Bring back Buryatia

[izadirad1]

Hello community

I just wanted to ask for the game to bring back buryatia as a starting tag. The tag exist already and it use to be on the map. I think it was taken out because it wasn’t centralized enough and it was considered an easy gold mine for Manchu mongol oirat players.

I think buryatia would be just as organized as the Australian tribes

every YouTube video ever always goes for
The goldmines. Watch an Africa campaign on YouTube and tell me they don’t all rush for gold mines. Even in Russia videos they’ll rush for the goldmine in kazan. The mesoamerican games also rush for the gold mines.

possibly make the tag appear in game like ashanti or I think it’s called fulo near mali maybe if the region isn’t colonized by the year 1xxx because Muscovy got eaten by whom ever
That’s all thank you for your time

 

[Word_Smith]

I think buryatia would be just as organized as the Australian tribes

I don't think this is a great argument for their implementation as a tag, considering that the Australian Aboriginal groups were so small and decentralized that they shouldn't have made it into the game to begin with.

 

[AvengedK1ng]

I don't think this is a great argument for their implementation as a tag, considering that the Australian Aboriginal groups were so small and decentralized that they shouldn't have made it into the game to begin with.

They removed Buryat saying it was too tribal, then a dev's personal mod adds hawaiians, kiwis and Australians to the game complete with numerous bugs and terrible balance
lake Victoria africans also shouldn't have been added let alone an achievement

 

[MachopPower69]

I don't think this is a great argument for their implementation as a tag, considering that the Australian Aboriginal groups were so small and decentralized that they shouldn't have made it into the game to begin with.

Yeah. Aboriginal tribes didn't even have chiefs or central powers like the Cree or Penquot. Probably the Aboriginal tribes were for althistory or to give recognition to the Aboriginal minorities of Australia; but even the Aboriginal people wanted this. If Tinto wanted to be more realistic, Australia shouldn't have wastelands and have way more provinces like this:

Take that, 1.30 European province map!

 

[Aussiehawker]

Bad development in a nutshell. There are no set guiding standards, they are just doing things haphazardly. Remove this tag and then add a score of terrible ahistorical tags, a few dev cycles down the line.

Tags should be removed from North America outside Mesoamerica, and South America outside the Andes. No Australian or Pacific Island Tags. Interior Africa should be vastly scaled back.

And they could all be replaced, by actual interactions with colonisable land, or 'wasteland' provinces. Those provinces could produce trade goods, diplomatic relations can be formed outside of the diplomat system (wasting years for a diplomat to fabricate claims on a North American OPM is very silly), and armies could appear out of them. Some of them would have conditions to become nations.

Yeah. Aboriginal tribes didn't even have chiefs or central powers like the Cree or Penquot. Probably the Aboriginal tribes were for althistory or to give recognition to the Aboriginal minorities of Australia; but even the Aboriginal people wanted this. If Tinto wanted to be more realistic, Australia shouldn't have wastelands and have way more provinces like this:

View attachment 827160
Take that, 1.30 European province map!

Tasmania before the British arrived, had 3000-15,000 people. Not men, not armies, people total. Hunter-gatherer population densities are incredibly low. A lot of those interior areas are a tribal group of a few hundred. Yet they can raise standing armies bigger than their population in eu4.

Australia pre colonial, had between 300,000 to 1 million at most. Yet you want to give them hundreds of provinces. Even if they are all 1/1/1, that is far too much development.

 

[AvengedK1ng]

Bad development in a nutshell. There are no set guiding standards, they are just doing things haphazardly. Remove this tag and then add a score of terrible ahistorical tags, a few dev cycles down the line.

The issue with cycling devs and not keeping dedicated people

Tags should be removed from North America outside Mesoamerica, and South America outside the Andes.

Wait what? Then you cant play as the iroqouis

No Australian or Pacific Island Tags. Interior Africa should be vastly scaled back.

