• 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.
Galleblære said:
1) Like I've said a half dozen times, increase the movement times between and to Kola and Finnmark. That will kill off any 100k invasion army! ;)

2) I am saying that a "non-upgraded to city" Finnmark will kill off a lot more men than an upgraded Finnmark.

3) That's interesting. So you don't see the problems of totally different styles or "rules" for placing PTI for different regions of the new EU2 map. Interesting indeed! :D Does this apply to other aspects in your life as well? ;)

1) Can be done, but that means that ALL movement to and from Finnmark and Kola will be delayed for the same time...

2) Will it? Tell me how... :)

3) Is that a threat? Are you gonna surround my computer with PTI so I can't nag at you? :rolleyes:
And no, I don't see a problem with that as long as the decisions are based on a sound and reasonable discussion... :D
 
What people seem to be getting at with the river question is if there are to be river crossing penalties between:
Perm-Viatka;
Vologda-Kazan;
Luki-Kaluga;
Tula-Ryazan.

And if those penalties are there, will that be clear for someone playing on this map?

And that river flowing through the Galizien province serves no purpose.
 
Gwalcmai said:
What people seem to be getting at with the river question is if there are to be river crossing penalties between:
Perm-Viatka;
Vologda-Kazan;
Luki-Kaluga;
Tula-Ryazan.

What I think:
Yes
No
Yes
No
That's what seems best to me, graphics would have to be changed to accomodate of course.
 
anti_strunt said:
What I think:
Yes
No
Yes
No
That's what seems best to me, graphics would have to be changed to accomodate of course.

I agree, provided of course that all rivers are needed... :rolleyes:
 
Hallsten said:
1) Can be done, but that means that ALL movement to and from Finnmark and Kola will be delayed for the same time...

2) Will it? Tell me how... :)

3) Is that a threat? Are you gonna surround my computer with PTI so I can't nag at you? :rolleyes:
And no, I don't see a problem with that as long as the decisions are based on a sound and reasonable discussion... :D

1) Exacly. So the AI will take the "long" route when wanting to invade Norway. And players will want to avoid attacking from that direction.

2) Well, the support limit goes up as a city is colonised, and specially if you construct a fort. So if you leave Finnmark "as is", it will kill off a lot more men than if you use cash to upgrade it. So in a way, the player could be encouraged to develop Finnmark more historically slowly.

3) No, not a threat, just a statement of surprise, since you stated earlier the same concern for no "overall" plan.
 
Galleblære said:
1) Exacly. So the AI will take the "long" route when wanting to invade Norway. And players will want to avoid attacking from that direction.

2) Well, the support limit goes up as a city is colonised, and specially if you construct a fort. So if you leave Finnmark "as is", it will kill off a lot more men than if you use cash to upgrade it. So in a way, the player could be encouraged to develop Finnmark more historically slowly.

3) No, not a threat, just a statement of surprise, since you stated earlier the same concern for no "overall" plan.

Could work, but it's not that easy to apply mapwide...

Only the limit for yourself, not for your enemy. Putting 10000 friendly men in a fortified city in Finnmark is unhistorical enough, but it's a lot worse with 10000 enemies...

There's a grave need for a general plan on map-design, yes. But regarding PTI I don't think so. Completely different thing IMHO...
 
Galleblære said:
2) Well, the support limit goes up as a city is colonised, and specially if you construct a fort. So if you leave Finnmark "as is", it will kill off a lot more men than if you use cash to upgrade it. So in a way, the player could be encouraged to develop Finnmark more historically slowly.

Actually, I would upgrade Finnmark as quickly as possible and build a gigantic fort there. No AI-army would survive the Never-Ending Winter Siege of Doom!
 
anti_strunt said:
Actually, I would upgrade Finnmark as quickly as possible and build a gigantic fort there. No AI-army would survive the Never-Ending Winter Siege of Doom!

That's what I do as Russia :), but I think you can't build big forts in low value provinces.
 
New update

RUSSIA.gif


Ok, now better?
 
To Josip.

That's fine. I don't see it quite long, but from first sight - it is almost perfect.

Couple of small things - anyway. Very long Rivers in Smolensk area.

Oka River - main feature of Russian plain must be - between Tula and Kaluga - not to west from Kaluga anyway.
Very big Briansk province. It mustn't have border with Tula at all. In real map we've got rather big Orel Province - between Tula, Kaluga, Kursk and Briansk provinces of reality. If we need this province - it is a big question (I would vote for it inclusion), but if we wouldn't - this land must be part of Kursk and Tula - due to their belonging to the same "Black-soiled" Russia Region. Then this quite fertile land must share rather high tax value - equal to Kursk or Tula, - not to swampy Briansk province, which must receive quite shitty numbers.
It means:
1) You must divide your Briansk province to half - anyway. Western part of it will be Briansk (swampy land with shitty numbers), eastern part - Orel province or parts of Kursk and Tula provinces.
2) Oka River must go to south cutting Tula from Kaluga (and Briansk - if you drop Orel) completely.
In case of Orel province inclusion - Oka River must cut Orel from Kaluga and Briansk as well.
It means - Moscow, Kaluga and Briansk on one bank of Oka River.
Ryazan, Tula and Orel (if included) on other bank of Oka River.
In start of Kursk province (just under Orel - if included, or under Tula if Orel isn't included) - Oka River disappears.

Velikie Luki of this map is actually part of modern Smolensk province and there isn't big rivers around, but there is a lot of swamps in area. I'm not sure if we need river between Smolensk and Luki, but this point is debatable.

Eastern hand of Don River of your map (which divide Tambov-Voronezh from Sarai-Saratow) is excessive - kill it.
We are missing Lipezk province of actual map, but its' inclusion is debatable, then its land would be divide between Tambov and Voronezh, but I'm not sure if Voronezh province would make common border with Ryazan province - any way. In actual map we've got ideal "diamond"-structure here - with
Ryazan as northern point of diamond, Voronezh - southern tip of structure and Lipezk and Tambom - making middle pair. Something like that:
Ryazan
Lipezk/Tambov
Voronezh.
I'm not sure if we need Lipezk province inclusion (but it would be rather nice idea), but idea of Ryazan and Voronezh as close neighbors - is quite revolting for my sense of history (Forest-filled Lipezk province by its climate and tax value is close cousin to Forest-partially filled Tambov province - not to steppe-like Voronezh anyway). It means - if we would drop Lipezk, then border between Tambow and Voronezh must be in latitudal direction, not in meridional. Do you see?
By the way - please, make Voronezh much bigger, by cutting a bit huge Sarai province. Hint: Voronezh and Saratow MUST be close neighbors.
In Russian chronicles Voronezh is used to have common name as "Southern shield" - i.e. rather long barrier in latitudal direction, which used to stop any Crimean tartar incursions. In this chart it isn't "shield", but rather - "spear" of some sort. Do you see? ;)
By the way - in WWII times - ancient fortresses of "Voronezh province" became to be "natural" defense line, held by Soviet troops in German 1942 assault. Whole local front, which kept central Russia from possible German advance from South was named as "Voronezh' Front". Later - the same "Voronezh Front" name was applied to southern face of Soviet troops in Kursk battle - with the same idea - "Voronezh Front/Voronezh Fortress Line" is SOUTHERN line of defence for Russia.
Then Voronezh Province thing must be some sausage-like thing in latitudal direction, which must keeping all Tartars (from Sarai for example ;), or Poles-Lithuanians (Ukrainians) from other side of Don River - to South from "Voronezh Front/Line of Fortresses".
This thing was southernmost line on the Earth, which Russians traditionally (till XVII century - anyway) considered to name as "Mother Russia". ;)
All other lands - like Kharkov surrounding / Slobodshchina, or Lower Don/Kouban Valleys / Cossack lands, or lands in Lower Volga Valley was considered as "not quite Russian lands". For example - in WWII terms - "Voronezh Front" was southernmost group of Armies which received "Russian common name", but more southern Fronts start to receive names - like "Steppe Front", because - there wasn't another "Ancient Russian city" to south from Voronezh.
Do you see?

Sincerely yours, Bash
 
Josip said:
<map>

Ok, now better?

This is what I mean with Finland and Österbotten, it's a little too far south now. That's my bad...:
finland1mf.jpg

Looking better by the day though.. :)
 
To Josip:

Has got e-mail from friend, which found out - you overdue my "Voronezh province" request a bit.

I can't see Forum myself, but it seems "Voronezh province" now is reaching Volga Valley with Saratow province is cut from Sarai province completely.
It's rather funny idea and my friend asked me - if I suggested this hilarious thing? No, I'm definitely not.

