• 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.
I don't understand the point you're making.

You don't know what impact cultures have in EU5, how they work, nothing. It's probably the case that the various Polish cultures will easily accept one another, just like basically Polish culture can easily accept Pommeranian or Polabian culture in CK3.
I find this line of reasoning to be fundamentally flawed. Generally, discussions like this always take the form of 1. I list all of the ways having this many cultures would break the game, 2. the pro-splitter side attempts to address this by listing ways all of those effects are nullified. Ultimately, if all of the actual impacts of having many cultures are nullified, then what is the point? You are just admitting that the game has to be constructed in order to defeat your suggestions.

Of course, it is true that the culture TT has not been released yet. It may easily change the way we think about this. But in the absence of it, I am prepared to make the default assumption that eu5's culture mechanics will fall within the range of variation that has been demonstrated by all previous paradox games. Unless the culture TT introduces truly radical new mechanics, such as allowing Greater Polish and Lesser Polish to both spawn the same rebel group seeking independence for a common Poland, the only affects this can have on the game are negative.
Why are there tons of German or French cultures? Why are you not complaining about that? They're still far more divided than Polish culture.
As it happens I am complaining about that. Just not in this thread, obviously, because this is the eastern europe thread. In fact if you go to the Germany tinto maps you can indeed see me complaining about it there!

Regardless, the real diversity of Germany and France is greater than that of Poland. There is really only one Polish language, but Germany and France contain many traditional regional speeches that are really separate languages. So there is a linguistic justification for dividing them that you can cite. This is not the case for Polish. The Polish dialects are just dialects of a single language. People seem to have this fixation that every country must be divided into the same number of regional cultures, if there are multiple German cultures that must mean there should be multiple Polish, Romanian, English, etc. cultures. This is wrong and naive. Some countries have less cultural diversity than others.
Poland has just emerged from fragmentation. There were quite a lot of differences between Silesia, Lesser Poland, Greater Poland, and Mazovia at this point. There were some big political disagreements between Greater Poland and Lesser Poland. Greater Poland and Lesser Poland were descended from two different tribes. Casimir the Great would issue separate statutes for the two provinces. Hell, the "Crown of Poland", aka the true political unification of Polish lands, hasn't even happened yet in 1337.
I am prepared to argue that the sense in which Greater and Lesser Poland functioned as a common ethnicity outweighed their differences. The most important one, of course, is that Poland was reunified at all. If they were really actual separate cultures, then there wouldn't have been any political will to reunify them after the period of division. Of course, there were differences of identity between the regions. It is valid to talk about the political community of Greater Poland and the political community of Lesser Poland as two entities within the same country that have different attitudes. However, eu5 has no mechanics for representing that. If they are both accepted cultures, they are both just packed into the country's "Nobility" estate and treated as a homogenous block. Therefore there is no point to doing this.
 
  • 7
  • 2
Reactions:
The most important one, of course, is that Poland was reunified at all. If they were really actual separate cultures, then there wouldn't have been any political will to reunify them after the period of division. Of course, there were differences of identity between the regions.
If you delve into the history of Poland and other Slavic countries, you will find that there were many (partial) unifications of Slavic tribes, development of a new country and divisions again. Due to these divisions and the fact that the winners write history, it is difficult to have one version today. Many old Slavic tribes underwent changes in culture due to influences from other countries. For example, between the Oder and Elbe rivers there were many Slavic tribes that joined the Kingdom of the Franks and were Germanized (but still minority use there some slavic language).

There were many attempts to unite the Slavs by the Poles, Czechs, Moravians and Ruthenians, and there was a lot of big countries in different times, so it was kind of reasons to have difference in each culture. Silesia and Kashubia was a part of Poland in some period in history, but dut to some internal conflicts (also about successions) and wars with other countries, they was separated from Poland. So the culture and language of Silesians or Kashubians underwent a drastic change.

Greater Poland, Lesser Poland and Masovia in the most of Polish history was together, so it can be reason that the difference of Polish culture in this regions is similar. But as a Polish man, I can tell a difference between each other. So it's better to have Greater Polish, Lesser Polish, Masovians, Sillesians and Kashubians in this region, and maybe more like Kuyavians, Łęczycan and Sieradzan which are/were culture groups between those main ones.

