[Development] Map Suggestions

[Leoreth]

Okay good. I also always found them strange/surprising but don't know enough about Argentine geography to dispute it. By the way your Argentina looks great with the new terrain types.

 

[Krieger-FS]

Thanks!

Now about Chile, with the original map:

Spoiler :

In pre-Columbian times, Chile was the southernmost border of the Inca Empire. Spain conquered and colonized north and central Chile after defeating the Incas, while in the south the colonial projects were abandoned after the fierce resistence of Mapuche (who were independent until the 1880s) and lack of accesible mineral wealth. During colonial times, Chilean production was closely related to the mining economy of the viceroyalty of Peru, supplying mostly meat and grains. Although Chile proclaimed independence in 1810, the country achieved it de facto in 1818, when an Argentine army under leadership of the libertador San Martín crossed the Andes and defeated the royalist forces there. While initially Chile was probably the smallest and least populated independent country in South America back then, the state and nation-building there was done more quickly, which gave Chile a political stability that her neighbours didn't have in much of 19th century. This proved to be a valuable asset, as allowed Chile to slowly start a territorial expansion, first over indigenous areas (the conquest of Araucanía and the competition with Argentina over Patagonia) and then at expenses of her neighbours (War of the Pacific). At the end of 19th century, Chile was quite prosperous (fueled with the guano, saltpeter and mining industries) and powerful nation, one of the three South American "great powers" (the others being Argentina and Brazil) despite the huge differences in their territory and population, and also was perceived as a threat to the US economic and political influence expansion in the South American Pacific coast. Chile had, by then, the most powerful army in the region (which was trained by Prussian/German instructors) and an equally powerful navy (the country had several capital ships and the highest ratio of warship tons per citzens in the world in 1902). In the 20th century, however, Chile was unable to compete as equal with the other larger South American countries on the regional balance of power system, but it became one of the most stable Latin American democracies during much of the century until Pinochet's military dictatorship established in the 1970s. Nowadays Chile is one of the most stable and prosperous countries in South America.

My proposal is based in the changes that you guys (especially TJDowling) already discussed here, so it is about terrain features and resource allocation.

Spoiler :

1) removed the lake in North Chile. There are a few Andine lakes in the borders with Bolivia and Argentina, but none has the size to justify the water title.
2) changed some plains titles to semi-desert, to make a smooth transition between the desert and the more humid areas in Central Chile. We could also add a salt flat title 1NE of Antofagasta, as Atacama Desert is home of the Salar de Atacama (the 3rd largest in the world).
3) included an suggestion of a mountain title (2N1W of Santiago) that turns hills by 1550s. It is meant to be the Uspallata Pass, a traditional Andine route between Argentina and Chile used since colonial times.
4) included the Maipo river near Santiago. Although the river is not so large or important than those in Amazon and Platine basins, Maipo river is the main Chilean river and was probably the border between the Inca Empire and the Mapuche tribes. Gameplay-wise, it also helps Santiago becoming a large and productive city (it is the Chilean main industrial center and largest city, with 7 million people).
5) changed some plains titles to steppe in South Chile for purely aesthetic reasons.

Resources:

Spoiler :

Pre-Colonial:
2 Cooper (1E and 2N of Antofagasta): Chile has the largest cooper reserves in the world and this was the main economic activity in much of 20th century. I included as a pre-colonial resource because indigenous peoples in the region (including the Incas) had bronzework knowledge, making weapons and even armour. Perhaps we could have just only one resource in pre-colonial age, with another spawning after 1800 CE to represent the development of the modern exploitation.
3 Whales (2W1S of Arica, 2W1S of Concepción and 2W1S of Punta Arenas): several species of whales live on Chilean waters and they were hunted even in prehistoric times. In 19th century, there was large whaling operations in the region, especially around Southern waters.
2 Fish (2W3N of Santiago and 4S of Concepción): Chile has a large fishing industry since 19th century, with a devoloped salmon aquaculture in Southern regions.
Crab (1W of Santiago): represents the traditional crab fishing in Chile.
Deer (1S of Concepción): it was present in the original map, apparently to represent the traditional stag hunting in Southern Chile.
Stone (1S of Antofagasta): Another resource present in the original map. I suppose that is meant to represent the granite and other kinds of stone quarries in North Chile. Anyway, this could be easily removed if we want.

