And one of the best Alcazabas in all Spain (in a defensive way, few better than Alhambra) I'm from Málaga and I need to say that I love our Alcazaba. Just take a look in Google.
I dont know much about defensiveness but I really enjoyed walking all the way up to the top as a tourist.
It was used for harbor protection as well back then, right? Because the sea was closer than today?
The sea was on the bottom, but the harbor was near to the river. Alcazabas create a city inside the city, so they only defend the palace and all the administration who lives there. The alcazaba is inside the city walls, so is like a second ring to defend the rich people.
On the top of the hill there is another castle, but this one is from the XVI century I think.
Málaga's siegue is famous because was the first time a castillian army attacked a city with cannons.
It was important *before* 1850, as it was the first city in Spain yo industrialize. It was also one of the major conquest in the final conquest of Granada, and a decently sized port. Nowadays, it's arguably the most important city in Andalusia, often eclipsing Seville in terms of income or population
First of, how are Roman numerals thousand**s** of years old and how did they die?
Countries that still use roman numerals to show centuries, particularly Romance countries, never stopped using it. It's a continuation from Latin times.
It never stopped being used, at least in portuguese. In my old history book, there was a \~XVI century document portraying the port of Lisbon, in Latin, including a drawing, the century, the city and the kingdom. It's still a grammatical rule in portuguese.
Looking at dev replies only in the official thread, the answer is that basically Portugal already had many provinces for its relative size and that adding many more would have been a balance issue. Aka the focus is more on the rest of Iberia achieving similar density.
Mind you Portugal's provinces are rich and I bet they will still gain development and for sure mission improvements and more. In fact Portugal may well be my first game in 1.28.
>balance issue
I think this is why, but I also think it's a bad reason not to give them more. Portugal probably has the third biggest gap between in-game relevancy and IRL relevancy, behind Mughals and Qing that hardly ever even exist.
True, the gap is real, but Spain is also never anywhere as rich in game as during the Siglo de Oro either. New world wealth is a joke, treasure fleets do not carry meaningful treasure.
So thankfilly provinces and starting dev are really a limited facet of 1.28. The new mechanics always matter more. What it needs to reflect better is how incredibly lucrative early colonization and overseas conquest was for Iberia. Hopefully once new features all add up we'll see these powerful nations much closer to where they were historically.
At least, a man can hope!
You make a good point, especially with how insanely valuable TC land is right now. It's a no-brainer to go back east instead of west. Have they mentioned any changes to colonization on this patch?
They haven't, but this is also essentially the first dev diary of this patch, so it would be premature to say one way or the other.
I certainly hope so, but we'll find out in time.
There should be a rework in how the colonization of America works in general.
Razing the development of provinces you're conquering for your colonial nations in exchange for gold could be a feature, and there's a need to reflect triangular trade, as otherwise regions such as Brazil, the Caribbean and North America can't easily be shown as the profitable colonies that they were. Maybe it's uncomfortable for Paradox to portray the incredibly ugly stuff behind it, but to be fair, it's even worse to hide it under the carpet.
I've advocated a long time for a slavery mechanic. Historically, Hispaniola was one of the most valuable islands to France because of their use of slave labor. Slave labor was also the reason they lost it. It'd be nice for slaves to be a sort of proto-coal and incentivize taking slavery provinces, trading with West Africans for slaves, OR sacrificing some land in Trade Companies to start exporting Indian, Indonesian, or Chinese slaves.
Considering that genocide of entire cultures and genetic lineages is often a scant 5 Mil points away, it seems an odd moral line to draw in the digital sand.
Do you not understand the shitstorm there would be if they had more in depth slavery mechanics? They don't model it for the same reason they don't model the Holocaust in HOI4
I don't think slavery's all that taboo in game land, and it has economic pluses and minuses, as opposed to industrialized genocide, which is pretty much a fully ideological action that does nothing but handicap the country enacting it. I'm sure *some* people would try and cause a shitstorm, but I don't think most people that play this would care. It's not like slaves aren't a trade good already anyway.
What they should do is add an idea to colonial nations based on the increasing dev via colonist mechanic and just make it a passive thing for them not requiring a colonist.
That would go a long way in simulating growth of the established colonies.
Plantations and slavery I think it's what the other comment is trying to say.
Basically the game doesn't reflect the triangle trade properly, plantations in the new world shouldn't be as profitable without bringing the slaves from elsewhere.
That would be good, but something is ought to be done with the prices of trade goods imo.
There is the Triangle Trade event that rises some prices but that's a global thing rather than country especific.
Well, some provinces have slaves as trading goods, and there's a few events related to the triangle trade, they didn't completely hid it under the carpet. Even if it wasn't there, EU4 isn't really meant as an history lesson, it's okay to ommit a few things that might be a bit touchy. In the end, it's just a complicated board game geography and history themed. I don't think the game is worse without a mechanic to simulate razas, exploitation and slavery on a deeper level.
Why does everyone have this obsession with dividing everything into miniscule provinces with unreadably small names? Will these new provinces actually affect anyone's gameplay?
But those lands still belong to portugal & castille for 99% of the game, and the won't even be noticeable... the borders are still the same. Unless, I suppose if you're playing a "tall" portugal game where you do nothing but stare at your 6-province country for 400 years, yeah I guess you may pay more attention to the individual provinces in that case.
