Question to devs about Eastern European provinces in post-AoW

[Zak Preston]

This isn't a race you also pick random things and throw at me out of nothing

you have problems with reading what you wrote as-well

And a final move, I'll call it "fatality":
In various researches I've provided here generic Ukrainian territories counted 3.5-5 millions people in total during XVII century. Consider Khmelnytsky's National Liberation war and compare to Poles population provided a few posts before.

This is an English language forum

 

[olm]

Imo Eastern Europe (from Finland all the way down to Balkans) definitely needs more provinces but this thread just cant stick to that issue without constantly going offtopic.

 

[jrgen3]

Ok, I'll fix it )

What do you mean? How can you fix that?

Back on topic: I am not against Eastern Europe getting more provinces, but there are only a very few places I am against adding provinces in (Norway being one of them), so that might not count as much. However, I am more for reshaping current provinces and then see if we need more provinces.

Edit: Question answered before I posted...

 

[Zak Preston]

In the same vein of "To be honest" most Russian (or Russian fan) posts haven't helped much either.
1. He's a constructive (Ukrainian) nationalist.
2. Most of the stuff he's proposing doesn't affect Russia in any way.
So I'd actually blame the other side of the barricade for turning this topic into a pissing contest by a lot of negative posts without much substance to them.

Anyway, this is off topic, maybe we can salvage this topic - even though I doubt it.

Thanks for support again =)

1. Could you please define what makes you (and maybe others) think I'm a nationalist? =)
2. Actually I'm proposing changes to the whole Eastern Europe, not only Ukraine or Belarus. BTW generic Russian regions in Muscovy and Novgorod could get more tweaks too, because their provinces are also enormous and are lacking compared to AoW standards. But I don't want to make any researches myself thanks to rus trolls that have already flooded a few of my topics.

 

[Seelmeister]

Numerous posts deleted for being off topic, trolling or insulting other members.

Folks, its pretty straight forward. If you think someone is being insulting or trolling, let a mod know. If you respond in kind, you are also breaking the forums rules and this will result in disciplinary action being taken against you as well.

Insulting other members is against the forum rules, there is no exception to this.

If you want to disagree with someone, do so respectfully. If you can't be respectful, then do not post.

 

[oblio-]

Thanks for support again =)

1. Could you please define what makes you (and maybe others) think I'm a nationalist? =)
2. Actually I'm proposing changes to the whole Eastern Europe, not only Ukraine or Belarus. BTW generic Russian regions in Muscovy and Novgorod could get more tweaks too, because their provinces are also enormous and are lacking compared to AoW standards.

1. Nationalist is the wrong word, but I see it's thrown around a lot over here. Before joining the forum I had used "railroaded" and "nationalist" something like 50 times in my life at most.
The correct word is "patriot": one who loves his or her country and supports its authority and interests.
Versus "nationalist"/"nationalism": a feeling that people have of being loyal to and proud of their country often with the belief that it is better and more important than other countries.

As long as you have good arguments for what you're asking, I see no reason why you shouldn't lobby why a specific part of the game (incidentally involving your home country) shouldn't be improved. After all these are just suggestions and it's up to the devs to pick them and implement them. As far as I'm concerned most complaints in these topics are about sour grapes. Or downright nationalism from another country against your country - with the definition I pasted above.

2. I think that things are exacerbated by the current civil war in Ukraine. After all, real life affects even games
Your requests are drowned out by the changes to Ukraine, many people don't get past those. If this topic is cleaned up, who knows, maybe some things will end up in the game?

Edit: I see that the topic has been cleaned up. Cool!

 

[panionios]

No. People are already complaining (not me) about performance issues due to the addition of too many provinces. And they have already added many provinces in that part of the world.

I mean, how much is enough?


P.S. Please give Greece a gazillion new provinces. Thanks!

 

[petertel123]

Muscovy was not a vassal of the Golden Horde, but it paid tribute. This should be modelled by early game events where Muscovy has the choice of paying ducats or being invaded by the Golden Horde, occurring every few years.

well, in the current situation that would just lead to muscovy owning the golden horde every few years, not very different from how it is now

 

[oblio-]

No. People are already complaining (not me) about performance issues due to the addition of too many provinces. And they have already added many provinces in that part of the world.

I mean, how much is enough?


P.S. Please give Greece a gazillion new provinces. Thanks!

Most of the people are actually complaining about the compressed save files, and they're fixing that in 1.8.1.
Another group of people is complaining about multiplayer desync.
I don't see many people complaining anymore about speed.

 

[jrgen3]

No. People are already complaining (not me) about performance issues due to the addition of too many provinces. And they have already added many provinces in that part of the world.

I mean, how much is enough?

The province increase is definitely not alone in making the game go slower. It is also caused by all the new tags (tags cause a lot more slowdown than provinces), trade nodes (which cause even more slowdown than new tags), new mechanics etc. Adding 10 provinces to Eastern Europe would have no measurable effect on performance.

