Put North Africa in the European continent

[TheDarkMaster]

With the new changes to Wasteland in Northern Africa, now would be an excellent time to move the whole of Northern Africa into the European continent for the purposes of calculating overseas penalties. It doesn't make sense for the two sides of the Mediterranean to be distant overseas, while Lisbon and Constantinople are not distant overseas.

I'd suggest cutting things off at the two new unsettled passages into West Africa. As for Egypt, have all of the Mamlukes starting territories in Europe, except for the provinces that boarder on the Red Sea. I suggest putting the Red sea provinces, and most of East Africa into the Asian continent, so that the overseas treatment there is more sensible as well.

Finally, I suggest that the East coast of the med be put in the European continent as well, ideally all provinces West of the Caspian Sea should be in the European continent, cut off by a line drawn between the sea and the new Northern wasteland in Arabia. To the West of this line is the European continent, and to the East is the Asian continent.

This will lead to overseas penalties being avoided in places where it simply does not make sense for them to be in place, and avoids situations where some large nations like the Ottomans in later start dates can end up with large parts of their nation becoming distant overseas by cutting them in half, removing their direct land connection. It also ties North Africa closer to Europe, when it historically has been quite strongly tied to it through things like the Roman Empire.

 

[Haccoude]

My only suggestion, is that maybe it would be better to create a new "continent" centered around the Mediterranean. But either of the two is a good suggestion.

 

[ahyangyi]

My suggestion would be using distance and connectivity and completely refrain from the concept of "continents".

 

[TheDarkMaster]

My suggestion would be using distance and connectivity and completely refrain from the concept of "continents".

This works too. In this case, a range for heartlands which can go down to 0 autonomy, close range that can go down to 25% autonomy, then 50% autonomy, and anything more distant having a min 75% autonomy.

Distance from old world to new world is always 75% min.

 

[Gustav91]

Yes it belongs to the old world! It's common history add Levant and North Africa to Europe!

 

[klingonadmiral]

Just make distant overseas ignore inland seas. This would increase the connectivity of Europe and Northern Africa, and of Arabia/Persia and Eastern Africa. Also make name placement ignore inland seas, if we're at it. (and there should maybe be a few more inland seas as well)

 

[ahyangyi]

Here is the problem:

We want a Spain to treat Morocco as not distant overseas.
We want a Morocco which colonized that one uncolonized province in western Sahara treat west Africa as not distant overseas.
We want a Spain to treat west Africa as distant overseas.

which is why continent-based solution will never work.

 

[TheDarkMaster]

We want a Morocco which colonized that one uncolonized province in western Sahara treat west Africa as not distant overseas.

Well, under the current rules it wouldn't treat them as overseas unless it lost that province, since then it has a direct land connection with West Africa.

 

[Vedinu]

+1

 

[Seelensturm]

My suggestion would be using distance and connectivity and completely refrain from the concept of "continents".

This!

 

[Gustav91]

Here is the problem:

We want a Spain to treat Morocco as not distant overseas.
We want a Morocco which colonized that one uncolonized province in western Sahara treat west Africa as not distant overseas.
We want a Spain to treat west Africa as distant overseas.

which is why continent-based solution will never work.

I wouldn't have a problem if Morocco treated West Africa as overseas....
Better than treating Iberia as overseas.

 

[grommile]

Well, under the current rules it wouldn't treat them as overseas unless it lost that province, since then it has a direct land connection with West Africa.

What? Arguin has no direct land connection to the Maghreb and no direct land connection to sub-Saharan Africa.

 

[TheDarkMaster]

What? Arguin has no direct land connection to the Maghreb and no direct land connection to sub-Saharan Africa.

I thought we were talking about the passage provinces that go through the Sahara? If not, I'd say that Morocco being overseas from West Africa is perfectly fine, as Gustav said.

 

[IIWW]

I thought we were talking about the passage provinces that go through the Sahara? If not, I'd say that Morocco being overseas from West Africa is perfectly fine, as Gustav said.

Thats right, Sahara isn't easier to get through than sea (well, it's much harder), so it would be more reasonable place to divide the continents.

+1

 

[Wizzington]

I'm not terribly happy with how overseas works right now... but this is not how to solve it. Would prefer some ideas on how overseas could be reworked in a sensible way (ie, not something fiddly and abusable like distance from capital).

 

[TheDarkMaster]

I'm not terribly happy with how overseas works right now... but this is not how to solve it. Would prefer some ideas on how overseas could be reworked in a sensible way (ie, not something fiddly and abusable like distance from capital).

