Scenarios consistency

[unmerged(40707)]

Does it mean Raipur is wrong and should be removed from 1520?

About India which other names are wrong?

 

[Garbon]

Odisa is actually 560. 562 is Sambalpur, which is where Raipur (city) is in the province.csv. As a result, the Raipur entry can be removed as it is redundant.

489(Iraq) should be removed. I don't think Qizilbash is the name of a city, it is the name of a group of people that made up the Safavid Empire.


With regards to India in the 1648 scenario, what is our policy on city changes? I believe that Constantinople stays the same, no? If that's the case, then we should pull back all of the Indian changes as those changes are simply pointing out what cities became more important.

Rajputana (542): Ajmer (instead of Jodhpur)
Gujarat (547): Surat (instead of Cambay)
Maharashtra (550): Ahmadabad (instead of Pune)
Howrah (558): Hughli (instead of Gaur)
Hyderabad (566): Golconda
Bangalore (567): Bangalore (instead of Vijayangar)

 

[unmerged(40707)]

About 1520:
Selatan (699): Balikpapan - Source
Kalimantan (700): Samarinda - Source
Sulawesi (707): Palu - Source
Issas (754): Zeila - also defined in 1648 Source
Somalia (757): Bissasso - also defined in 1648 but location of the city should be reworked - Source and map and spelling should be Boosaaso (for Somali spelling)

1648:
Keren (753): Assab - Source
Afars (755): Barbera - Source and spelling should be Berbera
Mudugh (759): Obbia - Map
Mogadiscio (760): Muqadishu - Source and spelling should be Muqdisho in Somali (Muqadishu being Arabic)

I suggest to include all the names in province.csv (and thus applicable to 1419 too).

About 1648:
Saleharo (1584): Mangazeya (but this is a Russian colony)

I suggest to add the name as RUS entry for colonynames.csv. Source

About 1648:
Mogotcha (609): Kyakhta (but this is a Russian colony)

Nerchinsk is already defined as city for this province in colonynames.csv but it seems wrong... Nerchinsk is far to the east.

Furthermore, according to the map, Kyakhta is between Irkutsk and Ulan Ude (but to the south of both cities. It can be located in Mogotcha province. I suggest to simply remove the 609 entry for RUS.

And there is a typo for this entry:
RUS;Vladivostock;639

About 1520:
Mindanao (693): Davao - also defined in 1648 - I suggest Catabato for legendary history and Sultan Kudarat - Source
Salabanka (709): Kendari - also defined in 1648 => it is the location of Butung country and its capital. Name should be Bau-Bau - Source and location of the city should be reworked.

Entries are colored in blue in post #159.

 

[unmerged(40707)]

Odisa is actually 560. 562 is Sambalpur, which is where Raipur (city) is in the province.csv. As a result, the Raipur entry can be removed as it is redundant.

489(Iraq) should be removed. I don't think Qizilbash is the name of a city, it is the name of a group of people that made up the Safavid Empire.

Ok, thanks.

With regards to India in the 1648 scenario, what is our policy on city changes? I believe that Constantinople stays the same, no? If that's the case, then we should pull back all of the Indian changes as those changes are simply pointing out what cities became more important.

Rajputana (542): Ajmer (instead of Jodhpur)
Gujarat (547): Surat (instead of Cambay)
Maharashtra (550): Ahmadabad (instead of Pune)
Howrah (558): Hughli (instead of Gaur)
Hyderabad (566): Golconda
Bangalore (567): Bangalore (instead of Vijayangar)

But there is a reason why we don't use Istanbul. Constantinople is still the right name even if not the only one used, right?

IMHO, reflecting the changes is not a bad idea even if we can't model it by event when starting earlier (at least with current engine). Of course, it is only for flavor and has no impact on the game but it adds something. It could be the case for Würzburg => Amberg, and other cities I didn't check yet.

 

[Crookback]

But there is a reason why we don't use Istanbul. Constantinople is still the right name even if not the only one used, right?

That is correct. It shouldn't be Istanbul until the 1920s.

 

[unmerged(40707)]

Other cities:

Ingermanland (275): Ivangorod (instead of Narva) - should apply in 1648 too, Source

Silesia (314): Vratislavia (instead of Breslau) => I suggest Germanized Breslau already present in province.csv. All events refers to the city with this version except this one:
EVENTHIST258036;The first printing press in Poland has been established in Kraków in 1473 or 1474. In the same time first paper mills came into beeing. Although first tests in Polish language (short prayers) have been published in Wroclaw (VratislaviaBreslau), first book in Polish language, 'Raj duszy' by Biernat from Lublin, was printed in Kraków in 1513. Also first books in cCyrillic, ordinals in Old Church Slavonic language were printed in Kraków in 1494.;;;;;;;;;;

Würzburg (347): Amberg (instead of Bayreuth) - also defined in 1648
Bayreuth
Amberg
Because Würzburg province should be inherited by Bavaria and Bayreuth refers more to Prussia later, maybe Amberg could be included in province.csv but I'm not sure which solution is the best with current map.

Tambow (447): Kasimov (instead of Tambov)
Tambov was founded in 1636. Name can apply in 1648 but not before. Better use Novy Nizovoy before.

Crimea (463): Bakhchi-sarai (instead of Kherson) - Better use Bakhchisaray spelling for 1648. Former capital was Salaçıq (but is it useful for 1520 and only 12 years?). According to this site, we could use Qarq Yer as name in 1419 for the city.

To be continued.

 

[Canenald]

What happened with the open source code of EU2? I'd gladly try my hand in making some minor modifications, such as adding a new event command to change the name of the province capital.

 

[unmerged(40707)]

What happened with the open source code of EU2? I'd gladly try my hand in making some minor modifications, such as adding a new event command to change the name of the province capital.

I am in contact with Paradox. I you want to join, please PM me.

 

[unmerged(40707)]

According to this source:

Yet the village of Sûq (Shiq in Soqotri) seems to have earned the distinction of capital, it is not clear when, and maintained it apparently until the 16th century. This was undoubtedly due to the advantage of having an inlet in which ships could be anchored. This offered some protection both from the easterly and westerly winds as well as being located in a central position that facilitated internal communication; and therefore it was the obligatory stop for all trading ships. This facilitated the regulation of maritime commerce with the island and the imposition of taxes. Indeed, it was at Suq that the tribes from Mahra disembarked, when they arrived in a flotilla of ten ships to take over, or more accurately to formalize their heretofore informal presence on, the island in 1480 in their attempt to forestall the colonial ambition of their perennial rival the Qu`aytî Sultanate in Hadramawt. The Portuguese reported that, “to keep control the Arabs had built a fort at `Soco' (al-Sûq), which was where trading ships called. A garrison of a hundred men was usually stationed there and tribute was imposed” (Beckingham quoted in Serjeant 1992:161). According to Doe, Hadiboh's rise from the shadow of Sûq, seems to have occurred soon after the departure of the Portuguese in 1511 when they terminated their brief colonial experiment on the island, which had started in 1507.

As a conclusion:

Socotra (756):
Shiq for 1419
Hadibuh for 1520 and 1648


According to Theodoros thread:
Kaffa (464):
Mangup for 1419
Kaffa for 1520 and 1648