MAP DESIGN: Philosophies of what provinces to impliment

[Mad King James]

I've been developing a philosophy in regards to this, I have these checks to make:

The province is the domain of a relatively important state in the region that was independent during the time period.

The province was heavily contested in numerous inheritances, wars, and/or treaties, and exchanged hands numerous times seperately from the province it is currently lumped into AND contains at least one city, fortress or port of significance.

The province is historically an independent jurisdiction and has NEVER EVER been a part of the province it is currently lumped into. This only works if it can't be lumped into another province instead.

The province contains a very important seaport and shipyard, but the province it is lumped into already has one.

The province contains vastly different terrain from the one it is lumped into and is significantly large.

The province has a totally different religious or ethnic makeup than the one it is lumped into, and it is significant to history that this is represented accurately.

A state had significant territory in the area that is not represented at all.

 

[Norrefeldt]

Should a new province have to fulfill one of these criteria?

I have some other ideas.
*For an independent state to be included in it's own province it should have had some impact on the history. (For example Ragusa, Lucca in Italy had not.)

*A province shouldn't mess up the balance between small states. A historically weaker state should not hav emore provinces than a historically stronger state. How hard we try, we cannot make up for this with higher tax values.

*An added province should not mess up travel time. For example, it shouldn't take as much time from southern Sweden to northern Sweden as from Turin to Venice. Travelling along Swedens west coast to Lapland from Skåne shouldn't be faster than travelling along the east coast. (This point can be removed if we can modify travel time. I currently beleice we cannot. I'd love to be proved wrong.)

*A province should be clickable.

 

[Hive]

I like Norrefeldt's points more than MKJ's, I must admit. And that's because Norrefeldt takes gameplay into consideration, while MKJ really doesn't. We must think about stuff like travel time, clickability, tech and stab costs, balance towards other areas, etc...

I have already scrapped some provinces no my maps that I would have liked to have in, because of this - and will likely have to scrap even more...

 

[Rythin]

Guys, I must admit that I don't like all these provinces and maps. I thought you will just change some major map bugs, reduce PTI, add vital provinces, change the border in current ones, but you are just adding shitloads of craploads new provinces (mostly MJK ) not thinking about the balance of the gameplay. Of course, both tax and manpower values will be reduced, but I simply think it will be not enough. With the current map it seems we (you) will have to betatest it for months, before you could release it, 'coz it is really messy.

 

[Norrefeldt]

I think you have a very valid point, Rythin.
It all depends on how much time you wish to spend on making a new map and adapt the whole system to it. Lots of changes means a lot of work to get it going.
If someone is willing to do that, I'd be interested in the result. For anyhting that I will do in AGCEEP, it will have to be less work. So far, the HC hasn't showed that it's able to do too much at the time. If however, someone is willing to spend all the hours to do the work for an overhaul, I will gladly step aside. We'll still have the old map till it's done and working.

 

[WiSK]

*An added province should not mess up travel time. For example, it shouldn't take as much time from southern Sweden to northern Sweden as from Turin to Venice. Travelling along Swedens west coast to Lapland from Skåne shouldn't be faster than travelling along the east coast. (This point can be removed if we can modify travel time. I currently beleice we cannot. I'd love to be proved wrong.)

You've mentioned this a couple of times over the past days. I have already made two posts in different threads responding to this, hopefully third time lucky

The solution is the size column in province.csv file. If you don't believe it works, test it yourself by comparing travel time into and out of a province when size=1 and when size=2.

 

[Norrefeldt]

The solution is the size column in province.csv file. If you don't believe it works, test it yourself by comparing travel time into and out of a province when size=1 and when size=2.

I'll try it tonight!

 

[Mad King James]

You've mentioned this a couple of times over the past days. I have already made two posts in different threads responding to this, hopefully third time lucky

The solution is the size column in province.csv file. If you don't believe it works, test it yourself by comparing travel time into and out of a province when size=1 and when size=2.