Colonial:
Cattle (2N of Santiago): represents the cattle husbandry established in colonial times and the huaso tradition in Chilean Central Valley, quite similar to the gaucho in the Platine basin. We could also add a wheat resource to represent more accurately the Chilean colonial economy, however I think that would leave this area too much cramped.
Wine (1N of Santiago): Chile is well known by its winery production, one of the best in South America and a traditional export product.
Horses (1N of Concepción): I only added this resource because I strongly support the addition of a Chilean civilization in the mod when the new map is implemented. I will not argue about the inclusion now while I'm discussing the map changes, but soon I will make a post about it. Alternativelly, this could be the place for the wheat mentioned above.

Post-independence:
Rare Earths (1NW of Antofagasta): represents the large litium reserves in Chilean side of the Andes, which are mostly located under the salt flat in the Atacama. Alternativelly, this could be a salt resource, with the rare earth close.
Iron (2S1W of Antofagasta): compared with other mineral resources, Chile has a relatively low iron production. There is a large iron production in that area (Coquimbo province), but its exploitation wasn't fully developed until 20th century.
Coal (1SE of Concepción): in mid-19th century Chile had a important coal mining operations; it was in that area that were located the main mines.

 

[Publicola]

My proposal is based in the changes that you guys (especially TJDowling) already discussed here, so it is about terrain features and resource allocation.

I'm guessing you didn't see the changes that he made (partly from my suggestions) on the next page. Here's the post with his final changes, with the inclusion of the Loa river, several Andean lakes near northern Chile & Bolivia, and several Patagonian lakes on the southern tip of the continent. It also includes the Santiago tile as a mountain that changes to a hill with the colonial era. I think I like the idea of blocking the Inca from the rest of South America until the colonial age, at which point multiple 'mountain passes' open up and allow more direct connection.

 

[Leoreth]

You also may want to update to the latest map branch. For example, I included a salt flat in northern Chile, likely in the same place you suggested.

 

[hnrysml]

I apologise for a lack of useful sources, but I remember researching rice cultivation in ancient Persia and the time that's stuck in my head for when it was introduced is c. 1000BCE. Certainly by the conquests of Alexander rice was already an important crop further west in the Nile Delta.

I also remember looking up agricultural and rainfall maps and deciding that some of the tiles immediately west of the zagros should be grassland, and not plain, similar to how the caspian coast of Iran is represented with grassland

 

[Krieger-FS]

I'm guessing you didn't see the changes that he made (partly from my suggestions) on the next page. Here's the post with his final changes, with the inclusion of the Loa river, several Andean lakes near northern Chile & Bolivia, and several Patagonian lakes on the southern tip of the continent. It also includes the Santiago tile as a mountain that changes to a hill with the colonial era. I think I like the idea of blocking the Inca from the rest of South America until the colonial age, at which point multiple 'mountain passes' open up and allow more direct connection.

Being honest, I saw these proposals several months ago, but didn't saw it again when I was redesigning the area in last weeks. So I apologize.

Regarding his final changes, I personally have mixed feelings about the inclusion of Loa river and in general adding any South American river that flows into the Pacific. These rivers are, in general, considerable smaller (both in lenght and drainage system) and less important than their counterparts that flow into the Atlantic, so I think we would have a good reason (be historical or gameplay) to include them while other larger rivers in the Atlantic basin aren't represented in the map.

I think is quite interesting to represent the Patagonian lakes, which are an important feature of the southern tip of the continent. However, I found them too big on the map, considering the size of the other South American lakes. So, in the end, I think that this is a matter of personal preference and guess that either proposals are reasonable accurate representations.