Probably it was once in the history, when all Slavs was kind of united in one thing as Eastern Block, when there was a USSR and Yugoslavia. I know that there was a lot of independent country, but heyr was "independent" only in name. But this ideology and system wasn't good and a lot of Slavs don't like it :cool:
 
  • 2Like
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
So, when we can expect new/next "Tinto Maps #4 Poland, Ruthenia, Baltic Feedback" Feedback ?
 
  • 7Haha
  • 2
  • 1Like
  • 1Love
Reactions:
Greater Poland, Lesser Poland and Masovia in the most of Polish history was together, so it can be reason that the difference of Polish culture in this regions is similar. But as a Polish man, I can tell a difference between each other.
Mazovia was probably fairly distinct due to different regional landscape, political independence, and dialectal differences.

As for Lesser/Greater Poland, you have to be careful not to project modern distinctions onto the distant past – the bulk of differences exists due to over a century of Polish territories remaining partitioned between three different empires. That said, some differences between them already existed beforehand -- we know, for example, that the magnates were much more powerful in Lesser Poland, while in Greater Poland the smaller and less wealthy noble families were the standard.
 
  • 5Like
Reactions:
I found on X a photo of a map from 1638 with the then nomenclature of towns in Poland and Silesia. I'm posting here for inspiration.

Polonia Regnum, et Silesia Ducat 1638.png
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Revised hungarian location and province names for the region

Bereschany - Bersány
Biecz - Begéc
Biylsko - Bél
Bohorodchany - Bohorodcsány
Bolekhiv - Bolhó
Brody - Barádi
Buchach - Bucsács
Bytom - Bitony
Cieszyn - Tessény
Częstochowa - Csensztokó
Czchów - Csehó
Dolyna - Dolina
Drohobych - Drohobics
Gdańsk - Dancka
Halych - Halics/Gács
Jarosław - Iroszló
Jasło - Jászló
Kolomyia - Kolómia
Kosiv - Kőszív
Kraków - Krakkó
Krosno - Korosznó
Lisko - Liszkó
Lviv - Ilyvó
Myślenice - Mislenice
Nowy Sacz - Újszandec
Nowy Targ - Újvásár
Opole - Opoly
Piotrków - Petrikó
Piskorowice - Piszkorovice
Płock - Palacka
Przemyśl - Perémes
Pszczyna - Pusztina
Racibórz - Ratibor
Rohatyn - Rohatin
Rzeszów - Királyudvari
Sambir - Szambor
Sandomierz - Szandomér
Sanok - Szanok
Sniatyn - Konstantin
Stryi - Sztríj
Tarnów - Tarnó
Tysmenytsia - Tismenyica
Toruń - Tornya
Turka - Turka
Warszawa - Varsó
Wieliczka - Velicska
Wiślica - Vislica
Włocławek - Ladiszló
Wroclaw - Boroszló
Yavoriv - Jávoros
Zhovka - Zsovka
Zhydachiv - Zsidacsév
Zvenyhorod - Zévény
Żywiec - Zsivjec
--------------------------
Drohobych - Drohobics
Gdańsk - Dancka
Halych - Halics/Gács
Kraków - Krakkó
Lviv - Ilyvó
Masuria - Mazúrvidék
Nowy Sacz - Szandec
Pokutia - Kutas
Przemyśl - Perémes
Sandomierz - Szandomér
Sanok - Szanok
Szczyrzyc - Velicska
Těšín - Tessény
Warszawa - Varsó
Zhydachiv - Zsida
Seems like you basically "hungarianised"/translated some names, which didnt really have a hungarian name before, I am not sure if thats the proper way we should be doing, even for these nearby regions. I fully support digging out obscure contemporary(-ish) names, if possible to at least point to a reasoanble source, but I dont think the design philosophy is to make up names just for the sake of it.
 
  • 2Like
Reactions:
I think the devs have done a tremendous job improving the outlook of Medieval Livonia and what we have now is times better than what existed previously.

In general, I think that whatever the boundaries were during the Medieval period, should be the preference. Sure, changes happened in the 16th and 17th century, and even more, other changes in the 18th and 19th century, which have led to the modern countries, but if someone starts the game, having things from the 18th century exist there is not really important or reasonable in my opinion. Yes, those things happened, but they were the result of hundreds of other changes that took place before that time, and if this game works out differently (as it always will), then perhaps that 18th century event would have not taken place at all or would have been different. So, I don't think that locations or provinces or areas should be named too anachronistically (the medieval period in itself is fine, because especially in Livonia our capability for sourcing things with any accuracy is pretty low with regards to whether a location started developing in the 14th century or in the 15th).