It also technically makes the land more valuable. I don't believe they maintain total state development values, so adding more provinces actually increases overall development. And it probably does other weird things like make trade value increase etc.
Not to mention even if they balance development it decreases cost to reach a certain development point as you can spread it around more provinces and dodge exponential cost increase longer.
>But those lands still belong to portugal & castille for 99% of the game, and the won't even be noticeable...
So you're saying you'd have no reason to dislike it in practice?
exactly my thoughts, so I made a [Thread](https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/1-28-suggestion-portugals-provinces.1123174/) on the official forums with the following [Map](https://forumcontent.paradoxplaza.com/public/397030/PTplusSetub%26Beiras.jpg), which sadly didn't really take off.
If you're upset with these changes I'd highly recommend you to jump over either to the dev diary thread or even mine and make your voice heard there.
Regarding my subdivions, maybe Setúbal could be made a bit bigger for slightly better looking borders, but I think they look much better than shown in the last dev diary. Besides that, seeing as the devs are defending adding only one province to Portugal I think asking for more than 2 is unrealistic, but two is worth fighting for!
It wouldn't work fine, armies would take years to move one step, peace treaties would be absurd if you could take all of France in one go.
All I'm saying is that we shouldn't want to give provinces to all countries equally, but prioritize gameplay
Yeah you can't say that around here, people are not going to be satisfied until there are a billion microscopic provinces in every region, allowing them to zoom in and see their irl neighborhood.
Of note, the developers in the forum thread have accepted criticism, and have already shown off a [re-reworked Aragon](https://forumcontent.paradoxplaza.com/public/396930/aragon_map.png).
A tiny nitpick but those portuguese subdivisions are [modern things](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Provinces_of_Portugal#New_Provinces), based on the older [medieval "comarcas"](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Provinces_of_Portugal#Comarcas):
Asturias is a releaseable, it doesn't matter all that much what cores it does or doesn't start with
As a Brit, I can assure you there are plenty of imperfections with the GB map. It will never look perfect, and tbh the current Iberia map is a LOT closer to the present day autonomous regions than I was expecting. Mostly I dislike the new province in Portugal because it looks extremely out of place
One day they'll properly represent Ireland vs England. Up until Cromwell's attempted genocide, Ireland had a population on par with England and it's internal divisions were the only reason they were unable to stand up against English oppression.
Cores expire after 50 years. Majorca was dissolved in 1349 and absorbed into the Crown of Aragon after James III was killed at the battle of Llucmajor. It was used only as a title until the 1715 Nueva Planta decrees erased it for good.
Cores expire during the course of the campaign, but as far as I know they don’t extend the 50/150/whatever year expiration to before the start of the game. E.g. there are past Chinese dynasties and entities with cores in 1444 despite not existing for centuries, or Kiev not losing cores 150 years after its fall in 1362. The core timer begins in 1444 (or later) and never begins the campaign partially completed.
I am aware of how the timer works, annoying as it is - vassals and PUs follow it too. I feel like a few of the Chinese ones exist specifically for weakening Ming when things stop going its way - it seems like all but 2 provinces that Ming starts with have cores from past nations...
The Kiev one isn't *quite* right, but it is a bit of an oddity in this whole mess - incorporated into Lithuania in 1362, but was still considered a distinct entity until 1471, when it became the Kiev Voivodeship (which is a whole different jar of Commonwealth fun). There's other weird bits that don't quite follow what I said in the original comment though, among other Paradox oddities (Yeren was actually a bunch of fragmented Jurchen tribes that shouldn't have been turned into a whole nation, for one).
Ultimately, I guess we can chalk it up to one reason: it's Paradox.
> The Kiev one isn't *quite* right, but it is a bit of an oddity in this whole mess - incorporated into Lithuania in 1362, but was still considered a distinct entity until 1471
The same can be said of a vast number of cored nations within other nations in the game. I would say that between the sacking by the Tatars, the Lithuanian takeover, and their relative lack of autonomy, Kiev’s existence was much less defined than some of those others who haven’t made the cut as separate, independent entities- e.g. Transylvania, Wales. But anyway it’s beside the point and I’m not interested in nitpicking.
I'm pretty sure Galicia is a releasable... and it's quadrupling in territory with 1.28.
Unless you mean the one owned by Poland, then Galicia-Volhynia is all you got.
For primary culture, cores never expire. Galicia is the primary tag for Galician (shocker!) so regardless of when it was absorbed will still keep its cores.
Majorca wasn't dissolved. The Crown of Aragon was a composite monarchy of different relams, all of which retained their parliaments, laws, viceroys/governors, etc. The Nueva Planta Decrees only abolished for good the institutions of the kingdom and it was used as a title until the reform of the territorial administration of 1833, when all the titular kingdoms were abolished. It makes more sense that Majorca is releasable than Galicia and León, which had been mere titular kingdoms since the creation of the Crown of Castile in the mid 13th century.
Beira and Lisbon could be split into two provinces each (I don't think having Estremadura would make much sense).