I also like the ideia of blocking the Incas from inland South America (even though this is not really historically accurate; in Spanish wikipedia there is an interesting discussion about it). I like most of his proposed "mountain passes", although I think they must be few so they became very strategically important. The Andes were and still are a formidable geographic barrier for military manoeuvres, which made offensive operations difficult. This was one of the main reasons why sea control was so important in the region and Chile, Argentina and Peru developed their navies. In fact, Chile only conquered Lima during the War of the Pacific because had the sea control and was capable of doing an amphibious operation.

You also may want to update to the latest map branch. For example, I included a salt flat in northern Chile, likely in the same place you suggested.

Honestly, I didn't updated because I'm working in these proposals for a few weeks and was afraid to lose the map save. I will update tomorrow.

 

[TJDowling]

I apologise for a lack of useful sources, but I remember researching rice cultivation in ancient Persia and the time that's stuck in my head for when it was introduced is c. 1000BCE. Certainly by the conquests of Alexander rice was already an important crop further west in the Nile Delta.

I also remember looking up agricultural and rainfall maps and deciding that some of the tiles immediately west of the zagros should be grassland, and not plain, similar to how the caspian coast of Iran is represented with grassland

Out of curiosity I googled this and I found a delightfully informative piece on how to make Iranian style rice (interestingly they mention that this style has remained since ancient times) https://explorepartsunknown.com/iran/how-to-make-rice-like-an-iranian/

EDIT: I found a source about rice in Persia.

http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/berenj-rice

Some evidence to show ancient cultivation around the Caspian Sea around 4th C BCE but perhaps not significant until the Islamic era as even the most fertile regions around the Caspian Sea were not well-suited to mass rice cultivation.

I also ran across peaches and oranges in Persia... and got me thinking... is there any "appetite" for adding citrus or another fruit along with bananas as an additional resource? I remember when I was making a map of potential spawning resources in Africa that peaches were especially prevalent in the Congo River basin (I marked them as bananas) and oranges are an important resource in a few regions of the world. Also, IIRC Leoreth mentioned that new resources might be welcome since adopting the limited effects resource rules.

 

[ozqar]

Hey Krieger, what you're doing in South America is amazing work, keep it up! Would it make sense to move Santiago's proposed location one tile north? It's IRL at the same latitude as Buenos Aires and Mendoza, and that way I think you get better use of land tiles (northern Chile is less crowded with cities).

 

[Leoreth]

I also ran across peaches and oranges in Persia... and got me thinking... is there any "appetite" for adding citrus or another fruit along with bananas as an additional resource? I remember when I was making a map of potential spawning resources in Africa that peaches were especially prevalent in the Congo River basin (I marked them as bananas) and oranges are an important resource in a few regions of the world. Also, IIRC Leoreth mentioned that new resources might be welcome since adopting the limited effects resource rules.

As a thought exercise, where else would you put this resource type?

There are multiple ways to go about this. I am not opposed to adding another health resource if justified. But another alternative would be graphical variants of the same resource, by renaming Banana to something more generic like Fruit. Right now graphical variants for resources do not exist, but in principle that should easily be possible. I want to give this a try sometime.

 

[TJDowling]

As a thought exercise, where else would you put this resource type?

There are multiple ways to go about this. I am not opposed to adding another health resource if justified. But another alternative would be graphical variants of the same resource, by renaming Banana to something more generic like Fruit. Right now graphical variants for resources do not exist, but in principle that should easily be possible. I want to give this a try sometime.

For areas where there is currently no banana resource (assuming that in order to add a new resource rather than add variants) major areas for current production that I'm familiar with would be Florida and Southern California. Other areas with no banana that have citrus production that I'm not totally familiar with are circled on this map in purple.

