The real stability maps

[dragodon64]

Nationalism as a concept wasn't around for many hundreds of years after the split of the Frankish empire.

I disagree with your view that "culture and language did not diverge in that area because of a schism".

My view isn't that there is only one reason for the differences today between France and Germany, but that a significant reason for the differences between France and Germany can be attributed to the splitting of Charlemagne's empire amongst his sons at the time of his death. And I don't think that this is an "absurd" concept either.

In review, I felt that I was too harsh. Sorry for taking your statement the wrong way. I completely agree that the political division was a factor, though I don't believe it was as much of a factor as you do.

Also, the borders of the Roman empire were quite moot by the time Charlemagne came about, as Gaul had been thoroughly penetrated by various Germanic groups, the most important of whom were the Franks.

 

[civ_king]

Germany should have yellow in Argentina
BTW Persia stretched into Egypt...

 

[Hive Watch]

German and French languages have very different roots, I don't think Charlemagne is the main cause of the split, it's the language

 

[-Perceval-]

I'm french and in my country, charlemagne is considerer like a french king by the most part of the people(especially the children who don't like him because he "invented" the school).

 

[Antilogic]

I'm french and in my country, charlemagne is considerer like a french king by the most part of the people(especially the children who don't like him because he "invented" the school).

So that's the person to blame for making me learn about who invented what!

 

[mikebert]

I think the reason that light green never appears in other's core areas is that if you settle their before they spawn you automatically lose those cities no matter how stable you are. Once the civilization has spawned, the culture they create continues on, if if they collapse as a political unit. So if you lose stability old civilizations will pop up in their core areas.

The best civs then will be those whose actual region doesn't contain core areas. Rome is is bad because almost all of the Roman Empire is core regions for someone. Same thing for Persia. On the other hand the British empire contains large regions (Canada, Australia, South Africa) that aren't core areas and so can be light green. Not only that but two of England's safe territorities (S Africa and New Guinea) are richly endowed with resources

I've just started playing England and boy it is easy to have a kick ass economy with England.

I have a question do the islands north of Australia (e.g. New Guinea) count as part of a "continent". If so which one?

 

[dragodon64]

They are part of Australia, Australasia, Oceania, whichever one you want, but its the one thats not Asia.

 

[mikebert]

They are part of Australia, Australasia, Oceania, whichever one you want, but its the one thats not Asia.

So if you are playing England and you build cities in NW Australia (good spot there), and two cities on New Guinea (room for two cities there with lots of exotic resources) you will meet the requirements of three cities on a continent?

 

[Deego3]

I think only half of New Guinea is part of Oceania.

 

[mikebert]

So maybe the Indonesian portion is Asia and the Papua new Guinea portion is Australia?

In this case one could found two cities on New Guinea, one in NW Australia, one at Melbourne and two in India, one of the Malabar coast and another on the East coast to fufill the Asia and Australia requirements.

In my current game I have planned for three cities in India and am fighting a war (using my American adventurers as troops) to take out the city in NE India so I can found Calcutta and then one more in between Calcutta and Malabar.

The New Guinea strategy would probably be more efficient, and it would be more stable, as I think New Guinea is light green territory for England.

I am now considering taking stability into account by focusing on the light green regions as much as possible. I will still probably always build Buenos Aires as it is such a good spot and there is no room for three cities in the tiny light green spot for England in S America.

What about Carribean islands? I see some of them are stable for England. What continent, if any, do they fall on?

 

[Cetrix]

I'm french and in my country, charlemagne is considerer like a french king by the most part of the people(especially the children who don't like him because he "invented" the school).

"Qui a eu cette idée folle, un jour d'inventer l'école ? C'est ce sacré Charlemagne !"

I'm french too, and this is true that we learn at school about commons french-german roots of Charlemagne !

 

[Wessel V1]

I wouldn't settle in that jungle at all. Australia and New Zealand have more than enough nice spots.

 

[dragodon64]

The Carribean Islands are all considered part of North America, meaning you will have to leave the stable areas to make it in South America.

In Oceania, everything East or South of Borneo is safe territory, including all Indonesian Guinea, Sumatra and Borneo itself.

For general reference, this helps a lot: http://www.ions.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/rfcatlas.htm

The Dutch had already take Guinea and NW Australia in my most recent English game, so I settled Brisbane (2E of silver) and Adelaide (between 2 sugars) and Christchurch (1NE of bottom tip).

 

[Wessel V1]

I'm affraid that's an older version (Inca still has to keep the Europeans out of Brazil). A new version can be found somewhere in the wiki. I don't know if there's any difference for the English UHV but I believe something was changed in a recent version.

 

[senturus]

Two remarks about the french stability map :

1) Couldn't Jerusalem be regarded as an historical area? Most part of crusaders where frankishs I think. And even Libanon/Syria may be regarded as a French historical area.

2) Why south of Australia is in green? To my mind, France has never colonized any area in Australia.

 

[civ_king]

Germany should have some light green in Argentina or at least yellow to represent all those Germans...

 

[-Perceval-]

agree with senturus, crusader was frankish generally.

 

[Arkaeyn]

Two remarks about the french stability map :

1) Couldn't Jerusalem be regarded as an historical area? Most part of crusaders where frankishs I think. And even Libanon/Syria may be regarded as a French historical area.

Again, just because a country conquered an area isn't reason for them to be more stable in that area. In fact, in many cases, they should be less stable in those areas, because the conquests were short-lived and tended to damage the stability of their governments.

In this case, the Crusader states were not directly attached to the French government, and they were terribly unstable on their own.

Now, if you want to argue that the AI should try to get to Jerusalem anyway, that's fine. But stability maps aren't the way to get to that.

 

[BurnEmDown]

Then what about, if a country COULD benefit from conquering an area, but didn't actually do it? That'll be pretty tough to do though, as we can't tell who would be more stable conquering or colonizing where they didn't.

 

[-Perceval-]

Again, just because a country conquered an area isn't reason for them to be more stable in that area. In fact, in many cases, they should be less stable in those areas, because the conquests were short-lived and tended to damage the stability of their governments.

In this case, the Crusader states were not directly attached to the French government, and they were terribly unstable on their own.

Now, if you want to argue that the AI should try to get to Jerusalem anyway, that's fine. But stability maps aren't the way to get to that.

Ok ok so can you say to me why the hell the american have dark green in east europa? To the beginning, the crusader was accepted by the christian minority(especially in lebanon) and the sultan used them to make war to each other, after all the french staid in jerusalem udring a lot of time. More than american in east europa!
And so can you say to me why the hell the japan have green in west america? I don't think that apacheans would have liked so much the japanese on these times.
ps:sorry for bad english