Suggestions for the upcoming 1.23 update

[KuroS45]

Greetings,

As the Middle East is getting a "facelift" I wanted to suggest that some name errors should be fixed as well.


I suggest the Iranian culture group of "Khorasani" should be removed because it is either a culture based merely on geography or a Persian subculture.

And I think we should add other Iranian culture groups like the Ossetians in the Caucasus, Talysh in Shirvan region, Gilakis in Gilan region and Zazas in Anatolia region as well.

I would be glad if this suggestions would be considered as well.

 

[Utretch]

To my understanding the current Persian cores are being removed entirely, and instead any nation forming Persia will receive cores or claims over the extent of "Persia", though I'm sure the definition of that geographically could vary a tremendous amount.

What evidence do you have to suggest that Khuzestan was ethnically closer to Iranian cultures (and specially Persian)? I'm not deeply familiar with the history of the region but what I understand is that is typically been in the Arabic sphere ethnically at least since the expansion of the Arabs out of Arabia, and that was often under the control of local Arab nobles, and even today is home to many Arabs. But also some quick googling suggests that it's been pretty ethnically mixed so I'm not trying to refute you, just asking why it should be Persian specifically.

On Khorasani I believe it's in place to breakup the already quite powerful Persian culture (though probably originally it was there to facilitate Khorasan tag breaking away) and while I'm not entirely sure on its legitimacy as a unique culture it certainly is in line with other cultural splits, like the breakup of Russian culture into regional varieties.

 

[fredrikslicer]

To my understanding the current Persian cores are being removed entirely, and instead any nation forming Persia will receive cores or claims over the extent of "Persia", though I'm sure the definition of that geographically could vary a tremendous amount.

What evidence do you have to suggest that Khuzestan was ethnically closer to Iranian cultures (and specially Persian)? I'm not deeply familiar with the history of the region but what I understand is that is typically been in the Arabic sphere ethnically at least since the expansion of the Arabs out of Arabia, and that was often under the control of local Arab nobles, and even today is home to many Arabs. But also some quick googling suggests that it's been pretty ethnically mixed so I'm not trying to refute you, just asking why it should be Persian specifically.

It was divided between an Iranian part (north) and an Arab part (South) with a lot of kurdish pastoralists

 

[KuroS45]

Well I meant the cores or claims over the extent of "Persia" (which as you said the definition of that geographically varies). And the provinces I listed above all used to be part of various Persian dynasties throughout the 15th to 19th century.

About Khuzestan, yes I am aware that the region is/was home to various ethinc groups including Persians and Arabs. But as much or even more as it was/is Arab it was/is Persian. Persians are the indigenous people there which is why the province its name is Persian . So it would be not correct to say their are "Mashriqi" culture only if atleast half of it is not Arab but Lurish and Persian.

And you mentioned Russian culture got divided into regional varities. Well I have no problem with that if Persian culture got divided into regional varities as well but not by calling one variety "Persian" and the other "Khorasani". That is kind of odd. At least call them "Shirazi", "Isfahani", "Khorasani" etc. if they are all Persians. I mean even if it is about Khorasan tag breaking away from Persia it is kind of weird because there never was an independet country called "Khorasan".

 

[fredrikslicer]

About Khuzestan, yes I am aware that the region is/was home to various ethinc groups including Persians and Arabs. But as much or even more as it was/is Arab it was/is Persian. Persians are the indigenous people there which is why the province its name is Persian . So it would be not correct to say their are "Mashriqi" culture only if atleast half of it is not Arab but Lurish and Persian

The province had enough arabs to be refered to as "Arabistan" since at least the Saffavids and Khuzestan was very often spilt the current administrative region was established during the Pahlavi so maybe we should split the province in two

 

[Utretch]

The province had enough arabs to be refered to as "Arabistan" since at least the Saffavids and Khuzestan was very often spilt the current administrative region was established during the Pahlavi so maybe we should split the province in two

In the Dev Diary we saw that there was a split up of Khuzestan so the devs may already be ahead of us here.

And I agree Khorasan is definitely an odd tag, I've noticed it used to represent Timurid factions in the history files. Obviously lots of states and polities have arisen and disappeared historically in the region but none that I'm aware of ever saw themselves as a Khorasani nation. We might have to wait and see what the devs have done with the tag in the coming patch.

 

[Trin Tragula]

Greetings,

As the Middle East is getting a "facelift" I wanted to suggest that some name errors should be fixed as well.