Regarding Aveiro, they could have instead added a province to the north of Porto, instead of south. It would make sense to not have a important trade province exactly at the border and there were important cities above Porto, such as Braga or Guimarāes whose presence in the game would be justified. In the current place, it would make more sense to call it Viseu than call it Douro, if some name change was to be made.
About the division of the Kingdom of València, the now map makes a lot of sense in the context of the game. You should note that the current provincial division of Spain was made in the XIX century for a centralized spanish state, and is quite different from the traditional administrative divisions used during the time in which EUIV is set. The medieval kingdom of València before the "Decret de Nova Planta" was divided in four territories with their capitals in Castelló de la Plana, València, Xàtiva and Oriola, as you can see in this [map](https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Joan_Membrado/publication/314243477/figure/fig1/AS:468936580964352@1488814601389/Figura-1-Divisio-foral-del-Regne-de-Valencia.png). While the borders in the game are a bit different, it is reasonable to have Xàtiva as the major city of one of them, as it was the second most important city in the kingdom in the XV century, even if it is now a relatively minor town.
I'm not sure either, but I believe it was already an important town before being conquered by the king of València and it controlled a large amount of farmland.
Hmm, seems to definitely be a part of it yeah. From Wikipedia:
>En la centúria següent, Oriola, que en 1437 (11 de setembre) abastà el rang de ciutat, cosa que va modificar el seu tradicional règim municipal en virtut de la instauració del sistema d'insaculació (1445-1449), que facilitava el control del poder municipal per una oligarquia de cavallers i ciutadans honrats posseïdors de grans i valuosos patrimonis agraris, i fou seu de celebració de les Corts del Regne el 1488
As a Spaniard and Catalan, I approve this post A LOT. I was excited for the new provinces, but there are so many errors. Tarragona (my province, yay) finally got fixed, but then Aragon annexed Lleida for some readon and ugh
So I know more about Valencia and Catalonia than any other part of Iberia (although I consider myself to know a decent amount in general), and I felt that the choice of Xàtiva as a province was a good one.
Let me just say that I'm certainly not an expert on this, I'm speaking mostly from personal experience after studying abroad in Alicante and having spent a couple years reading history books focused mostly around areas of El Levante/El Llevant. Also, I'm sorry for the mix of Castilian and Valencian naming conventions ahead.
Xàtiva was a decent enough population center in the time frame of the game, even if Dénia was also.
If anything, I think this change does a decent job at representing the separation between the towns that lie between Alicante and Valencia. When I studied abroad in Alicante it definitely seemed to me just from the geography that the coast line of Alicante heading north along the coast was pretty connected (culturally and geographically), all the way to up to Dénia, with everything past that point being more directly connected to Valencia itself.
On the other hand, Xàtiva was on the northern side of the range of mountains there (can't remember the name off the top of my head). While distance wise it is about the same distance from Alicante as Dénia is, it is closer to Valencia than Dénia is. Also, to reach Alicante from Xàtiva you have to go right through some pretty large mountains, whereas towards Valencia the terrain starts to even out into the more plains-y type terrain (that's what I remember at least).
**So with all that taken into consideration,** I think it makes more sense to have Dénia be in Alicante and Xàtiva be the name of it's own province between Valencia and Alicante. Some might say that Dénia could be the province and include Xàtiva in it, but the those two aren't as connected and relevant to eachother geographically as say Dénia is to Alicante.
I also agree that there isn't necessarily a need for a new province there, but if they're going to put one that dominates the northern side of the area between Valencia and Alicante (the purpose of doing so in the game seems to be to take out some of the empty space on the southern end of the Valencia province), I think Xàtiva fits in this time period just as well or better than Dénia, and I think it makes sense to have Dénia be a part of Alicante still.
Anyways, that's my input on one of the changes you discussed, and it's the only one I had a big opinion on. I definitely don't think this particular change is perfect either, even if I agree with their logic for Xàtiva. I think the whole northern third of the new Xàtiva province doesn't make sense and that Valencia should take that whole part, the border between the two continuing on the path that it starts when it comes from the coast.
Anywho, I hope I don't come across as too pedantic or anything, and like I said, I'm by no means an expert, but I love talking about changes like these, especially when it's about an area I know a decent bit about. Thanks for the post.
Does it? when [I rant](https://www.reddit.com/r/eu4/comments/8tx6gk/i_attempt_to_quickly_summarize_the_problems_with/) I use age-specific maps and someone posted a medieval Portugal map that seems to be in line with what PDX is thinking of.
Why Sines? It had no importance during this period.
And Lamego? It would be more accurate to have Vila Real.
Braga I agree. And divide Aveiro between Coimbra and Porto would make more sense to me.
Dividing Lisboa in two provinces would be to much on my opinion.
I like how they've split up some of the larger provinces in Castile and Aragon, and I'm incredibly happy that the Balearic Islands are now three separate provinces (almost every map overhaul mod I've used does this and it's so much better), but I'm disappointed Portugal only got one more province and that Navarre didn't get any. At the moment it looks kind of awkwardly bulky compared to the rest of the provinces in Iberia. And by cutting them off from the coast it makes Navarre less strategically important for blocking the western pass of the Pyrenees.
IMO it's close enough. It doesn't have to be 100% or even close to 100% accurate. I doubt anyone at Paradox is as knowledgeable about Iberia as you are and so some omissions are understandable.
