Ethnic composition maps of the early 1860s

Cool story, bro.

This was supposed to mean that the story you wrote was cool, broski. No sarcasm.

Those maps aren't terribly accurate, agreed. But they're pretty ok for the general info. They give slightly more info than "germans live in germany", and doesn't go into details about which Slavic tribe lives where. I doubt the OP bro needs this uber precission, although he didn't reveal in particular the purpose of his request.
 
Well, I just dislike the idea that in Victoria etc, the surroundings of Vilnius and Grodno, Bialystok are, I believe, shown as Lithuanian, Belarusian, Belarusian, while they were 90% (not the cities itself, there were also lots of Jews there, but the surroundings) 90% polish or so, and still are often majorly polish. I can understand eastern Galicja to be shown as Ukrainian, because it was majorly Ukrainian, apart from bigger cities, but this land was mostly polish and it's a major difference.

There are other mistakes in Victoria maps: for example, for some reason, Bukowina is majorly polish in Victoria map. There was a polish minority there (the Czadca highlanders I've mentioned), but it was 2% or so... (nowdays it's even less, but somehow they are guaranteed a sit in the romanian parliament. I guess Romania was obliged to guarantee some sits to national minorities and preferred to give one to underserving Poles than to deserving Hungarians). There are no Greeks in Pontos or Smyrna area, according to Vicky... Almost no Armenians in Cilicia, the religion of Lebanon and Syria is mostly wrong etc... Lots of inacurracies. But of course, for patriotic reasons, I'm mostly concerned with inacurracies that concern Poles.
 
Well, Paradox aren't known for very accurate maps anyway.

I mean it's only recently in DW that they have made a half-decent map of Russia, and this only relates to it's Western part. In EU:Rome the map is a joke. Their best map so far is in CK.

:gripe:This all is obviousely a part of global conspiracy against Slavs.:gripe:
 
Paradox's only good maps are the ones in Darkest Hour and Victoria II. Neither was made by Paradox. DH is an independently developed game, and the V2 map grew out of the Victoria map improvement project - and Paradox inexplicably made that map worse. EU3: DW's map is the V2 map for coastlines, but the provincial borders are still as bad or worse than they were in previous incarnations of the EU3 map.

Of course, Paradox (namely King) has stated that they don't care about the map. Sigh.

Anyway. Digression aside, back to ethnicity nonsense.
 
...Of course, Paradox (namely King) has stated that they don't care about the map. Sigh.

Tsk-tsk-tsk...

How does it manage to escape them that in their games the map is basically everything. It's nothing but the map. Map is all that matters. Better map = better sales. Quit the ridiculose 3d crap, just make a good map. Sheesh...
 
I too have no idea why they don't at least move the province boundaries around. In all but a few cases, its just a (badly needed) aesthetic improvement.

But I do understand why they're not about to change the ethnic representations too much. Much easier to just ignore the problem, and smack down every raging nationalist who complains in the fora. Some regions of the world are obviously worse than others, and it's particularly bad for EU, given that you can only have 1 culture per province. Less excusable for Vicky.
 
if you can't distinguish between serious and balanced posts and nationalist propaganda, that's your problem, it's your shame. You don't have to boast with it by such worthless posts as the one you've made.
 
Back
Top Bottom