New map: Poland and Lithuania

[Garbon]

Frankly speaking Opole has better reasons to exist than Masovia. Masovia (in fact a hanfull of smaller duches) COMPLETELY stopped to have separate history after 1526 (and half of them already in XVth century becuase they were incorporated into Poland).

Opole on the other hand had interesting history at least till mid od XVIIth century.
(some of tidbits of Opole history were mentioned above).

So my controversial proposal: give Masovian tag to Opole o :looking around and fretting replies of pro-Masovian lobbysts:
But seriously, Opole had richer history than Masovia.

Umm..yea, did you actually read my post about not justifying new states based on them having better justification than an already existing state? If you can't get the evidence to get it to stand on its own merits, it won't be included.

 

[Garbon]

there is another point
bohemia gets province that it didnt own, it gives bohemia additional money and manpower, so if you plan not to give tag for Oppeln, what was the reason for making province, which you dont want to represent historiacally????

Sorry, but I have no tears for this issue. I can think of many places accross the map that are forced to own provinces that were actually owned by some minor entity because we don't have tags to give them. It's unfortunate but it doesn't mean that there should be an automatic tag grant.

if you dont give tag for oppeln it is better that you merge it with breslau into one silesia province, since you are supposed to represent population of city (so one has breslau population instead of breslau + oppeln)

I have no thoughts on this matter.

and i played mymap and in my games, bohamia does not annex any of 4 silesian duchies that ar on the map before 1500, i slighltly modified mymap though, by not giving bohemia cores on silesian duchies, which is resonable since, bohemia DIDNT own any of them (besides breslau that is) before it was annexed by Austria

Irrelevant, this project isn't MyMap, so any discussion on what might happen based on "tests" on MyMap is simply speculation.

 

[zdlugasz]

Umm..yea, did you actually read my post about not justifying new states based on them having better justification than an already existing state? If you can't get the evidence to get it to stand on its own merits, it won't be included.

I have proposed to remove Masovia

 

[rybka]

Sorry, but I have no tears for this issue. I can think of many places accross the map that are forced to own provinces that were actually owned by some minor entity because we don't have tags to give them. It's unfortunate but it doesn't mean that there should be an automatic tag grant.


Irrelevant, this project isn't MyMap, so any discussion on what might happen based on "tests" on MyMap is simply speculation.

Could you please enlight me why you decided to put Oppeln on map than?
I dont see any reason for its existance
from your post i can only conclude that you wanted for some reason to divide silesia to have 2 smaller provinces unfortunatelly it does not make any sense in this case, you can divide one province into two if they shared same history, but not to two if they didnt share same history for 25% of the eu2 timeframe
so deletion of oppeln is best imho

 

[Garbon]

I didn't put Oppeln in, MKJ did back on his map and I just smoothed out the borders in the region.

 

[rybka]

I didn't put Oppeln in, MKJ did back on his map and I just smoothed out the borders in the region.

well yes but nowadays on mkjs map oppeln have its tag, which justifies its existannce on map

 

[Garbon]

well yes but nowadays on mkjs map oppeln have its tag, which justifies its existannce on map

So, just to be clear, without a tag it should be merged?

 

[zdlugasz]

So, just to be clear, without a tag it should be merged?

Hehe, but maybe we will submit "good enough" arguments. But it will require time.

Without tag one could swap province to Ansbach, Transylvania or Poland (rulers of at least these three countries ruled duchy after extinction of original dynasty in XVIth century) but it would look strange, because it was not incorporation, annexation or whatever, only common ruler.

 

[Herr Doctor]

Hehe, but maybe we will submit "good enough" arguments. But it will require time.

Without tag one could swap province to Ansbach, Transylvania or Poland (rulers of at least these three countries ruled duchy after extinction of original dynasty in XVIth century) but it would look strange, because it was not incorporation, annexation or whatever, only common ruler.

I think the more reasonless way to list all your arguments why you would like to see Opole as a separate country in AGCEEP than to make any proposition what tag to use for it first…

 

[rybka]

So, just to be clear, without a tag it should be merged?

imho, yes

 

[zdlugasz]

Last try

Back to Pereyaslavl - this "y" comes from transcription of Belarusian or Ukrainian name? I have seen ukrainian name with "i".

And "l" again. Are we supposed to use old Ruthenian, old Polish, old French, old anything? It seems to me that most cities and provinces get "modern" names in modern versions of appropriate languages.