About time someone agreed with me

 

[Jayavarman]

Concerning clickability, I hardily suggest people ask Johan to allow an extra zoom level. As I mentioned before, I believe there was an extra zoom level in the early (beta?) stages of EU.

 

[Mad King James]

An extra zoom level isn't that easy, that would require an entire extra graphic layer, and a much bigger map.

 

[saskganesh]

Guys, I must admit that I don't like all these provinces and maps. I thought you will just change some major map bugs, reduce PTI, add vital provinces, change the border in current ones, but you are just adding shitloads of craploads new provinces (mostly MJK ) not thinking about the balance of the gameplay. Of course, both tax and manpower values will be reduced, but I simply think it will be not enough. With the current map it seems we (you) will have to betatest it for months, before you could release it, 'coz it is really messy.

I have to agree with Rythin. I don't realy know what will be gained by doubling or tripling Spain or Poland's provinces, just for example.

I suport some map changes. I'm wary about major ones.

 

[Mad King James]

Being timid is great and all, but It's not my style

 

[Falstaff]

Being timid is great and all, but It's not my style

Yeah. I don't want a few provinces here and there. I want a complete makeover

 

[Birger]

I agree, there should be at one extreme makeover map!

 

[Owen]

You've mentioned this a couple of times over the past days. I have already made two posts in different threads responding to this, hopefully third time lucky

The solution is the size column in province.csv file. If you don't believe it works, test it yourself by comparing travel time into and out of a province when size=1 and when size=2.

Hive has already told me this, but if you implement this anywhere in Europe or the Near East, MP players won't use your mod, since it will make military manouevring unpredictable without learning all the travel times between provinces. In addition, if the size modifier is an integer, then it isn't flexible enough to deal with the situations you are discussing.

 

[Norrefeldt]

I agree. For MP it will have to be the same all over. Or very easy to remember, like Africa is different, or China.

 

[Hive]

Concerning clickability, I hardily suggest people ask Johan to allow an extra zoom level. As I mentioned before, I believe there was an extra zoom level in the early (beta?) stages of EU.

But who says that extra zoom level halfway hidden inside EU2 is a zoom *in* level?

 

[WiSK]

Hive has already told me this, but if you implement this anywhere in Europe or the Near East, MP players won't use your mod, since it will make military manouevring unpredictable without learning all the travel times between provinces. In addition, if the size modifier is an integer, then it isn't flexible enough to deal with the situations you are discussing.

You raise an interesting point. Paradox chose to make provinces not vary wildly in size for gameplay purposes. This (among other things) has lead to the maps being criticised for lack of historical accuracy. Now we can change that, we run into the problem that troop movement will become unrealistic. Large provinces gain strategic value because you can move through them more quickly. Attempting to fix such discrepancies may alienate MP players.

But who says that extra zoom level halfway hidden inside EU2 is a zoom *in* level?

Indeed, there is no possibility of Johan adding another zoom-in level. He removed the two extra zoom-out levels because they were too fiddly.

 

[Hive]

You raise an interesting point. Paradox chose to make provinces not vary wildly in size for gameplay purposes. This (among other things) has lead to the maps being criticised for lack of historical accuracy. Now we can change that, we run into the problem that troop movement will become unrealistic. Large provinces gain strategic value because you can move through them more quickly. Attempting to fix such discrepancies may alienate MP players.

It's funny. I have often been like "what the fuck was Paradox thinking here?" - but now that I have the chance to alter the map myself, I am beginning to understand and respect their map more...

It's really not easy, with all the stuff you have to consider.

 

[TheArchduke]

It's funny. I have often been like "what the fuck was Paradox thinking here?" - but now that I have the chance to alter the map myself, I am beginning to understand and respect their map more...

It's really not easy, with all the stuff you have to consider.

That`s why only cosmetic and very needed changes should occur in Europe. (Denmark, Portugal, Istria, genoese mediterranian islands, Brandenburg, Poland and maybe a bit of redrawing in Russia. Renaming is another issue though.)

Maybe we can create two teams, one for the small map upgrade and another big group for the big work?