How about new provinces in Africa?

[DEEPGAME]

Especially south africa is so empty. Between kongo and mutapa there can be two new provinces. Like a walk path.

Also south west african coast can expand through cape of good hope. Some new provinves near lake victoria to colonize would be great as well.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Supposedly the path between Kongo/Mutapa is not viable for armies of the period. I don't have any personal knowledge of the region, but it's certainly possible that the terrain made it not-viable.

 

[AhoyDeerrr]

I agree, there were several largish kingdoms in central Africa as well as around the Great Lakes region which would be perfect candidates to add and if Paradox can justify adding OPM tribes in Siberia that literally do nothing, I think it only makes sense to add these African states.

Supposedly the path between Kongo/Mutapa is not viable for armies of the period. I don't have any personal knowledge of the region, but it's certainly possible that the terrain made it not-viable.

I never really understood this argument. Wasn't the whole of western Africa non viable for troops outside of western Africa? hence why the only country from outside of western Africa to ever conqueror part of the inland during the EUIV period was Morocco, which it also was unable to maintain long term. So based on that do you think all of Western Africa except the coastal provinces should be removed?

My point is that its a little silly to use the realism argument to try to prevent unrealistic additions whilst at the same time not opposing the existence of other unrealistic parts of the game because at that point your argument becomes completely arbitrary.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

I never really understood this argument. Wasn't the whole of western Africa non viable for troops outside of western Africa? hence why the only country from outside of western Africa to ever conqueror part of the inland during the EUIV period was Morocco, which it also was unable to maintain long term. So based on that do you think all of Western Africa except the coastal provinces should be removed?

My point is that its a little silly to use the realism argument to try to prevent unrealistic additions whilst at the same time not opposing the existence of other unrealistic additions because at that point your argument becomes arbitrary.

Please don't misunderstand, these are separate arguments:

- Europeans struggled in West Africa due to disease/climate/locals not vulnerable to their own diseases.

- There are terrains which are hostile to organized military operations regardless of origin.

Basically, the argument for this thread is the latter; that this territory was sufficiently treacherous + limited in supply/resources that moving large or even modest forces through it wasn't viable (for anybody). Rather than the reasoning used for West Africa, the reasoning is more similar to why inner Brazil, the Rocky Mountains, or the areas around the Himalayas are wasteland.

 

[AhoyDeerrr]

- Europeans struggled in West Africa due to disease/climate/locals not vulnerable to their own diseases.

And yet Spain for example can take all of western Africa as easily as it could take land in Europe. So would you argue for a mechanic that gives non western African countries say a fixed 10% attrition modifier to all armies in western Africa?

- There are terrains which are hostile to organized military operations regardless of origin.

But there were several Kingdoms in central Africa, which I presume had armies of some sort. My understanding of wastelands is that they are there to reflect land which people can not inhabit or use in some way, like as you said the Himalayas but clearly this land was use able to some extent, exemplified by the fact states existed there. Besides that we have terrain types that can be used to make the passages into the areas the Kingdoms inhabit quite hostile.

EUIV is not really realistic anyway, even if the passages in real life were completely impassable, I think it is still fine to have the passages exist because it gives access to the countries that could be placed there and as I said earlier, if Paradox can justify adding OPM Siberian tribes I think they can justify adding the several inland African kingdoms.

 

[captain zulu]

And yet Spain for example can take all of western Africa as easily as it could take land in Europe. So would you argue for a mechanic that gives non western African countries say a fixed 10% attrition modifier to all armies in western Africa?

would be nerfd to 5% ingame anyway

 

[TheMeInTeam]

t there were several Kingdoms in central Africa, which I presume had armies of some sort. My understanding of wastelands is that they are there to reflect land which people can not inhabit or use in some way, like as you said the Himalayas but clearly this land was use able to some extent, exemplified by the fact states existed there. Besides that we have terrain types that can be used to make the passages into the areas the Kingdoms inhabit quite hostile.

I don't mind representing kingdoms that existed there, and if the terrain really wasn't as impassable as the Sahara or Himalayas then maybe a passage is warranted.

