YnAMP sub-project: True location corresponding city names

[guidemwit]

Finished China for Giant Earth Map !!! Merry X'Mas... zZzZ

P.S. I recheck all the missing name already.

Spoiler Northern China :

Spoiler Southern China :

Spoiler Western China :

 

[tomaltachpaulson]

I think we should begin with smaller map because I don't have to put effort to marked every cities with population in a hand-drawn map. I can just open google map three times (for three earth maps) to find smaller city to add. We can also release public version faster than the largest map!
For largest map, you have to put more effort into the city tier mark-up so you don't remove wrong cities. Otherwise, you have to re-open google map three times anyway to find which one is smaller cities. It means similar workload for both ways.

So, shall we vote?

Probably the the most efficient way would be for one person to do a region in all three sizes one after the other, though that does significantly increase the commitment required, so I don't necessarily think that is an entirely practical suggestion.

I can attempt to work on Australia. I am beginning on Giant Earth. It should be fun to find and recognise small little townships in the centre of my great (both size and descriptively) nation.

I had already started doing Australia/Papua/New Zealand using the three size method described above. My apologies for not saying so earlier, but you folks have moved through Play Europe Again faster than I was expecting and I have been away from the internet for a while. Here is the Giant Earth:

Spoiler Australia :

Feel free to suggest changes!

When I worked through it I started with the largest size and worked down. I've worked out all the locations for each, and all I need to do now is code them all in.

 

[TheGamingNoobster]

Probably the the most efficient way would be for one person to do a region in all three sizes one after the other, though that does significantly increase the commitment required, so I don't necessarily think that is an entirely practical suggestion.



I had already started doing Australia/Papua/New Zealand using the three size method described above. My apologies for not saying so earlier, but you folks have moved through Play Europe Again faster than I was expecting and I have been away from the internet for a while. Here is the Giant Earth:

Spoiler Australia :

View attachment 461891

Feel free to suggest changes!

When I worked through it I started with the largest size and worked down. I've worked out all the locations for each, and all I need to do now is code them all in.

Mine is pretty similar, but on the East Coast the cities tended to be a bit further north (Brisbane being more north with Toowoomba to its west). Ah well, first in, best dressed.

EDIT: May I request that you add in the township of Amby (southern-central QLD). Thanks!

 

[brick623]

Just to give you guys a heads-up I'll be starting on Britain, Ireland and Iceland for GEM including as many exonyms as I can find

 

[God of Kings]

Just to give you guys a heads-up I'll be starting on Britain, Ireland and Iceland for GEM including as many exonyms as I can find

Be sure that certain civs call England's capital "Londres" rather than London.

 

[brick623]

Be sure that certain civs call England's capital "Londres" rather than London.

Here's an example, feel free to make suggestions:

<Replace Tag="LOC_CITY_NAME_LONDON" Text="London" Language="en_US" />
<Replace Tag="LOC_CITY_NAME_LONDON_ARABIA" Text="Landan" Language="en_US" />
<Replace Tag="LOC_CITY_NAME_LONDON_AZTEC" Text="Londres" Language="en_US" />
<Replace Tag="LOC_CITY_NAME_LONDON_BRAZIL" Text="Londres" Language="en_US" />
<Replace Tag="LOC_CITY_NAME_LONDON_CHINA" Text="Lúndūn" Language="en_US" />
<Replace Tag="LOC_CITY_NAME_LONDON_EGYPT" Text="Landan" Language="en_US" />
<Replace Tag="LOC_CITY_NAME_LONDON_FRANCE" Text="Londres" Language="en_US" />
<Replace Tag="LOC_CITY_NAME_LONDON_GREECE" Text="Londino" Language="en_US" />
<Replace Tag="LOC_CITY_NAME_LONDON_INDIA" Text="Landan" Language="en_US" />
<Replace Tag="LOC_CITY_NAME_LONDON_JAPAN" Text="Rondon" Language="en_US" />
<Replace Tag="LOC_CITY_NAME_LONDON_KONGO" Text="Londres" Language="en_US" />
<Replace Tag="LOC_CITY_NAME_LONDON_NORWAY" Text="Lundúnir" Language="en_US" />
<Replace Tag="LOC_CITY_NAME_LONDON_ROME" Text="Londinium" Language="en_US" />
<Replace Tag="LOC_CITY_NAME_LONDON_SPAIN" Text="Londres" Language="en_US" />
<Replace Tag="LOC_CITY_NAME_LONDON_SUMERIA" Text="Landan" Language="en_US" />
<Replace Tag="LOC_CITY_NAME_LONDON_POLAND" Text="Londyn" Language="en_US" />

-Languages that call it "London" (ie same as default) are not listed - so for this example russian and german.