This suggestion is more of a patch fix to solve a more difficult problem. Most of the current issues with the overseas penalties in the game can be resolved with this, but I can understand if you want to fix the basic issue.

Well, maybe we should look at this from another perspective? What stuff shouldn't be distant overseas, what stuff should be? Then see how we can calculate this.

Here is one possible suggestion:
-Find the shortest path from your capital to the province. You can only go through up to 10-20 provinces you don't own.
-If that path crosses two/three or more ocean spaces, it is distant overseas.
-If that path crosses five/six or more sea/coastal spaces, it is distant overseas.
-Prefer routes that avoid the overseas penalty if possible.

The biggest problem that I can possibly see with this calculation is it being more resource intensive then the current continent/distance system. However, if that's only calculated when the province changes owner or the capital is moved, it shouldn't be that bad.

 

[mudcrabmerchant]

I have an idea:

Put in an adjacency property for continents. Remove overseas penalties for adjacent continents. Add in overseas penalties for all non-adjacent continents, regardless of land connection.

Then, divide up the world into different continents than we have now (might be better renamed to super regions). I'd propose something like the following:



EDIT: I think it might be better to merge Southern and Northern Europe here, and put Egypt and the coast of the Levant into North Africa. That way, any Europeans can own any land along the Mediterranean without penalty. And perhaps West Africa should be delinked from North Africa, so that Levantines can't own Timbuktu without penalty. That means Moroccans can't either, but how much continuous, direct control were they historically able to project across the Sahara?

EDITEDIT: As for abusability... you may get the opportunity for weird stuff around border regions. If Wallachia moves their capital one province south, they can now rule North Africa with no penalties. But if they are going to be conquering so far out of their home region that capital change matters, they will gain so much land in the intervening region that they will probably want to move their capital to a more natural spot- in this case, somewhere like Constantinople or Italy, which are capital changes that make perfect sense. The cases where major gameplay effects are gained by cheesily moving your capital one province over should be rare.

 

[keytium]

I have an idea:

Put in an adjacency property for continents. Remove overseas penalties for adjacent continents. Add in overseas penalties for all non-adjacent continents, regardless of land connection.

Then, divide up the world into different continents (might be better renamed to super regions). I'd propose something like the following:

View attachment 118520

EDIT: I think it might be better to merge Southern and Northern Europe here, and put Egypt and the coast of the Levant into North Africa. That way, any Europeans can own any land along the Mediterranean without penalty. And perhaps West Africa should be delinked from North Africa, so that Levantines can't own Timbuktu without penalty. That means Moroccans can't either, but how much continuous, direct control were they historically able to project across the Sahara?

This is an amazing idea. The areas might need a little tweaking (I would have Indonesia as a separate region from mainland indochina on the basis that Bali should be distant over seas for Gujarat and Tasmania should be distant overseas for Ayutthaya, but that is a minor objection), but the principle is sound. Its basically the current system, but with an added grace zone.

 

[mudcrabmerchant]

This is an amazing idea. The areas might need a little tweaking (I would have Indonesia as a separate region from mainland indochina on the basis that Bali should be distant over seas for Gujarat and Tasmania should be distant overseas for Ayutthaya, but that is a minor objection), but the principle is sound. Its basically the current system, but with an added grace zone.

Personally, I would like to divide up zones more, and cause more areas to be distant overseas, but that (hopefully) would be easy to mod if this system is put in place, and for a general EUIV patch, I think there would be a lot of pissed off people if Colombia was distant overseas for Buenos Aires, or if you split up some of the Asian zones. Better to default toward more linkage when in doubt.

 

[TheDarkMaster]

I have an idea:

Put in an adjacency property for continents. Remove overseas penalties for adjacent continents. Add in overseas penalties for all non-adjacent continents, regardless of land connection.

Then, divide up the world into different continents (might be better renamed to super regions). I'd propose something like the following:

View attachment 118520

EDIT: I think it might be better to merge Southern and Northern Europe here, and put Egypt and the coast of the Levant into North Africa. That way, any Europeans can own any land along the Mediterranean without penalty. And perhaps West Africa should be delinked from North Africa, so that Levantines can't own Timbuktu without penalty. That means Moroccans can't either, but how much continuous, direct control were they historically able to project across the Sahara?

Put simply, having your capital in one region gives you no overseas penalties in that region and any region adjacent to it. On your original region map, this would mean that if your capital is in the Middle East, you can hold territory in South Europe, North Africa, East Africa, Eastern Europe, Western Asia, and India without penalty. Yeah, that's a pretty simple model that seems fairly reasonable to me.

The exact breakdown of where the regions should be remains for debate, as well as whether or not having a direct land connection should wave the limit.