And they could all be replaced, by actual interactions with colonisable land, or 'wasteland' provinces. Those provinces could produce trade goods, diplomatic relations can be formed outside of the diplomat system (wasting years for a diplomat to fabricate claims on a North American OPM is very silly), and armies could appear out of them. Some of them would have conditions to become nations.

But then you end up in a situation like pirates where you just nation ruin Portugal

Tasmania before the British arrived, had 3000-15,000 people. Not men, not armies, people total. Hunter-gatherer population densities are incredibly low. A lot of those interior areas are a tribal group of a few hundred. Yet they can raise standing armies bigger than their population in eu4.

Australia pre colonial, had between 300,000 to 1 million at most. Yet you want to give them hundreds of provinces. Even if they are all 1/1/1, that is far too much development.

Agreed, but we do have to also keep in mind dev iz relative wealth not just population, to prevent India and China being op

 

[st360]

I think buryatia would be just as organized as the Australian tribes

I see putting those Australian fantasy nations in the game is the gift that just keeps on giving.

 

[BlazeKnight_]

The Buryats actually did something unlike the Aussie natives. They were a Mongol group not that much different from the Khorchin, the Khalkha, the Chahar, etc. & under the Northern Yuan influence.

The absurdity of the Buryat culture still being in the bloody Evenki group NEEDS to be fixed. Buryats are clearly Mongol. Also, the absurdity of the "Evenki" group being named Evenki, when it should be called something else like Tungusic because Evenki is LITERALLY ANOTHER WORD for the individual culture "Evenk."

 

[AvengedK1ng]

The Buryats actually did something unlike the Aussie natives. They were a Mongol group not that much different from the Khorchin, the Khalkha, the Chahar, etc. & under the Northern Yuan influence.

The absurdity of the Buryat culture still being in the bloody Evenki group NEEDS to be fixed. Buryats are clearly Mongol. Also, the absurdity of the "Evenki" group being named Evenki, when it should be called something else like Tungusic because Evenki is LITERALLY ANOTHER WORD for the individual culture "Evenk."

Eh japonic is a grouping of languages including japanese

 

[BlazeKnight_]

Eh japonic is a grouping of languages including japanese

and Tungusic is a language/culture grouping including Jurchen, Evenki, and others. NOT Evenki being a grouping of Jurchen and Evenkis.

That's like saying English is a grouping of Welsh, Scottish, and English, instead of British being a grouping of those 3. It doesn't make sense at all.

 

[AvengedK1ng]

and Tungusic is a language/culture grouping including Jurchen, Evenki, and others. NOT Evenki being a grouping of Jurchen and Evenkis.

That's like saying English is a grouping of Welsh, Scottish, and English, instead of British being a grouping of those 3. It doesn't make sense at all.

I mean Ingvaeonic is a grouping of frisian, English, anglo saxon, saxon, and jutish, when Ingvaeonic can also just mean English

 

[Blust]

I read this as "let's remove australian tags" and honestly yes please

 

[EarlKonrad]

I read this as "let's remove australian tags" and honestly yes please

Honestly, how many people would be opposed to that? And, how many would even notice that they were gone?

My guess is two.

 

[AvengedK1ng]

Honestly, how many people would be opposed to that? And, how many would even notice that they were gone?

My guess is two.

Malacca players would probably complain they actually need to take ideas to take Australia now

 

[FleetingRain]

Australia cost us the Andes wastelands so I'm in favor of removing the entire continent.

 

[vaLor-]

Yeah. Aboriginal tribes didn't even have chiefs or central powers like the Cree or Penquot. Probably the Aboriginal tribes were for althistory or to give recognition to the Aboriginal minorities of Australia; but even the Aboriginal people wanted this. If Tinto wanted to be more realistic, Australia shouldn't have wastelands and have way more provinces like this:

View attachment 827160
Take that, 1.30 European province map!

Ah yes, the Holy Australian Empire...

Home...