Page 7 of 215 FirstFirst 12345678910111213141516173257107 ... LastLast
Results 121 to 140 of 4288

Thread: SSHIP - Original Thread (archived)

  1. #121
    Tiro
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Novgorod
    Posts
    238

    Default Re: The Stainless Steel Map Adjustment Project (SSMAP) - Ideas on East-Central Europe are up, next part: Balkans!

    I don't think it's needed, cause it is not matters that much, but would complicate other submod compatiblity considerably.

  2. #122

    Default Re: The Stainless Steel Map Adjustment Project (SSMAP) - Ideas on East-Central Europe are up, next part: Balkans!

    Quote Originally Posted by napoleonic View Post
    Bellum Crucis has a feature (script) that can automatically change cities names according to the owner... I think it's a great idea to be implemented on SS too so Durazzo would be Durazzo if owned by venice and Dyrrachion if owned by byz....
    Yeah, in fact this idea has already come up in the SSHCP thread before, but as I said then, I don't think it is worth the effort realize this.

  3. #123

    Default Re: The Stainless Steel Map Adjustment Project (SSMAP) - Ideas on East-Central Europe are up, next part: Balkans!

    Here goes my proposals on the Balkan area.

    Part 8: Balkans
    EDIT: see the first post for details!

  4. #124

    Default Re: The Stainless Steel Map Adjustment Project (SSMAP) - Ideas on East-Central Europe are up, next part: Balkans!

    I am fine with that. Keep Venice busy as now they rarely fight with Hungary. Corinth and Crete are enough in southern Greece. With Rhodes gone that will help more balance for Byzantines.

  5. #125
    helmersen's Avatar Praepositus
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Oslo, Norway
    Posts
    5,759

    Default Re: The Stainless Steel Map Adjustment Project (SSMAP) - Ideas on East-Central Europe are up, next part: Balkans!

    why are there no pictures yet?!
    Interested in how Attila and the new LONGBEARDS DLC plays?

    Check out my Total War Attila: Jutes Let's Play: http://youtu.be/rFyxh4mj1pQ
    Check out my Total War Attila: The Langobards Let's Play: http://youtu.be/lMiHXVvVbCE
    Total War: Attila with ERE vs Sassanids GEM at max settings:
    http://youtu.be/jFYENvVpwIs
    Total War: Rome II Medieval Kingdoms Mod Gameplay: http://youtu.be/qrqGUYaLVzk

  6. #126
    Giorgios's Avatar Campidoctor
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    England
    Posts
    1,722

    Default Re: The Stainless Steel Map Adjustment Project (SSMAP) - Ideas on East-Central Europe are up, next part: Balkans!

    Yeah, it'd be nice to see map_regions so far

  7. #127

    Default Re: The Stainless Steel Map Adjustment Project (SSMAP) - Ideas on East-Central Europe are up, next part: Balkans!

    Quote Originally Posted by helmersen View Post
    why are there no pictures yet?!

    Quote Originally Posted by Giorgios View Post
    Yeah, it'd be nice to see map_regions so far

    The mapper still working in our ideas, so we can continue doing it and the map should come faster.


    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The changes on the map are just ok for me. But i guess Adrianople should be on the map (but i think it already is).

    What about the adition of Constanta on the Danube Delta that i proposed on this post?
    This should give a importance to the Danube Delta.

  8. #128

    Default Re: The Stainless Steel Map Adjustment Project (SSMAP) - Ideas on East-Central Europe are up, next part: Balkans!

    -8 already? does that mean you are going to take out some eastern regions?

  9. #129

    Default Re: The Stainless Steel Map Adjustment Project (SSMAP) - Ideas on East-Central Europe are up, next part: Balkans!

    Quote Originally Posted by napoleonic View Post
    -8 already? does that mean you are going to take out some eastern regions?
    That is pretty much guaranteed. It should be able to be spread out a bit more though than just in the east. Between N Africa, Arabia, and the east I can easily see -7 but after that it gets really hard. Anything much taken out after that is going to make the east quite weak. So we are already at that point...

