• 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.
It would be too confusing and go against the "purpose" of the tag
But what do you do when, say, the Jalayirids split into three competing branches: one at Baghdad, one at Tabriz, and one at Sultaniyyah?

There's a reason why, towards the end of my stint at M&T, that we were moving towards removing all of those "dynastic" tags in favor of "regional" ones. What you're proposing (Ottomans remaining Ottomans no matter who rules them) wasn't a feature of EU4; it was a limitation.

In an ideal world we'd have CK2-style "regional name that is replaced with dynastic name under the right conditions" setup that can just be done in script to avoid all these problems.
 
  • 4Like
Reactions:
Both under the rule of the Safavids and the local Armenians, the province of Artaz was part of Armenia.

Erivan province​


The_Administrative_Divisions_of_Safavid_Iran_in_the_the_South_Caucasus.svg.png

You can also rename the Armenia region to Yerevan and add the lands of the Arran province to the region as shown on the map below.
ARTAZ_L'_EMPIRE_De_PERSE_1779_d’Anville_P.Santini_~3.jpg


From the province of Hoy a new province should be carved out, called Artaz
Zrzut ekranu 2025-04-06 225022.png

Artaz Province should be part of the Armenian Area since this province was not part of historical Azerbaijan.
Zrzut ekranu 2025-04-06 225005.png

Mughan Plain Should be part of Historic Azerbaijan and not part of Shirvan.
 
  • 6Like
  • 3
Reactions:
After looking at the feedback map i think the devs have done a really good job for the country placements and additions with only a few tweaks that some people have mentioned here (Circassia comes to mind and maybe some parts of the Caucasus and Armenia).

However i am pretty disappointed at the lack of new locations and increase in location density especially in areas of the Caucasus and especially the north east Caucasus. Could i recommend splitting some locations in these areas especially so you can depict the polities more accurately? For example i think the OPM of Rutul should be split into two so Tsakhur can also be represented.

The location of Rutul should be split in half with the western half of the valley made a new location and a new polity in place which would be Tsakhur while Rutul would stay the same on the eastern side of the valley


1744021787889.png
 
Last edited:
  • 5Like
  • 3
Reactions:
I've already written about this in the old thread, but I'll reiterate it here:

I think Georgia should have cores and claims on the land it had lost during the Mongol occupation, namely the locations of Shamkor and Gardman as cores, and the province of Arran and the locations of Julfa and Nakhchivan as claims.

According to the Historical Atlas of Georgia, in the 1330s, "in the extreme southeast the provinces of Shamkor and Gardman were lost". These territories used to be core parts of the kingdom since the early 12th century. Additionally, the provinces were majority Christian and populated by "accepted pops", in in-game terms. Thus, I think it would make sense to give Georgia cores over this land at game start.

The Emirates of Ganja and Nakhchevan were tributaries of the kingdom also since the 12th century. Hence, I think it would be fitting to make these lands as outlined below a claim of the kingdom. I would like to mention that the Zhamtaaghmts'ereli, the official court chronicler of the 14th century, (whose writings are seen as quite reliable in Georgian historiography) asserts that these lands were once again made into tributaries by the end of Giorgi V's reign in the late 1340s, which I think vindicates my suggestion.

Georgia Cores and Claims.png
 
  • 4
  • 2Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Development

I feel like the area circled in white below (Khorasan and Transoxiana) should have more development, especially when compared to Arabia and Kurdistan.

Dev.png


It has been 80+ years since the Mongol invasion, and many of the previous Ilkhans initiated several reconstruction, repopulation and agricultural projects to revitalize the devastated regions, having imported labour from across the Mongol empire, such as Khitans/Chinese.
Strongly agreed here. Many of these places had rebuilt and returned to prosperity. And we’re still pre-Timur so those effects haven’t been felt yet.

In Khwarazm, Urgench should be the location with the highest development and it should be noticeably into at least yellow.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
Islamdomic polities were much less stable than those in Christiandom, and combined with the lack of inheritance through female lines makes dynastic naming much more appropriate for Muslims than Christians.
One idea I had was for the "full name" of Muslim polities to be "[dynasty] of [place]" so for instance you would have the "Jalayirids of Baghdad". This would be useful in particular for distinguishing the multiple states when an empire fragments into parts ruled by the same dynasty. This happened in particular to the Timurids for example. Of course, this would require the game to actually be able to allow that to happen, which wasn't the case in eu4. But that's just a particular aspect of paradox games being extremely bad at simulating islamic empires.
 
  • 3Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Strongly agreed here. Many of these places had rebuilt and returned to prosperity. And we’re still pre-Timur so those effects haven’t been felt yet.

In Khwarazm, Urgench should be the location with the highest development and it should be noticeably into at least yellow.

I'm not sure about prosperity, but certainly returned to productivity, which was the goal of the mid-to late Ilkhans to increase their tax income. Let's not forget that some of the lands the Mongols took were entirely turned to pasture.

Notably, it was common for nomadic troops to raid the "subjects" they were supposedly there to govern. This is because they were not salaried, and when there was no war, the sedentary "subjects" were just as valid targets as the neighbouring countries, because sedentary people were the same as cattle (to the nomads).
 
I'm not sure about prosperity, but certainly returned to productivity, which was the goal of the mid-to late Ilkhans to increase their tax income. Let's not forget that some of the lands the Mongols took were entirely turned to pasture.

Notably, it was common for nomadic troops to raid the "subjects" they were supposedly there to govern. This is because they were not salaried, and when there was no war, the sedentary "subjects" were just as valid targets as the neighbouring countries, because sedentary people were the same as cattle (to the nomads).
Urgench at least is described as prosperous and populated under the Mongols. What happened in Khwarazm is that Urgench, the most important city even pre-Mongols, redeveloped quite quickly and extensively, but many of the smaller cities in the region were much slower to recover.
 
  • 2
Reactions: