AbsintheRed
Deity
Do we have a consensus on Brandenburg and Schleswig/Holstein?
Province assignment
- Thread starter civ_king
- Start date
Kartoffelvampir
Chieftain
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2008
- Messages
- 49
Ah, seems like i didn't checked enough.
The Problem is: some of provinces you have to conquer or settle for the UHV's are really small and forcing the player to found cities in bad spots or to close to other cities, which can be annoying
It isn't a problem by preplaced cities or starting provinces, mostly, but in areas the AI settles or.Specific:
- Bosnia for the ottomans (see last post)
- Flanders for Germans and Burgundians (quite small, and next to the equally small Lorraine province, which you need both for the german UHV. Maybe merging with the Netherland-province (i know, unhistorical))
- Northumbria, Mercia and especially East Anglia (couldn't find a decent spot in the later, and Mercia hasn't a good city if you don't raze York and Edingburgh. A lot peoble probably won't like that idea, but Gameplay-wise they may should be merged to a single one.)
Well, all in all we shouldn't force the Player to found cities in bad spots, even if it goes against historical correctness.
Kartoffelvampir
Chieftain
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2008
- Messages
- 49
I say: there is no gameplay or historical need for another Province there, because:
- There wasn't a "Schleswig-Holstein" until 1866
- There isn't a good city-spot between a city in north denmark and Lubeck
- There wasn't a city so important that we have to push it in (Lubeck is only part of Hostein now becaus Hitler hated the City, no kidding
)- If we want to create wars between the Danes and the Germans, we can make the Danes more likely to conquer Lubeck (they did it several times in the middle ages)
So, i vote no for a new province. We could change borders there, however.
Morholt
Prince
Lesser Poland might be added as OK for Austria since they got it in the third partition of Poland (1795).
3Miro
Deity
To conquer a province you don't necessarily have to settle a city in it. If the province is entirely covered by your cultural borders, then you have conquered the province.
I never build a city in East-Anglia.
Ottomans shouldn't build a city in Bosnia, if they get Ragusa and Belgrade they it should be enough.
I never build a city in East-Anglia.
Ottomans shouldn't build a city in Bosnia, if they get Ragusa and Belgrade they it should be enough.
I know it doesn't really help but I have a somewhat different opinion about how the provinces should possibly look like
No to Schleswig.
Holstein maybe but not enough room. So... also no.
To Brandenburg.. 2 different ideas (both get rid of Brandenburg as a province)
divide up Brandenburg between Pommern & 'Meissen' map
or even better imo, divide up Brandenburg into the Ostmark & Nordmark map
(East March & North March)
(Thüringen?)
and possibly adding Westfalia / Westfalen in SW Saxony map
(shows the smaller core area of 'Old-Saxony' including Westfalia)
edit: It wasn't on the topic but I've wondered why 'Holland' as entire Province for the Netherlands?
No offence but maybe call it Frisia / Friesland instead? like in previously linked map
Michael Vick
#1
Two Suggestions:
Malta does not have a province. Either give it its own province or make it part of Sicily?
I think the province referred to in the reference folder as "Extremadura" might be more accurately called "Lusitania"? The actual Extremadura province is taken up by the Castile province. Not that you should split Castile up, I don't think we need an Extremadura province.
Malta does not have a province. Either give it its own province or make it part of Sicily?
I think the province referred to in the reference folder as "Extremadura" might be more accurately called "Lusitania"? The actual Extremadura province is taken up by the Castile province. Not that you should split Castile up, I don't think we need an Extremadura province.
AbsintheRed
Deity
The RFCEProvinces.html is totally outdated. Wasn't refreshed for 4 months
Actually Malta has it's own province, while Portugal's province is Lusitania.
These were changed right after we introduced the province system, somewhere between Beta 7 and 8
I say: there is no gameplay or historical need for another Province there, because:
- There wasn't a "Schleswig-Holstein" until 1866
- There isn't a good city-spot between a city in north denmark and Lubeck
- There wasn't a city so important that we have to push it in (Lubeck is only part of Hostein now becaus Hitler hated the City, no kidding
- If we want to create wars between the Danes and the Germans, we can make the Danes more likely to conquer Lubeck (they did it several times in the middle ages)
So, i vote no for a new province. We could change borders there, however.