My further recommendations based on a quick look.

Areas name changes:
- "Baltic" > "Livonia"

Province name changes:
- "Rotalia" > "Osilia" (Eng.) / "Ösel" (German). In reality, this encompasses both "Osilia" and "Maritima" of this part of the lands, but the first was the medieval common use name so we can be happy using it now. Rotalia was a sub-divison of what became Maritima in "Osilia et Maritima", so it doesn't really work applying this name on this scale.
- The name "Tartu" should right now get the suffix "maa" to signify that it applies to a land. In truth, Estonian historiography doesn't apply "Tartumaa" as the name of this land, but this is the way to make it consistent and to have the land denominators appear more or less similar. "Tartu" is right now the only name here based on its Estonian root, and I would rather go to the medieval Tarbatum which was the Latinized name of Tartu (the city). Meanwhile, the Bishop was e. Tarbatensis, which I tried to decline for "Tarbate", but perhaps that's not exactly correct.

In any case it feels better to me to have the English starting names inherit from the Latinized common-use forms of the medieval period.

The area and provinces would have the following names in general (one change to current map because of culture issues):

Name (English)Name (German)Name (Estonian-Based)
LivoniaLivlandLiivimaa
EstoniaEstlandEestimaa
OsiliaÖselSaaremaa
CourlandKurlandKuramaa
Tarbatum / TarbateDorpatTartu(maa)
Semigalia /SemigalliaSemgallenSemigallia
SeloniaSelonia / OberlettlandSeloonia
LatgaliaLatgallenLatgallia
North / South / InnerNord- / Süd- / Mittel- (the last isn't literal)Põhja- / Lõuna- / Sise-


I have seen some other comments bounced around here regarding this area though, and I will express opinion on some of them.

- I don't think only locations that ended up being major castles should be represented. As such, a place like Saarde is excellent as it allows to develop the economy in a different way.
- I think the Southern Estonian population point of view which has been represented here is an interesting one, but if that's done then a small minority of eastern peasantry should also be added to the province of Tarbatum/Tartu. This emigration was happening and it would be perhaps rather interesting to see it develop. Perhaps maximum 15% or similar of some of the locations. This site, for example, is one where Votian objects and items have been found (I believe, from the 14th century). Assimilation should be quick on the religious side, I think, so this wouldn't lead to Orthodoxy in the same areas.

I would like to find an opportunity next week to comment on the locations.
 
  • 3Like
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
I found on X a photo of a map from 1638 with the then nomenclature of towns in Poland and Silesia. I'm posting here for inspiration.

View attachment 1187893
Here you can see a huge difference in the density of cities in relation to the whole of Silesia and Poland. It is immediately obvious that Silesia was part of the HRE. Eastern Brandenburg is also highly urbanized.

The most urbanized area of Poland from this period is Wielkopolska. The northern Vistula areas are definitely more densely urbanized than for example Mazovia and Lesser Poland.

You can't see on this map a large part of Pomerania and Prussia.
 
Here you can see a huge difference in the density of cities in relation to the whole of Silesia and Poland. It is immediately obvious that Silesia was part of the HRE. Eastern Brandenburg is also highly urbanized.

The most urbanized area of Poland from this period is Wielkopolska. The northern Vistula areas are definitely more densely urbanized than for example Mazovia and Lesser Poland.

You can't see on this map a large part of Pomerania and Prussia.
This map is more detailed:


Polish crown in XVI century, according to various documents from that period (censuses etc.).
 
  • 2
Reactions:
A really great map!

1726424340439.png


It was there that I saw the Kurpiowska Forest (Puszcza Kurpiowska in Polish), which had been unpopulated for many centuries. Casimir the Great founded the gord of Nowogród not far from Łomża. This gord was supposed to protect Masovia against the invasions of the Yotvingians and the Teutonic Order - interestingly, it was very far from the conventional northern border of Masovia. Nowogród was to administer the Kurpiowska Forest. This map shows three hunting manors belonging to the Masovian princes and then to the Polish kings inside the forest: Rososza, Szkwa and Krusko (located on Lake Krusko, which does not exist today - visible on the map). Permanent settlement in the Kurpiowska Forest occurred only in the 17th century. At the end of the 18th century, the Kurpiowska Forest could have been inhabited by 12,000 people.

