Tinto Maps #7 Anatolia Feedback

[Pavía]

Hello everybody, and welcome to another Tinto Maps feedback review! Today we will be taking a look at Anatolia. As a foreword, when we tackled the review, we found that in general terms, the region was in a pretty good state. Therefore, the scope of it was more in line with the review of Italy, than with the massive review of Tinto Maps #4 (and we could do it faster). Here you are the log with the entire list of changes (which is juicy enough, nonetheless), as usual:

Spoiler: List of changes

ADDITIONS

Added the following:

• Locations (15+ 9 Lakes + 18 Wastelands)
  • Afşin
  • Altınekin
  • Arguvan
  • Bozan
  • Çine
  • Çumra
  • Finike
  • Karakeçili
  • Kaymaz
  • Kulu
  • Obruk
  • Şabanözü
  • Sülüklü
  • Turgut
  • Yahyalı
• Lakes
  • Lake Acıgöl
  • Lake Akşehir
  • Lake Bafa
  • Lake Burdur
  • Lake Eber
  • Lake Hazar
  • Lake Köyceğiz
  • Lake Marmara
  • Lake Uluabat
• Wastelands
  • Divided many Wastelands into more pieces.
• TAGs
  • Bingöl
  • Bulduqani
  • Çemişgezek
  • Mayyafaraqin
  • Kilis
  • Tavas
  • Zraqi
• Characters
  • tvs_ilyas_bey
• Dynamic Names
  • Added Greek and Turkish Dynamic Names.

CORRECTIONS

Renamed the following:

• Locations:
  • Akçakoca to Akçaşehir
  • Araç to Arac
  • Diyarbakir to Diyarbekir
  • Düzce to Konrapa
  • Eğil to Egil
  • Hani to Heni
  • Kızıltepe to Dunaysir
  • Pasinler to Hasankale
  • Toprakkale to Iskenderun
  • Yenice to Yenicepazarı
  • Xarani to Kars (Kadirli)

Raw Goods

• Changed several Raw Goods as suggested

Terrain and Vegetation

• Comprehensive Review

Locations

• Redrew several Locations

Minorities

• Added more minorities to the region

And here you've got the relevant maps:

Countries:

Some more tags have been added to the region, you've got the entire list above. The most relevant ones are those split from the Sutayids, which are now more divided (and start with disconnected lands, which will pose an early game challenge).

Dynasties:

There have not been many changes regarding dynasties, there have been some adjustments here and there, and also the ones of the new countries added.

Locations:

Some more locations were added to the map, although not many, as the density was already good enough. We've also improved the connexions, so they're in general more clear, especially in wasteland-dense areas.

Areas:

We're skipping the map of provinces this time, as they're exactly the same as the last time, but I'm now sharing with you the map of areas, as it was not shown previously.

Terrain:

As you might have noticed, there have been several tweaks to the terrain mapmodes.

Cultures:

We've also made several changes to the cultural distribution. Now there are more Turkish and Turkoman pops in Western Anatolia, we also added Mongolian tribesmen to Central Anatolia, and in the East, the Armenian Highlands are more fragmented among Armenian, Kurdish, and Turkoman pops.

Religions:

We've also added more religious minorities to the region. Now there are plenty of Shiites, being the majority on some locations here and there. You might also notice a couple of blue minorities in the map, compared with the Tinto Maps: in the center of Anatolia, we have Tengri Mongolians, while in the east, we have Yazidi Kurdish.

Raw Materials:

Another mapmode with plenty of tweaks, thanks to your feedback. The overall design is not so different, but we've gone across all the suggestions to make sure that the resource distribution is even more accurate.

And that's all for today! We will be reading your feedback in this thread as well, and implementing further suggestions that we find reasonable, as usual. Also for your information, the next map review we will be doing is that of Carpathia and the Balkans, as Russia is also going to take a while and we prefer to prioritize former over the later; but it won't be as fast as this one and will be posted in a few weeks for now, as we'll have some people on vacation this month, and we also have some other priorities to address during the month. Cheers!

 

[Pavía]

May we see the harbour suitability map mode?

I plan to share the harbor suitability map mode of Europe and the Mediterranean soon (maybe next week, if time allows), with the criteria we've used, so it's easier from now on to address this type of feedback; that's why I skipped it today.