-I guessed "Landan" for Egypt and Sumer because Arabic and Hindi both call it "Landan", so my logic was that ancient egyptian and sumerian would probably use something similar if they were still around (I wont be doing this for every city, only major cities and capitals).

-I used the Icelandic name "Lundúnir" because Icelandic is arguably the closest thing we have to old Norse. If anyone knows the actual Norse name for London please let me know or feel free to edit the code once I've posted it on GH

 

[guidemwit]

Here's an example, feel free to make suggestions:
<Replace Tag="LOC_CITY_NAME_LONDON_CHINA" Text="Lúndūn" Language="en_US" />

For Chinese language, there are two options. Use normal English alphabets (a, e, i o, u) or Chinese romanization of pronunciation alphabets (a, e, i, o, u with symbols above them). Normally, westerners can pronounce normal Chinese name in English alphabets without problem e.g. Beijing instead of Bĕijīng, Shanghai instead of Shànghǎi, Huawei instead of Huáwéi.
The ú and ū vowels are actually pronounced the same voice but different tone (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pinyin#Tones). So, there is no different for speakers whose native language didn't have specific tone for each words anyway since both Lundun and Lúndūn would sound the same.

Moreover, I already finished 150 Chinese cities name for GEM and I didn't include all these symbols.

So, I'm not sure whether we should include the "tone marker" symbol for all translated Chinese name or not.

 

[brick623]

For Chinese language, there are two options. Use normal English alphabets (a, e, i o, u) or Chinese romanization of pronunciation alphabets (a, e, i, o, u with symbols above them). Normally, westerners can pronounce normal Chinese name in English alphabets without problem e.g. Beijing instead of Bĕijīng, Shanghai instead of Shànghǎi, Huawei instead of Huáwéi.
The ú and ū vowels are actually pronounced the same voice but different tone (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pinyin#Tones). So, there is no different for speakers whose native language didn't have specific tone for each words anyway since both Lundun and Lúndūn would sound the same.

Moreover, I already finished 150 Chinese cities name for GEM and I didn't include all these symbols.

So, I'm not sure whether we should include the "tone marker" symbol for all translated Chinese name or not.

Very valid point, I'll remove tone markers for Chinese names, also it will be more consistent with your work. Thanks for the info!

 

[niklas153021]

I'm not quite sure if it makes much sense to have civ specific names for each city as I think it conflicts with translations.

IMO it is only a good idea to have multiple civ specific names where there were different historical names e.g. Lutetia for Romans and Paris for France / Gdansk for Poland and Danzig for Germany / Guangzhou for China and Canton for european civs / Saint Petersburg for zarist Russia and Leningrad for a hypothetical Soviet civ. If these names are different in the respective languages it should be up to the localization (afaik we have a French and a German one already started) to change these names to their respective "translation"

As an example: If Germany founds the city of Cologne, it gets called Cologne. If the Romans found a city there, it gets called Colonia Claudia Ara Agrippa. But if my game language is now set to German, Cologne should be called Köln. Of course, you could argue that Köln should rather be specific to Germany, so it will only be called Cologne if an English-speaking civ founds it. But that would require us to provide a name for every city in each civ's native language, and that is not what the game normally does.

So for example, the russian capital is Moscow if your game is set to English and Moskau if you set it to German, while it both means the same name. If we were now to name it specifically by civs, it would be Москвa for Russia (who is most likely to found it). For civilizations such as Spain, France, Germany etc. it wouldn't be much of a problem as they use the Latin alphabet, but adding the native names for Russian cities would leave the player with a map cluttered with cyrillic city names, which I doubt the majority of western players is able to read.

We could of course use transcribed names, so Москвa would be Moskva, but these are specific to the respective language. So in this example, while in English Moskva is fine, in German you would transcribe it as Moskwa. Cities like Moscow are the exception as most Russian (I'm just gonna stick with my example, but I guess this also applies for most if not all civs with a different writing system) cities have the transcribed name in the respective language, e.g. Ярославль would be Yaroslavl in English and Jaroslawl in German, which is what the city is called in each of these languages.

So I think for the example with London it would be the best solution to leave the translation of names for London to the localized names and not the specific civs. I would draw the line between localization and civ-specification at if the name is a historical name or not, so if a city had once officially a different name, it's a case for a civ specific name, if it simply has a different name in a different language, it's up to the localization. This is just my personal opinion, as I thik it matches the way Firaxis named the cities best, saves us quite a bunch of work and is likely most user friendly or at least more comprehensible for the average user.