    I am not sure if he included Ajuccio and Rhodes in the list as taken out. I think those 2 can also easily go. To me the British isles at 10 region is still too large and can easily lose 1 more region probably even 2 but I'd be fine with even just 1 more. So if we do that it leaves over the chance to add at least +2 more regions. I think 1 should go north of Caucuses and 1 in Anatolia or Rus principalities.

    East can be radically changed, Persia is not bad now and shouldn't lose more than 1 if even that. Arabia has too many regions for sure, Oman and the central desert merged or Oman taken out and Mecca/Medina/central desert merged something like that to give -2 there. In N Africa Libya and Benghazi merged and Algeria lose 1 region, probably the small village next to Tunisia for -2 there.

    In the north east the 3 regions from the most NE position down can be merged and Khiva also taken out leaving Urgench as a single Huge city giving -3. So actually that is -7 more from all over the map. Anything else extra 1 should go to Samarra or something else near Baghdad and past that looking into Central Europe again or Dalmatia/Serbia/Caucuses.

    The only other things I could see being done are to make Sahara and central Arabia and the extreme NE uninhabitable regions. That would only free an additional 1 or 2 though as otherwise those would be merged with nearby anyway. I like RW's solution for the Sahara but we could try something different here.
    Last edited by Ichon; July 13, 2011 at 12:28 PM.

  10. #130

    Default Re: The Stainless Steel Map Adjustment Project (SSMAP) - Ideas on East-Central Europe are up, next part: Balkans!

    Quote Originally Posted by Giorgios View Post
    Yeah, it'd be nice to see map_regions so far
    We're still in the discussion phase and considering some parts might be reexamined later, there's no point in showcasing the new map until it's been finalized.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mbrabant View Post
    What about the adition of Constanta on the Danube Delta that i proposed on this post?
    This should give a importance to the Danube Delta.
    I guess I have missed this suggestion, though it's a very good one! Wallachia shouldn't have access to the Black Sea, thus inserting the Dobruja region with Constanta as capital seems absolutely acceptable - I'm gonna add this to the proposals, thanks for the idea!

    Quote Originally Posted by napoleonic View Post
    -8 already? does that mean you are going to take out some eastern regions?
    Yep, some eastern regions will have to be sacrificed to compensate for that. However, I think you shouldn't worry about it for now, even if we end up in the negative (but hopefully above -3), we could still select the most suitable proposals in a poll, as I have already mentioned in this post.

  11. #131

    Default Re: The Stainless Steel Map Adjustment Project (SSMAP) - Balkans ready, next up: Baltics!

    I consider the Balkan area done folks, thus I suggest moving on to the next step of the revision: the Baltics.
    Here are the affected settlements, in North-South direction:
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 
    Turku
    Reval
    Riga
    Palanga
    Vilnius
    Hrodna
    Good news is that we are halfway through the discussion process - this Part shouldn't take long either, but as always, I welcome all ideas and arguments!

  12. #132

    Default Re: The Stainless Steel Map Adjustment Project (SSMAP) - Balkans ready, next up: Baltics!

