Tinto Maps #23 China Feedback

[DC123456789]

Edit: I misread your post and thought you were referring to location names. I think there's some merit to calling the cultures by their endonyms (eg Teochew, Hakka), but the tricky thing is that in the present day there is often disagreement over what the right endonym is. For instance, overseas Chinese use the term Hokkien, but in mainland China and Taiwan the preferred term is Banlam (Minnan in Mandarin). And sometimes the most common English name isn't even the endonym! Eg Foochow (Cantonese exonym that is frequently used) vs Hockchew (native endonym) vs Fuzhou (Mandarin). Or Hainanese (English) vs Hainam/Kengchew (Qiong/Hainanese Min endonym) vs Hainan (Mandarin)

Well the standard is to use the most common/appropriate English-language term. Using the endonym (where different) would frankly still be kind of inconsistent, but the fact that it's explicitly Mandarin-language forms being used definitely raises some eyebrows.

 

[pheonix_cruz]

Don't "uh" me, have we seen the statistical difference in resource output and power of - say - a population of 10 million spread out over 500 locations compared to the same population in just 100 locations?

Of course a location with more pops is better, but does it scale correctly compared to just owning more locations?

Low Location Density Stronger:
1) greater difficulty propagating control due to control loss moving from one location to the next
2) country can be well covered by forts more cheaply and defending armies more quickly
High Location Density Stronger:
1) having access to a greater variety of recourses (not as relevant once you have so many locations that gaining more is mostly repeat resources)
2) more places to build buildings with flat (not scaling with location population) modifiers like +50 manpower
3) the existence of some cap on or non-linear growth of resource production based on population
4) your enemy has to conquer more locations

I think the post I'm replying to lays out the fundamental question/experiment of strength of location density well. I would be interested if anyone could provide more info on this topic, more specifically what are the details regarding how population affects resource production (Reason 3). Also, what are other ways that location density might be an advantage/disadvantage, and if there is a tilt one way or another, how should that be addressed in terms of Europe being given higher location density?

 

[SuperLexxe]

---

---

The title was nominal, but the rule was de facto real. The rulers administered Yunnan hereditarily, but preferred to go by the title of Liang, which maybe they thought was more prestigious. Kind of like if the King of England only held England, but primarily referred to himself as King of France first and foremost.

The reason I would keep Liang (Yunnan) is because of Basalawarmi and his last stand against the Ming, as the last Yuan loyalists in China.

Basalawarmi - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

---

It was no longer a nominal title after 1330, the Prince of Liang controlled taxes, military, and even the appointment of local officials:

View attachment 1336949

View attachment 1336950

---

@Roger Corominas

If you do decide to add Liang, which I think would be most accurate, taking the above into account, it would also be good gameplay and flavour wise.

I would suggest for Liang (Yunnan) to start as a Celestial Governor. At this time, Yunnan was not part of the Chinese core territories, and this special status would suit Liang (Yunnan) perfectly. It would also be cool for this special status to include occasional events for Chinese settlers from core China, which was a continuous process.

---

There should also be some existing Chinese settlers in the centre of Liang, as well as Mongol minorities to account for their military presence, as it was common for Mongol units to also include their families. The modern Khatso people are descendants of these Mongols:

Khatso - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

---

 

[NaiveCarto]

I wonder whether the recent location number of China 'proper' could fit on the scary-great number of Chinese population on 1820AD, which is about 383.1 million.

 

[NaiveCarto]

It will now be called semi arid, but it will still represent Cold Arid (that is both BWk and BSk climates). Hot semi arid (BSh) will still be inside the normal Arid climate (which will represent Hot Arid, including BWh and BSh)

Koppen climate classification overlooks the impact of evaporation.

 

[Kranbearys]

Pretty cool to see Hmong in. I know some agree with the change and others disagree.
I have to add, it looks like instead of breaking up Miao, a simple name change was implemented.

Be nice to have those other cultures represented, although I understand if it's not prioritized.

Also, having the religion as Kev Dab Kev Qhuas is funny since that's written in Hmong RPA.
I don't have a solution for it since in English we just call it shamanism (Kev Dab Kev Qhuas literally means Spirit Praise, so praising spirits)

I just found it funny everything is in English, then suddenly a random Hmong word slaps me across the face.

 

[Linbot#6018]

Koppen climate classification overlooks the impact of evaporation.

This is not true.

 

[hf61]

One Mistake on Shen Yang (King of Shen)

沈阳路，元朝时设置的路。
Shenyang Lu was established during the Yuan Dynasty.

元成宗元贞二年（1296年）改沈州为沈阳路，由沈王治理。
In the second year of Yuanzheng (1296) during the reign of Emperor Chengzong of the Yuan Dynasty, Shenzhou was changed to Shenyang Lu, governed by the King of Shen.

属辽阳等处行中书省，治所在乐郊城（位于今辽宁省沈阳市）。
It belonged to the Liaoyang Xingzhongshu Province, and its seat was in Lejiao City (located in Shenyang City, Liaoning Province today).

辖境相当今辽宁省沈阳市及其西至新民县、南至辽阳市，北至开原市。
Its jurisdiction was equivalent to Shenyang City(a), Liaoning Province today, and to Xinmin(b) County in the west, Liaoyang(c) City in the south, and Kaiyuan(d) City in the north.

from wikipedia”沈阳路（元朝）”

 

[hf61]

And btw Hada, Ula, Yehe and so on Haixi Jurchen was NOT exist 1337 (not 1444 as well they move to south in 1450s from Harbin area)

 

[keaswaran]

Comparing location densities of Europe and China is rather silly, when Europe was much more politically fragmented in this period. But I guess forum users here have for some reason decided that the number of locations is a metric for measuring how "important" and "valuable" a region is.

In the game, one main function of locations seems to be to determine the population density cap and growth rate.

 

[matfer13]

some internal adjustment between areas that are already present in game but don't properly follow their historical borders(Gansu, Shaanxi, Yunnan, Sichuan and Guizhou)

Speaking of, here some adjustments to make it so that the internal borders between these areas of China proper look more historically accurate:
-1-Move the provinces of Lingzhou, Guyuan, Ningxia and Lintao from Shaanxi to Gansu
-2-Move the provinces of Muli, Baixing, Dongchuan, Wumeng, Yongning and Changning from Sichuan to Yunnan
-3-Move the provinces of Zhenan, Xinzhou and Wusa from Sichuan to Guizhou

 

[ArVass]

Of course a location with more pops is better, but does it scale correctly compared to just owning more locations?

From what Johan and Pavía said, it appears to scale actually BETTER than just owning more locations and overall much more powerful. At least this is how I understood Johan

 

[matfer13]

I still want to know that why language in Taiwan been called Formosan?

This is the Portuguese term for Taiwan, not any local language or ethnic name in Taiwan. I'm puzzled why we don't directly use the names of the local ethnic languages in Taiwan, especially since there were still hundreds of years before the arrival of the Portuguese in 1337. You can choose some local language names with a larger population as a substitute, rather than choosing a title brought by a colonizer.

the local ethnic languages in Taiwan

View attachment 1337703
View attachment 1337704
View attachment 1337705

Because the native languages of Taiwan are known as the "Formosan languages" to this day, I'm pretty sure the language in-game represents that since there is only one culture in Taiwan, the best way would be to first split the culture and then give each of them a language and finally(maybe) make Formosan into a language group

 

[Linbot#6018]

Speaking of, here some adjustments to make it so that the internal borders between these areas of China proper look more historically accurate:
-1-Move the provinces of Lingzhou, Guyuan, Ningxia and Lintao from Shaanxi to Gansu
-2-Move the provinces of Muli, Baixing, Dongchuan, Wumeng, Yongning and Changning from Sichuan to Yunnan
-3-Move the provinces of Zhenan, Xinzhou and Wusa from Sichuan to Guizhou
View attachment 1338029View attachment 1338026
View attachment 1338028View attachment 1338027
View attachment 1338031

No! PLEASE do not use that map.