 

[Pavía]

Great job with the review! I have some questions I prepared:
- Can you change the colour of the greek and turkish culture to the purple of the Byzantines and the green of the Ottomans, or if you wanna be more generic to the blue and red of the modern greek and turkish flags so that they can be told apart by afar;
- Is Ahis a republic in game? Apparently historians refer to it as such because it was a guild;
- Do we know if the Dulkadirids were already enstablished by the 1st of April 1337? And if they were should they be an actual vassal of the Mamluks or just a nominal one?
- Are the Eretnids a vassal of the Jalayirids or the Chobanids and is there any mechanic that represent Eretna's title of Viceroy of Anatolia of the Ilkhanate?
- I don't think neither the Karasids nor the Ayadinids ever were vassals of the Germiyanids, why are they represented as such?
- Why isn't Alaye a vassal of the Karamanids, since they were it for all their existance?
- You forgot to two of the Canik beyliks, the Kutluşah based in Amasya and Taşanids based in Merzifon(I may have written their names wrong).
And finally some nitpiks:
- The Canik beyliks usually are referred as nominal vassals of the Eretnids so I'dont know how much sense makes to have them as such by 1337;
- Although it's not wrong I think the Saruhanids should be renamed fo Sarukhanids because their founder and ruler 1337 was called Sarukhan, also it's not technically wrong to have them as vassals of the Germiyanids since Sarukhan started as an emir of them but I'm pretty sure that by 1337 he was just a nominal vassal;
- The Inancids(which we know were vassals of the Germiyanids) should be spelled Inanjids.

1. We may review the colors of the cultures, yes.
2. Yes, it's a Republic.
3. We think so.
4. Eretnids are their zenith at this moment. And there are some mechanics linked to Ilkhanate, I'll talk about that on Friday.
5. I'll check with the team about the more specific country questions and feedback, thanks!

 

[Pavía]

What's the name of that Tav country near the Mentesids also harbour map plz(Anatolia is not Europe )

Tavas.

 

[Pavía]

I noticed a different map style from previous Tinto map, with tiny mountains "paintings" and so on...
It is a different map mode, a graphic option or it depends from zoom level?

Are you maybe referring to the colored wastelands on the political mapmode? If that's the case, it's a setting that the player can select; the first two maps are the countries with and without colored mapmode, for comparison.

 

[Pavía]

What determines dynastic colours? Seeing the colour changing between map modes is strange when the countries have not changed.

I just asked our color bakers, it's akin to the country color, and in the case of having a dynasty present in different countries, it takes the color of the most relevant country. However, there's a bug in the code, which has yet to be fixed.

 

[Pavía]

Already?? If we have a full locations, provinces, cultures and resources proposal pending for Hugary, do we still have the time to post it before it's too late?

To be fair, it was posted two months ago, the first reviews were much closer to the DD release than this one. But yes, there's some time to post it before we start the in-depth review.

 

[Pavía]

Are the new tags in the east all vassals of the Sutayids?

Yes.

 

[Pavía]

Also, I don't know if this was already a thing, but the game shortens names now?

View attachment 1185409

Since some time ago, yes.

 

[Pavía]

View attachment 1185410


Steve Lacy - Static

0:12 -◍──────── 2:38

Lol, we'll correct, thanks.

 

[Pavía]

No, I'm referring to the tiny mountains or trees you can see in the political map mod (with or without colored wastelands), while in arabia tinto map (e.g.) there was just plane colours without any decoration

Oh, that. It depends on the level of zoom.

 

[Pavía]

From what it looks like to me, the Eretnids share colour with the Jalayirids, except in dynastic map. So it is likely they are subordinate to the Jalayirids. Same goes for the Sutayids colour.

I may correct myself, and yes, Eretnids are subjects of the Jalayirids.

 

[Pavía]

Is it a beylik, an emirate? I've never heard of it as a "country"

Beylikate, yes.

 

[Pavía]

Question, are the Shi'ites Alevi? I generally agree with representing all Turcoman populations as Alevi, but there really should be a distinction from Orthodox Shi'ite since Alevism was quite heterodox. Alevis in Anatolia and where Turcomans are in general (Which would also be the main followers of Shah Ismail of Safavids) and Alawites in Syria are important to represent I believe. It would also be cool if Janissaries could be represented as Alevi as well.