 

[Zak Preston]

A few of my posts containing data on PLC population in EU4 period have been deleted by moderator because they contained answers to trolls.
1. PLC's population according to Wiki:

The population of the Commonwealth of both nations was never overwhelmingly either Roman Catholic or Polish. This resulted from Poland's possession of Ukraine and federation with Lithuania; in both these countries ethnic Poles were a distinct minority. The Commonwealth comprised primarily three nations: Poles, Lithuanians, and Ukrainians and Belarusians (the latter two usually referred to together as Ruthenians). Shortly after the Union of Lublin (1569), at the turn of the 16th to 17th century, the Commonwealth population was around 7 million, with a rough breakdown of 4.5m Poles, 0.75m Lithuanians, 0.7m Jews and 2m Ruthenians.[9] In 1618, after the Truce of Deulino the Commonwealth population increased together with its territory, reaching 12 millions that could be roughly divided into: Poles - 4.5m, Ukrainians - 3.5m, Belarusians - 1.5m, Lithuanians - 0.75m, Prussians - 0.75m, Jews - 0.5m, Livionians - 0.5m; at that time nobility formed 10% and burghers, 15%.[10] Population losses of 1648-1667 are estimated at 4m.[10] Coupled with further population and territorial losses, in 1717 Commonwealth population had fallen to 9m, roughly 4.5m Poles, 1.5m Ukrainians, 1.2m Belarusians, 0.8m Lithuanians, 0.5m Jews, 0.5m others[10] The urban population was hit hard, falling to below 10%.[11]

Proving that PLC was quite a rich and populous state in EU4 timeline.

2. Khmelnytsky's National Liberation War (or Uprising, depending on side you prefer ) of XVII century had battles with 100-300k people on each side (sources: Eng, Pol, Ukr) that indicates about huge manpower resources both sides of conflict operated (and in EU4 terms manpower is calculated from BT, if I recall correctly).

3. There are Ukrainian researches on this matter which tend to show a bit higher numbers of population in Ruthenian\Ukrainian lands: around 4-5 millions at the beginning of XVII century and 2.5-3.5 millions at the end of XVII century.

Note that actual population could vary greatly from posted numbers. Also, IMHO, adding new provinces in Eastern European region shouldn't change overall BT much in terms of balance and historical issues.

 

[nicechinos]

A few of my posts containing data on PLC population in EU4 period have been deleted by moderator because they contained answers to trolls.
1. PLC's population according to Wiki:


Proving that PLC was quite a rich and populous state in EU4 timeline.

It doesn't prove anything yet.
It is a comparative problem.
Italy, 13,000,000
Spain and Portugal, 10,000,000
France, 16,000,000, in its boundaries in 1600[2]
England and Wales, 4,500,000
Scotland and Ireland, 2,000,000
Netherlands, 3,000,000, including the Spanish Netherlands in 1600[3]
Denmark, 600,000
Sweden, Norway, and Finland: 1,400,000
Poland with Prussia: 3,000,000
Germany: 20,000,000, probably including most or all of the territory of the*Holy Roman Empire*outside Italy.[4]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_modern_demography
No earlier comparison but that is before the Thirty Years War so we could roll with it.

"at the turn of the 16th to 17th century, the Commonwealth population was around 7 million, with a rough breakdown of 4.5m Poles, 0.75m Lithuanians, 0.7m Jews and 2m Ruthenians."

The problem is that Lithuania's tax base is twice as high as Poland's at the start of the game. That probably makes little sense.

 

[oblio-]

The problem is that Lithuania's tax base is twice as high as Poland's at the start of the game. That probably makes little sense.

I'm not a historian, but weren't Belorussians and a lot of Poles actually living in Lithuania at the time? Those could actually tip the scales towards Lithuania actually having a larger population that Poland itself.

Just asking, I don't have any data for this.

 

[Zak Preston]

It doesn't prove anything yet.
It is a comparative problem.
Italy, 13,000,000
Spain and Portugal, 10,000,000
France, 16,000,000, in its boundaries in 1600[2]
England and Wales, 4,500,000
Scotland and Ireland, 2,000,000
Netherlands, 3,000,000, including the Spanish Netherlands in 1600[3]
Denmark, 600,000
Sweden, Norway, and Finland: 1,400,000
Poland with Prussia: 3,000,000
Germany: 20,000,000, probably including most or all of the territory of the*Holy Roman Empire*outside Italy.[4]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_modern_demography
No earlier comparison but that is before the Thirty Years War so we could roll with it.

"at the turn of the 16th to 17th century, the Commonwealth population was around 7 million, with a rough breakdown of 4.5m Poles, 0.75m Lithuanians, 0.7m Jews and 2m Ruthenians."

The problem is that Lithuania's tax base is twice as high as Poland's at the start of the game. That probably makes little sense.

In 1444 EU4 start Lithuania also has a lot of troubles with nationalists and zealots, which wasn't an issue until XVI century =)
I just wanted to state with provided numbers that Ruthenian and Belarussian region wasn't poor in XV century by any means. The most negative factors for pop growth were Tartar raids and Cossacks rebellions later.