I'm big on allowing alternate history (to the point where it's my preferred playing environment), however in this case it might be a situation where it doesn't matter what nation you put there or what tech it had (even tech from after 1821), the area just isn't traversable for military operations/populations of any density. I don't know the area well enough myself to say that's definitively the case, but I don't see the upside in (further) misrepresenting the world's 1444 position. Some of the stuff done to baby the "historical lucky nations" is already annoying and makes the game self-inconsistent.

 

[FleetingRain]

would be nerfd to 5% ingame anyway

It could be increased by other modifiers, like Severe Winter (or is it Arctic climate?) increases the maximum attrition to 10%.

 

[grommile]

It could be increased by other modifiers, like Severe Winter (or is it Arctic climate?) increases the maximum attrition to 10%.

Nope. Nothing raises max attrition any more, not even extreme climates. Mouse over the province effect tooltips in, say, Arkhangelsk in February if you don't believe me

 

[3ishop]

quite a few threads on this the past few months, a lot of the terrain wasn't fitting for any organised nation to do with and the key difference between the great lakes and the siberian natives is the siberians were part of the wider world during the game time, central africa wasn't.

I'd rather see more coastal nations such as Madagascar (I want them to have a King Julian! )

 

[Mcwynne]

To be able to walk in more than two directions on the east coast would be nice and I wouldn't have anything against more nations either.

 

[AirikrStrife]

Some new provinces as well as some new tribal states would be fitting. Since there is plentiful of ahistorical state organisation around the world already, some quite powerful at times, it wouldn't matter form a realistic POV. As well as several tribal kingdoms did exist. I think great lakes region would be one of the most interesting and logical regions to open up. A Xhosa state wouldn't be too out of place either. Concerning a corridor between southern west and east africa one could be created from congo and span a few historical states such as Luba, Lunda and Kuba which could appear during te 16th century just like Funj

 

[DEEPGAME]

Africa seems so lonely. That makes me cry

 

[Gaussia]

I think Africa is quite well with provinces right now.

The only thing I would like to see added would be the great lake civilizations (separated from east africa my 2-5 colonisable provinces.

 

[Danary]

Africa seems so lonely. That makes me cry

Africa never gets any love man. CK2 they are just placeholders. And EU4 they are just placeholders. Dont think ill buy CK3 or EU5 until i see them do something with Africans in general. They can put in a whole DLC pack with Aztecs but cant work on a culture and region that was already in the game. Sigh...

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Africa never gets any love man. CK2 they are just placeholders. And EU4 they are just placeholders. Dont think ill buy CK3 or EU5 until i see them do something with Africans in general. They can put in a whole DLC pack with Aztecs but cant work on a culture and region that was already in the game. Sigh...

Africa got one substantial re-work boost, and that was the 1.8 AoW patch which altered their starting provinces drastically (especially West Africa). Admittedly, most areas of the world received similar attention.

Their limited starting vision/contact is perplexing, but at least they don't share the Mesoamerican fate of "can't do anything for 50-80 years if you handle the region well early on". Portugal actually gets there fast enough (1480) that the limited starting vision isn't nonsensically gimping them like Aztec. If anything, I'd like to see something better done with Madagascar and the West African religions.

 

[Danary]

Was talking more or so about CK2. EU4, i dont have much of a problem with.

 

[DEEPGAME]

I believe we need kingdoms in Great lakes region as compatible to history.

They may appear in uncolonized lands like Funj appears. These are already 15th century kingdoms.Europeans reached this region in late 19th century. Already, in the game, colonizer AI does not reach Uganda before 1820 as it already does not attach importance to East coast except Mutapa and Kilwa.

Regarding Namibia Coast, actualy as i donot know history of africa, as wikipedia says, until 19th century this land was inhabitant. That's interesting.

Regarding path way between kongo and mutapa, it is logical to have 1 base tax uncolonized provinces there.

 

[Grand Historian]

The only region in Africa that is in need of a rework is the tripartite island of Madagascar.

 

[FleetingRain]

The only region in Africa that is in need of a rework is the tripartite island of Madagascar.

This, a hundred times. We could stay here talking about the relevance of inner Africa in EU4's time period all day long, it won't change the fact Madagascar and all of East Africa is really poorly represented right now.