"The new map has a lot more provinces, and a map-trading ban would be harmful for gameplay, especially colonial wars. The more people know of possible colonial areas, the more likely there will be friction caused by competitive colonising."
Doesn't this arguments argue for a removal of all "fog of war" playing with an open map then if the one overshadowing object of the game is to manipulate a situation where non-historical colonial friction is sought for in the early 16th hundreds?
"Indeed, and the new world is relative unknown for the players.
Hell, it took me years to even find Americas
All the new sea zones and all."
Lack of player knowledge of the new map I find an argument that, although true, is beside the point here.
Personally I would prefer a more historical and realistic approach where every nation seeks it's own maps through explorers, random or not. This way we risk every nation knowing more or less the same areas way before historical times. Hopefully the historical explorer nations will be as careful as their historical counterparts to not divulge these secrets to simulate this area of colonial development.
