• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.

muttoneer

Heretic
47 Badges
Jan 13, 2004
457
4
  • Europa Universalis IV: Third Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Cities: Skylines - Snowfall
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Stellaris
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Cities: Skylines - Natural Disasters
  • Cities: Skylines - Mass Transit
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Cities: Skylines - Green Cities
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cradle of Civilization
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rule Britannia
  • Cities: Skylines - Parklife
  • Europa Universalis IV: Dharma
  • Cities: Skylines Industries
  • Europa Universalis IV: Golden Century
  • Cities: Skylines - Campus
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Crusader Kings III: Royal Edition
  • Europa Universalis 4: Emperor
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Deus Vult
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Cities in Motion
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Victoria 2
  • 500k Club
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Knight (pre-order)
  • Europa Universalis III: Collection
Hello everyone,
I think its fair to say that on the EU2 map North Africa is a bit underused and West Africa is all over the place! I thought I'd spend some time researching the area to see if I could improve on the existing EU2 map. The initial results are below, and I'd like to know what you think!

I've taken the land west of Egypt and northwest of the Gulf of Guinea and firstly repositioned some of the provinces which were a long way out. Then I've added some new ones.

For the north coast I have been influenced by Mad King James's excellent map at
this thread. I have however trimmed the number of provinces he used in Morocco and Algeria as I thought there were a few too many considering the fairly low importance of these areas. I have not included anything on the Nile area as I suspect there are quite a few Egyptophiles on this forum who have ideas on that already!

You may notice I've cut down on the Permanent Terra Incognita in the Sahara Area. This is a deliberate move - the original EU2 map did try to represent trans-Saharan trade networks by including the line of provinces from Morocco to Timbuktu. My map has several more 'trade routes' included (based on real routes) which should open up the north of the continent to players. Why do this? Well, the Europeans may not have ventured into the African interior much before the 1800s, but the area was well known to the Arab world. There were cultural links along these routes as well as trading ones (the spread of Islam across the Sahara is a noticeable by product). It makes sense to me to make more of the region than is currently possible on a map which is very Euro-centric. That way players who want to play Arab states, or native African ones, have a bit more interest in their games, as does the more adventurous European!

To make up for the loss of some PTI in the Sahara, I propose that the caravan route provinces have a very low troop support figure - large armies lingering in the Sahara should in reality die out pretty quickly!

If you all like this idea for West Africa, I'll put some more detail up on this thread about regional goods production and possible starting nations. You may notice that with the extra provinces in the south of this map there is room to accurately represent the Hausa States and Kanem-Bornu - both important in the 15th century.

Finally, regarding the number of new provinces - I'm aware that if this idea does go further, we'll probably need to trim the number of new provinces a little. This map represents an ideal amount, not a requisite.

Cheers for your time and consideration,
Peace, love and pies,
M.
;)

westafrica2.JPG
 
Last edited:
muttoneer said:
Hello everyone,
I think its fair to say that on the EU2 map North Africa is a bit underused and West Africa is all over the place! I thought I'd spend some time researching the area to see if I could improve on the existing EU2 map. The initial results are below, and I'd like to know what you think!

I've taken the land west of Egypt and northwest of the Gulf of Guinea and firstly repositioned some of the provinces which were a long way out. Then I've added some new ones.

For the north coast I have been influenced by Mad King James's excellent map at
this thread. I have however trimmed the number of provinces he used in Morocco and Algeria as I thought there were a few too many considering the fairly low importance of these areas. I have not included anything on the Nile area as I suspect there are quite a few Egyptophiles on this forum who have ideas on that already!

You may notice I've cut down on the Permanent Terra Incognita in the Sahara Area. This is a deliberate move - the original EU2 map did try to represent trans-Saharan trade networks by including the line of provinces from Morocco to Timbuktu. My map has several more 'trade routes' included (based on real routes) which should open up the north of the continent to players. Why do this? Well, the Europeans may not have ventured into the African interior much before the 1800s, but the area was well known to the Arab world. There were cultural links along these routes as well as trading ones (the spread of Islam across the Sahara is a noticeable by product). It makes sense to me to make more of the region than is currently possible on a map which is very Euro-centric. That way players who want to play Arab states, or native African ones, have a bit more interest in their games, as does the more adventurous European!

To make up for the loss of some PTI in the Sahara, I propose that the caravan route provinces have a very low troop support figure - large armies lingering in the Sahara should in reality die out pretty quickly!

If you all like this idea for West Africa, I'll put some more detail up on this thread about regional goods production and possible starting nations. You may notice that with the extra provinces in the south of this map there is room to accurately represent the Hausa States and Kanem-Bornu - both important in the 15th century.

Finally, regarding the number of new provinces - I'm aware that if this idea does go further, we'll probably need to trim the number of new provinces a little. This map represents an ideal amount, not a requisite.

Cheers for your time and consideration,
Peace, love and pies,
M.
;)

<map>

I'm against removing PTI in the Sahara. This is a pretty hostile place and walking an army across it shouldn't be possible. Besides what do you want to model? It's not like there were powerful nations in the Sahara... :rolleyes:
You could, however, try to see what happens if you put many (5?) provinces in the Sahara-corridor and set the movement-time to max. That along with 0 base-tax might make it, but I'd still rather have the PTI.
Same thing with the link to Egypt. I seem to remember there being trade-routes there but no 10000-men army-movements...
 