 

[nicechinos]

In 1444 EU4 start Lithuania also has a lot of troubles with nationalists and zealots, which wasn't an issue until XVI century =)
I just wanted to state with provided numbers that Ruthenian and Belarussian region wasn't poor in XV century by any means. The most negative factors for pop growth were Tartar raids and Cossacks rebellions later.

It does say nothing about its wealth honestly, we only have comparable population numbers and I'm not sure that these particularly favor Lithuania/ Ruthenia in the context of Lithuania's EU4 already very favorable starting position.

 

[DevastatingTech]

In 1444 EU4 start Lithuania also has a lot of troubles with nationalists and zealots, which wasn't an issue until XVI century =)
I just wanted to state with provided numbers that Ruthenian and Belarussian region wasn't poor in XV century by any means. The most negative factors for pop growth were Tartar raids and Cossacks rebellions later.

Yes those provinces were poor as can't defend from Tartar 'raids'. Game is true.

 

[Zak Preston]

Yes those provinces were poor as can't defend from Tartar 'raids'. Game is true.

And who could, actually? Muscovy, Poland, Moldavia?
As a reaction to those raids Zaporozhian Sich was created, and they also raided Kaffa (largest slavemarket), Trebizond, Sinop and even Constantinople suburbs. So Ottomans were poor and couldn't defent themselves from raids too :sleep:

Someone here complained that Ruthenian provinces are too rich, you say they are poor... Dunno what to respond =)

It does say nothing about its wealth honestly, we only have comparable population numbers and I'm not sure that these particularly favor Lithuania/ Ruthenia in the context of Lithuania's EU4 already very favorable starting position.

Can't argue with the fact that hight population always turns to wealthy one, but this is merely one factor that at list disproofs that Ruthenian lands were uninhabited and utterly poor.

 

[WeissRaben]

A few of my posts containing data on PLC population in EU4 period have been deleted by moderator because they contained answers to trolls.
1. PLC's population according to Wiki:


Proving that PLC was quite a rich and populous state in EU4 timeline.

2. Khmelnytsky's National Liberation War (or Uprising, depending on side you prefer ) of XVII century had battles with 100-300k people on each side (sources: Eng, Pol, Ukr) that indicates about huge manpower resources both sides of conflict operated (and in EU4 terms manpower is calculated from BT, if I recall correctly).

3. There are Ukrainian researches on this matter which tend to show a bit higher numbers of population in Ruthenian\Ukrainian lands: around 4-5 millions at the beginning of XVII century and 2.5-3.5 millions at the end of XVII century.

Note that actual population could vary greatly from posted numbers. Also, IMHO, adding new provinces in Eastern European region shouldn't change overall BT much in terms of balance and historical issues.

It doesn't prove anything yet.
It is a comparative problem.
Italy, 13,000,000
Spain and Portugal, 10,000,000
France, 16,000,000, in its boundaries in 1600[2]
England and Wales, 4,500,000
Scotland and Ireland, 2,000,000
Netherlands, 3,000,000, including the Spanish Netherlands in 1600[3]
Denmark, 600,000
Sweden, Norway, and Finland: 1,400,000
Poland with Prussia: 3,000,000
Germany: 20,000,000, probably including most or all of the territory of the*Holy Roman Empire*outside Italy.[4]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_modern_demography
No earlier comparison but that is before the Thirty Years War so we could roll with it.

"at the turn of the 16th to 17th century, the Commonwealth population was around 7 million, with a rough breakdown of 4.5m Poles, 0.75m Lithuanians, 0.7m Jews and 2m Ruthenians."

The problem is that Lithuania's tax base is twice as high as Poland's at the start of the game. That probably makes little sense.

Adding to the sheer population numbers, I'll point out that the PLC at its greatest extent might have had 12 million inhabitants, but with a land area of 1.2 million square kilometers. To compare, France had half the land area; and Italy a sixth. Those numbers tell me of a large and populous, but still sparsely inhabited, country.

 

[Zak Preston]

Adding to the sheer population numbers, I'll point out that the PLC at its greatest extent might have had 12 million inhabitants, but with a land area of 1.2 million square kilometers. To compare, France had half the land area; and Italy a sixth. Those numbers tell me of a large and populous, but still sparsely inhabited, country.

What population did Central America, West Africa, West Coast of NA or Persia and Central Asia (with it's wastelands) have in XVI centuries? Yet they got much deserved province layout updates.
BTW I agree that Italy is vastly misrepresented in EU4 and needs a major province rehaul too. So does Balkans, IMHO.

 

[WeissRaben]

What population did Central America, West Africa, West Coast of NA or Persia and Central Asia (with it's wastelands) have in XVI centuries? Yet they got much deserved province layout updates.
BTW I agree that Italy is vastly misrepresented in EU4 and needs a major province rehaul too. So does Balkans, IMHO.

A lot of places in Europe do. Let's be honest: the best maps in Paradox history came from modders. It was true for Victoria II and it is true for the world overhaul of 1.8. At PDS they presumably have half a dozen pages of priorities, before "historically correct maps" show up. If they pull a 1.8 for Europe as well, call the modders and let them improve their European niche, the results will be nice to see.