As far as where to place them in time. From ancient times citrus would have been most prevalent in SE Asia, Malaysia, Indonesia, South China and Eastern India. Could spread to Middle East and Europe sometime in the classical era and then to the rest of the world in the colonial era. I think citrus would be a good candidate for it's own resource because for one it appears in regions where there aren't already banana resources also because of its historic importance in health/happiness/trade... also I think it's a resource in Civ: Colonization?

https://world-food-and-wine.com/history-of-citrus

Spoiler :

As for peaches I guess they would start in Northwest China and Japan from the ancient era. Perhaps India and the Iran/Middle East around 1000BCE. Could enter Europe/North Africa in the Classical Era and reach Southern USA/Chile/Argentina by the colonial era. Maybe peaches are a better candidate for fruit variant though it seems to grow in drier climates than bananas so again it could stand on its own. I think there is more overlap between bananas and peaches but I'm having trouble finding a reliable resource that concisely describes its historic and current distribution.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peach

https://www.mapsofworld.com/world-top-ten/peach-producing-countries.html

 

[Krieger-FS]

Hey Krieger, what you're doing in South America is amazing work, keep it up! Would it make sense to move Santiago's proposed location one tile north? It's IRL at the same latitude as Buenos Aires and Mendoza, and that way I think you get better use of land tiles (northern Chile is less crowded with cities).

Thanks! Yeah, you are right, Santiago should be 1N. I think that there are still other cities that are misplaced on the map. I'll check again.

 

[ozqar]

As a thought exercise, where else would you put this resource type?

There are multiple ways to go about this. I am not opposed to adding another health resource if justified. But another alternative would be graphical variants of the same resource, by renaming Banana to something more generic like Fruit. Right now graphical variants for resources do not exist, but in principle that should easily be possible. I want to give this a try sometime.

I think variants for resources would be super interesting, and with fruits in particular what would be nice is that they can cover different areas of the map. Whether or not you'd like to implement them as graphical variants of the same resource or as different resources altogether, I don't know.

If we were to add fruits, here are some interesting things to consider
The most important groups of fruit worldwide, by tonnage (FAO data) are (in order): Banana and Plantain, Melons (watermelon, melon, cantaloupe), Citrus, Pommes (apple, pear), Grapes, Mangos and Guavas (always classified together, don't know why), Stone fruits (peach, plum, etc), Pineapples, Berries, Papaya, Dates, Avocados, Persimmon, Kiwi, Figs.

It would be interesting to have these groups, based on similar growing conditions / historical production regions:
1) Melons are grown in semiarid areas in subtropical regions: Northwestern China, Greater Middle East (Turkey, Egypt, Iran, Algeria, Morocco), Central Asia (Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan), and the US / Mexico border region (northern Mexico, California), India-Pakistan region (northeastern India); historically watermelons were first used to carry water across desertic areas. Nowadays they're also grown in more humid regions (like Florida and the Southeast of the US, and Eastern China (around Shanghai), but I think this is a more modern development).
2) Citrus would be a great addition in places with subtropical and Mediterranean climates: Southern US (California, Florida), the whole Mediterranean basin (not just Spain!), South America (Peru, Brazil), South Africa, Australia, and Eastern India, Southeast Asia (from Indonesia to southern China).
3) Apples (and stone fruits) are grown in similar places: temperate, semihumid regions: western and southern Europe (from France to the Balkans), Turkey, Northern Iran, Russia (European part), Northeastern and Eastern China, Northeastern US, northern Argentina and Chile (and Southern Brazil). In general, stone fruits are more common in warmer/drier regions while pomme fruits are more common in cooler/more humid regions, but I wouldn't make any difference between them.
4) Mangos, Papayas, and Pineapples are all produced in tropical, humid climates. They are different in that they were domesticated in different regions of the world and previous to the Colombian exchange Papaya, Guava (;esoamerica) and Pineapples (Brazil) were only grown in the Americas, while Mangos (Southeast asia) were restricted to the old world. Nowadays I don't think there's that much of a geographical difference. I'd put them all in the same category though, perhaps mangos can be the best representative for all? In any case, they're grown in places such as India, all of Southeast Asia (Indonesia, Thailand, Philippines), southern China, Mesoamerica, Brazil, Peru, Colombia, the Caribbean, most of tropical Africa (Mali, Nigeria, Kenya, Congo, Tanzania, Malawi).
5) Dates and/or Figs, which are traditionally grown in very dry areas (especially figs), and serve as as important food source there (ie, drier places than melons), especially in the Middle East, North Africa, and Sahel regions (even in places like Saudi Arabia, and all the way to Sudan, Chad, Niger, and Mauritania). Less important countries are all outside this region and would include dry but agriculturally strong areas in China, the US, Mexico, Spain, Brazil, India.