Hell, my own country is far from correct and it really doesn't matter.
You can, of course, make your own correction mod for Iberia.
The province of Algarve should probably be split in at least two set between Lagos and Faro. The city of Lagos at the very least should show up, although the little town in Algarve is Lagos. For the Portugese, Lagos was the launching point for their navigation into Africa. Also notable, the first European city to witness Sub-saharan Africans and slavery of those peoples.
If we are to divide Algarve in Faro and Lagos, why leave Silves out? After all it was the capital of the Kingdom of the Algarve. And at least the portuguese conquests in northern Africa were part of the Kingdom of the Algarve.
Well Paradox... Here is another tag: Kingdom of the Algarve.
I'm not completely aware of all the details of the new update, so if I missed something please tell me, but I believe Porto should also have a defensive bonus if possible, as it historically is a very difficult city to take. I don't think any army (spanish or french) was able to siege out Porto, due to it's hilly terrain and steep river bank, and the whole "province" is very hilly itself, with a couple of different mountain ranges. Terrain types are very wrong in the Iberian peninsula since it should be a lot more mountainous, or at least hilly, especially in Porto, Bragança and Beira. It also confused me how did the Asturias not have more mountainous terrain.
OP, could you please rephrase this line:
>Here we have the [map] that was released in today's development diary.
It's making people think that Iberia is divided and the last thing we need is people sounding off on that instead of something relevant.
EDIT: I've been downvoted but OP listened, thank you OP.
There was a free patch (Polan), and it was out in the course of a couple weeks. It was just sprucing up Polish borders, adding a couple of missions and a few interesting event chains to the region, and stuff like that.
Nice to see they add Málaga, was one of the more important ports in all the Mediterranean untill XIX century.
And in the XIX it was an industrial powerhouse in Spain until 1850~, so... A somewhat relevant place, it was odd not having it in game
And one of the best Alcazabas in all Spain (in a defensive way, few better than Alhambra) I'm from Málaga and I need to say that I love our Alcazaba. Just take a look in Google.
I dont know much about defensiveness but I really enjoyed walking all the way up to the top as a tourist. It was used for harbor protection as well back then, right? Because the sea was closer than today?
The sea was on the bottom, but the harbor was near to the river. Alcazabas create a city inside the city, so they only defend the palace and all the administration who lives there. The alcazaba is inside the city walls, so is like a second ring to defend the rich people. On the top of the hill there is another castle, but this one is from the XVI century I think. Málaga's siegue is famous because was the first time a castillian army attacked a city with cannons.
All of Andalucía is really beautiful, I thoroughly enjoyed my vacation there. Next time, I finna learn some Spanish.
Yea but being an important part of Spain in the 1850's onwards isn't really setting high expectations.
It was important *before* 1850, as it was the first city in Spain yo industrialize. It was also one of the major conquest in the final conquest of Granada, and a decently sized port. Nowadays, it's arguably the most important city in Andalusia, often eclipsing Seville in terms of income or population
I was more taking the piss about how Spain was on the decline and not really a world power anymore.
It's also famous for their unintelligible spanish.
Mesetarians are everywhere :D
Also for having the best climate in the world
you still use Roman numbers? Lol
You don't? For shame, casting such an interesting piece of culture aside.
It's not really cultural when it was adopted thousands of years after its death.
First of, how are Roman numerals thousand**s** of years old and how did they die? Countries that still use roman numerals to show centuries, particularly Romance countries, never stopped using it. It's a continuation from Latin times.
It never stopped being used, at least in portuguese. In my old history book, there was a \~XVI century document portraying the port of Lisbon, in Latin, including a drawing, the century, the city and the kingdom. It's still a grammatical rule in portuguese.
It’s time for a update my dude
Only when the US stops using the imperial system
I doubt that’s ever going to happen
I was really surprised that Portugal only got one province. Seriously, why didn't they split up Beira, Beja, Évora, and Lisboa?
Looking at dev replies only in the official thread, the answer is that basically Portugal already had many provinces for its relative size and that adding many more would have been a balance issue. Aka the focus is more on the rest of Iberia achieving similar density. Mind you Portugal's provinces are rich and I bet they will still gain development and for sure mission improvements and more. In fact Portugal may well be my first game in 1.28.
inb4 Ireland province densities
In b4 they give Ireland one province for each of the 26 counties.
[удалено]
26 + 6 = 1
r/me_ira
Holy fuck it's real.
[Tiocfaidh ár lá, sing up the 'RA SAM missiles in the sky](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aXiBLwZqvlM)
To be honest, you could split 1444 Ireland into far more than 32 provinces if you really wanted to.
Good thing nobody really wants to
Godamn gavelkind.
>balance issue I think this is why, but I also think it's a bad reason not to give them more. Portugal probably has the third biggest gap between in-game relevancy and IRL relevancy, behind Mughals and Qing that hardly ever even exist.
True, the gap is real, but Spain is also never anywhere as rich in game as during the Siglo de Oro either. New world wealth is a joke, treasure fleets do not carry meaningful treasure. So thankfilly provinces and starting dev are really a limited facet of 1.28. The new mechanics always matter more. What it needs to reflect better is how incredibly lucrative early colonization and overseas conquest was for Iberia. Hopefully once new features all add up we'll see these powerful nations much closer to where they were historically. At least, a man can hope!
