Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

New map: Poland and Lithuania

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Show only dev responses
TheMaster said:
Great map and I think that it's all for Central Europe.

We can go to south, Doctor can you make Moldavia?
Click to expand...
Done ;)
Moldavia.txt


46. Bukovina – Suceava
47. Moldavia – Iaşi
48. Besarabia – Chişinãu
49. Bujak – Chilia​
 
This map is very good.I think that Poland,Lithuania,Ukraine and Baltic States should have historical provinces.Old provinces haven't shown these lands correctly.Other countries were full of small provinces (seen under microscope only ;) )

It is outstanding piece of work.
 
Owen said:
Zaporoze: You need to think about which the most important city or cities are in the province, and whether it/they lie east or west of the river. This should then show you whether the river should be on the west or east side of the province.
Click to expand...
As has been said, it'd be hard to point a single city or a town in that area, it was pretty much some sort of a European Wild West, without any significant settlements. But still, the latest version of the borders seem perfect to me. It's too bad there was no way to redo the map back in my EU2 days...

To make it clear: the new map of PL-C would enhance the game significantly and if you succeed with preparing it, I would most probably install the game again. IMHO the map was one of the weakest points of the game and fixing it would mean that a brand-new excellent game will be made. The best strategy game ever.

As to the names of the provinces - many of them have their names in English. Perhaps you could make use of some of them:

TheMaster said:
List of provinces:
2. Pomorze - Pomerania
3. Poznan - Greater Poland
4. Kalisz - Calisia
5. Kujawy - Cuyavia
6. Mazowsze - Masovia
7. Podlasie - Podlachia
9. Krakow - Cracow (Lesser Poland)
13. Rus - Ruthenia
15. Podole - Podolia
17. Kijow - Kiev
18. Czernichow - Chernikhov
21. Witebsk - Vitebsk
24. Brzeskolitewskie - Brest
28. Zmudz - Samogitia
29. Kurlandia - Courland (Livonia)
37. Lower Prussia - Masuria
Click to expand...
Cheers
 
OK now it work. I think that is good map.

Halibutt thanks for list.

Now we are waitnig for verdict.

English names of provinces:
mapafinalfull.jpg

1. Warmia
2. Pomerania
3. Greater Poland
4. Calisia
5. Cuyavia
6. Masovia
7. Podlasia
8. Sieradz
9. Lesser Poland
10. Sandomierz
11. Lublin
12. Chelm
13. Red Ruthenia
14. Volhyn
15. Podolia
16. Braclaw
17. Kiev
18. Chernikhov
19. Smolensk
20. Mscislaw
21. Vitebsk
22. Polock
23. Minsk
24. Brest
25. Nowogrodek
26. Vilnus
27. Troki
28. Samogitia
29. Courland
30. Dyneburg
31. Perejaslav
32. Zaporoze
33. Chelmno
34. Danzig
35. Belz
36. Nowogrod Siewierski
37. Masuria
38. Prussia
39. Zytomir
40. Poltava
mapbaltics.jpg

41. Livonia (or Livland)
42. Dorpat
43. Osel
44. Estland
45. Narva
moldavia.jpg

46. Bukovina
47. Moldavia
48. Besarabia
49. Bujak
 
Last edited:
In my opinion TheMaster’s map proposition of Poland and Lithuania is very good. It include all important places like (for example Zmudz with access to Baltic sea) and borders change (like East borders of Poland after 1667, etc) It isn’t perfect but I don’t think it could be better.
Sorry for mistakes :)
 
Halibutt said:
As has been said, it'd be hard to point a single city or a town in that area, it was pretty much some sort of a European Wild West, without any significant settlements. But still, the latest version of the borders seem perfect to me. It's too bad there was no way to redo the map back in my EU2 days...
Click to expand...

As only an occasional visitor here, feel free to ignore me; but why does a "European Wild West, without any significant settlements" deserve it's own province?
 