 

[Herr Doctor]

Back to Pereyaslavl - this "y" comes from transcription of Belarusian or Ukrainian name? I have seen ukrainian name with "i".

Both. It is often used in English for Eastern Slavic “i” and “j”.

 

[unmerged(5145)]

(Poland-Lithuania map)

If it's not too late to move province borders, I'd recommend making some slight adjustments in order to make certain province adjacencies (or non-adjacencies) more obvious.

Chelmno - Warsaw. If Chelmno (536) is supposed to be adjacent to Warsaw (538), give a little chunk of Mazovia (537) to Chelmno to make the adjacency more obvious.

Podlasia (541) and Navagradak (544). Same issue.

Volynia (546) and Podolia (527)

There's also some potentially hard-to-see adjacencies in teh Sudeten-Silesia-Moravia-Opole area and the Marchfeld-Pressburg area, but that's out of the scope of this map.

I am concerned that when the game engine overlays colored borders over the borders on this map (to show national boundaries, for example), it is possible that some of these subtle adjacencies and near-but-not-quite-adjacencies could be obscured.

 

[zdlugasz]

If it's not too late to move province borders, I'd recommend making some slight adjustments in order to make certain province adjacencies (or non-adjacencies) more obvious.

Chelmno - Warsaw. If Chelmno (536) is supposed to be adjacent to Warsaw (538), give a little chunk of Mazovia (537) to Chelmno to make the adjacency more obvious.

Podlasia (541) and Navagradak (544). Same issue.

Volynia (546) and Podolia (527)

IMO Chemno is too big anyway looking into my historical atlas should not be adjacent to Warsaw at all. (One my question was not answered: is it possible to do veritcal split instead of horizontal oe Masovia and Warsaw?)

Volynia should be adjacent to Podolia and as I have stated before Volynia should be bigger on east.

Podlasia and Navahradak historically were connected but connection was even smaller than on AGCEEP map, almost "point" on maps. But from visibility point of view I agree.

 

[zdlugasz]

I have updated my proposal and posted preliminary propsal concerning province.csv data look here

Any comments regarding names/goods and proposals of internal tax/MP shifting are welcomed.

 

[Herr Doctor]

If I could suggest some?..

Kiev should probably produce grain as the rest of the region I hardly could recall when it was major iron producing center.

Lwow is better to produce Salt: Lacko, Stara Sol, Drohobycz, Stebnik, Stryj, Bolechow, Dolina major mines which were working since the medieval times.

Krakow (Malopolska) is also should produce Salt (famous Wieliczka and Bochnia since the Medieval) or clothes (the city and towns in the region).

In fact in MyMap Opole (Oppeln) produces mineral (famous mineral mines in the region).

Sieradz and Cujavia regions are famous for the grain production oriented on import. I really do not know any major salt mines in Cujavia to replace the grain for which it was famous in the 16th century.

Pomerelia should produce grain IMO. Much more sense really (much as Sieradz and Cujavia).

Warmia is better to produce cloth (Malbork and Elbing textile centers since the 15th century). The grain from Warmia region was not really valuable commodity.

Warsaw is better to produce cloth too. In fact it became important textiles producer only from the 16th century, but as soon as you cannot change resources in EUII, it is better to allow it to start with it (as there are already too many grains provinces).

Sandomierz region was the most important iron-specialized (hutnictwo) region of the Crown. It surely should produce this commodity.

Polostk should produce NAVS. It never produced any kinds of marketable metal (it is mistake from vanilla). Same story with Chernigov (better grain).

Regarding base taxes and manpower, if it could be possible I would make Troki 6 base tax, Volynia 4 base tax and 3 manpower, Minsk 5 base tax, Polotsk 3 manpower, Smolensk 4 manpower, Pereyaslavl 4 base tax. So, there are 8 base tax and 5 manpower to use in more populated western regions: raise Navahradak to 7 base tax and 5 manpower, and Polesia to 6 and 5 manpower.

 

[zdlugasz]

Krakow (Malopolska) is also should produce Salt (famous Wieliczka and Bochnia since the Medieval) or clothes (the city and towns in the region).

Near Krakow were major mining centers of Poland (Olkusz and others). Lead, sliver and other minerals were mined. (especially lead in large quantities).

I really do not know any major salt mines in Cujavia to replace the grain for which it was famous in the 16th century.

There are now, but it is possible that they did not exist at that time. I have to check.

 

[Herr Doctor]

Near Krakow were major mining centers of Poland (Olkusz and others). Lead, sliver and other minerals were mined. (especially lead in large quantities).

Yeah, I know. However it should be mineral (connected with mining) in this case not iron (more connected with production and manufacturing)

 

[zdlugasz]

Yeah, I know. However it should be mineral (connected with mining) in this case not iron (more connected with production and manufacturing)

Krakow:
There is also zinc. All three were mined since XIII century.

Zinc and lead ores are mined (together). Silver is mined. Zinc is used to produce bronze -> cannons. Lead is used for ammunition. And metal provinces are designed for weapon manufacturies.

But regarding goods salt is also good (Wieliczka and Bochnia) and probably more income was obtained from salt than from other mining.
I checked Kujawy (Kuyavia) and exploatation of salt started during Piasts but was not really extensive untill XVIIIth century so I will change to Grain. On vanille map Wielkopolska produces Clothes, so I propose to give them to Sieradz.
Sieradz (in XV and XVIIth century) had 12 guilds, among them 3 connected with clothes (of tailors, furriers and fabric/clothes). City was imortant trade center, mediating between Lesser Poland and Greater Poland, Masovia, Ruthenia nad Silesia.



And Podlasia? Right now we have 4 provinces producing NAVS. I would change goods in Minsk. Any proposal?


I did remove 2 tax from Volynia, but I think that is all for now - I do not recall Volynia described as poor area.
More fair would be removal of tax from Kiev (it is very small area)
After that I moved 1 tax from Kiev to Volynia


Also tax for Podlasia - after Polish colonization it was densely populated (over 20 persons/square km) and I though rather rich region.

 

[Herr Doctor]

But regarding goods salt is also good (Wieliczka and Bochnia) and probably more income was obtained from salt than from other mining.

Was in Wieliczka year ago btw – quite an amazing place really.

I checked Kujawy (Kuyavia) and exploatation of salt started during Piasts but was not really extensive untill XVIIIth century so I will change to Grain. On vanille map Wielkopolska produces Clothes, so I propose to give them to Sieradz.

Sieradz (in XV and XVIIth century) had 12 guilds, among them 3 connected with clothes (of tailors, furriers and fabric/clothes). City was imortant trade center, mediating between Lesser Poland and Greater Poland, Masovia, Ruthenia nad Silesia.

Naturally, Sieradz as many other big towns of the crown had quite considerable number of the guilds, but the province (not only a city itself) was not really important textiles producing center. I could recall only also small Szadek as more or less considerable textile guilds center here, but nothing else. It became important textile center only in the first half of the 19th century (the colossal for Central-Eastern Europe and especially Poland industrial infrastructure of Lodź and the towns around). Before it the main commodities of the province traditionally were grains and metal from Częstochowa iron fields (Zagłębie Częstochowskie). So, if you just do not want to add more useless grain provinces better add metal.

And Podlasia? Right now we have 4 provinces producing NAVS. I would change goods in Minsk. Any proposal?

It could be only grains or navs. We fixed this problem in MyMap with additional Linen (to Cotton) and Honey (merging Coffee and Tea) commodities which made Baltic trade and production in Eastern and Northern Europe profitable as it was really. Doubt that this would be ever done in AGCEEP.

I did remove 2 tax from Volynia, but I think that is all for now - I do not recall Volynia described as poor area.
More fair would be removal of tax from Kiev (it is very small area)
After that I moved 1 tax from Kiev to Volynia

I do not say that Volynia should be poor, but 5 base tax is quite normal, and Brest voivodship was much more richer (mostly thanks to the rich soils in its western parts and very important big trade cities: Brest, Pinsk, Turau, Biala, Kobryn and a bit smaller – Davydharadok etc). So, I think Polesia should be 7 base tax and Navahradak 6 (make Velikie Louki 5 base tax – it is really not a rich region).

Also tax for Podlasia - after Polish colonization it was densely populated (over 20 persons/square km) and I though rather rich region.

I think it is better to represent this with events (for example about the Polish colonization as well as the Dutch – famous Podlasian and Brest “Holendrzy”).

Also Opole should be defiantly minerals (not metal): there are ores, tin, silver. I think it is much more important than iron for the province.

And if you think that Eastern Europe is overstuffed with these “grain” and "navs" provinces you could change Troki to the cloth: Hrodno was one of the most important regional trade centers with well-developed textile guilds (the reason why there were built many textile manufactories in late 18th century – during Tyzengauz’ reforms). Troki and Kounia (Kaunas) also had textile guilds.