Is the political map of 1399 correct?

[xcrissxcrossx]

In my opinion the Franken province should be an independent Nuremburg, since it rebels from the palatinate so much. Also Westfalen should initially belong to Cologne (like it does now), but there should be a Paderborn revolter state that can rebel if Cologne loses control.

 

[birdboy2000]

There's a lot of abstractions, most of which make sense, a few which do seem odd. (Would've liked to see at least one Swiss minor, for instance. No good reason for the modern divisions of North Africa - Tunis should be bigger, Algiers(Tlemcen) and Tripoli (though I guess really Cyrenaica in 1399) smaller, for instance. Europe is certainly better done than the rest of the world.

There's an awesome mod community out there for this game, though. Maybe a "1399 accuracy overhaul" mod could get some people interested, if the other mods stray too far from vanilla for your taste.

 

[Checco]

If adding small states (especially in HRE and Italy) would raise the tag number and make the game unplayable, there is no point in discussing too much imo, no one would play an unplayable game (by definition ).

About small states that would be annexed within 10 years, well, it already happens as someone said, even with a good BB system, so that's not the problem.

In my SP experience, the difference between a blobbing nation that collapses and one who blobs without collapsing is the amount of core-giving missions; any nation whose % of cores is over 50% inevitably collapse during the 1st big war, but that means the rebel system and BB system work.

If a small state is historically annexed 10 years after 1399, just give the future owner a mission that gives a core on it, and call it a day (that's how most of the nations disappear while others stick for centuries, within or out the HRE; just compare Ireland, Anhalt, Luxembourg, Sardinia, Urbino -with England, Bavaria, Burgundy, Aragon, Papal State having a mission for them- with Cologne, Alsace, Mantua, Meissen, Modena).

 

[Mehow_pwn]

Has nobody noticed Poland? been completely wrong in the game...

 

[Seek75]

Of course it's not right...France isn't blobbed all the way to China.

 

[gela1212]

Has nobody noticed Poland? been completely wrong in the game...

Once more a thing of balancing. I'd rather see Poland how it is now then the PLC being replaced by uber Lithuania like it used to.

 

[Me_]

Once more a thing of balancing. I'd rather see Poland how it is now then the PLC being replaced by uber Lithuania like it used to.

He/she might refer to the fact that some provinces have wrong names and odd shapes.

 

[Ashantai]

I think that as others have said trying to represent the whole world in minute detail is practically impossible, if only from a gameplay POV, not to mention a technical one. There is of course room for improvement, but PI do a good job of giving things the broad focus they need.

 

[Arizal]

Interesting thread.

I don't think any of the current border problems are "game-breaking", but I do wish to have a game as historically accurate as possible. The claim that making the real borders would destabilize the game is strange, because in my mind, if the real borders were here and all the historical situations too, we could have in one of a million chance a map of 1820 which look fairly like the historical one. Yes, I'm deterministic. To me, if you could have all the data without random choices and put them in a giant simulator far greater than any computer existing or which will exist, you could have history.

Now, I would like that if the map were more accurate in 1399 and in any dates of the game, and little changes by little changes, maybe we will approach that. I also like the idea that a vassal could have vassals, which goes with my idea of a "treaty-based" diplomacy.

And about the muslim countries name (and China Ming and Mandchy), I think there should be a feature to modify the name of those countries accordingly to their new dynasties, since they were about their dynasties. So, if "Ottoman Empire" switches from the Osman dynasty to the Habsburg dynasty, you would have the "Habsburg empire". It's that or giving them the name of their regions, which could change. What would you do if Turkey is expelled of Minor Asia? But that go with all the countries, in fact, and many Strange Screenshots of misplaced countries could be dealt with an option to give to the countries the name of their cultural majority (and major culture).

 

[Graspiloot]

Inside Europe it is fine except for some smaller issues like misplacing augsburg. Oh well.
Someone pointed out that the Arabaian world doesn't much look like it, but I don't know as I'm not that well known with arabian history.
I do know however that India and Japan are just completely wrong. Yes PI does a great job inside Europe, but outside much less. Japan uses daimyo's that were already gone a few 100 hundred years as in 1399 japan is in the sengoku period. India just uses completely random province sizes with names that are completely off and states that didn't exist and have wrong flags.

I hope they can fix that before EU4, I find it much more important than correctly showing switzerland, as india and japan are much larger parts of the world and have a lot bigger impact on global history than switzerland.

 

[gela1212]

Actually India is done decently well in the south, just when you get further north it devolves into complete randomness.

To be fair, the Inca are just ridiculously messed up when it comes to size, so it's not like India and Japan are the worst regions of the game.