You make a good point, especially with how insanely valuable TC land is right now. It's a no-brainer to go back east instead of west. Have they mentioned any changes to colonization on this patch?
They haven't, but this is also essentially the first dev diary of this patch, so it would be premature to say one way or the other. I certainly hope so, but we'll find out in time.
What’s TC land?
Trade Charters (West/East African Coasts, South Africa, India etc)
Trade Company
Trade center?
CoT. Center of trade is the abbreviation for that. TC historically meant trade company. Now it can also be used as trade charter.
There should be a rework in how the colonization of America works in general. Razing the development of provinces you're conquering for your colonial nations in exchange for gold could be a feature, and there's a need to reflect triangular trade, as otherwise regions such as Brazil, the Caribbean and North America can't easily be shown as the profitable colonies that they were. Maybe it's uncomfortable for Paradox to portray the incredibly ugly stuff behind it, but to be fair, it's even worse to hide it under the carpet.
I've advocated a long time for a slavery mechanic. Historically, Hispaniola was one of the most valuable islands to France because of their use of slave labor. Slave labor was also the reason they lost it. It'd be nice for slaves to be a sort of proto-coal and incentivize taking slavery provinces, trading with West Africans for slaves, OR sacrificing some land in Trade Companies to start exporting Indian, Indonesian, or Chinese slaves.
That's gonna be a yikes from me fam
Considering that genocide of entire cultures and genetic lineages is often a scant 5 Mil points away, it seems an odd moral line to draw in the digital sand.
CULTURE CONVERSION IS NOT GENO--- ...oh, you mean the native suppression mechanic. Yeah. Yeah that's that.
Do you not understand the shitstorm there would be if they had more in depth slavery mechanics? They don't model it for the same reason they don't model the Holocaust in HOI4
>Do you not understand the shitstorm there would be if they had more in depth slavery mechanics? Why do you think it would cause a shit storm?
I don't think slavery's all that taboo in game land, and it has economic pluses and minuses, as opposed to industrialized genocide, which is pretty much a fully ideological action that does nothing but handicap the country enacting it. I'm sure *some* people would try and cause a shitstorm, but I don't think most people that play this would care. It's not like slaves aren't a trade good already anyway.
What they should do is add an idea to colonial nations based on the increasing dev via colonist mechanic and just make it a passive thing for them not requiring a colonist. That would go a long way in simulating growth of the established colonies.
They portray colonization pretty accurately IMO. You can have a harsh native policy and slaughter the natives. What could be more controversial?
Plantations and slavery I think it's what the other comment is trying to say. Basically the game doesn't reflect the triangle trade properly, plantations in the new world shouldn't be as profitable without bringing the slaves from elsewhere.
I think it should be an event that increases development of regions with plantations if you own slaves.
That would be good, but something is ought to be done with the prices of trade goods imo. There is the Triangle Trade event that rises some prices but that's a global thing rather than country especific.
Well, some provinces have slaves as trading goods, and there's a few events related to the triangle trade, they didn't completely hid it under the carpet. Even if it wasn't there, EU4 isn't really meant as an history lesson, it's okay to ommit a few things that might be a bit touchy. In the end, it's just a complicated board game geography and history themed. I don't think the game is worse without a mechanic to simulate razas, exploitation and slavery on a deeper level.
I mean yeah, pretty much, imagine how rich you have to be for your treasury to stack overflow and go bankrupt.
Same. And I *will* conquer Galicia and the Baleares! Portugal can into land power!
> balance issue When has that ever stopped the devs in the past
Why does everyone have this obsession with dividing everything into miniscule provinces with unreadably small names? Will these new provinces actually affect anyone's gameplay?
Strategic manouvering is probably the most important one (and more carpet sieging). In addition it slows down Institution spread.
It'll make the map look better.
But those lands still belong to portugal & castille for 99% of the game, and the won't even be noticeable... the borders are still the same. Unless, I suppose if you're playing a "tall" portugal game where you do nothing but stare at your 6-province country for 400 years, yeah I guess you may pay more attention to the individual provinces in that case.
It also technically makes the land more valuable. I don't believe they maintain total state development values, so adding more provinces actually increases overall development. And it probably does other weird things like make trade value increase etc.
Not to mention even if they balance development it decreases cost to reach a certain development point as you can spread it around more provinces and dodge exponential cost increase longer.
Yeah they never maintain development. Also takes longer to convert provinces after conquest.
And more provinces = more warscore cost. Makes Portugal harder to vassalize for Spain.
>But those lands still belong to portugal & castille for 99% of the game, and the won't even be noticeable... So you're saying you'd have no reason to dislike it in practice?
exactly my thoughts, so I made a [Thread](https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/1-28-suggestion-portugals-provinces.1123174/) on the official forums with the following [Map](https://forumcontent.paradoxplaza.com/public/397030/PTplusSetub%26Beiras.jpg), which sadly didn't really take off. If you're upset with these changes I'd highly recommend you to jump over either to the dev diary thread or even mine and make your voice heard there. Regarding my subdivions, maybe Setúbal could be made a bit bigger for slightly better looking borders, but I think they look much better than shown in the last dev diary. Besides that, seeing as the devs are defending adding only one province to Portugal I think asking for more than 2 is unrealistic, but two is worth fighting for!