To sum up, at that times it was probably the most large unpopulated area in borders of modern Poland. I think this could be an area that wasn't colonized at the start of this game.
 
Last edited:
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Dzień dobry!

Below will be my analysis of this Feedback:

Countries:

I really like the refreshed map of countries. I'll just add from myself, countries that were created shortly after the game's launch date:

  1. Duchy of Pless (in German: Pleß; in Czech: Pština; in Polish: Pszczyna) - 1424–1921
  2. Duchy of Koźle (in German: Cosel; in Czech: Kozel) -1284–1532
  3. Duchy of Bielsko (in German: Bielitz; in Czech: Bílsko) - 1572–1752
  4. Duchy of Krnov (in German: Jägerndorf; in Czech: Krnov; in Polish: Karniów) - 1377–1849
Locations:

I really like the large number of completely new Locations. I respect the effort you put into this work!

But it's a pity that quite a few good old Locations were removed at the same time - in a special way in Prussia!

View attachment 1183608

More detailed map of Locations for Upper Silesia area:

View attachment 1183583

The letters indicate the current Locations that would remain in the game: A - Bytůń; B - Toszek; C- Koźle; D-Racibōrz; E- Pszczyna; F- Ćeszyn; G- Biylsko; H-Żywjec; I-Uośwjyńćim; J-Chrzanów; K-Mstów; L- Częstochowa; M- Lublyńec; N-Krnów.
  1. Greifenhagen (in Kashubian: Gripiewò; in Polish: Gryfino)
  2. Friedeberg in der Neumark (in Silesian: Krajyńske Strzelce; in Polish: Strzelce Krajeńskie)
  3. Frankfurt an der Oder (in Silesian: Uodrzański Frankfurt)
  4. Śwjybodźin (in German: Schwiebus)
  5. Międzychód
  6. Wolsztyn
  7. Leszno
  8. Rawicz
  9. Września
  10. Neustadt in Westpreußen (in Kashubian: Wejrowò)
  11. Tiegenhof (in Kashubian: Nowi Dwór)
  12. Preußisch Stargard (in Kashubian: Starogarda)
  13. Prust (in Polish: Pruszcz)
  14. Aleksandrów
  15. Brodnica
  16. Deutsch Eylau (in Polish: Iława)
  17. Heiligenbeil (in Polish: Święta Siekierka)
  18. Rastenburg (in Polish: Kętrzyn)
  19. Sensburg (in Polish: Mrągowo)
  20. Marggrabowa (in Polish: Olecko)
  21. Johannisburg (in Polish: Pisz)
  22. Augustavas (in Polish: Augustów)
  23. Białystok
  24. Wysokie
  25. Ostrów
  26. Otwock
  27. Wyszków
  28. Siematycze
  29. Skierwienice
  30. Kutno
  31. Bełchatów
  32. Tomaszów
  33. Białobrzegi
  34. Starachowice
  35. Skarżysko
  36. Włoszczowa
  37. Pińczów
  38. Kazimierza Wielka
  39. Tarnobrzeg
  40. Zamość
  41. Bochnia
  42. Gorlice
  43. Poronin
  44. Sucha Beskidzka
  45. Wadowic (in Polish: Wadowice)
  46. Biołŏ (in Polish: Biała)
  47. Będzin (in Silesian: Byńdźin)
  48. Olkusz
  49. Tarnowske Gůry (in Polish: Tarnowskie Góry)
  50. Katowicy (in Polish: Katowice)
  51. Rybńik (in Polish: Rybnik)
  52. Glywice (in Polish: Gliwice)
  53. Zobrze (in Polish: Zabrze)
  54. Wjelgo Ruda (in Polish: Ruda Śląska)
  55. Kynighuta (in Polish: Chorzów)
  56. Wałbrzich (in Polish: Wałbrzych)
  57. Jelyńo Gůra (in Polish: Jelenia Góra)
  58. Ślůnski Lwůwek (in Polish: Lwówek Śląski)
  59. Lubań
  60. Lubin
  61. Uodrzański Bytům (in Polish: Bytom Odrzański)
  62. Karwino (in Czech: Karvina)
  63. Brůntal (in Czech: Bruntál)
  64. Uostrawa (in Czech: Ostrava)
  65. Frydek (in Czech: Frýdek)
  66. Myslowicy (in Polish: Mysłowice)
  67. Wisła
  68. Mikołůw (in Polish: Mikołów)
  69. Tychy
  70. Żory
  71. Bjerůń (in Polish: Bieruń)
  72. Śwjyntochlowice (in Polish: Świętochłowice)
  73. Polkowic
  74. Piekary (in Polish: Piekary Śląskie)
  75. Władźisłůw (in Polish: Wodzisław Śląski)
  76. Strzelin
  77. Olsztyn
  78. Koniecpol
  79. Biłgoraj
  80. Leżajsk
  81. Mława
  82. Grodzisk
  83. Braunsberg (in Polish: Braniewo)
  84. Oliva (in Kashubian: Òlëwa)
Renaming

