Are the provinces properly balanced?

[Me_]

Never mind Warsaw, look at Kiev.

Oh boy. Kiev is the most overrated province in EU.

As for Krakow and Warsaw - the royal salt mines around Krakow provided about a third of the Crown's income (that is the royal income from all the rest of Poland was only twice as big as the income from those mines) at the start of the game. I think that some of the base tax in Krakow should be moved to production.

Meanwhile, Warsaw was only slightly more than a village before the incorporation of Mazovia, when it became the meeting place for the Sejm.

We're not going to nerf Warsaw into the ground because we don't just base development on 1444 but also what it became later, but a tweak may be in order.

That's what the +2 base tax event and +1base tax/+1base manpower decision are for.

 

[ZangoZett]

We're not going to nerf Warsaw into the ground because we don't just base development on 1444 but also what it became later, but a tweak may be in order.

Would it be better in these kinds of cases (in which provinces are weak in 1444, but grow strong over the time period) to simply create a new "Future Glory" (or something) modifier that reduces developments costs? That way, they can still start poorer, but are easier to grow and become wealthy of the course of the game.

 

[WeissRaben]

Would it be better in these kinds of cases (in which provinces are weak in 1444, but grow strong over the time period) to simply create a new "Future Glory" (or something) modifier that reduces developments costs? That way, they can still start poorer, but are easier to grow and become wealthy of the course of the game.

Development improvement is DLC-only.

 

[CzokletMuss]

Oh boy. Kiev is the most overrated province in EU.

As for Krakow and Warsaw - the royal salt mines around Krakow provided about a third of the Crown's income (that is the royal income from all the rest of Poland was only twice as big as the income from those mines) at the start of the game. I think that some of the base tax in Krakow should be moved to production.

Meanwhile, Warsaw was only slightly more than a village before the incorporation of Mazovia, when it became the meeting place for the Sejm.

This. I say move some development from Mazovia to Małopolska and Wielkopolska. Especially basetax and production from Warsaw should go to Kraków to reflect Wieliczka and Bochnia salt mines.

Or you may give some province modifier to Kraków (Żupy krakowskie +50% production) and just nerf Warsaw if you feel generous:

Żupy krakowskie was a Polish salt mining company which operated continuously from its inception in the 13th century to the late 20th century. It managed salt mines and salt works in two neighboring towns (known as the Royal Salt Mines collectively), Wieliczka Salt Mine in Wieliczka and Bochnia Salt Mine in Bochnia (city rights, 1253), as well as river salt ports on Vistula and, only in the 17th century, a salt work in Dobiegniewo. The company was created around 1290 by the Polish Crown, thus giving birth to the largest industrial centre in Europe until the 18th century, according to UNESCO, both in terms of the number of employees and its production volumes.

Żupy krakowskie works ("Żupa" is the Old Polish word for salt mine) was one of the primary sources of income for the Polish Crown until 1772. For most of its existence, it was also one of the largest salt mining enterprises worldwide along with the Alpine salt mines in Hallstatt, Hallein, Hall and Berchtesgaden; with an output of over 30,000 tons a year.

 

[LikeNothing]

We're not going to nerf Warsaw into the ground because we don't just base development on 1444 but also what it became later, but a tweak may be in order.

Wiz!!!

Please notice that while the starting Development Levels in 1444 is rebalanced with 1.12, the later numbers in the History files are not and follow their old values in 1.11. So London jumps from 8,8,6 to 13,13,6 in 1580, Paris from 10,10,8 to 14,14,8 in 1589, etc. I'm pretty sure you would prefer the transition to be much smoother?

 

[fraesp29]

Agreed, but if the current systems stays as is, at the very least, we should be able to sort provinces by development cost. Since cost scales not with total development, but with input, it would be nice to easily discern which provinces are cheap and easy to invest in from the build menu.

You can, in the macrobuilder.

 

[oblio-]

Look at Lyon - it's 6-6-8. I lived in all of those three cities and I'm not going to believe for a second that Krakow and especially Warsaw was more developed in 1500s.

Never extrapolate from current data. Especially when comparing to pre-industrial societies.

Otherwise you'll end up like our many of our dear forumers, thinking that Norway or Finland in the 15th century were economical powerhouses, for example

 

[vfmikey]

Never extrapolate from current data. Especially when comparing to pre-industrial societies.

Otherwise you'll end up like our many of our dear forumers, thinking that Norway or Finland in the 15th centuries were economical powerhouses, for example

Oh, I didn't mean as modern times. I'm saying that basing on history of the cities, what the medieval parts of town look like, urbanistically, etc. I did forget about the "region not city" part, that Wiz stated, probably Kraków area was in fact better developed in terms of "industry" and farming.

 

[petertel123]

We're not going to nerf Warsaw into the ground because we don't just base development on 1444 but also what it became later, but a tweak may be in order.

isnt that supposed to be covered by development though?

 

[MAHak]

We're not going to nerf Warsaw into the ground because we don't just base development on 1444 but also what it became later, but a tweak may be in order.