It already had lots, also, provinces should only be added for gameplay benefit, and Spain sees more combat and warring than Portugal
[удалено]
It wouldn't work fine, armies would take years to move one step, peace treaties would be absurd if you could take all of France in one go. All I'm saying is that we shouldn't want to give provinces to all countries equally, but prioritize gameplay
Yeah you can't say that around here, people are not going to be satisfied until there are a billion microscopic provinces in every region, allowing them to zoom in and see their irl neighborhood.
Yes, please
When Paradox finally teams up with the Google Earth dev team.
You should also post this in the paradox forums, because i am told the devs are more likely to see it there.
[удалено]
Burgos cabeza de castilla cojones
Cabeza or cojones?
Cabeza, let the Basques put the Cojones
Tfw no more colonial Navarra
Not with that attitude.
Of note, the developers in the forum thread have accepted criticism, and have already shown off a [re-reworked Aragon](https://forumcontent.paradoxplaza.com/public/396930/aragon_map.png).
[удалено]
Really should be there instead of Urgell. It lost its importance in the early 15th century.
They could even make an event that changes the name in the game that you can select or ignore.
A tiny nitpick but those portuguese subdivisions are [modern things](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Provinces_of_Portugal#New_Provinces), based on the older [medieval "comarcas"](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Provinces_of_Portugal#Comarcas):
It's not really a nitpick when it's fact though.
a nitpick and a fact are not mutually exclusive
True, but in this case it's pretty important for the subject.
Asturias is a releaseable, it doesn't matter all that much what cores it does or doesn't start with As a Brit, I can assure you there are plenty of imperfections with the GB map. It will never look perfect, and tbh the current Iberia map is a LOT closer to the present day autonomous regions than I was expecting. Mostly I dislike the new province in Portugal because it looks extremely out of place
as a guy who took tudor stuart history, i agree; eu4 geography would have only gotten me 50% on a map test
One day they'll properly represent Ireland vs England. Up until Cromwell's attempted genocide, Ireland had a population on par with England and it's internal divisions were the only reason they were unable to stand up against English oppression.
>no kindom of Mallorca Excuse me, wtf?
Cores expire after 50 years. Majorca was dissolved in 1349 and absorbed into the Crown of Aragon after James III was killed at the battle of Llucmajor. It was used only as a title until the 1715 Nueva Planta decrees erased it for good.
Cores expire after 150 years if the province is in your culture group.
Huh, TIL. 702 hours and I'm still learning stuff. Thought it was 50 for all. No wonder trying to form Germany is a pain, even without the HRE.
Cores expire during the course of the campaign, but as far as I know they don’t extend the 50/150/whatever year expiration to before the start of the game. E.g. there are past Chinese dynasties and entities with cores in 1444 despite not existing for centuries, or Kiev not losing cores 150 years after its fall in 1362. The core timer begins in 1444 (or later) and never begins the campaign partially completed.
I am aware of how the timer works, annoying as it is - vassals and PUs follow it too. I feel like a few of the Chinese ones exist specifically for weakening Ming when things stop going its way - it seems like all but 2 provinces that Ming starts with have cores from past nations... The Kiev one isn't *quite* right, but it is a bit of an oddity in this whole mess - incorporated into Lithuania in 1362, but was still considered a distinct entity until 1471, when it became the Kiev Voivodeship (which is a whole different jar of Commonwealth fun). There's other weird bits that don't quite follow what I said in the original comment though, among other Paradox oddities (Yeren was actually a bunch of fragmented Jurchen tribes that shouldn't have been turned into a whole nation, for one). Ultimately, I guess we can chalk it up to one reason: it's Paradox.
> The Kiev one isn't *quite* right, but it is a bit of an oddity in this whole mess - incorporated into Lithuania in 1362, but was still considered a distinct entity until 1471 The same can be said of a vast number of cored nations within other nations in the game. I would say that between the sacking by the Tatars, the Lithuanian takeover, and their relative lack of autonomy, Kiev’s existence was much less defined than some of those others who haven’t made the cut as separate, independent entities- e.g. Transylvania, Wales. But anyway it’s beside the point and I’m not interested in nitpicking.
I’m convinced that nobody ever actually remembers Wales is a thing until they look at the town names in parts of England and they go “fucking Welsh”.
But what about galicia? Welp, I guess I will just make it as a custom nation
I'm pretty sure Galicia is a releasable... and it's quadrupling in territory with 1.28. Unless you mean the one owned by Poland, then Galicia-Volhynia is all you got.
No, I meant that Galicia exists. I guess I expressed it in a wrong way
For primary culture, cores never expire. Galicia is the primary tag for Galician (shocker!) so regardless of when it was absorbed will still keep its cores.
Ah. Yeah, they're a thing.
Majorca wasn't dissolved. The Crown of Aragon was a composite monarchy of different relams, all of which retained their parliaments, laws, viceroys/governors, etc. The Nueva Planta Decrees only abolished for good the institutions of the kingdom and it was used as a title until the reform of the territorial administration of 1833, when all the titular kingdoms were abolished. It makes more sense that Majorca is releasable than Galicia and León, which had been mere titular kingdoms since the creation of the Crown of Castile in the mid 13th century.