- Grapes, keep them as they are, they mostly used for wine production, so I wouldn't put them in the fruit category at all.
- Berries overlap a lot with Apples and Stone fruits, the main difference is that they're also grown in highland areas in semitropical countries (like Mexico, Peru, and Eastern Africa); I wouldn't include them separately though
- I think that avocados, persimmons, and kiwi fruits are too specific to add on their own, and too difficult to group together with other fruits; also they don't cover different geographic ranges, so I don't see much point in adding them.

About bananas, though, there's something else to keep in mind. While they're biologically super close, bananas and plantains function very differently for people. Plantains are starchy and serve as a source of complex carbohydrates - they cover the same function as grains or potatoes, they're a staple. Bananas are sweet and serve as any of the other fruits above. Globally, bananas represent about 70% of production, and plantains the remainder 30%. However, the bananas only became massive in the 20th century, while plantains have been historically important as a staple in many tropical countries (where grains (exc maize) and potatoes don't grow well). Since I think most banana resources on the map are there to provide food in these tropical regions, I think we should consider the resource either the same as the other grains or at least as a different thing from the generic fruits mentioned above (just like grapes work differently because they're there for wine).

One thing to consider though about whether variants add additional bonuses or not, is that for some things having additional resources does bring more benefits IRL, and for some others, it doesn't. With spices, for example, there's a good argument that people get additional benefits from each type they get. I mention spices because it's one thing where it would be easy to think that pepper, cinnamon, and cloves could all only be graphical variants. Maybe variants can provide additional happiness, but not additional health?

Just some thoughts.

 

[Leoreth]

That's the problem with dividing things up I see though, because e.g. spices represent so many different things and making all these categories explicit also more clearly excludes everything not represented with its own special variant. That is less clear with graphical variants because it is e.g. all spices. I see food similarly even though I see some of the point in the difference between staple and supplementary fruits.

 

[Orbii]

Another point: fruits like oranges and apples should be improved through Orchards while stuff like bananas would still be through Plantations, right? Kind of matters for the early game and for civic bonuses (I will fully admit that this comment is based on TV advertisements and popular conceptions about how bananas are grown).

 

[Leoreth]

Bananas are currently and deliberately a plantation resource, but other foods would make sense in an Orchard. Speaking of, it really is strange that you cannot grow straightup fruits in an orchard in this game.

 

[TJDowling]

Bananas are currently and deliberately a plantation resource, but other foods would make sense in an Orchard. Speaking of, it really is strange that you cannot grow straightup fruits in an orchard in this game.

You mean on a tile without a resource?

 

[Leoreth]

No I mean any kind of fruit resource that is actually intended as fruit.

 

[ozqar]

Bananas are currently and deliberately a plantation resource, but other foods would make sense in an Orchard. Speaking of, it really is strange that you cannot grow straightup fruits in an orchard in this game.

What do you mean, that you can't?

If it's of any relevance, orchards are for fruit and nut bearing trees, while banana plants are giant herbs. Calling them plantations is correct, afaik, despite the colonial associations of the word.

 

[Enyavar]

Hm, fruits.
The game already has bananas (representing "jungle fruits", like cassioc as well).
Citrus, if the new map doesn't have it already, would represent "semi-arid fruits". If you have Realism Invictus' world map: there are also locations for the Citrus resource. I would expect them in California, 2 or 3 in the Northern Mediterranean (Spain/Provence, Levante), and finally in Southern China. For other areas, see the "citrus map" provided by TJDowling.
To represent "arid fruits", Dates/Figs sound like a good idea, unless that kind of stuff is supposed to grow in oases anyway. Another idea is the Coconut - before industrialization, Coconut Trees were a veritable resource not only for their fruits, but because nearly every aspect of the plant was possible to use for some benefit: Food, Wood, Fibers, Leaves, Alcohol...
About "northern fruits", as I would call apples/pears/plums/cherries, I'm less enthusiastic. Distributing an "apple" resource in the temperate northern hemisphere means, basically, that every civ always has access to a fruity health resource. In light of the resource distribution I see how this leads to an overabundance of resources.

