SS6.4 early era historically more accurate start position (1100)

SS6.4 early era historically more accurate start position (1100)

Re: Proposal: SS6.3 early era historically more accurate start position (1100)

Rozanov said:
well neither Venice or Ragusa or the new Trieste region controlled the area either,
there's a map here showing a region called Horvator
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/88/Louis_role.jpg
Click to expand...
Roz, this map you linked is a Hungarian one from the age of Louis I the Great (Nagy Lajos) who ruled from 1342 to 1382, and actually Hungary reached its largest extent during his reign. 'Horvátor.' is just an abbreviation for 'Horvátország' which means Croatia in Hungarian. :)
I didn't forget what the start date is, and you can also see on the map that Wallachia (Havasalföld in Hungarian) already existed at that time too, well before the Ottomans arrived.
Here's another map from the same time to back up that claim:
Nagy_Lajos_kir%C3%A1lys%C3%A1gai.JPG
You surely read that Wallachia was always divided into two regions: Oltenia (west) and Muntenia (east). The current campaign map has only the latter on itself but should also contain Oltenia too (the Bulgaria region takes its place for now, quite inaccurately). The text you inserted says the Wallachia region was officially called Muntenia back then, but even if it's true it has to bigger than currently it is.
 
Re: Proposal: SS6.3 early era historically more accurate start position (1100)

I think the middle east needs alot of work to properly represent the Crusader States and the Turks as they both appear far more united in SS than is historically correct.

Also is there anything that can be done to represent the Ayyubids taking over Fatimid territory, it really bugs me! lol
 
Re: Proposal: SS6.3 early era historically more accurate start position (1100)

SB - historically the three crusader states were independent but for game purposes we combine them (either that or just have one and make the other two independents?)
Even with a combined CS they have a hard time surviving without player input.

SS originally used the 1080 start date when the Selhjuks were more united, we're slowly trying to bring that up to 1100 - at which point we have a fragmented seljuk empire,
various independent emirates. we don't have Danishmends (for example) and a separate Seljuks of Rum and Abbasid caliphate.

an extra faction slot would be very handy here - only it's beyond the scope of this particular mod to introduce changes to the factions in the game, so we're staying with the vanilla SS6.3 factions. if nothing else this allows other people to make their own changes / sub-mods.

FP - Wallachia did not exist in 1100. ergo it is not represented as such on our map.
the refs to the Walalchia entry in wikipedia make this quite clear.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foundation_of_Wallachia

Due to a lack of exact maps etc for the time, the best information seems to be that the region that has Targoviste as its capital was the main area for the Pechenegs, whereas the Cumans (Kipchaks) controlled the area to the north and around the northern shores of the Black Sea and the Caspian Sea, and as far as the Aral Sea. Not, however as a unified state but as a series of loosely-linked independent khanates. Given their nomadic nature pinning them down to a precise geographical location at any particular time is difficult.

I still see no reason to support the naming of the region Wallachia or expanding its current extent.

here's a map that refers to the date 1190 (after the founding of the second bulgarian empire)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Europe_mediterranean_1190_cropped.jpg
the name wallachia is absent. Targoviste (north of the danube, but not shown) is clearly in the land of the cumans - although this is probably due the cumans expanding into Pecheneg territory after 1100.
 
Re: Proposal: SS6.3 early era historically more accurate start position (1100)

Okay Roz, I accept your arguments.
Wiki claims Oltenia was part of the first Bulgarian Empire, so probably that's the reason why it is part of the Bulgaria region on the campaign map.
If it'd be up to me, I'd certainly attach Oltenia to the Muntenia region (because it belongs more to Muntenia than Bulgaria), but as you said before, it's a co-operative project, so I won't force my opinion on anyone.
 
Re: Proposal: SS6.3 early era historically more accurate start position (1100)

There was 4 main crusader states, I think you might be forgetting Tripoli or Edessa? Anyway I guess it's not practical to implement all 4 of them from a gameplay point of view the only way is to have them represented as a whole, which is sad. It could probably work if there was alot more free faction slots and the Middle East could be better represented as if all 4 where made seperate now i guess the Fatis or Turks would destroy them. But even if there was someway of doing this, like you said, it's out of the scope of this mod lol.

The middle east and the crusades are what I find most intresting in this period of history and probably what I know most about, only if i knew how to mod well enough I would definitly try a few things out to see how historical accuracy could be pulled off without ruining the gameplay.