Norrefeldt said:
I think provinces 34, 33 and 17 are hardly playable. I agree with you that if France is made into a patchwork of small provinces, P-L also deserves a lot. (I don't think there should be many provinces added to France or Spain though.)
Click to expand...
“Independent” Danzig province must be represented in the new map. I believe without it the history of the Baltics will lack too much…
 
Herr Doctor said:
You offer to make it Terra Incognita? :confused:
Click to expand...

No... as some contributors to this thread have questioned the number of new provinces for Poland (as well as those some want to give Spain, or France, etc), why 'waste' a province on a region described as a "European Wild West, without any significant settlements"?

Why not divide that land between the surrounding provinces, which do have settlements and a reason for existence?
 
I don't like the proposed map. It's too detailed and puts 4 provinces where one would suffice. What is the importance of Elbing? What is the importance of the Masuren? Lublin, Chelm and Belz are all too small. Even your Masovia is just too tiny. Why separate Kurlandia and Dunaburg? Naming all the provinces in Polish is not right, even if Poland owned most of it most of the time. Don't call Galitsia 'Rus', it's quite confusing. Trakai and Vilnius have to get merged. Merge Braclav and Podolia. Simply, as a general rule, merge every two or three provinces to one. Mcislav and Novgorod Severski should be merged. I like the position of Dniepr better then in Vanilla, but let's stick to having rivers on province borders. It will be confusing, otherwise.
 
redmark said:
No... as some contributors to this thread have questioned the number of new provinces for Poland (as well as those some want to give Spain, or France, etc), why 'waste' a province on a region described as a "European Wild West, without any significant settlements"?

Why not divide that land between the surrounding provinces, which do have settlements and a reason for existence?
Click to expand...
Because it was Cossack region with its own high part of autonomy and “rights” firstly under Polish suzerainty, and later – Russian. I personally cannot decide to which province to add this region…
 
almoravid said:
I don't like the proposed map. It's too detailed and puts 4 provinces where one would suffice. What is the importance of Elbing? What is the importance of the Masuren? Lublin, Chelm and Belz are all too small. Even your Masovia is just too tiny. Why separate Kurlandia and Dunaburg? Naming all the provinces in Polish is not right, even if Poland owned most of it most of the time. Don't call Galitsia 'Rus', it's quite confusing. Trakai and Vilnius have to get merged. Merge Braclav and Podolia. Simply, as a general rule, merge every two or three provinces to one. Mcislav and Novgorod Severski should be merged. I like the position of Dniepr better then in Vanilla, but let's stick to having rivers on province borders. It will be confusing, otherwise.
Click to expand...
May be you did not notice but this map is based on historical borders of the voivodhips (just with several changes to fit the rivers). It’s not a fantasy thing just to unite Braclav and Podolia (justify?), or Mscislav and Novgorod Severski… And why Kurland and Dynaburg must be united?? I personally did not remember when Dynaburg was for example part of the Duchy of Courland-Semigalia; instead of vassal Courland Dynaburg was under direct common control of Poland-Lithuania.
 
redmark said:
No... as some contributors to this thread have questioned the number of new provinces for Poland (as well as those some want to give Spain, or France, etc), why 'waste' a province on a region described as a "European Wild West, without any significant settlements"?

Why not divide that land between the surrounding provinces, which do have settlements and a reason for existence?
Click to expand...

A few of this provinces in EU 2 times are richer and have more population than many Spanish and French provinces.
 
TheMaster said:
A few of this provinces in EU 2 times are richer and have more population than many Spanish and French provinces.
Click to expand...

You misunderstand. I'm not attacking the general basis of the map, or saying France and Spain should be expanded but Poland not. (I have no intention of ever playing a map with 36 French provinces, for instance).

'Some of these provinces are rich with large population' - fine. This one has no significant settlements and no significant independent political entity. Therefore, it doesn't warrant a province, IMHO. Redraw the surrounding provinces to take up the land.

I am interested in developments from the map editing and province adding capability. But if each set of interested groups expands their own area of interest too far, others won't use it. There will be 50 AGCEEPs, or rather none.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back