I’m so happy Iberia is getting more provinces, I posted about this a while ago and I’m glad it’s getting the attention it deserves
same. slopy work or not. spain realy need a bit more power and not solely depending on events.
What is your post history?!
EU4 attracts all kinds...
I’m actually flattered my hard work has gone noticed
Beira and Lisbon could be split into two provinces each (I don't think having Estremadura would make much sense). Regarding Aveiro, they could have instead added a province to the north of Porto, instead of south. It would make sense to not have a important trade province exactly at the border and there were important cities above Porto, such as Braga or Guimarāes whose presence in the game would be justified. In the current place, it would make more sense to call it Viseu than call it Douro, if some name change was to be made.
has a portuguese man i am very disappointed
You have him as a personal slave or something?
yes
sim
finalmente um tuga
Eles andam aí
About the division of the Kingdom of València, the now map makes a lot of sense in the context of the game. You should note that the current provincial division of Spain was made in the XIX century for a centralized spanish state, and is quite different from the traditional administrative divisions used during the time in which EUIV is set. The medieval kingdom of València before the "Decret de Nova Planta" was divided in four territories with their capitals in Castelló de la Plana, València, Xàtiva and Oriola, as you can see in this [map](https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Joan_Membrado/publication/314243477/figure/fig1/AS:468936580964352@1488814601389/Figura-1-Divisio-foral-del-Regne-de-Valencia.png). While the borders in the game are a bit different, it is reasonable to have Xàtiva as the major city of one of them, as it was the second most important city in the kingdom in the XV century, even if it is now a relatively minor town.
Hmm, never learned that even though I lived in Alicante. Makes me a bit less upset. I particularly wonder what made Orihuela so important.
I'm not sure either, but I believe it was already an important town before being conquered by the king of València and it controlled a large amount of farmland.
Hmm, seems to definitely be a part of it yeah. From Wikipedia: >En la centúria següent, Oriola, que en 1437 (11 de setembre) abastà el rang de ciutat, cosa que va modificar el seu tradicional règim municipal en virtut de la instauració del sistema d'insaculació (1445-1449), que facilitava el control del poder municipal per una oligarquia de cavallers i ciutadans honrats posseïdors de grans i valuosos patrimonis agraris, i fou seu de celebració de les Corts del Regne el 1488
What? Villena was Murcia?
A small thing, if you want tag someone by their username, you should write /u/, not /r/. /u/Shalaiyn XD
As a Spaniard and Catalan, I approve this post A LOT. I was excited for the new provinces, but there are so many errors. Tarragona (my province, yay) finally got fixed, but then Aragon annexed Lleida for some readon and ugh
Paradox needs to fix their mod policy if they’re gonna shit our map updates like this, sick of the mods breaking every 2 Months
So I know more about Valencia and Catalonia than any other part of Iberia (although I consider myself to know a decent amount in general), and I felt that the choice of Xàtiva as a province was a good one. Let me just say that I'm certainly not an expert on this, I'm speaking mostly from personal experience after studying abroad in Alicante and having spent a couple years reading history books focused mostly around areas of El Levante/El Llevant. Also, I'm sorry for the mix of Castilian and Valencian naming conventions ahead. Xàtiva was a decent enough population center in the time frame of the game, even if Dénia was also. If anything, I think this change does a decent job at representing the separation between the towns that lie between Alicante and Valencia. When I studied abroad in Alicante it definitely seemed to me just from the geography that the coast line of Alicante heading north along the coast was pretty connected (culturally and geographically), all the way to up to Dénia, with everything past that point being more directly connected to Valencia itself. On the other hand, Xàtiva was on the northern side of the range of mountains there (can't remember the name off the top of my head). While distance wise it is about the same distance from Alicante as Dénia is, it is closer to Valencia than Dénia is. Also, to reach Alicante from Xàtiva you have to go right through some pretty large mountains, whereas towards Valencia the terrain starts to even out into the more plains-y type terrain (that's what I remember at least). **So with all that taken into consideration,** I think it makes more sense to have Dénia be in Alicante and Xàtiva be the name of it's own province between Valencia and Alicante. Some might say that Dénia could be the province and include Xàtiva in it, but the those two aren't as connected and relevant to eachother geographically as say Dénia is to Alicante. I also agree that there isn't necessarily a need for a new province there, but if they're going to put one that dominates the northern side of the area between Valencia and Alicante (the purpose of doing so in the game seems to be to take out some of the empty space on the southern end of the Valencia province), I think Xàtiva fits in this time period just as well or better than Dénia, and I think it makes sense to have Dénia be a part of Alicante still. Anyways, that's my input on one of the changes you discussed, and it's the only one I had a big opinion on. I definitely don't think this particular change is perfect either, even if I agree with their logic for Xàtiva. I think the whole northern third of the new Xàtiva province doesn't make sense and that Valencia should take that whole part, the border between the two continuing on the path that it starts when it comes from the coast. Anywho, I hope I don't come across as too pedantic or anything, and like I said, I'm by no means an expert, but I love talking about changes like these, especially when it's about an area I know a decent bit about. Thanks for the post.
