Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

MKJ's Map - Discussion Thread

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.
Show only dev responses
I made my comments in the appropirate thread, but to recap, Western Anatolia will kill the Ottoman Empire on BB when the Ottomans inherit all those provinces. Coming as it does in the first ten years of the game, the OE will be immediately beset by BB wars and be carved up by its neighbors.
 
chegitz guevara said:
Western Anatolia will kill the Ottoman Empire on BB when the Ottomans inherit all those provinces. Coming as it does in the first ten years of the game, the OE will be immediately beset by BB wars and be carved up by its neighbors.
Click to expand...
The Balkan, and most of all Greece and Albania, has too many provinces to make it possible for OE to aquire it and keep it with all the stab costs (and BB) they will get from it.
I don't have enough knowledge to make a suggestion for the entire area, but it should be kept in mind that a reduction here is needed.
AFAIK Achaia and Morea only serve as seperate provinces for the two despotates that merge early in the game, for the rest of the 400 years they were one province. A historical simplification would be fine here IMO, by having only one province, and an event for the merge.
 
Twoflower said:
Guyenne is Guienne in English
Click to expand...

No, actually, Guyenne is far more commonly used. Having three vowels in a row is very unusual.

And I don't think any English-speakers bothered to name Cattaro/Kotor. Neither sounds particularly English.

If we're going to come up with a rule, I'd say go with the province names being English is possible, and the city names being in the language of whatever culture the province has. Makes sense to me, anyway :p
 
chegitz guevara said:
I made my comments in the appropirate thread, but to recap, Western Anatolia will kill the Ottoman Empire on BB when the Ottomans inherit all those provinces. Coming as it does in the first ten years of the game, the OE will be immediately beset by BB wars and be carved up by its neighbors.
Click to expand...
And to recap, this statement is false. How many of MKJ's provinces should the OE inherit in the first ten years? Even if it's eight, that means only 2 bb, which certainly is not going to kill the OE on bb or result in BB wars. The OE might be involved in BB wars (or more exactly attacks of opportunity from most of its neighbours) early on, but that's because of ahistorical aggression against countries that it isn't supposed to attack in the first decades of the game.
 
There are five to six countries in those provinces. You get 4BB for each annexation. Do the math. I am making the assumption that with the ability to actually represent each of the Turkish minors, we won't continue using the horrid Ghazi kludge.
 
chegitz guevara said:
There are five to six countries in those provinces. You get 4BB for each annexation. Do the math. I am making the assumption that with the ability to actually represent each of the Turkish minors, we won't continue using the horrid Ghazi kludge.
Click to expand...
You however get only 0.25 bb per province for provinces gained from inheritances, and since the OE gains all these provinces by inheritance events, your calculation is simply wrong.
 
What is the reasoning behind the Mallorca/Menorca split? Wouldn't it be more sensible to name the whole, Belarics? (or whatever the spelling is)

On the subject of naming. I think it would be best to use a native name* where possible, and the modern day English name where this would result in flamewars. But who am i?

*Obviouly transliteration would be used in areas that did not have latin script.

BtW, the Lowlands are looking excelent
icon14.gif
 
Last edited:
I think that your eastern most provinces could be pushed around. Luristan is a little odd looking and really shouldn't be touching Basra. I'm not sure about Arabistan as it doesn't seem to be used that often in English. Perhaps Khuzistan or Awhaz? Here's a sort of nice map.

Image5.gif
 
Khuzistan or Al-Ahwaz is rather anachronistic for pre-modern Persia wouldn't you say?
This isn't the 1970s, this is the 1570s :p
As for Menorca/Mallorca, you can go look up the 9 times I explained it in the other thread.
I disagree that Spain should have fewer province than Vanilla :p
 
Hallsten said:
One little nag:
I don't like warp-zone Courland. Disconnect Courland from Polotsk, you could pull down the southern border of Dünaburg and connect it with Vilna.
Click to expand...
This would be a big step backwards in terms of accuracy.
 
Some of the names seem a little anarchronistic (sp?), especially with regards to Anatolia. Wouldn't it make more sense to use (more) contemporary Turkish names instead of Byzantine names (i.e. Isauria, Pisidia, etc.)?

Additionally, the naming convention seems odd in that region - some provinces are named after cities where a region might be more appropriate (Erevan -> Armenia), while in other cases a regional name is used where a city name might be more appropriate (Bosphorus -> Constantinople). "Hellespont" province confuses me too.

Cherson seems misplaced, isn't the city in the Crimea?

Also, couldn't the Caucaus (sp?) use more provinces? It seems a little lacking for such a traditionally fractured region.

On a tottally unrelated note, Ile de France and Champagne still seem oddly misshapen and large. Only asethetically of course.