 

[tomaltachpaulson]

As I have done most of the civ-specific names so far, I suppose I should share my methodology/thoughts. For any city, the default en_US localization is the standard modern-day English name of the city. If there is another civ which owns/owned the city with a different name, then I add a en_US civ-specific localization of that name in the Latin Alphabet, anglicised where necessary. To look at our Moscow example then, the default en_US localization is "Moscow" while the Russian civ-specific en_US localization is "Moskva". Then other language localizations are done on the same pattern, substituting the language in question for English. So the default de_DE is "Moskau" and the Russian civ-specific de_DE is "Moskwa". As I understand it, this is essentially in line with your thoughts, @niklas153021.

The question of civ-specific names for cities the civ never owned is an interesting one. On the one hand including them is a lot of work which does greatly overlap the default language localizations. On the other hand civs are unlikely to stay within their historical areas of influence, and the difference between the civ's names and local names can be quite jarring (especially with the Romans). In the end I think the solution is compromise. If a city location is near another civ which never owned the city but quite easily could in a game of civ and that civ has a specific name from that city, then perhaps including a civ-specific name is worth it in that situation.

 

[Gedemon]

As I have done most of the civ-specific names so far, I suppose I should share my methodology/thoughts. For any city, the default en_US localization is the standard modern-day English name of the city. If there is another civ which owns/owned the city with a different name, then I add a en_US civ-specific localization of that name in the Latin Alphabet, anglicised where necessary. To look at our Moscow example then, the default en_US localization is "Moscow" while the Russian civ-specific en_US localization is "Moskva". Then other language localizations are done on the same pattern, substituting the language in question for English. So the default de_DE is "Moskau" and the Russian civ-specific de_DE is "Moskwa". As I understand it, this is essentially in line with your thoughts, @niklas153021.

That's also exactly how I see it.

But I can add some general options to help the mod to stay user-friendly, for example to allow (or not) renaming on city capture or to allow (or not) civ-specific names.

There is also the possibility to split the mod if really needed, with standard names in the main mods (and specific names for big empire like Rome), and additional mods for "what if" civ-specific names.

When I made YnAEMP for civ5 I didn't put a lot of thought about external modifications, but this time I'm trying to build YnAMP for civ6 in a way that will make it customizable by any external mods, for example to add TSL or city maps in a custom Civilization mod, or add new maps or map scripts using the advanced setup options added by YnAMP, or, like in the current example, extended city naming.

 

[brick623]

But I can add some general options to help the mod to stay user-friendly, for example to allow (or not) renaming on city capture or to allow (or not) civ-specific names.

I haven't actually tested this yet - it would be great if civs automatically renamed cities on capture (if they have a civ-specific name for that city). I think the Civ4 Rhye's mod allowed for this too.

So I think for the example with London it would be the best solution to leave the translation of names for London to the localized names and not the specific civs. I would draw the line between localization and civ-specification at if the name is a historical name or not, so if a city had once officially a different name, it's a case for a civ specific name, if it simply has a different name in a different language, it's up to the localization.

Yes it does add a bit of work but going back to @rock_and_ride 's original post, if I were role-playing Napoleon and launched my invasion of Britain/ peacefully settled on îles Britanniques I would probably rename cities so:

London--->Londres
Newcastle-upon-Tyne---->Neufchâtel-sur-Tyne
Edinburgh---->Édimbourg
etc

The Cologne problem you described won't be much of an issue because there aren't many English exonyms for major cities other than capitals. There are very few for the major cities of France and Spain, I can only think of 3 for Germany - Cologne, Munich, Nuremberg. In this case the Germany-specific name should be Köln but if I forward settled as France/invaded it should be called Cologne when settled/captured - like the real life example Straßburg/Strasbourg that France and Germany fought over for centuries.

If a city location is near another civ which never owned the city but quite easily could in a game of civ and that civ has a specific name from that city, then perhaps including a civ-specific name is worth it in that situation.

Agreed, the key question is whether or not a Civ (AI or Human) is likely to settle or attack a certain area. Also @tomaltachpaulson I've been using your Roman names for British places on GEM so all credit goes to you for that. Nearly finished the British Isles, Ireland and Iceland, will give it a couple of tests and upload the xml.

 

[tomaltachpaulson]

That's also exactly how I see it.

But I can add some general options to help the mod to stay user-friendly, for example to allow (or not) renaming on city capture or to allow (or not) civ-specific names.

I haven't actually tested this yet - it would be great if civs automatically renamed cities on capture (if they have a civ-specific name for that city). I think the Civ4 Rhye's mod allowed for this too.

I believe currently cities are renamed upon capture (and reloading as well)—otherwise the times it has happened to me during testing is a bug... Also, building YnAMP with compatibility in mind is a smart move in my opinion—for example I see potential for it to make an excellent base for scenarios later on.