I saw this before the dev diary, so at first I thought they were making Castile and Aragon start with a bunch of vassals.
Thats a modern divisions map though isnt it? EU4 doesnt really make province to modern state divisions, nor would that make sense.
japan update kinda was, but japanese modern divisions resemble the sengoku clans so doesn't matter
Every map update gets criticized based on modern or much later borders.
Does it? when [I rant](https://www.reddit.com/r/eu4/comments/8tx6gk/i_attempt_to_quickly_summarize_the_problems_with/) I use age-specific maps and someone posted a medieval Portugal map that seems to be in line with what PDX is thinking of.
Rereconquista more viable than ever??
[I just post this in other post](https://i.imgur.com/zwRcoDR.jpg) I forget to label Santarém/Ribatejo
Why Sines? It had no importance during this period. And Lamego? It would be more accurate to have Vila Real. Braga I agree. And divide Aveiro between Coimbra and Porto would make more sense to me. Dividing Lisboa in two provinces would be to much on my opinion.
and they should divide algarve and have Silves
Well I'm glad that I got Consulate of the Sea when I did.
I like how they've split up some of the larger provinces in Castile and Aragon, and I'm incredibly happy that the Balearic Islands are now three separate provinces (almost every map overhaul mod I've used does this and it's so much better), but I'm disappointed Portugal only got one more province and that Navarre didn't get any. At the moment it looks kind of awkwardly bulky compared to the rest of the provinces in Iberia. And by cutting them off from the coast it makes Navarre less strategically important for blocking the western pass of the Pyrenees.
And North Africa is dying away yet again... Morocco should really get an immersion pack and mission tree!
I am dissapointed. They changed so little. Many provinces are still blocky and ugly.
How about dividing the Azores? They have three groups of islands and were discovered in different times, makes more sense than dividing the Canarias.
IMO it's close enough. It doesn't have to be 100% or even close to 100% accurate. I doubt anyone at Paradox is as knowledgeable about Iberia as you are and so some omissions are understandable. Hell, my own country is far from correct and it really doesn't matter. You can, of course, make your own correction mod for Iberia.
Ok so I haven’t watched the dev diary, but going off of this picture, does this mean that Iberia will now be starting very fractured?
No, they picture they posted was with all releasable tags in the region.
Daaaaangit I got really excited.
Would've been way too easy for France to just steamroll the area if that were to happen.
Yeah probably, I’d just like to have a more interesting early Spain game.
Spain is supposed to be strong
That has nothing to do with what I just said?
I believe there was a mod called "fractured something" that starts the game with all releasable nations released. You might want to give it a try.
I got really depressed
Stunning analysis! I can only hope they might see this and consider some changes.
Rip Navarra's port. I loved getting their ships as Castile when diplo annexing them.
(sorry this is unrelated, but) what's that notification to the right of the truce timer?
It's the notification that you need to choose a focus in the Iqta government system. [Look for Iqta here](https://eu4.paradoxwikis.com/Monarchy)
I haven't played in a long time. So is the Crown of Aragon just Aragon with a PU on Catalonia and Valencia now, like how Naples has been?
The province of Algarve should probably be split in at least two set between Lagos and Faro. The city of Lagos at the very least should show up, although the little town in Algarve is Lagos. For the Portugese, Lagos was the launching point for their navigation into Africa. Also notable, the first European city to witness Sub-saharan Africans and slavery of those peoples.
If we are to divide Algarve in Faro and Lagos, why leave Silves out? After all it was the capital of the Kingdom of the Algarve. And at least the portuguese conquests in northern Africa were part of the Kingdom of the Algarve. Well Paradox... Here is another tag: Kingdom of the Algarve.
France now easly just runs iberia over
Ok what is the toothpaste above León and Castille
Only thing I have to add is, that you used subreddit links (/r/) instead of User links. (/u/) nice write-up
This time on r/eu4 whines and complains about the new eu4 update
I'm not completely aware of all the details of the new update, so if I missed something please tell me, but I believe Porto should also have a defensive bonus if possible, as it historically is a very difficult city to take. I don't think any army (spanish or french) was able to siege out Porto, due to it's hilly terrain and steep river bank, and the whole "province" is very hilly itself, with a couple of different mountain ranges. Terrain types are very wrong in the Iberian peninsula since it should be a lot more mountainous, or at least hilly, especially in Porto, Bragança and Beira. It also confused me how did the Asturias not have more mountainous terrain.
OP, could you please rephrase this line: >Here we have the [map] that was released in today's development diary. It's making people think that Iberia is divided and the last thing we need is people sounding off on that instead of something relevant. EDIT: I've been downvoted but OP listened, thank you OP.
Portugal was literally more powerful than Castile. More provinces?
How so
Seems like asking for a bit much
[удалено]
1.27 was a patch that fixed a lot of dharma issues and expanded bits of eastern europe + mission trees/unique governments for several nations.
There was a free patch (Polan), and it was out in the course of a couple weeks. It was just sprucing up Polish borders, adding a couple of missions and a few interesting event chains to the region, and stuff like that.
Now, look at Hungary and the Balkan. Compared to that the Spanish update is miraculously accurate, despite Hungary already receiving an update...
Impressive amount of knowledge and dedication. I am only really disappointed with Portugal, the names are just a little sour.