The province of "Tehran" e.g. should be renamed into "Rey" because Tehran used to be a tiny village in this region until 1776. The main city in this region for centuries used to be Ray thus the province should be called "Ray" not Tehran.

As far as I know Rayy was destroyed almost entirely by the mongols and ceased to be a place of importance after that point. There's some evidence of a bit of presence there again in Timurid time as a military installation but as far as I know not much more than nearby cities. If you have access to references that say something else I would love to see it so we represent the place better
Teheran on the other hand was already said to be counted as a city by observers during Timur's time.

What I also wanted to suggest is to the strenghten the formable nation of Persia by giving the "Persia region" more rightful cores like:

Khuzestan (of which culture should be Persian and not "Mashriqi")
Zaranj
Birjand
Sabzevar
Mashhad
Bojnord
Merv
Herat
Hormus
Bahrein

Most of these are already included in the decision to form Persia in the release version
There will be no Persian cores at start in 1444 anymore, it is now a country that must be formed. Instead most of these have regional revolters that can form Persia (which then will get permanent claims on all of it, just like all other unifications in the game).

Another suggestion is to remove the Iranian culture group of "Khorasani" and replace it by Persian since Khorasani is not a language but Khorasan used to be a historical Persian speaking region from where many famous Persian poets and sholars originated from like "Rumi", "Omar Khayyam", "Ferdowsi" etc.

Khorasani is a culture in the game, not a language, and it is part of the Iranian group which a formed Persia will be a cultural union for. This is true in the release version of the game and it will be true in the upcoming patch.
The game does not model languages at all. Only cultures.
I would also say that it is not strange to claim that Khorasan had a somewhat different character than western Persia. More so than the difference between say Shiraz and Isfahan.

there never was an independet country called "Khorasan".

It is very conventional to refer to the countries in this era that were centered in the geographical region of Khorasan as Khorasan. There are no nations in this game, only countries or states, and Khorasan was certainly one of those many times.


As for Khuzestan, as you can see in the dev diaries there is no longer any one province called Khuzestan, instead it is an area made up of more than one province.

 

[KuroS45]

Well If Khorasani is a culture based only on the geography of Khorasan.. or is a culture which exists in the region of Khorasan , historical Khorasani cities like Merv, Balkh, Maimana, Bamyan, Ghor, Kunduz, Kulob, Badakhshan, Khujand, Samarqand, or Bukhara should be Khorasani as well. It makes no sense only including the region between Eastern Iran and Herat as Khorasani.

Actually Khorasan was a region which inhabited many different cultures like Uzbeks, Turkmens and Persians like the famous Persian physician Avicenna, Omar Khayyam or Rumi who all had Persian culture while being from Khorasan. If Khorasani and Persian are 2 different cultures then these people which I named should not be called Persian since Persian is only a culture of western iran but all people agree that these people from Khorasan were Persians and this proves that Khorasan must be simply a region where many culture coexisted back then. It is strange to have both a "Persian culture" as well as a "Khorasani culture" on the map.

This 2 maps clearly shows that Persian/Tajiks are clearly their own culture alongside the many other culture of Khorasan and should be represented as well like the Uzbeks are who live in Khorasan e.g.. For example the region of Tajikistan has simply Uzbek or Afghan culture although Tajiks/Persians are not Uzbeks nor Afghans. And lived in northern Afghanistan, Samarkand and Bukhara and Khujand for centuries.

Historically northern Afghanistan or "Khorasan" did not have Afghan culture like it does in the start 1444. The region simply got conquered by Afghan tribesmen in the late 17th century but never got assimilated to Afghan/Pashtun culture. Which is why the provinces in northern Afghanistan either should be Khorasani (If it is about geographic culture) or Tajik Persian (if it is about ethnic culture).

 

[Mehryaar]

What evidence do you have to suggest that Khuzestan was ethnically closer to Iranian cultures (and specially Persian)? I'm not deeply familiar with the history of the region but what I understand is that is typically been in the Arabic sphere ethnically at least since the expansion of the Arabs out of Arabia, and that was often under the control of local Arab nobles, and even today is home to many Arabs. But also some quick googling suggests that it's been pretty ethnically mixed so I'm not trying to refute you, just asking why it should be Persian specifically.

from pre history to now, it was Iranian region. Arabs come there few centuries ago... never become dominant Element.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elam
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Susa