Anyway I'm starting to ramble and go slightly off topic. I like the look of this mod, keep up the good work :thumbsup2
 
Re: Proposal: SS6.3 early era historically more accurate start position (1100)

The county of Tripoli was founded after 1100, still though, the different states worked close together on most occasions that they are about as close to one state , especially considering that most other factions in the game at that period were also far more loose than the game actually represents them. (HRE, Turks, Kiev Rus, Moors, France etc...)

The Almoravid dynasty of the Moors for example, was still effectively just a loose collection of Berber tribes and North African / Andalusia city states barely held together by a core military confederation of semi-nomadic tribes . Yusuf deposed the taifa rulers but the governement in those cities were still largely run by the same people (infact they even attempted to export some of them to Africa). meanwhile the various berber tribes were still independent and was only answering the call to arms as long as the Almoravid was still strong (which was why they fell apart quickly after about 2 generation, and also why the Almohad dynasty that succeeded them also collapsed at an amazing pace after their major defeat)
 
Re: Proposal: SS6.3 early era historically more accurate start position (1100)

There was also so times when they didn't help each other out when they really needed too. Allthough the King of Jerusalem held some sway over the other Crusader States this was not absolute, especially in the case of Antioch, so the best argument is for Antioch to be made a faction. But as you say they also did often work closely together so I don't think making them Rebel provinces except for Jerusalem would be a very good representation. The other factions you mentioned I know less about, allthough from the little i do know I think rebel states make alot more sense in the case of HRE than of the CS.

Also Kerak is in the game when it wasn't built till 40 or so years after the start date. Why not include Montreal instead? It is just as important and famous I think and was built alot closer too the start date of the campaign. Or even Krak des Chevaliers was built closer to the time, it was quite important.

A few other places not on the map which would be nice to see in the game are Sidon, Ascalon, Jaffa, Beiru, Tyre (might allready be in can't remember) and I'm sure there are more I can't think of. Also a few of the places the city's are need to be moved, I think Alleppo is one of them, just google a map of the Crusader States to see.

Anyway after reading my post back I don't know how much of this is the kind of stuff you want to cover in your mod, am i better off posting this elsewhere do you think?
 
Re: Proposal: SS6.3 early era historically more accurate start position (1100)

Fair Prince said:
Here's another suggestion, this time regarding Muntenia/Wallachia:

The in-game Muntenia region (with Targoviste as capital) is more or less accurately implemented, but I think it should be changed to Wallachia as it was historically more important. To do that, the region needs to extended towards west, what is currently the Bulgaria region in the game - the latter now borders with the Southern Carpathians on the campaign map, which is nonsense in my opinion.
The capital should also be changed to Câmpulung, the earliest known capital, but unfortunately it doesn't look feasible due to the dense forest in the area.

I attached two historical maps of the region and an in-game map with my suggested changes.
Click to expand...

If I may add to your suggestion, Wallachia should also not have access to the Black Sea. The Dobrogea region was part of Wallachia for a very short while in the Middle Ages (late XIV century) and it was controlled by the Byzantine Empire (until the Bulgarian rebellion) at the game's start date.
 
Re: Proposal: SS6.3 early era historically more accurate start position (1100)

RollingWave said:
The county of Tripoli was founded after 1100, still though, the different states worked close together on most occasions that they are about as close to one state , especially considering that most other factions in the game at that period were also far more loose than the game actually represents them. (HRE, Turks, Kiev Rus, Moors, France etc...)
Click to expand...
I couldn't agree more - but since it's just a game, we have to adapt to its limitations. ;)
 
Re: Proposal: SS6.3 early era historically more accurate start position (1100)

Yeah it's a shame everything can't be included.

I know there is a limited number of factions but is there a limited number of regions and/or overall area regions can cover?
 
Re: Proposal: SS6.3 early era historically more accurate start position (1100)

Well I don't think there is any regions that can be removed anyway :hmm:

So do you not think Kerak should be removed seeing as it wasn't built till 1140ish i think. Montreal was also built after 1100 but before 1140 and the closer the better i guess.
 
Last edited:
Re: Proposal: SS6.3 early era historically more accurate start position (1100)

Roz, and what's your opinion on my Hamadan suggestion btw?
Considering that the in-game Seljuks were practically the Hamadani 'branch' of the nation (as I pointed out in post #30), I think it would make sense to replace Kermanshah with the city of Hamadan.
What's more, it could be even selected as the capital of the Empire.
 
Re: Proposal: SS6.3 early era historically more accurate start position (1100)

Al Karak was an important town but it's the castle represented on the map, which wasn't yet built. Maybe change the name and start it as a town.