  • Kożuchów rename into Kożuchůw
  • Świdnica rename into Świdńica
  • Krnów rename into Karńůw
  • Gubczyce rename into Gubczice
  • Frywałdów rename into Frywołdůw
  • Hułczyn rename into Hulczyn
  • Pszczyna rename into Pszczina
  • Plock rename into Płock
  • Znin rename into Żnin
  • Dobrzyn rename into Dobrzyń
  • Lubartow rename into Lubartów
  • Poznan rename into Poznań
  • Ląd rename into Słupca
  • Urzędów rename into Kraśnik
  • Kazimierz rename into Puławy
  • Kunów rename into Ostrowiec
  • Gąbin rename into Wyszogród
  • Szadek rename into Zduńska Wola
  • Brzeźnica rename into Pajęczno
  • Buk rename into Nowy Tomyśl
  • Rhein rename into Rößel
  • Barten rename into Rhein
  • Mirchau rename into Karthaus

Provinces:

View attachment 1183611
  1. Sudovia
  2. Neustadt in Westpreußen
  3. Southern Kuyavia
  4. Nur
  5. Biała Podlaska
  6. Kielce
  7. Jasło
  8. Żywiec
  9. Racibórz
  10. Bytom
  11. Gliwice
  12. Jelenia Góra
  13. Leszno
  14. Zielona Góra
  15. Ostrava
  16. Pszczyna
  17. Będzin
  18. Zamość

Areas:
View attachment 1183616

I suggest dividing the following areas:
  1. Baltic into Estonia and Latvia
  2. Prussia into West Prussia and East Prussia
  3. Silesia into Lower Silesia and Upper Silesia
  4. Eastern Poland area separated from Polesia, Volhynia, Mazovia and Lesser Poland.

Cultures:

View attachment 1183619

The culture map after the refresh is excellent. I like the proper representation of the cultures of the Balts the most. The division of large cultures such as Ruthenian and Polish adds more immersion and can be a chance for interesting missions to unify cultures, e.g.:
  1. Polish - Greater Polish + Lesser Polish = Old Polish; Old Polish + Masovian = Polish
  2. Ukrainian - Halychian + Volhynian + Ruthenian + Severian = Ukrainian
  3. Belarusian - Polesian + Polatskian = Belarusian
  4. Lithuanian - Aukstaitian + Samogitian + Sudovian = Lithuanian
I think it would be interesting to add some cultures:
  1. Goral
  2. Southern Estonian
  3. Krivich
  4. Dregovich
  5. Ulich
  6. Scanian (I know this doesn't apply to the regions in question, but I added it anyway because it can be seen on the map)
Rename Ruthenian into Polian.

Markets:
View attachment 1182584

In my opinion, Gdańsk (Danzig) is sorely missed as a Trade Center. This city was a very important member of the Hanseatic League and a major trade center in the region.

Names

Silesian

  1. Kożuchów rename into Kożuchůw
  2. Świdnica rename into Świdńica
  3. Krnów rename into Karńůw
  4. Gubczyce rename into Gubczice
  5. Frywałdów rename into Frywołdůw
  6. Hułczyn rename into Hulczyn
  7. Pszczyna rename into Pszczina
  8. Jawor (without rename)
  9. Złotoryja (without rename)
  10. Lubań (without rename)
  11. Wschowa (without rename)
  12. Oława (without rename)
  13. Świdnica (without rename)
  14. Koźle (without rename)
  15. Żary (without rename)
  16. Toszek (without rename)

The rest of the Silesian locations shown in this Feedback are fine.