Having viciously attacked you, might I say that this map looks amaing?
 
Mad King James said:
I disagree that Spain should have fewer province than Vanilla :p
Click to expand...
What are your reasonings? I pointed out all of mine and there really wasn't any dispute with them other than czuse the vanilla has that many and cause people think it should. But in case you forgot here it they are again:
  • Spain does not have a high population density except around Tejo and Granada, though its population density is greater than places like Africa
  • During this era, 1419-1820, there were no major wars in the area. Only Castile vs. Granada and Granada was on its last legs.
  • There was only the three border changes, two with Granada and the annexation of Aragon by Castile
  • The economic and military power can be represented with higher taxes and manpower, so no need for more provinces there.
  • Most of the muslims were in the south, around Granada. Their conversions came all about the same time after the inquisition
  • The cultural differances were mostly related to Portugal, Granada and the remnant Moors, Spain. Except for around the south, there really wasn't much diversity.
  • Castile in the early game is too much of a powerhouse and becomes a regional bully as it is now.
  • Neither Castile nor Aragaon need help in staying alive.
The provinces you want to add were important in CK time period, but we're past that here, unless we decide to go back to a 1405 scenerio (i still don't see how people would pull off without cheats up the wazoo a Timurid Conquest mod though, so i wouldn't support that). Even with a 1405 or late 14th century scenerio startdate, it still won't matter. Stll only Granada is left. The north is in solid control, no real wars there, etc, etc.
 
I would if there were any.

Shadowstrike said:
Some of the names seem a little anarchronistic (sp?), especially with regards to Anatolia. Wouldn't it make more sense to use (more) contemporary Turkish names instead of Byzantine names (i.e. Isauria, Pisidia, etc.)?

Additionally, the naming convention seems odd in that region - some provinces are named after cities where a region might be more appropriate (Erevan -> Armenia), while in other cases a regional name is used where a city name might be more appropriate (Bosphorus -> Constantinople). "Hellespont" province confuses me too.

Cherson seems misplaced, isn't the city in the Crimea?

Also, couldn't the Caucaus (sp?) use more provinces? It seems a little lacking for such a traditionally fractured region.

On a tottally unrelated note, Ile de France and Champagne still seem oddly misshapen and large. Only asethetically of course.

Having viciously attacked you, might I say that this map looks amaing?
Click to expand...
 
Mad King James said:
Khuzistan or Al-Ahwaz is rather anachronistic for pre-modern Persia wouldn't you say?
This isn't the 1970s, this is the 1570s :p
Click to expand...

I haven't really been able to tell. I mean I've seen them stated across many documents including those that don't talk about the present, I just don't know what was more common at the time. With that though, I still think the borders are a bit funky.
 
Mad King James said:
This would be a big step backwards in terms of accuracy.
Click to expand...
Care to explain why the Courland-Polotsk border is of so immense importance that it should be allowed to make military movement in the area totally illogical and reduce playability?
 
Norrefeldt said:
Care to explain why the Courland-Polotsk border is of so immense importance that it should be allowed to make military movement in the area totally illogical and reduce playability?
Click to expand...

It isn't, though on the other hand it wouldn't do what you describe either. Not that I have to justify myself to you :p

The obvious solution would be to cut off Semgalia from Courland, not merge it incorrectly with a neighboring province, which is precisely what I have done.
 
I thought you did not want to discuss anything on this map ;).

I can only say I like it, even if it's kinda too detailed for AGCEEP. I definitely like the 'anachronistic' names for Anatolia and Balkan provinces. Keep in mind we currently have a byzantine alternate history line in. Also, Europeans used ancient names over turkish ones whenever they could.

On Caucasian mts. I didn't find a good online map, but must tell that Samtskhe should be smaller then Imereti or Kartli. I'll give more info later, I guess.

Although Chechens were living around Terek for quite a while, Chechenia was not called like that before 19th century, I believe (but am not too certain). I'd rather call it "Terek" (or merge it with Daghestan, a prime example of 'superflous province'). If you are at merging, you can also merge Ossetia away. Although Ossetians were independent, they were quite far from being a nation rather then a tribe.

P.S.
Zaporozhia is much more commonly spelled Zaporozh'e or Zaporozhye. And you can hardly say that it is on the bank of the Black/Azov Sea. Tatars lived there before russian colonization, I think, and Zaporozh'e can have no other culture then ruthenian or ukrainian. It's the heartland!

Btw. are the empty provs in Europe PTI, btw? :wacko: :D

@chegitz guevara
We can reduce BB by event, can't we? The Ottomans will easily take the area. What I'm concerned about are the country tags. We'll have 5 Georgian states with that map, and an uncountable quantity of german, balcanic, italian, anatolian, north african etc. etc.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back