 

[Frozen_Predator]

i quite like the suggestions given on the first page (and since i was mucking about with the provinces anyway) i decided to incorporate some of the changes in my own changes i was making to the grand campaign

 

[Shackel]

I do think Japan deserves its own little HRE-esque system... but the idea that putting realistic countries in the game "takes balance" doesn't ring right with me. If they get conquered, they'll revolt and you get a mighty chunk of BB for it. Missions would change this: Switzerland, for instance, would get missions to slowly take... well... Switzerland. Wallis would be independent but would start out guaranteed by other Swiss powers and Savoy might have a mission(without CB, though) to take Wallis.

 

[grommile]

Savoy might have a mission(without CB, though) to take Wallis.

National missions shouldn't be actively inferior to getting a potluck mission to do the same thing.

 

[nOxr]

If Nogai and Kazakh were split even by GH and Timurids we could set up one of the grandest war of that era. As it is now GH and Timurids rarely fight each other, but with such a long border, coupled with some war missions, they are bound to start one epic war. Incidentally, this could in one stroke solve the balance problem with the hordes as well as ensure a historically plausible deterioration of the great hordes.

There are several benefits. With an even larger GH they are actually weakened, especially if nogai and kazakh keep their cores. Also, their focus would be turned towards Timurids and away from expanding in eastern europe. In the same way, Timurids would turn their focus away from the ottomans and towards GH. And while the great hordes are fighting a historically correct and thrilling blood bath on the steppes, their neighbours can move ahead techwise. Since GH probably wouldn't expand much in eastern europe they would not encounter austria and bohemia and their likes. Then it would be Poland, Lithuania and Russia that would be well placed to settle the steppe. And most importantly, it would be so much fun to play GH or Timurids.

 

[sprites]

maybe giving Wallis and core to Savoy , but keeping the swiss one on it?

for the two hordes , i don't think they would declare war on each other if they are busy with the other nations ...

 

[kristoff]

The worst is clearly Georgia, as Ton de Vid mentioned. Just look at zoomed-out map and you'll see that according to PI Georgia was one of the biggest countries of the world...

Just everything about Georgia in EU3-DW is bad:
- "Georgia" province does not have anything in common with any real Georgian-culture lands - it's a part of so-called Circassia and by 1399 it was controlled by GH. The same with "Alania",
- In-game "Georgia" and "Alania" (Georgian culture) are lands, which IRL never had Georgian culture as a dominant one or even one of somehow important,
- "Abkhazia" is huge beyond any sense, taking up whole north-eastern shore of Black Sea,
- "Imeretia" and "Kartli" are like one "slot" to the west too far (Imeretia is where IRL are Guria, Megrelia and Adjaria, Kartli is where IRL is Imeretia ect.),
- Half of Georgia in EU3-DW lies north of Caucasus range, which is an absurd. Even at the peak of its power (13th century), Georgia did not control these lands, but was expanding to the south. No to say that it didn't went north of Caucasus any time from 1399 to today.

Shortly speaking, real Georgia was and is 2 times smaller and lies in a completely different place (south of main Caucasus range)... After seeing such things with Georgia and many countries in Europe, I would be afraid to even try to check countries i.e. in Asia, which I'm not so familiar with. I suspect there are gazillion of similar mistakes.

 

[incognitus]

One inaccuracy is that everything is a kingdom, when many were duchies, counties, landgraviates, etc.

Another example is Holland. According to DW it is in a PU under Hainaut. In actual history both Holland (a county, not a kingdom) AND Hainaut (also a county) were in a PU under (what's "under" anyway?) Bavaria, resp. one of the Bavarian Dukes, Albert I.

The game simplifies more than you think, but not too much I think.

 

[unmerged(145677)]

The two hordes thing sounds interesting but..wouldn't the eastern europe and the ottomans just attack when they're focused on eachother and conquer their land? ...then we have poland-lithuania and ottomans that stretch from starting position to india/ming within the first 100 years :s

 

[nOxr]

The two hordes thing sounds interesting but..wouldn't the eastern europe and the ottomans just attack when they're focused on eachother and conquer their land? ...then we have poland-lithuania and ottomans that stretch from starting position to india/ming within the first 100 years :s

Would you daringly venture into an area where two 100 000 armies are fighting? Well, the AI probably would anyway. I imagine that the great hordes would have enough spare troops to fend off the europeans for the first hundred years. But as sprites says, the question is if the war would ever start with all the automatic wars going on. You could have all their neighbours paying them tribute at game start, as well as the epic war already started...