You cannot simply take a random map off of google search and assume it is either historically accurate or relevant to the game's time period. In fact, neither of these are true. That map is terribly wrong and the period it is attempting to depict is the early 19th century, whereas EU5's provinces are based off of the Ming dynasty. The current internal borders the game has are perfect.

 

[zeruosi]

No! PLEASE do not use that map.

You cannot simply take a random map off of google search and assume it is either historically accurate or relevant to the game's time period. In fact, neither of these are true. That map is terribly wrong and the period it is attempting to depict is the early 19th century, whereas EU5's provinces are based off of the Ming dynasty. The current internal borders the game has are perfect.

However, I believe certain regions need to be subdivided - particularly the massive provinces like Huguang, Southern Zhili, and Shaanxi. These enormous, unwieldy administrative units are clearly inappropriate. Additionally, there's the issue of Guangdong's territorial outliers, as well as Hainan's status as a non-independent province.

 

[Linbot#6018]

However, I believe certain regions need to be subdivided - particularly the massive provinces like Huguang, Southern Zhili, and Shaanxi. These enormous, unwieldy administrative units are clearly inappropriate.

I'm not sure. What makes an administrative division "unwieldy"? I don't see an obvious problem with them, and I also believe it is a good idea for the game to use the same administrative divisions used by the Ming dynasty.

Additionally, there's the issue of Guangdong's territorial outliers, as well as Hainan's status as a non-independent province.

Hainan was never an independent province prior to 1949, and it was always unimportant, so I don't think it needs to be separated from Guangdong.

 

[zeruosi]

I'm not sure. What makes an administrative division "unwieldy"?

I'm not sure why the AI model translated "ugly" as "clumsy."
While these were indeed administrative divisions from the Ming Dynasty, they're clearly excessively large. I believe these regions need to be subdivided - or at the very least, we should be allowed to subdivide them within the game.

 

[Linbot#6018]

I have a few comments to make on the southwest.

I appreciate that the devs decided to follow my suggestion for the Tusi setup. I am pleased by the results. However, I have a few problems I want to talk about.

It does not make sense for the for red-circled areas to be controlled by Yuan.

Here is my original feedback map:

Spoiler

In this map, I marked out the regions controlled by each tusi, and then added some additional regions coloured in grey. Basically, the territory of the southwest can be divided into three types:

1. the region administered by the Liang princes, which it is acceptable to consider directly-ruled Yuan territory
2. the tusi
3. the "wild" regions, which are marked in solid grey on my map

The "wild regions" are inhabited by tribes who are outside of Yuan control. Thus, they are actually the only part of the southwest that the Yuan dynasty did NOT have any control over, so it makes no sense for them to be owned by the Yuan tag.

I think the most obvious thing to do with these territories is to
1. make them uncolonised provinces. I can't think of any reason why this wouldn't work, but it seems very obvious, so perhaps there is something I missed.

However, if that is considered to be unacceptable, they could potentially instead be
2. tribal landed tags

the other option is
3. fold them into nearby tusi

Those three options are all superior to giving these territories to Yuan.

 

[FleetingRain]

I'm not sure why the AI model translated "ugly" as "clumsy."
While these were indeed administrative divisions from the Ming Dynasty, they're clearly excessively large. I believe these regions need to be subdivided - or at the very least, we should be allowed to subdivide them within the game.

I haven't stopped to count the number of locations/provinces, but devs said once they're working with the soft limits of 3-10 locations per province and 25-75 locations per area (can't recall if there's anything on provinces per area). I don't know if there's any mechanic related to areas (like Cabinet Actions), but at least aesthetically they're trying to keep their size at a sane level.

 

[Linbot#6018]

I also recommend that the "Chelei" tusi in southern Sichuan (Xuyong and Gulin counties) should be renamed to Yǒngníng 永宁, which seems to be the most common name for it.