I stated "Voronezh" was Russian south shield, which divided Russian lands from southern steppe wilderness. Period.
Problem is - "Saratow" name is "russified" ancient turkish name - "Saraj-tau" with direct meaning "Mountainous nomad/shifting capital" (compare with ancient name of Circassian region - "Besh-Tau" (must be translated as Five Mountains / modern russian name - "Pjatigorsk" - with the same meaning) or with name of Altai (Ala-Tau) Mountains.)
In other words you placed Voronezh-"Russian southern shield" in more southern region then province with definite turkish prefix "SARAJ-tau" in its name. ;) Do you realize - all funny meanings of this idea?
I've stated - Voronezh must be direct close neighbor of Saratow, but I don't speak - Voronezh is southern Saratow' neighbor. It's - WESTERN Saratow neighbor.
By the way - Saratow was quite empty land - quite long. Local soils is almost pure limestones/chalkstones - then nomads couldn't keep a lot of sheep flocks in these rather non-hospitable lands. Alas, Russians as rather dedicated grain-raisers couldn't use this land as well.
Then - in rather late time of Russian history "Saratow" region was rather empty - no-man zone - between grain-raising "core-Russia" and more southern "lamb-raising" steppe zone. It means - any Muslim invader (potentially) could penetrate Russian defense line in Voronezh region through Saratow broken hilly landschafts and came into rather defense-less Tambow or more northern lands.
Then Russian Emperors traditionally asked anyone to fill in this "natural gap" in "Russian ranks". At last in Ekaterine II the Great times - a lot of Hessian Germans were placed in this region and transform it into "Volga Germany" or "heaven on earth" land. Secret was - Germans didn't raise grain in Russian manner or livestock in nomadic manner. They raised vegetables, fruits, cherries and all other "lime-affinited" cultures. Later (due to large-scale phosphate usage from end of XIX century and growing "acidisation" of local soils) this land became to be grain-raisers as well.
More then that "Volga Germans" created local limestone-build complex, - then all houses in Volga Valley in whole timespan of XIX century (and start of XX century) were built from "white-stones" of Saratow province by local German-originated business groups.

By the way - due to erosion processes in limestones Volga Valley has in this region rather - canyon-like appearance. It's not Colorado River Valley, but any idea of crossing Volga in Saratow vicinity till modern times was quite laughable idea - riverbanks is quite steep in this region. For examople, Germans in WWII times never had any trace of idea to came to Volga in "Volga Germany" - Saratow region, because it would be definite dead/stump-end for any offensive. I've mean - it would be advisable to make Volga-River presentation in Saratow region a bit more wide - for underlying inability for anyone to cross from one bank of this river to other bank in game time-span (or making it in rather hard way) - just imagine some medieval Army crossing Colorado River ;).

Sincerely yours, Bash
 
Bash said:
To Josip:

Has got e-mail from friend, which found out - you overdue my "Voronezh province" request a bit.

I can't see Forum myself, but it seems "Voronezh province" now is reaching Volga Valley with Saratow province is cut from Sarai province completely.
It's rather funny idea and my friend asked me - if I suggested this hilarious thing? No, I'm definitely not.

<snip>

OK fine, but you should really make links to web source maps, if you can't explain something with words...

Hallsten is this better?
RUSSIA.gif
 
Josip said:
OK fine, but you should really make links to web source maps, if you can't explain something with words...

Hallsten is this better?
<map>

Sure is, but could you make Kexholm lean a little less? Look at my map for reference, it's pretty accurate... :)
 
You really have to do something about northern Georgia and "Kuban" province.

Cut the western part off of Kuban province and call it Taman. Merge the eastern half with northern "Georgia" province and call this Abkhazia.
Rename "Georgia" province to "Imereti"
 
It would be nice if Crimea was actually Crimea too, its just confusing otherwise. Orenburg isn't a particularly good name either since it was founded sometime around 1735.
 
Last edited:
Don't think we need something as pitiful as Taman. Orenburg may be founded late, but got quite important from then on. There is barely a better name for it. Is Abkhazia really needed? They did nothing outside of their borders and the only excuse for their existence would be the fact that Russia swallowed it some time before Imereti. Include them in a Kolkhis/Imereti/west Georgia province.

Now, let's come to discussing the most recent map, which is close to perfect, but not perfect yet.

1. Josip, as we say in Russia, dropped the Baby with the water, by deleting Beloozero (the small round lake north of Rybinsk.vdkhr.) with Rybinskoe vodokhranilishe. It would be nice if you put it back.

2. Unless you people have noticed, Tver borders Lithuania with Smolensk province, which it probably shouldn't. What do we do about it?

3. Tula and Kaluga stretch awfully far south, while, in fact, they were border forts and the lands south of these towns belonged to LIT for the bulk of 15th century. Can we replace Tula and Kaluga with one Tula stripe, while their southern parts would be given to Kursk or Orel?
 
...and Smolensk is misspelled as 'Somlensk', I notice..
 
Erm... what?

You and I must be reading different histories and atlases, because I was under the distinct impression that Taman was the only significant settled area in the whole region.

The fact that you named Imereti an anachronism like Kolchis somewhat lowers your credibility in this area :p