So, let's say we could have these four fruit types in the game: Bananas, Palm tree, Citrus, Apples. [Only colonial empires would have more than two of those, I think?]

• First, the tile yields: Banana (+1F) Plantations (+3F) yield lots of food, which would be unchanged. Citrus (+1C) Orchards (+2C), I would think should yield similar results as Wine Orchards, no additional food. Cocos (+1F) Plantations (+1P +1C) would provide a bonus in all three aspects. Apple (+1C) Orchards (+1F) would not be spectacular, and it would be fully reasonable to build a city right on top. Or Farms, in the vassalage period.
  
• Second, the empire-wide distributed health: Could we pool their basic health benefit as "fruits", so that theoretically having 1 instance of each resource would count as "4 fruits" for the player cities to distribute among them? If that's not feasible, better not implement Cocos and Apples, I think. But if it is possible to lump all fruits together for the distribution, the same could also be done with "grains" (Rice, Wheat, Corn, Millet).
• Third, the building-specific benefits. Only Banana and Citrus would be suitable for a +1 health effect each, from the Pharmacy, I think. About Cocos and Apples, maybe re-introduce the Grocer? +1 currency for having the resource, and add some other resources to the Grocer as well? Olives, Sugar - dunno? With all the new resources coming, I think that nearly all building effects would need to be re-thought. Maybe even introducing production chains?

 

[1SDANi]

Hm, fruits.
The game already has bananas (representing "jungle fruits", like cassioc as well).
Citrus, if the new map doesn't have it already, would represent "semi-arid fruits". If you have Realism Invictus' world map: there are also locations for the Citrus resource. I would expect them in California, 2 or 3 in the Northern Mediterranean (Spain/Provence, Levante), and finally in Southern China. For other areas, see the "citrus map" provided by TJDowling.
To represent "arid fruits", Dates/Figs sound like a good idea, unless that kind of stuff is supposed to grow in oases anyway. Another idea is the Coconut - before industrialization, Coconut Trees were a veritable resource not only for their fruits, but because nearly every aspect of the plant was possible to use for some benefit: Food, Wood, Fibers, Leaves, Alcohol...
About "northern fruits", as I would call apples/pears/plums/cherries, I'm less enthusiastic. Distributing an "apple" resource in the temperate northern hemisphere means, basically, that every civ always has access to a fruity health resource. In light of the resource distribution I see how this leads to an overabundance of resources.

So, let's say we could have these four fruit types in the game: Bananas, Palm tree, Citrus, Apples. [Only colonial empires would have more than two of those, I think?]

• First, the tile yields: Banana (+1F) Plantations (+3F) yield lots of food, which would be unchanged. Citrus (+1C) Orchards (+2C), I would think should yield similar results as Wine Orchards, no additional food. Cocos (+1F) Plantations (+1P +1C) would provide a bonus in all three aspects. Apple (+1C) Orchards (+1F) would not be spectacular, and it would be fully reasonable to build a city right on top. Or Farms, in the vassalage period.
  
• Second, the empire-wide distributed health: Could we pool their basic health benefit as "fruits", so that theoretically having 1 instance of each resource would count as "4 fruits" for the player cities to distribute among them? If that's not feasible, better not implement Cocos and Apples, I think. But if it is possible to lump all fruits together for the distribution, the same could also be done with "grains" (Rice, Wheat, Corn, Millet).
• Third, the building-specific benefits. Only Banana and Citrus would be suitable for a +1 health effect each, from the Pharmacy, I think. About Cocos and Apples, maybe re-introduce the Grocer? +1 currency for having the resource, and add some other resources to the Grocer as well? Olives, Sugar - dunno? With all the new resources coming, I think that nearly all building effects would need to be re-thought. Maybe even introducing production chains?

Alternatively, fruits could service only one city per resource to make up for their commonality?