Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

Tinto Maps #14 Western Africa Feedback

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
1744658384637.png

Arabic was not present in CAR until 19th century.
 
  • 5
  • 4Haha
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Sulphurologist said:
Oh yeah, forgot about that nuance. In any case, it doesn't seem to do much atm :p
Click to expand...
Maybe they haven't implemented Rivers in this area for the build they were using.

Big_birdy said:
doesnt market access go both up stream and downstream but downstream is better
Click to expand...
I still don't understand why the decided to do this. Both trade and control require two directions of travel. It shouldn't matter if I am x miles upstream or downstream, I still have to take stuff to the market and take stuff back from the market.
 
  • 9
Reactions:
Oglesby said:
I still don't understand why the decided to do this. Both trade and control require two directions of travel. It shouldn't matter if I am x miles upstream or downstream, I still have to take stuff to the market and take stuff back from the market.
Click to expand...
Thinking of trade as one-directional, they must have spent too much time with EU4. :p
 
  • 9Haha
  • 1Like
Reactions:
ArVass said:
Sure, though merging those groups is still weird if you don't include the Bantu branch too, as the East-Benue-Congo group contains in itself the Bantu languages, so it's a bit like grouping Baltic and Slavic together as Balto-Slavic but leaving the South Slavic languages out for some reason.

What is the mechanical reason for not dividing the languages further, at least for the more notable ones? Bantu being one language and one dialect really doesn't fit well with me for example, mostly because not having Swahili as the trade language of the Swahili coast is like eating toast without butter or salt.

What about splitting Nigerian to Voltaic language with Yoruba, Igbo, Edo etc. dialects, Benue-Congo with its own dialects, and Bantoid (with its own dialects)?

Splitting Bantu would be extremely tricky, so you could go by either splitting to dialects/languages by regional groupings, or perhaps highlighting some major ones like Swahili, Kongo, Xhosa etc. and applying them to wider areas.

View attachment 1281035
View attachment 1281033

On Bantoid - having it as one "Bantoid" culture sounds weird, and on top of that immersion breaking as nobody is going to self-identify as "Bantoid", I couldn't imagine someone going "I must set my primary culture to Bantoid and assimilate everyone in the world to be Bantoid". Perhaps consider splitting the culture to 2-4 of its major groups, such as Tiv, and keep "Bantoid" for the language's name.
Click to expand...
The regional groupings of Bantu would be good, just that the southern zone should be subdivided into Nguni, Sotho-Tswana, Shona and Tsonga.
 
  • 3
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Kr4mpus said:
I like the adding of more central African provinces, and the extra corridor to the Congo region. Before it seemed like you could conguer the entire region of west Africa and then just bunker down by holding the handfull of choke points on the map.
Click to expand...
Hopefully they could be raided by the states directly to the north, this happened historically.
 
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Oglesby said:
I still don't understand why the decided to do this. Both trade and control require two directions of travel. It shouldn't matter if I am x miles upstream or downstream, I still have to take stuff to the market and take stuff back from the market.
Click to expand...
I think the reasoning is that it's easier to travel downstream than upstream
 
nyetflix2 said:
The regional groupings of Bantu would be good, just that the southern zone should be subdivided into Nguni, Sotho-Tswana, Shona and Tsonga.
Click to expand...
As long as at least some of the regional Bantu languages, at least the most important ones, are present, I would be happy.

They obviously have to find the balance between gameplay considerations (somewhat consistent language sizes), immersion (recognisable and believable), and scientific accuracy, but unfortunately for me neither of those seem to be fulfilled by the current setup.
 
Last edited:
  • 3
  • 2Like
Reactions:
I really think pepper in West Africa should be the same trade good as Indian pepper. Even if you can't say they're perfect substitutes, you can't argue that they aren't imperfect substitutes. The game has a variety of imperfect substitutes represented by a single good. Salmon isn't the same as halibut but they're both represented by the "fish" trade good.
 
  • 5Like
Reactions:
ArVass said:
Sure, though merging those groups is still weird if you don't include the Bantu branch too, as the East-Benue-Congo group contains in itself the Bantu languages, so it's a bit like grouping Baltic and Slavic together as Balto-Slavic but leaving the South Slavic languages out for some reason.

What is the mechanical reason for not dividing the languages further, at least for the more notable ones? Bantu being one language and one dialect really doesn't fit well with me for example, mostly because not having Swahili as the trade language of the Swahili coast is like eating toast without butter or salt.

What about splitting Nigerian to Voltaic language with Yoruba, Igbo, Edo etc. dialects, Benue-Congo with its own dialects, and Bantoid (with its own dialects)?

Splitting Bantu would be extremely tricky, so you could go by either splitting to dialects/languages by regional groupings, or perhaps highlighting some major ones like Swahili, Kongo, Xhosa etc. and applying them to wider areas.

View attachment 1281035
View attachment 1281033

On Bantoid - having it as one "Bantoid" culture sounds weird, and on top of that immersion breaking as nobody is going to self-identify as "Bantoid", I couldn't imagine someone going "I must set my primary culture to Bantoid and assimilate everyone in the world to be Bantoid". Perhaps consider splitting the culture to 2-4 of its major groups, such as Tiv, and keep "Bantoid" for the language's name.
Click to expand...
This map is really bad tho, because Ijo, Dogon, Mande, Talodi-Heiban, Lafofa, Katla, Rashad and Kru are not part of the Atlantic-Congo family (Niger-Congo is not real family)
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Wildrake said:
This map is really bad tho, because Ijo, Dogon, Mande, Talodi-Heiban, Lafofa, Katla, Rashad and Kru are not part of the Atlantic-Congo family (Niger-Congo is not real family)
Click to expand...
Yeah but the map does acknowledge this by putting asterisks after the purely geographical groupings, to show that they are indeed only put together by location, if you read the map carefully. It is not a "really bad" map at all
 
  • 1
Reactions:
King_Potat said:
The Mbuti and Mbenga people can be added to the new regions added as minorities.
Click to expand...
Actually two groups of Mbenga pygmies have been added, the Baka and Gyele. Bomassa might also fall under this category, but I'm not finding much information about them right now.

If they add the Mbuti pygmies, they should add a few local agricultural groups who are their 'patrons'. I think Lese would be the main one on the map.
 
Last edited:
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Mef said:
Yes, but after you travel somewhere to trade or control (whatever that means), you also have to travel back home in the opposite direction.
Click to expand...
Worth noting that the way it currently works makes Wien a better capital for "Austria-hungary" than Budapest, while if it was changed the opposite would be the case.
Not saying that should be what the decision is based on but perhaps it may have influenced.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back