The Canadian North...

[unmerged(3787)]

...deserves a quick note.

In EUI I have found that colonizing the north of Canada is ridiculously cheap and easy.

- Success rates are high
- Colonist costs are low
- Colony 'location' growth rate is really good (given the location).

Now, you see.... that is just... well... wrong.

It is now 2001 - and after years of pro-growth colonization of the north by the Canadian government, if you add up ALL the people of the Yukon, NWT and Labrador, you would be hard pressed to get a population over 60,000 people.

Now. To be fair, the Yukon territory does have a fairly mild climate as it is west of the mountains and gets a lot of warm pacific air. Having a -4 population location growth rate there until you get to a 1000+ population level isn't that big a stretch.

However. Populating the far north of Canada should be akin to populating the deserts of Africa. A population location growth rate of -8 through to -14 would make a lot more sense and be more accurate. So please get this right.

I know it is a small thing to complain about, but it is also a small thing to ask. You gotta remember - large portions of the NWT are ABOVE the tree line. To native peoples back then wood was more valuable/practical than gold.

ONE MORE NOTE - Newfoundland had a native population when the explorers and colonists first arrived - the Beothuks - and they survived until the 1800's. Do not forget them in EUII like they were forgotten in EUI.

Appropriate population levels and aggressiveness for them would be 300-500 per province and Low aggresiveness. If they hadn't been hunted to extinction by murderous Newfoundland fishermen and the Micmacs they would have been quite approachable.

Looking forward to EUII,

YKOil

 

[Blade!]

Good points... I always thought it was odd how I always build a secret Huson Bay empire...and that in real life Cnada did not do the same!

 

[Spruce]

IMO the places you are talking about aren't that inhuman to live in. The main reason you find less densely populated areas compared with the USA is that the USA was at a given moment more popular to colonists and adventurers.

If Canada would have broke loose from England quicker than the USA, you'll get another result.

It's not logical to punisch these areas wiht population growth penalties as I stated.

I would choose Quebec above Malaysia, Australia, etc.

 

[unmerged(3787)]

Quebec...

...and especially Montreal/Quebec City isn't the same as Labrador/Nunavut.

I live in Yellowknife, Northwest Territories, Canada.

It gets cold here. REALLY COLD. It isn't unheardof to get temperatures lower than -25 degrees Celcius for 5+ months straight. And at times there have been stretches where it is lower than -40 C for several weeks straight.

There is no agricultural base here to speak of. PERIOD.

Go farther north from where I am and you get into temperatures where water would freeze in a waste water bucket BEFORE you could try to empty it.

There is a reason why there were VERY few natives up here and they all lived a nomadic existence - it was extremely hard just to survive. Sorry Spruce - you're wrong on this one. Colonizing the north in the timeframe of EUII would have been extremely expensive, extremely risky and it would have taken an extremely long time.

Let me put it this way - from 1999 to 2009 the Government of the NWT will spend over $100 million dollars to pave just under 100 kms of road between Yellowknife and Rae-Edzo. That is WITH every advantage available to modern man. That timeframe (10 kms a year) at that cost (1+ million per km) is... well, almost beyond belief. Settling the north of Canada - even in the modern age - is STILL extremely expensive and STILL takes an extremely long time.

YKOil

 

[Shadowstrike]

Now that you mentioned it, could you give me a short overview of the Canadian north? I live down here in Toronto, and our winters are like a summer breeze compared to say Iqaluit. We have some cold days but nothing like -25 every day (closer to -10/15 here, at most). What is the economic base there? Transportation network? Ecology?

 

[Spruce]

YKOIL,

I'm refering to some provinces in Canada, not all of them.

Maybe I missed something in the thread starters post, he was talking about north of Canada. In that way you're 100% correct.

The region you're talking about is indeed to easy to colonize in EU I.

Hope you'll have EU II by Christmass to warm you up!

 

[unmerged(739)]

I agree with YKoil here I live in Winnipeg and it gets to -30 here and we live very far south compared to you.

 

[unmerged(3627)]

Most games I've played, the whole of north Canada comprises maybe half a dozen colonies of less than 1,000 people each, and a bunch of trading posts. Which sounds about right for the time.

 

[unmerged(3787)]

No problem Spruce...

...Canada being 'north', northern Canada, and north of Canada are all very different things.

I am slightly opposed to all those posters that want to see every terra-incognito space turned into a province - I can't imagine Baffin Islands being a 'colonizable' option during the time frame. Let's face it - it's not colonizable now.