I know this is not an issue that is on top of the "to do list" but, I tried starting a Great Britain game in 1818. Then I looked at Lancashire (Northern England, the birthplace of the industrial revolution), and the development was the same as in a 1444 start (13 dev.), I thought the base production would be 3 digits. Actually all the English provinces seems to be at the same development level as in 1444 except London which was at 42 (22 in 1444).
So I'm wondering if this is the case for all other countries in the world? Some provinces should have a significant development improvenment in, say a 1600 start then in a 1444 start.
One funny note many of the English provincial capitals seems to have changed name in a 1818 start, Liverpool insted of Chester in Lancashire, Leeds instead of York in Yorkshire, Birmingham seem to be the provincial capital in both Derby and Norfolk (mistake?). When does the name changes kick in?

 

[gall]

Oh, I didn't mean as modern times. I'm saying that basing on history of the cities, what the medieval parts of town look like, urbanistically, etc. I did forget about the "region not city" part, that Wiz stated, probably Kraków area was in fact better developed in terms of "industry" and farming.

"medieval parts of town look like" in Warsaw? Most (i don't remember 95% or 99% i don't think it matter) of old buildings were completely demolish by Germans after uprising (2nd WW). It's almost totally a 70 years old city. Rebuilding of Polish capital from scratch take a while, you could even argue that is even 60 years old city..
You may add few things like sociological/economical effects of partition of Poland etc. Border regions between 3 great powers were perceive as rather bad investment area (Prussian part was kinda different).
EDIT: I do agree most of Kraków production development should be higher and tax lower, 1444 Warsaw should get pretty huge (1/1/1 would be drastic, but entirely without reson) nerf (and get some random event with +1 dev from time to time if it is capital).

 

[Dr. B]

How come the Lithuania area is so incredibly well developed compared to other areas in europe? Was this really the case in medieval times?
I am not very familiar with the economics and demographics of this area in the time period, but this looks strange.

 

[AlphaSonic]

Why isn't Granada a Milan/Paris/Constatinople developed type?

 

[Rabid]

How come the Lithuania area is so incredibly well developed compared to other areas in europe? Was this really the case in medieval times?
I am not very familiar with the economics and demographics of this area in the time period, but this looks strange.

The provinces are much larger which probably plays into it somewhat.

 

[Aquae Sulis]

How come the Lithuania area is so incredibly well developed compared to other areas in europe? Was this really the case in medieval times?
I am not very familiar with the economics and demographics of this area in the time period, but this looks strange.

History would seem to suggest that Lithuania's lands were certainly not so developed, not to mention the fractious religious/cultural sentiment.

I think it's a flaw in the scale used for Paradox's development system, in that important cities seemed undervalued when compared to number of provinces. Take ten 3 dev provinces in Siberia and you have more development than Kraków and more coring cost.

Of course Kraków is a far more desirable city and I don't know how tax received, production etc. scales (is one 30 dev City giving more tax than ten 3 dev provinces?), but in terms of admin cost the scales seem a little off...

(Plus I suspect Lithuania has a large amount of manpower dev to support the rather large army's they needed to survive/to become Polands attack dog).

 

[Trin Tragula]

Made some adjustments here and there Among other things Mazovia has been reduced (some of which was given to other areas in the region).
Some Ukrainian provinces have also been reduced a bit and Kiev has been brought closer in line with other European cities.

The provinces are much larger which probably plays into it somewhat.

Yes. This also has a lot to do with it, both for the provinces themselves and for the countries. A large country will have more total development simply due to its size and the Poltava province for instance is big enough to fit 4 of Brandenburg's provinces in it, which can result in a higher development level in a province - province comparison even if it would be dwarfed by those 4 provinces together.

 

[harvesarmy]

Rotw might need bumping a little bit, thinking particularly Meso and South America, hugely dense and integrated areas especially in the inca empire. By all means there should be a disease event of some kind whereby you either spend a lot of money to stop the disease or take a massive -50% national tax modifier for so many years, but base development should surely be higher? Perhaps not quite Italian levels, or French levels but probably an average of about 15 instead of the current 10 development IMO.

There has been a noted North American development bug too whereby migration destroys all development in that province. Hopefully this will be fixed asap.

 

[Dr. B]

Made some adjustments here and there Among other things Mazovia has been reduced (some of which was given to other areas in the region).
Some Ukrainian provinces have also been reduced a bit and Kiev has been brought closer in line with other European cities.



Yes. This also has a lot to do with it, both for the provinces themselves and for the countries. A large country will have more total development simply due to its size and the Poltava province for instance is big enough to fit 4 of Brandenburg's provinces in it, which can result in a higher development level in a province - province comparison even if it would be dwarfed by those 4 provinces together.

Thanks for replying, and your diligent work on the details of the world Trin Tragula. It is great for us players to know that the developers of the game reads the forums and consider our opinions. That makes us want to help more in making the game even better.

 

[Koivin]

Thanks Trin, could you however increase production in Krakow and Ukraine while scaling down its base tax? Especially Krakowian salt and Ukrainian grain were produced at a disproportionate large scale at that time. About 25-30% (source needed) of European grain was produced in the Commonwealth in the 16th century. Perhaps give those provinces 100% goods produced modifier and reduce development, or switch base tax into production?