Kashubian (also works for Polabian culture)

  1. Stettin rename into Szcecëno
  2. Wolin rename into Wòlëń
  3. Schlawe rename into Słôwno
  4. Berent rename into Kòscérzna
  5. Kołobrzeg rename into Kòlbrzég
  6. Butow rename into Bëtowò
  7. Putzig rename into Pùckò
  8. Dramburg rename into Drôwa
  9. Lebork rename into Lãbórg
  10. Wolgast rename into Wòłogòszcz
  11. Rostock rename into Roztok
  12. Belgard rename into Biôłogarda
  13. Danzig rename into Gdúnjsk
  14. Karthaus rename into Kartëzë
  15. Tuchel rename into Tëchòlô
  16. Saatzig rename into Stôrgard
  17. Stolp rename into Stôłpskò
  18. Wyrzysk rename into Wërzëskò
  19. Schwetz rename into Swiecé
  20. Flatow rename into Złotowò
  21. Brandenburg rename into Branibòr
  22. Ruppin rename into Rypin
  23. Berlin rename into Kòpanica
  24. Köslin rename into Kòszalëno
  25. Dirschau rename into Dërszewò
  26. Bydgoszcz rename into Bëdgòszcza

Goral (potential)

  1. Nowy Sącz rename into Sonc
  2. Jasło rename into Josiel
  3. Nowy Targ rename into Miasto
  4. Biecz rename into
  5. Czchów rename into
  6. Sucha Beskidzka rename into
  7. Poronin rename into
Nowy Sącz is not Górla, it's Lachy Sądeckie and those are part of lesser poles
 
Seems like you basically "hungarianised"/translated some names, which didnt really have a hungarian name before, I am not sure if thats the proper way we should be doing, even for these nearby regions. I fully support digging out obscure contemporary(-ish) names, if possible to at least point to a reasoanble source, but I dont think the design philosophy is to make up names just for the sake of it.
The game is about historical alternatives. Like Hungary conquering Australia, so if developers have time to include such fanmade province names, we should cherish such contributions to the game. This will make it more fun and dynamic
 
Last edited:
  • 2
  • 1Like
Reactions:
The game is about historical alternatives. Like Hungary conquering Australia, so if developers have time to include such fanmade province names, we should cherish such contributions to the game. This will make it more fun and dynamic
They actually said they implement localised names where it makes sense, they have to be somewhat plausible (for example; Turkish names for Greek locations, German names for Hungarian ones, etc.).
 
The most urbanized area of Poland from this period is Wielkopolska.
Good remark -- I intended to mention it in my earlier post about differences between Lesser/Greater Poland but it escaped my mind.
To sum up, at that times it was probably the most large unpopulated area in borders of modern Poland. I think this could be an area that wasn't colonized at the start of this game.
I agree that in principle it could be interesting to make it uncolonized, but only if there are more such areas in the region. Would be weird if there was a random small uncolonized area hundreds of kilometres far from the other ones.
 
  • 2Like
Reactions:
Good remark -- I intended to mention it in my earlier post about differences between Lesser/Greater Poland but it escaped my mind.
Greater Poland developed much faster than Lesser Poland due to its close proximity to Western Europe. From what I remember, until modern times, Poznań residents call new residents "Bamberg" - that's also where many settlers came from in the old days.

However, over time, Lesser Poland has expanded quite significantly. Mazovia, where I come from, was a very sparsely populated and standing out from the rest.

I agree that in principle it could be interesting to make it uncolonized, but only if there are more such areas in the region. Would be weird if there was a random small uncolonized area hundreds of kilometres far from the other ones.
As I mentioned above, Mazovia was sparsely populated. The settlers of Kurpie were most often persecuted by the law, the Masovian peasantry and the poor szlachta. This region is unimportant but the fact is that it was uncolonized.

Of course, I don't care about that because it's more important to improve important regions such as Silesia, Lesser Poland or Prussia - who could still receive some love.
 
I'm kind of curious which parts of the follow-up feedback have been useful/included.