Similarly, I hope religions will have a representation of Orthodox and Heterodox split, with former being a conformation to state religion and latter being not so.

We yet have to implement the different branches of Shiism.

 

[Pavía]

@Pavía no pops nor market maps?

Not many changes for those.

 

[Pavía]

Am I seeing it wrong from colors but are the Greeks in around Cappadocia Pontic rather than Cappadocian? It might be a color illusion but it would be strange indeed. I would personally put the separation of Cappadocian and Pontic Greeks at provinces of Bozok and Sivas, with those areas and north of it being Pontic and south of it being Cappadocian.

Coloring issue, the Cappadocians are to the west of Sivas and south of Bozok, as you mention.

 

[Pavía]

@Pavía, sorry for bothering you with this, but it's a question from previous TM Feedback...

Will there be additions of releasable countries throughout the different regions of Tinto Maps?
I am interested in particular in addition of "Lauenburg and Bütow Land"... I just would like to know if it is going to be added...

In general terms, we aren't going so deep in the addition of releasable countries, I'm sorry.

 

[Pavía]

We've been working on an in-depth feedback (rework and combination of two previous proposals) in a smaller team and we took our time because we assumed #6 and #8 will come before, so we didn't know that you'd start the in depth review this soon

We aren't just going to start working on it, as I said, so you might still have some time to work on it.

 

[Pavía]

Well, that is very sad to hear.
Was there a change of approach when it comes to releasables? Because some time ago I thought that You were okay with that...
I mean, it was confirmed that there will be small, few locations releasables like Cornwall and others...

As I said in original post regarding the history of Lauenburg-Bütow and ideas behind adding it, I would be perfectly happy even if it was just a "bare bones" tag without additional flavor. Having it be recognized in a historical game in any form would be a big victory for my local history community by itself.
I just thought coding just another country in wouldn't be very difficult...


Is it a result of more tight deadline, so there is less time adding things, or is it something else?

In any way, I would kindly ask you to reconsider, even if it's just this once for this small addition.

And if not, can there still be hope for it in the future updates of Project Caesar?

Ok, now I see the issue, I thought you meant a releasable at setup, and in this case, it would be a releasable by event; there's a separate thread that you can use to post Flavor Event suggestions: https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/threads/flavor-event-suggestions-please-add-your-own.1697485/

And, in any case, better to discuss these issues in the proper Tinto Maps, to not hijack the discussion about Anatolian feedback.

 

[Pavía]

Im really sorry but compared to the other reviews of the regions, Anatolian one has been extremely lackluster. Compared to the density of iberia, poland and even arabia, the provinces in anatolia feel too large and generic. There were a lot of great recommendations and reviews under the original thread too. Its a shame for such a geographically and culturally diverse region

Does it feel a bit luckluster regarding the changes in Anatolia if we are to compare them to Poland and Germany especially some location changes could have been added to look more pleasing (the Biga location for one could have been reduced) but at least you gave Trebizond Kotyora and Oinaion as they controlled them at the time
View attachment 1185446
All in all a bittersweet Anatolia feedback maybe there could be reviewed again in the future?

Considering the amount of historical text related to Anatolia region, compared to other regions, where it's hard to find much. It do be looking quite lackluster indeed.
But then again, maybe we have been spoilt too much with how many locations some other regions have gotten. Like "but last year I had 37" moment.

I already mentioned this in previous map reviews, but I'll repeat it again. After we post each Tinto Maps, we find that each region is in different state with the others, in density, accuracy, etc., even if we tried to be consistent with our design and methods. This means that the review of each region will also be different, as we need to focus on different issues. So you may think 'hey, they added much less new locations in Anatolia', but then maybe you're overlooking that maybe it was already in a better position compared to others, and also that maybe what we needed to focus on for this region was not adding more locations, but improving the cultural and religious diversity of it (which is another thing that will make its gameplay different from, let's say, Western Europe).

So, as I say, do not expect each map review to add hundreds of locations; instead, giving us direct feedback in the Tinto Maps Feedback threads on what could specifically be improved even further after the review is quite useful.