I'd probably drop the Ghadames-Tadmekka link, and the Chad-Sudan one. And I'm not sure about Tuat-Ouragla.

Keep in mind that pretty much every province can eventually be colonised, and will then support 5000 people in its city, along with large troop movements. Can trans-Saharan and trans-Sudanese areas really do that?
 
If they're base 0 tax I don't see much problems with it. To move an army through 3-5 base 0 tax provinces in Africa* will kill most of that army. TO get from North Africa to West Africa it will be more effective to sail around it than to march through it attrition wise.

*Africa has a movement penalty, is that linked to the continent or is that set somewhere in the province.csv?
 
Well the province (Darfur) is actually partially IN the Sudan, it should be much farther east than it is now. Darfur is rather close to the Nile actually, and the region east of it (and bordering the nile) called Kordofan should probably be just as included.
 
Mad King James said:
Well the province (Darfur) is actually partially IN the Sudan, it should be much farther east than it is now. Darfur is rather close to the Nile actually, and the region east of it (and bordering the nile) called Kordofan should probably be just as included.

Those provinces east of Kanem were kind of on the edge of my knowledge / available data! I included them to illustrate the link eastwards!

The desert provinces are largely based on oases / mining areas on the caravan routes. As such they should have a very small native population and any European power succeeding in colonising one of them would only get a small city at the end of it. I agree with setting the base income as low as possible - these provinces should never have a large city, but could be strategically important later in the game. When drawing the map I visualised them as a good area for any country wanting to set up networks of trading posts for salt, copper etc.
 
I don't think that provinces in the actual sahara (far and away from even the tiniest oasis) should be included. After all, a city needs some sort of local food base. This isn't the modern era, people ate what was grown, caught or raised locally. Not to mention the lack of a water supply.

The only real access to the Sahel from North Africa is via the Nile or Timbuktu. Trade caravans don't count.
 
Garbon said:
Your West Africa bit, surrounded by the Niger, is all kinds of funky.
Thank you! :)


Mad King James said:
I don't think that provinces in the actual sahara (far and away from even the tiniest oasis) should be included. After all, a city needs some sort of local food base. This isn't the modern era, people ate what was grown, caught or raised locally. Not to mention the lack of a water supply.

The only real access to the Sahel from North Africa is via the Nile or Timbuktu. Trade caravans don't count.

Well all the Saharan provinces I've included are based on oases where there would be enough food available to support a small population (or a trading post). When you say "access via Timbuktu", is that discounting any link northwards from that province?
 
muttoneer said:
Well all the Saharan provinces I've included are based on oases where there would be enough food available to support a small population (or a trading post). When you say "access via Timbuktu", is that discounting any link northwards from that province?
Well you haveto remember those provinces likely may get colonized and become 5000 population cities instead.
 
Jinnai said:
Well you haveto remember those provinces likely may get colonized and become 5000 population cities instead.

What's the colonization-penalty for deserts?
It might be possible to make it neigh on impossible to establish colonies there.
 
muttoneer said:
Thank you! :)

Err...I was afraid of using that somewhat ambiguous term. What I actually meant, although I do like some of the new provinces...is that most of them are just odd. Like that Yoruba province, thats just odd! I'll give more constructive comments later, I just don't have the time today.

Oh but as a small bit, Bambuk and Bure are still misplacd, and that massive Walata provinces should go.
 
Garbon said:
Err...I was afraid of using that somewhat ambiguous term. What I actually meant, although I do like some of the new provinces...is that most of them are just odd.

Ah, ok. The number of compliments received is back down to zero then... :rolleyes:

I've tried to base the names of provinces in that area firstly on important cities/states, then on regional names, and if all else fails the name of the prevalent tribe (or in the case of Bambuk and Bure the local gold-fields!)

Any help with more accurate province names (or slightly less odd shapes) is all to the good...
 
I like the trans-Saharan links. It would be fun to push explorers through southward. As long as supply and tax values are nil, travel times are harsh, and the AI is prevented from wanting to settle them in any depth, it couldn't hurt. :)
 
Mad King James said:
I don't think that provinces in the actual sahara (far and away from even the tiniest oasis) should be included. After all, a city needs some sort of local food base. This isn't the modern era, people ate what was grown, caught or raised locally. Not to mention the lack of a water supply.

The only real access to the Sahel from North Africa is via the Nile or Timbuktu. Trade caravans don't count.

Totally in agreement.

I'm not sure what a saharan empire adds to the game...
 
I'd like to see the Trans-Saharan routes included myself. Of course they should be incredibly hard to colonize and have abysmally low tax values but I say we include them unless they repeatedly get made into colonies by the AI.
 
muttoneer said:
Ah, ok. The number of compliments received is back down to zero then... :rolleyes:

...and back up to one! :)

While I cannot comment on the accuracy of the names or shapes of the provinces, I wholeheartedly agree with the thinking behind them and for the trade routes, I agree that, by reducing them to 0 tax and manpower and ensuring max climate hostility, they should not be too much of a monkeywrench for the AI.

If a human player wants to invest time, effort and energy into making the desert bloom, it should be their prerogative!
 
Guinnessmonkey said:
I'm not sure what a saharan empire adds to the game...

Flexibility for a human player. :)