And if more castles are needed then i think Krak des chevaliers definitly should be considered, if only for the late campaign, it was very important in several ways. Also it was a head quaters for the hospitallers so should could be given a knights of st.john guild straight away? And allthough I thought the crusaders captured it after 1100, after a quick google search, I found they captured it in 1099 but then abandoned it until Tancred took over it in 1110. Unfourtunatly I don't have a good argument for Montreal to be included :(

Also Aleppo is shown as a castle but really it was a town with a citadel not that there is much to do about that.
 
Last edited:
Re: Proposal: SS6.3 early era historically more accurate start position (1100)

SB - the whole town / castle division is fairly arbitrary - you can probably make a case for changing a lot of settlements on that basis one way or another.
Al-Karak deserves its place on the map either way.
--
Hamadan / Kermanshah - presumably the same region, just requires moving the town and renaming it.
shouldn't require any other changes?

(although we'll need to change all the files that need Kermanshah and replace with Hamadan.)
as both were important settlements one can make a case for either.
only real question then becomes is it worth making all the changes?
 
Re: Proposal: SS6.3 early era historically more accurate start position (1100)

Rozanov said:
Hamadan / Kermanshah - presumably the same region, just requires moving the town and renaming it.
shouldn't require any other changes?

(although we'll need to change all the files that need Kermanshah and replace with Hamadan.)
as both were important settlements one can make a case for either.
only real question then becomes is it worth making all the changes?
Click to expand...
Roz, I think relocating the settlement and renaming it to Hamadan in the output text files will be enough.
There's no need to change the region ID in my opinion.
 
Re: Proposal: SS6.3 early era historically more accurate start position (1100)

Thinking about it maybe we should give Hamadan to Seljuks?

It's simple enough to do in the descr_strat
 
Re: Proposal: SS6.3 early era historically more accurate start position (1100)

Rozanov said:
Thinking about it maybe we should give Hamadan to Seljuks?

It's simple enough to do in the descr_strat
Click to expand...
Yes, definitely - and as I pointed out a few posts before, it should also be selected as their new capital.
 
Re: Proposal: SS6.3 early era historically more accurate start position (1100)

Roz, I see you also plan to add Targoviste to the Rebels - is this because you want to distinguish the Pecheneg territory from the Cuman lands?
I'm asking because I took another look at the map and I think I will follow suit in SSHCP, possibly making Baia independent too.
 
Re: Proposal: SS6.3 early era historically more accurate start position (1100)

yes Targoviste for rebels looks about right for Pechenegs
- and the Byzantines grab it on turn 2 or thereabouts.

Baia should be Cuman by 1100 I think (maps can be misleading but it seems about right.)
 
Re: Proposal: SS6.3 early era historically more accurate start position (1100)

CC - sorry to hear of your situation.

hope you can return to the fray in due course when things are more conducive to modding.
 
Re: Proposal: SS6.3 early era historically more accurate start position (1100)

Caesar Clivus said:
Sorry guys my life is rather :censored: right now so there hasn't been any progress of late.
Click to expand...
I second Roz's words - let's hope your problems will be gone soon, so you will be able to support us with your fine modding skills.
 
Re: Proposal: SS6.3 early era historically more accurate start position (1100)

only change I'd make (after game testing) is to give Mosul back to the Turks - would help them a lot!
 
Re: Proposal: SS6.3 early era historically more accurate start position (1100)

Rozanov said:
FP - read your comments after typing this summary :

Summary of proposed region changes for Stainless Steel 6.3 early era - 1100

Faction

Aragon
rename Aragon-Navarra
remove Zaragoza and Barcelona
add Pamplona (no change to region)

Byzantium
remove Durazzo
add Ragusa (SE part of region to be used for new region)

Crusader States
none

Cumans
remove Targoviste, Kazan, Bulgar, Yelabuga
add Azaq, Astrakhan, Oleshe
rename Astrakhan to Xacitarxan
merge Jaiksk and Embi regions
chop NW chunk off of Baia region and add to Halych

Denmark
change Lund from town to castle (no change to region)

Egypt
rename Luxor castle to Aswan castle (no change to region)

England
none

France
none

Genoa
remove Pisa and Ajaccio (no change to regions)

HRE
remove Staufen castle replace with Strasburg city (no change to region)
move Hamburg port to approx location of Lubeck (on Baltic coast)

Hungary
remove Brasov and replace with Gyulafehérvár (no change to region)
remove Kassa and replace with Eger (no change to region)

