A Suggestion: Better Chinese Map

[Qiu]

Agreed on Hohhot. But this Beijing and the likes are the real problem. It's unlikely that in-game China, player or AI, will settle Hohhot. Maybe we could start by deciding the names for cities that 100% always spawn in-game, like Xi'an and Beijing.

On Beijing, should Zhongdu be renamed? If so, should the city called Jicheng (Ji, 薊&#22478, Yanjing (Independent, 燕&#20140 or even Fanyang (Han, 范&#38451? I forgot what time the independent city spawn, but Zhongdu is a name from 12th century Later Jin Dinasty. After that, when the independent city is conquered, what should it's called as then? haha

If Suzhou and Shanghai is a different city, we shouldn't "evolve" Suzhou into Shanghai - as Carthago doesn't "evolve" to Tunis. This is just to maintain consistency. Also, in my opinion adding a new tile in medieval era won't be effective because we'd need a city on that region early. I think players are less likely to raze their Suzhou, Hangzhou, or any city there just so they can found Shanghai in a proper place.

For Beijing and some other import cities that are most likely to be settled, I suggest an in-game era based naming system as follows:

Spoiler :

Though I know Soul-breathing is prepareing a much more detailed project.

 

[BenZL43]

Such a great work!
Imo Beiping feels more appropriate for Renaissance Beijing (I assume that's Ming) rather than Wade-Giles' rendition of 北京 - but there's this tasty duck from here.... hmm

Also, how about Nanjing, Wuhan, Shanghai, Dali, Kashgar, Dunhuang and Baoutou in your version? I can't remember if there is any other city often settled in-game.

Yes I'm looking forward to see soul-breathing's project result too haha

 

[Qiu]

Such a great work!
Imo Beiping feels more appropriate for Renaissance Beijing (I assume that's Ming) rather than Wade-Giles' rendition of 北京 - but there's this tasty duck from here.... hmm

Also, how about Nanjing, Wuhan, Shanghai, Dali, Kashgar, Dunhuang and Baoutou in your version? I can't remember if there is any other city often settled in-game.

Yes I'm looking forward to see soul-breathing's project result too haha

Yes. When not the capital, it was called Beiping (early Ming, the RoC).

A revised edition

Spoiler :

 

[soul-breathing]

@Leo
Now we think it possible to expand the overall size of China. But instead of 1 line east and 1 line south, we prefer 1 line east and 1 line north(reduce the area of Siberia).

Because when expand China 1 line south, Australia and New Zealand will too near to the Antarctic. On the other hand, reduce the area of Siberia could also nerf over-powered Russia. As for 1 line to east , it will be almost no difficult to move Japan, Korea and Philippines 1 line east, I think.

The concrete plan could be improved gradually.

 

[BenZL43]

I'd like to revise my view on Shanghai a bit - because on #20 I mentioned that we shouldn't "evolve" old cities into a newer (and more popularly known now) city. Since this game's about history, I think trying to find old and unfamiliar names for historically-later-founded-and-now-big cities will result in peculiar names. This unwritten rule resulted in odd names for Arabic cities in Egypt like Tell-el-something and Tell-el-whatever.

So I think, why don't Carthago become Qartaj but Qartaj then become Tunis in the next earliest era? This way, Wu can become Suzhou on Medieval/Renaissance that change into Shanghai on Renaissance/Industrial era to symbolize the rise of Shanghai's prominence in the region... and Tell-el-something could then be renamed Cairo, I think. iirc there's some cities that follow this style of renaming but I can't remember any.

 

[Leoreth]

@Leo
Now we think it possible to expand the overall size of China. But instead of 1 line east and 1 line south, we prefer 1 line east and 1 line north(reduce the area of Siberia).

Because when expand China 1 line south, Australia and New Zealand will too near to the Antarctic. On the other hand, reduce the area of Siberia could also nerf over-powered Russia. As for 1 line to east , it will be almost no difficult to move Japan, Korea and Philippines 1 line east, I think.

The concrete plan could be improved gradually.

I didn't think the southern expansion out too much, to be honest, I thought maybe we could save the missing row somewhere in Indonesia, but probably not considering how squished that part of the world is as well.

Speaking of, Indonesia would also benefit from the extra column gained by expanding Asia to the east.

And you're right, expanding China to the north at the expense of Siberia is a better idea. We can probably move inner Mongolia up to Lake Baikal including Manchuria and the Korean peninsula 1N.

I'd like to revise my view on Shanghai a bit - because on #20 I mentioned that we shouldn't "evolve" old cities into a newer (and more popularly known now) city. Since this game's about history, I think trying to find old and unfamiliar names for historically-later-founded-and-now-big cities will result in peculiar names. This unwritten rule resulted in odd names for Arabic cities in Egypt like Tell-el-something and Tell-el-whatever.

So I think, why don't Carthago become Qartaj but Qartaj then become Tunis in the next earliest era? This way, Wu can become Suzhou on Medieval/Renaissance that change into Shanghai on Renaissance/Industrial era to symbolize the rise of Shanghai's prominence in the region... and Tell-el-something could then be renamed Cairo, I think. iirc there's some cities that follow this style of renaming but I can't remember any.

Well, Qartaj and Tunis are at least the same city (Qartaj is a district of Tunis). It's acceptable in these cases, but I'm decidedly against renaming city A to B when those cities are kilometres apart but happen to share the same tile.

 

[BenZL43]

Then, since China plays for a long time in-game, how about separating the settler map in the CNM? Two different iLangs, like Egypt's.

Therefore, if it's a 3000AD start, in modern era the city will be called Suzhou. If 1700AD start, Shanghai. There's other cities that could benefit from this arrangement, I think.

 

[Leoreth]

That might be worth it actually.

 

[wangjexi]

I like the proposed changes. When will it be ready?

 

[Leoreth]

Sorry, as I mentioned earlier, I'm focused on other things at the moment. But I also like the ideas here, so I'll definitely work on that later.

 

[soul-breathing]

I'm busy doing my work nowadays, hard to get time to do it. It's a pity that I can't focus on it until September.

 

[Malchar]

I've been following the mod for a few years on and off, and I have a quick question. Are the map changes always rolled up into the newest mod version releases, or do the maps have to be downloaded separately? I've seen a number of map change threads here and there, but it was never clear to me whether or not these changes are included in the mod release or if they are a separate modmodmod.

 

[Leoreth]

Nowadays everything that is part of the official mod (i.e. developed by me) comes together as part of optional components in the installer. I'm comparatively conservative with map changes, so if you saw sweeping changes it was probably either a discussion thread or a modmod.

 

[ngazi]

Any map should be functional first. A lot of historically and militarily important aspects are lost when taking a simple modern map directly into tiles. The most important thing is to have the correct geopolitical features, such as

1. Important passes and corridors like the Shanhai Pass and the Hexi Corridor using hills, mountains, lakes, deserts.

2. Accessibility from the correct directions. Tibet was never cut off from all directions. The Tibetan Empire were only blocked in the west and had contact with India (subcontinent), Yunan, Changan, the Tarim Basin, and other areas to the north. But the diverse landscape of southern and central China created key choke points and battlefields.

3. Movement speed. Movement in Gansu, northern, and northeastern parts should be fast, while slow in lower areas. There is a lot of desert on a modern map in many places that were open plains for trade and war in the past. Sadly there are no navigable rivers in Civ, but rivers can still be draw defensively for famously strong cities instead of solely for economic considerations.