Agreed, the key question is whether or not a Civ (AI or Human) is likely to settle or attack a certain area. Also @tomaltachpaulson I've been using your Roman names for British places on GEM so all credit goes to you for that. Nearly finished the British Isles, Ireland and Iceland, will give it a couple of tests and upload the xml.

Excellent! The nice thing about the Romans is they put a name on just about everything, so much so that I've been able to cover their entire empire so far without gaps. My one word of warning for the Roman names in Britain is Eboracum (York). There was no actual location for York in the default city map on Play Europe Again so it is added under a couple of different locations in the area which had no (significant) Roman settlement (Sheffield, Leeds, etc.) Admittedly there are loads of places where there is no direct match up across the work I have done so far (it is nearly 2000 years after all), but I think York is worst one in Britain. Just watch out that is isn't possible to settle two cities both named Eboracum—with the change in geography between maps it may be possible.

 

[brick623]

I have completed the city map for Britain, Ireland and Iceland on GEM - pull request sent.

I did 3 playtests on advanced eras online speed, seems to work

Spoiler UK of Great Britain, Ireland and Iceland :

Spoiler Danelaw :

Spoiler England's worst nightmare:lol: :

Admittedly I used some Norman French names here but if we want 100% historical accuracy we'll need a team of university professors and even then they'd probably argue with each other.

 

[Gedemon]

Great, merged!

I don't have time to review them right now, but note that there are some changes proposed to the map itself in the to do list (second post in the main thread), maybe we should validate the change before starting a city map in those regions.

 

[tomaltachpaulson]

I have completed the city map for Britain, Ireland and Iceland on GEM - pull request sent.

I did 3 playtests on advanced eras online speed, seems to work

Admittedly I used some Norman French names here but if we want 100% historical accuracy we'll need a team of university professors and even then they'd probably argue with each other.

My goodness, I've just looked through the code for this on GitHub, and there are far more civ-specific translations than I had been expecting! Finding all the info for it must have taken some time. I'm curious about Scythia though—what are their names based on? Also, this is stretching the idea of civs's likely area of influence considerably, but if you're happy to do it I guess there really is no reason why not...

 

[brick623]

My goodness, I've just looked through the code for this on GitHub, and there are far more civ-specific translations than I had been expecting! Finding all the info for it must have taken some time. I'm curious about Scythia though—what are their names based on? Also, this is stretching the idea of civs's likely area of influence considerably, but if you're happy to do it I guess there really is no reason why not...

Yeah I went a bit crazy with the names... I did it more out of interest because I'm from the UK. Sources were wikipedia and GeoNames database. For anyone interested in doing the european cities, this is a useful page:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_names_of_European_cities_in_different_languages

The Scythian names are just copy and pasted Russian names (if the general feeling is we should remove those names they can be easily deleted). Got the Russian names because I can translate Cyrillic>Roman.

I'll do France, Benelux, Spain next for GEM - again, I'll use the names you provided for the PlayEurope map @tomaltachpaulson

 

[_Impreza1_]

In relation to Great Britain, may I suggest that Carmarthen is replaced by Cardiff or even Swansea? It makes no sense to include minor cities or towns. Also, Salisbury should be replaced by Portsmouth, to reflect the fact that Salisbury is not a coastal city. I think, where possible major cities of historic and commercial importance should take precedence.

 

[brick623]

In relation to Great Britain, may I suggest that Carmarthen is replaced by Cardiff or even Swansea? It makes no sense to include minor cities or towns. Also, Salisbury should be replaced by Portsmouth, to reflect the fact that Salisbury is not a coastal city. I think, where possible major cities of historic and commercial importance should take precedence.

Hi @_Impreza1_ thanks for the feedback.

Carmarthen might be a very small town now, but it was the largest city in Wales for most of its history until the 19th century. Cardiff is placed one tile east. Of course we could have 2 tiles for Cardiff, but I think placing Cardiff on the west tip of Wales would look odd.

About Salisbury, I think you're right. My thought was that tile should be Dorset area so the 3 choices were Salisbury, Poole or Bournemouth - of those 3 at least Salisbury has cultural significance (enormous cathedral and nearby stonehenge). I have moved Southampton to where Salisbury was and put Portsmouth where Southampton was in latest update which I have just uploaded to GH - which also includes the following:

GEM update: Iberia, France, Switzerland and Benelux city map and names added. All credit to @tomaltachpaulson for the Roman and Arabic names that I've used from the Play Europe map. Screenshots:

Spoiler France :

Spoiler Espagne :

 

[_Impreza1_]

It's a difficult balance, agreed. Although you could also argue that Plymouth is wrongly placed and that Falmouth would be more suitable.

Though, I do think your point on Carmarthen holds, due to its historical relevance.

I also agree in replacing Salisbury with Southampton. Good work, all!