Countries ranking by total development (1444)

[oblio-]

Development is not just base tax

 

[Katsue]

While the economic surplus per square mile in the Eurasian steppe was rather lower than southern Italy, there were far more square miles of land being exploited. I mean, Uzbek starts the game with a province count in the high 20s. That guarantees they have 75-90 development (a province can't be worse than 1/1/1)

It can actually. Connacht is 1/1/0 in the 1792 start date.

 

[Christopholes]

Lithuania and Uzbek are frigging huge and have Kiev/Bukhara. Musvcovy's main problem I've found is their total lack of forts.

 

[grommile]

It can actually. Connacht is 1/1/0 in the 1792 start date.

... that sounds like a bug to me.

 

[corbenic]

The first and second point are in quite a conflict. Ruthenia was the closest part to wild fields, but had a population close to that of Poland, being smaller geographically.

How are those poor, loosely populated areas?

From wikipedia:
An estimate of the population in the territory of Poland and Grand Duchy of Lithuania together gives a population at 7.5 million for 1493, breaking them down by ethnicity at 3.75 million Ruthenians (ethnic Ukrainians, Belarusians), 3.25 million Poles and 0.5 million Lithuanians.

So territories of ethnic Ukraine and Belarus are included in Ruthenian ethnic group.
And between Lithuania, Ukraine, Belarus and Poland, Lithuania was actually the smallest.

That explains Poland's greater population density.

 

[CrabHelmet]

The first and second point are in quite a conflict. Ruthenia was the closest part to wild fields, but had a population close to that of Poland, being smaller geographically.

How are those poor, loosely populated areas?

The total area inhabited by Ruthenians and owned by Lithuania prior to the Union of Lublin is much larger than Poland proper. That also doesn't say anything about poor. You're just stretching at this point.