    Romanian being I can say is totally wrong. Dobrogea region was at control of byzantines and bulgarians. Wallachians controlled after 1300 the south east of Moldavia, from there they get access to Black Sea. Dobrogea also not have any sighnificant city, and Constanta pretty sure is not the place. Mircea de Elder was the only wallachian dominus who controlled Wallachia, but after many battles, last one lost to turks, he give it to ottomans.
    Add to that is a very, very poor region in population. In 1878 was started a heavy colonisation of region by king Carol I.
    To understand well, we must think how the region evolve. In dacian times, the region was heavy colonised by various city-states of helens. A lot of colonies was there but biggest was Histria, Tomis and Callatis. At Tomis the roman Ovidius was exiled. In the mainland, off the coast was a small kingdom of dacians, outside Burebista Dacia.
    Romans integrate the region in Moesia inferior. After reorganisation was the new province Dacia, when historical the Dacia province became the Goth Kingdom. After them come the gepids, and Dogrogea remain part of roman empire. After the colapse of Rome, it was part of byzantine empire, with some intermezzo's like First Bulgar Empire. When bulgarian disapear like state was again controlled by greeks. In this context the Vicina played a huge role. Add to that, some former roman-byzantine colonies became genovese.
    The Moldavia have it its ports on maritime Danube or at Black Sea in south Moldavia, not in Dobrogea. Tatar/mongolian destroy almost all settlements there, and after Mircea the Elder lost control, it became a turkish part of ottoman empire. The population was rare and was poorly coloniesed by tatars and turks.
    The shepards from Transylvani, but from Moldavia and Wallachia too, moved their cattle there in winter season.
    When it enter in Romania in 1878, was very few people there. Turks invested almost nothing. Was colonised and romanians maded the former Tomis, actual Constanta a big port at Black Sea.
    In 1100 we can talk about the area like hellenic region connected with Bulgaria. The wallachian rule there was around 100 years.

    Kill Them All, Let God Sort Them Out!


  13. #133

    Default Re: The Stainless Steel Map Adjustment Project (SSMAP) - Balkans ready, next up: Baltics!

    Turku, the finnish region must go. Not because is not important, but is far from almost anything. I am agree is a key for teutonic order to develop fast in late, being a fortress, but on long shoot, I think is a Rhodos case here.

    Kill Them All, Let God Sort Them Out!


  14. #134

    Default Re: The Stainless Steel Map Adjustment Project (SSMAP) - Balkans ready, next up: Baltics!

    Turku can go. Barely any Scandinavian settlements and mostly tribes in the interior but nothing seriously organized.

    Reval- more difficult as there are reasons it could even start as Kieven. Basically Reval was probably only a very small fort or perhaps fishing village nearby that could well have been abandoned due to earlier raids. By 1200s it was becoming important as a Livonian stronghold and could easily start as a castle. However it might be better to switch it with Tartu and make it belong to Kiev or add Sakala or something and be rebel pagan Chudes or similar tribes.

    Vilnius seems obvious to stay.

    Hrodna seems ok to me unless someone has a better suggestion? I think it should be about 40% pagan 40% orthodox and 20% catholic. There are even some connections to Kiev here as it could have belonged to a principality associated with Kiev. How to portray Kiev is something to consider as well- if we give every region to Kiev that was a principality Kiev would be quite strong. If we just give Kiev and a few of the nearby regions(not including ones which had major wars with Kiev) that might work the best.

    Palanga should stay I think- but be mostly Pagan with some timber and furs as resources.

    Riga seems certainly to stay and was probably one of the largest urban centers in the Baltic though compared to other regions it was quite small. Later when Reval surpassed it in 1200s Reval had probably less than 10,000 inhabitants so Riga was even smaller- however the countryside was quite settle by various tribes- just not very organized. To oppose the Livonian crusaders they were only able to gather and army of around 5,000 men.

  15. #135
    Tiro
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Novgorod
    Posts
    238

    Default Re: The Stainless Steel Map Adjustment Project (SSMAP) - Balkans ready, next up: Baltics!

    So what do we have about Hrodna.
    On russian. http://ru.wikisource.org/wiki/%D0%AD...B4%D0%BD%D0%BE
    My translation:

    First chronicle mentioning in 1128 as the residence of Duke Vsevolod Davidovich (Kievan Rus). In the XII century there were several orthodox churches. In 1224, was sacked by the Teutons, in 1241 by Mongols. Then in was occupied by Lithuania. In 1259 taken back from Lithuania by Daniil Galitsky (Kievan Rus). In 1270 - again Lithuanian Duke Troiden. During 1284 and 1392 Hrodna struggles against Livonian Order, two times was destroyed. In 1398 Vitovt made Hrodna his residence and it became the best city in Lithuania after Vilno. Since the beginning of XV-th century - under the Poland.

