wish 'lumber' had been listed as a resource outside of 'shipbuilding supplies'.
In this period you did not build a weapons manufacturie where there was iron, you built it where there was wood and coal. I think coal and possibly petroleum could have been viable resources in the game as well. A flaw in our educational system has told most Europeans/Americans that coal and petroleum were not used till the late 19th century, that is terribly incorrect; Petroleum was the source of around half of the wealth of the Nabatean Arabs as early as 500BC.
There are many other provinces where the resource shown is correct for 100 AD or 1900 but not for 1492.
Michael
I don't know anywhere near enough about Ingermanland in 1492 to really comment on this but i do agree from my source books that it was very contested at this period. I almost feel it should be neutral with a population of natives. The port in the province was not there in 1492. Neither Russia nor Sweden had the infrastructure to drain enough of the swamps to create a dry enough patch of ground for a port at the beginning of this game.
Maybe a population of 2-3000 natives at '3' aggresiveness? that way if you colonize it when it reaches city status the population will rise significantly.
Now, I am working on my Doctorate in Cretan History albeit focusing on an earlier period.
So i can say with some authority that sugar should NOT be the resource for Crete. The Venetians did attempt to grow various new world crops on their island possesions but it never really took off and the Portugese and Dutch were very secretive about the growing of Sugar cane. Probably a more realistic resource would be wool. Maybe fish, but Crete really did not produce enough fish to export on a signifacant level.
Another province that is incorrect would be Lebanon; the famed cedars used in ship building that the province was named for are already gone. The last great harvest of the cedars was for the Arab fleet built in 672.
Again, a closer to accurate resource would be wool or wine, although i do not think that there was much of a wine export business in Lebanon at that time.
I kind of wish 'lumber' had been listed as a resource outside of 'shipbuilding supplies'.
In this period you did not build a weapons manufacturie where there was iron, you built it where there was wood and coal. I think coal and possibly petroleum could have been viable resources in the game as well. A flaw in our educational system has told most Europeans/Americans that coal and petroleum were not used till the late 19th century, that is terribly incorrect; Petroleum was the source of around half of the wealth of the Nabatean Arabs as early as 500BC.
There are many other provinces where the resource shown is correct for 100 AD or 1900 but not for 1492.
Michael
Thanks Michael, this is very valuable info.
Making Ingermanland 'native' wouldn´t be a very good solution gameplaywise, though. One would have to have colonists to get it at all then and even the Russians don´t have any at the start. In fact I think, this goes to show that the decision of the designers to give this contested area to the weakest power was indeed a good one. The order will not have it for long, and this way it´s a 'real' province at least, which can be ordinarily conquered.
Hartmann
Making Ingermanland 'native' wouldn´t be a very good solution gameplaywise, though. One would have to have colonists to get it at all then and even the Russians don´t have any at the start. In fact I think, this goes to show that the decision of the designers to give this contested area to the weakest power was indeed a good one. The order will not have it for long, and this way it´s a 'real' province at least, which can be ordinarily conquered.
Hartmann
Question: When did the Teutonic Order disappear (and do they tend to disappear about the same time in the game)?
Comment/Question: I would love to be able to play Bretagne, and since there is already a code for them, it would be nice to have them in the game. Is their code being used for one of the non-European nations?
Question: What about adding Wales (not officially part of Britain until 1536)?
Comment/Question: I would love to be able to play Bretagne, and since there is already a code for them, it would be nice to have them in the game. Is their code being used for one of the non-European nations?
Question: What about adding Wales (not officially part of Britain until 1536)?
Some provinces should be Orthodox in 1492, certainly Trabzon, Albania, and Smyrna. They can go Muslim from random events.
Originally posted by Hartmann:
I think we can do this by editing province.csv (quite a drag, though). Any suggestions yet?
Hartmann
Yes.
Sweden-Finland should be a major iron-exporter (copper as well but the EU engine can't simulate a copper-mine like Falu koppargruva) - in order to reflect I suggest the following changes:
Svealand - iron
Jämtland - iron
Lappland - fur
Gästrikland - iron
Västerbotten - fish
Österbotten - fish
Maybe one of the finnish provinces should be a fur-producer rather than ships stores.
Another impression is that whenever a game designer didn´t really know what a coastal province exported they just chose Fish.
No Mediterranean province should be a fishexporter - the seafoods lovely I know, but the Med. is a poor fishing ground. Venice for example should export cloth, not fish. Thrace as en exporter of grain is a joke - Constantinople sucked up all the grain the eastern med. and black sea provinces could produce! As far as I can tell Constantinople mainly produced soldiers, poets and architects...
I agree with a post on the exports of some other med. provinces. Here are some of my ideas:
Crete - wine (a strong wine called Malmsey by the english)
Cyprus - sugar (one of the major reasons the cypriotes were dissafected by the venetian rule)
Lebanon - wine
Syria - cotton
Alexandria - sugar
One egyptian province - cotton
Castile - wool (Merino)
Toledo - iron
Kaffa - slaves
I would also challenge the idea that Persia was a producer of Oriental 'goods' - of the products included in this category the persians produced only silk (but so did a number of european provinces). I haven't checked it out in detail but I'd suggest changes from orientalgoods to cloth e.g for Täbriz and to wine for Isfahan (the famed Shirazi wines).
Oh, and did Armenia really produce gold? Or is this some allusion to the prodigious armenian merchants?
I do go on and on...
Cheers,
Vandelay
The biggest problem with assigning goods is making them relevant for 300 years. My suggestions for Ireland would be
Ulster - cloth or ship goods (historically correct from the late 1600's though)
Meath - grain
Lenister - Gold (most accurate for the early time period, iron or copper for the later period)
Munster - ship goods (the entire forests of Ireland were stripped for boats)
Connaught - fish
Paul.
Ulster - cloth or ship goods (historically correct from the late 1600's though)
Meath - grain
Lenister - Gold (most accurate for the early time period, iron or copper for the later period)
Munster - ship goods (the entire forests of Ireland were stripped for boats)
Connaught - fish
Paul.
I'm all for getting the production goods right for the all the provinces, but we should also keep in mind game balance. Changing provinces producing gold and oriental goods to something a lot less valuable, might make changes we don't want. Or possibly would have to change the population to compensate for the income loss.
This is especially valid for gold (which includes silver as well if I've understood the abstraction level correct), which in addition to being valuable gives a markedly different income than other trade goods, i.e. not in the COT but directly through province taxes...
Cobos
------------------
If you are not part of the solution you are part of the precipitate.
This is especially valid for gold (which includes silver as well if I've understood the abstraction level correct), which in addition to being valuable gives a markedly different income than other trade goods, i.e. not in the COT but directly through province taxes...
Cobos
------------------
If you are not part of the solution you are part of the precipitate.
Folks, I want You all to have a look at this map of the Iberian peninsula at 1500:
http://homer.span.ch/~spaw1241/souest15.htm
Now we should discuss and decide whether to implement Aragon as a Spanish vassal (with military alliance and relations close to annexation point).
Hartmann
http://homer.span.ch/~spaw1241/souest15.htm
Now we should discuss and decide whether to implement Aragon as a Spanish vassal (with military alliance and relations close to annexation point).
Hartmann
Hmmm...
The whole territory of Spain is described as 'Couronne d'Espagne' that means 'Crown of Spain'... so it might be thought as a sort of an UK-like thing...?!
Well Ferdinand of Aragon, and Isabella of Castille ruled together, so... I think we should leave Spain as it is.
But as it seems belongs Béarn to Navarra on this map, so you might give that province to Navarra?
------------------
Pour dieu et mon droit
[This message has been edited by Leprechaun (edited 20-02-2001).]
The whole territory of Spain is described as 'Couronne d'Espagne' that means 'Crown of Spain'... so it might be thought as a sort of an UK-like thing...?!
Well Ferdinand of Aragon, and Isabella of Castille ruled together, so... I think we should leave Spain as it is.
But as it seems belongs Béarn to Navarra on this map, so you might give that province to Navarra?
------------------
Pour dieu et mon droit
[This message has been edited by Leprechaun (edited 20-02-2001).]
I think we would be opening up a terrible can of worms to separate Aragon from the rest of Spain. Do we really want to run the risk of having Spanish leaders from Aragon doubled in the Aragon file? Also, this seems to me the most annoying problem with the Prussia/Brandenburg problem, but I am afraid there is no way to fix that.
------------------
History is a lie agreed upon. Napoleon
------------------
History is a lie agreed upon. Napoleon