Canada's north - namely the NWT. Nunavut and the northern coasts of Labrador are really just like the deserts of Africa/Middle East. There are a few months where the temperature/climate/environment are VERY livable BUT there are MANY months where it goes a WAY beyond miserable. That should be reflected in the game.

Besides - if every 'euro-guru' on this board can find the time to complain about the inaccuracy of THIS minor-barony or THAT King's mistress and "WHY ISN'T IT IN THE GAME" - the least I can do is throw my two cents on the table.

Just wait - if they don't do a decent job with Tecumseh, and if Sir Isaac Brock (War of 1812) does not appear as a military leader, I will be very unhappy. Those two leaders were, in large part, what kept Canada free from US domination.

Here is a link to small biography on Brock:

http://www.militaryheritage.com/brock.htm

He doesn't have to be much better than the standard British general IMO - but he should be better and he should be in the game.

SHADOWSTRIKE: To answer your questions:

Whitehorse (Yukon) and Yellowknife (NWT) are pretty good cultural centers with decent amenities and services. They are fairly small cities in terms of population BUT because the median incomes are so high they have the infrastructure of cities that would be twice their size or better down south. Population of Yellowknife is 17-18,000.

Economic base in Yellowknife is quite good while Whitehorse is in a rut. Whitehorse, however, has a much better climate overall:

Yellowknife (in comparison to southern Canada)
- mid-November to mid-April is pretty evil climate-wise
- mid-April to end of May and mid-October to mid-November is just 'kind-of' miserable.
- mid-August to mid-October is a long fall and June is basically spring
- July to mid-August is summer

Whitehorse (in comparison to southern Canada)- take all the dates above and make them 10-15 C warmer on average - EXCEPT summers, which are comparable. Pretty nice all things considered.

The transportation network is basically a single road into Yellowknife that leads to Edmonton (15-17 hour drive to get to your first 'big' city). Everything else is air travel (which is VERY expensive, it is cheaper to fly from Edmonton to England than it is to fly from Yellowknife to Edmonton) except for a single rail line into Hay River. Winter ice roads operate in the winter and ferries are the norm in the spring/summer/fall.

Luckily people 'typically' get paid LOTS of money to work up here.

Canada's north is definitely a life-style thing. I can drive ANYWHERE I want to in town in less than 15 minutes. I can be on a pristine lake fishing for Trout or Char in the middle of pristine wilderness inside of an hour. I can do dozens of amazing canoe portage trips every week-end if I want to. Everyone in town has an amazing story to tell simply because you have to be slightly nuts to live here - and simply put - slightly nuts people are a hell of a good party.

I love it here.

YKOil

 

[unmerged(3236)]

I agree that is it to easy to colonize that area, many natoins would not stand a chance. Sweden, russia and norway are antion wich lies far north and are used to cold so they should have a minimal chance of sucsess.

 

[Shadowstrike]

Thanks for the info. Well, at least I see why the Canadian government isn't having very much success in populating the north.... But getting anywhere in 5 min is nice. I don't think I could go anywhere "rural" other then a park in under 2 hours from my cozy little room here in Toronto. What's the general attitude up north about the plans to strip-mine/bring in hordes of annoying tourists for money? At least the Great Slave Lake is probably quite a bit cleaner then Lake Ontario (which most of us wouldn't poke with a stick, because of pollution), so there's plenty of skating/swimming/kayaking....

 

[Spruce]

well I would love to check it out there...sounds very interesting if you have the time to stay there for a year or so. Not the bus/guide/fotograph tour of "duty".

I live in the opposite: lots of cities all of them connected with motorways with trafic.

Each 30 km's you'll find a large city of at least 75.000 people, but the largest city is limited to a million.

guess where it is???

....Belgium.

 

[unmerged(4236)]

Thanks for the info. I have always had an intrest in geography and wondered how people lived in N. Canada.

I guess to you, Atlanta, GA(where I live) is a Tropical Paradise
December is our really only month for winter, if were lucky we get snow

 

[unmerged(739)]

You bastards stealing all the good weather! jk

 

[unmerged(5639)]

Lucky

Orginal:
Thanks for the info. I have always had an intrest in geography and wondered how people lived in N. Canada.

I guess to you, Atlanta, GA(where I live) is a Tropical Paradise
December is our really only month for winter, if were lucky we get snow

In Canada and for me in Sweden, you must be children to be lucky
in the snow.