-Schleswig-holstein in its modern setup didn't exist till 1864 true ... but they were duchies (holstein from 1111 as a german fief and schleswig as a danish fief in 1068), which was often a reason for fights between the danish crown and whoever owned Germany at that given time, where the ruling duke and the danish crown often was families, if not outright the same person
- Haithabu / Hedeby just north of the pigs, would be the most important city in the early middle ages until Hanse started out in Lubeck
AbsintheRed
Deity
I am not sure if we should do that.
It's at the very end of the timeline of the mod, and as 3Miro said, not every province should be OK (or better) which was ever in the possession of the given civ.
Actually, Transylvania and Moldova should be removed from the Ottoman OK provinces, as they were much closer to vassals. Same for Crimea and Zaporizhia, we won't add them, as vassalization shouldn't mean they are OK to conquer. So actually, Wallachia won't be completely surrounded
I don't really mind this, but also don't see any benefits. What's the point?
IMO it's more aesthetical this way
I'd like to point out that the vassals were similar to the Ottomans, the Ottomans controlled the area for centuries in that way and the would be vassals aren't in game
Kartoffelvampir
Chieftain
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2008
- Messages
- 49
Oh. Well, in that case I take my suggestion back, since my arguments aew useless now
That you don't have to settle the provinces them could become a load-screen-hint, maybe.
However still vote no for Schleswig-Holstein, Schleswig should be part of Denmark though - maybe pushing the border southwarts north of the pigs
Sian said:
Haithabu is the German Schleswig, or? (Well. not the same, but they were pretty close)
Also, Lubeck was big even before the Hanse as the capital of the obodrites, the strongest and most urban slavic tribes in modern east-germany.
Why do you want to get ride of Brandenburg as a province?Daffy said:
If you want to split them, I suggest Brandenburg for the northen part and Upper Saxony for the southern, maybe.
AbsintheRed
Deity
Similar to the Ottomans?
The Crimean Khanate was Islam for most of the time, but even they weren't too similar
Also, they were closer to allies than vassals to the Ottoman Empire.
You do make a good point with the vassals aren't ingame, so if the others agree with you, I will add some of the northern provinces back as OK
Michael Vick
#1
Provence is OK for Spain in the game I'm playing, apparently.
rock_star
Warlord
The Battle of Vienna in 1683 is seen as the beginning of the stagnation of the Ottoman Empire. The stagnation is adequately modeled by the research penalty because it allows others to get ahead and beat it.
It is tough, but doable - here's my Pax Ottomania:
Spoiler :
I went slightly beyond historical bounds (I kept Vienna, took Kiev, and captured both pillars of Heracles), but achieved the zenith with continuous borders by the correct year. My final stability is only +1, though, with every stability building built in nearly every city. I had to put off Divine Right until all cities had finished their manor houses, then had to camp outside Tunisia for about 20 turns at shaky/solid stability while I researched Divine Rights & Public Works before I continued the westward jihad.
If I gave up Tangier, Sevilla, Kiev and Vienna, my stability would be more respectable, though, and still have the whole empire under my thumb.
I'm not sure how accurately 3miro & co. have calculated these things or if it's just a fluke, but I can't expand much further beyond these historical limits (as +1 stability demonstrates) without experiencing the gradual decline that came after this peak - the rebellions are innevitable after this.
(I didn't bother trying to attack Malta - history tells me how that one would turn out.)
Attachments
AbsintheRed
Deity
Haithabu is just south of the schei whereas modernday schleswig is just north of schei, with Schleswig growing more important after the abandonment of Haithabu (1066), becomming the seat of the duchy (which for most part of its history was vassals to the danish king if not the danish kings private duchy)
Lübeck (as per Wikipedia, as much faith as you might put into it) first started to become more important on the 'international scene' after the decide of Haithabu in 10'th century, and modernday Lübeck, which was the one becoming the 'capital' of Hanse, was first established in 1143
rock_star
Warlord
pack your cities in your solid/OK territories even closer together
Not just this, but I've noticed you'll get an instant +1 for building a city in any solid province. The tiny, crowded, boring provinces like East Anglia will be useful to your empire with cities there, even if you prefer to "conquer" them by covering them with culture. With Venice, Augsburg and Salzburg leaving Tyrol almost completely worthless, I still build Essen between Augsburg and Salzburg as Germany, for no reason other than the free stability. (Btw - was there really an Essen in this spot??)
Of course, the free boost only happens with the first city founded, but as you said, infinite city sprawl is a good strategy because each additional city in a solid province can be founded without a stability hit.