Kievan Rus
replace Zhitomyr with Vladimir-Volonskii and moved Chernigov, Pereslavl, to more accurate positions.
relocate Pereslavl

Khwarezm
remove Rayy (no change to region)

Leon
rename of faction to Leon-Castile
add Burgos (no change to region)

Lithuania
none

Moors
rename faction to Murabitim or Almoravids
rename Seville to Badajoz (no change to region)
add new Seville region with land taken from Silves and Cordoba
relocate Granada to north of mountains
add Lisbon

Norway
add Oslo region (no change to region)

Novgorod
remove Moscow and Yaroslavl
add Pskov

Papal States
none

Poland
add Wroclaw (no change to region)
remove Halych
change Plock from town to castle (adjust region to take part of Thorn)

Portugal
replace Oporto with Braga (no change to region)

Scotland
remove Inverness (no change to region)

Sicily
add Bari and Durazzo

Turks
remove Tbilisi, Mosul
replace Qarisiya with Ar-Raggah (possibly adjust region)

Venice
remove Ragusa (no change to region)


Rebels
add Yelabuga, Kazan, Bulgar, Zaragoza, Barcelona, Rayy, Tbilisi, Mosul, Inverness,
add Halych (adjust region to give western chunk to Krakow and add NW chunk of Baia to Halych)
remove Oleshe, Azaq, Astrakhan (to Cumans), Lisbon (to Moors)
replace Benghazi with Barqa (no change to region)
replace Moscow with Vladimir (no change to region)
replace Yaroslavl with Rostov (no change to region)
replace Bern with Zurich (no change to region)
replace Thorn with Gdansk (shrink region)
replace Adana with Sis (no change to region)
replace Bruges with Ghent (no change to region)
relocate Smolensk and Polotsk to more accurate locations
adjust Zagreb region to reach Adriatic Sea
merge Kazan and Khlynov regions
create new region from southern sections of Ragusa and Belgrade regions - capital Shkodër.
Click to expand...

"remove Staufen castle replace with Strasburg city (no change to region)"

more likely the most important town in Swabia would be Augsburg


"move Hamburg port to approx location of Lubeck (on Baltic coast)"

no, thats wrong, only the river flows South of Hamburg

in 1100 Heinrich IV´s son Konrad should be in Italy, he died there 1101 in Florenz (should have 0 loyalty)
daughter Agnes should be married to Friedrich I von Stauffen (duke in Swabia)
by 1100 Heinrich IV + Heinrich V should be in the Frankfurt region
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Recent posts

Members Online Now

Total: 445 (members: 12, guests: 433)
Most Ever Online Statistics
Members: 29 on 4 Jan 2026
Guests: 50545 on 1 Jun 2026
Most visitors online was 50551 , on 1 Jun 2026

Site News

Join the Total War Center!

Register for free to:

Log in to TWC to post comments and messages or to give +rep, and to view the site without adverts!

Thread Statistics

Created
Gorrrrrn,
Last reply from
Ichon,
Replies
197
Views
28,724

Newest Blogs

View more blog entries

Newest Downloads

Featured Articles

View all featured Articles

Featured Blogs

View all featured blogs

TWC Tutorials

  • makanyane
    Promoting your mod on Total War Center
    Promoting your mod is as important as working on your mod! Unless you are only making...
    • makanyane
    • Updated:
    • 2 min read
  • GrnEyedDvl
    Create a Blog
    Acceptable Use Policy for Blogs No Politics - No Religion - This will be STRICTLY enforced! TWC...
    • GrnEyedDvl
    • Updated:
    • 6 min read
  • GrnEyedDvl
    Multi Quoting Posts
    This is one of the basic XenForo features that I do not think I have posted much about but I use...
    • GrnEyedDvl
    • Updated:
    • 3 min read
  • GrnEyedDvl
    Direct Messages on TWC
    The Direct Message system on XenForo is substantially different than the one we had on...
    • GrnEyedDvl
    • Updated:
    • 4 min read
  • GrnEyedDvl
    Resources for Modders & Mod Teams
    Total War Center now has several resources available to Mod Teams to help them collaborate and...
    • GrnEyedDvl
    • Updated:
    • 4 min read

Site Polls

What is your favorite board game?

  • Axis & Allies

  • Battleship

  • Checkers

  • Chess

  • Clue

  • Go

  • Monopoly

  • Risk

  • Stratego

  • Other

Results are only viewable after voting.
See comments…
Back
Top Bottom