  16. #136

    Default Re: The Stainless Steel Map Adjustment Project (SSMAP) - Balkans ready, next up: Baltics!

    what about Köningsberg, i know it was founded around 1250 so for a early campaign it would make much sense, though i think in late campaign it crucial while it was the stronghold of the german orders.

  17. #137
    Caesar Clivus's Avatar SS Forum Moderator
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    12,693

    Default Re: The Stainless Steel Map Adjustment Project (SSMAP) - Balkans ready, next up: Baltics!

    Quote Originally Posted by Ichon View Post
    Reval- more difficult as there are reasons it could even start as Kieven. Basically Reval was probably only a very small fort or perhaps fishing village nearby that could well have been abandoned due to earlier raids. By 1200s it was becoming important as a Livonian stronghold and could easily start as a castle. However it might be better to switch it with Tartu and make it belong to Kiev or add Sakala or something and be rebel pagan Chudes or similar tribes.
    Errr...why Kievan over Novgorodian? Kiev never held sway over those regions whereas Novgorod did.

    Riga is too important to be removed. BUT it was only founded in the 13th century so it doesn't really fit for the early campaign.

    Tarku could be removed. However, then you'd have to add all of Finland to another region which doesn't really work either.
    Last edited by Caesar Clivus; July 14, 2011 at 06:50 AM.

    BftB2 UPDATED 22nd DECEMBER. Member of the Complete Byzantine Unit Roster team

  18. #138

    Default Re: The Stainless Steel Map Adjustment Project (SSMAP) - Balkans ready, next up: Baltics!

    Thanks for input guys, I'll try to take all of them into consideration.
    Some initial remarks: ReQuest has suggested putting Königsberg on the map and I have to say it's already there, only it's called Palanga for some reason. Vilnius could remain, but if that's the case then Kaunas, the earliest known capital of Lithuania must be included as well, preferably with access to the Baltic Sea (its port could act as the real Palanga). Subsequently, Hrodna would become quite redundant if the aforementioned changes take place.
    Turku seems destined for the drop, but it might be problematic to merge that region with another - maybe make it a 'blank' region?

  19. #139

    Default Re: The Stainless Steel Map Adjustment Project (SSMAP) - Balkans ready, next up: Baltics!

    Quote Originally Posted by Fair Prince View Post
    Thanks for input guys, I'll try to take all of them into consideration.
    Some initial remarks: ReQuest has suggested putting Königsberg on the map and I have to say it's already there, only it's called Palanga for some reason.
    The reason beeing: Königsberg was founded by the Teutonic Knights just south of the Sambian peninsula in 1255 during the Northern Crusades. It just isn't feasable to have it in early campaign with that in mind.

  20. #140

    Default Re: The Stainless Steel Map Adjustment Project (SSMAP) - Balkans ready, next up: Baltics!

    Quote Originally Posted by Caesar Clivus View Post
    Errr...why Kievan over Novgorodian? Kiev never held sway over those regions whereas Novgorod did.

    Riga is too important to be removed. BUT it was only founded in the 13th century so it doesn't really fit for the early campaign.

    Tarku could be removed. However, then you'd have to add all of Finland to another region which doesn't really work either.
    You are right- I wrote Kiev but I was thinking Novgorod. Although I meant it in the context of Tartu or something else.

    As for Riga- I thought it existed much earlier than 12th century? Just that Germans and others didn't establish outposts to trade there until 12th century. But there was a town inhabited there for a very long time.


    Why not add Turku to Novgorod? In this period Swedish settlement was sporadic and probably as much or less than had occurred already in other Rus regions that Novgorod starts with control over. Novgorod did have alot of small trade missions but there were no major settlements or military fortifications until 13th century. So I think its fine to merged with Novgorod with just some resources. It certainly shouldn't be a castle in 1100 start. Though if Reval is kept that might be a castle.

    What do you think of something besides Reval? Since Reval didn't achieve importance until later but there were some other towns in the interior.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •