Baltic Crusades

[theBastard]

This looks very promising. This specific place are one of my favourites in history (I'm biased because I'm from there), so I really hope to see this through. Good luck and keep up the good work!

thanks. now it is more on mods as me, I think

[Commander9]

thanks. now it is more on mods as me, I think

Looks good enough for me

Btw, if you'd like to be geographically accurate, you'd have to change Saule to Siauliai (Šiauliai), Kavno to Kaunas, Sudovia to Suduva, Auksrairija to Aukstaitija (Aukštaitija). Also, Samogiria and Dutchy of Samogiria should be changed to Zemaitija (Žemaitija) and Dutchy of Žemaitija, while Sudovia becomes Suvalija or Suduva (Sudūva). I have no idea what Clarsovie is

I hope that helps

[theBastard]

Looks good enough for me

thanks

Btw, if you'd like to be geographically accurate, you'd have to change Saule to Siauliai (Šiauliai), Kavno to Kaunas, Sudovia to Suduva, Auksrairija to Aukstaitija. Also, Samogiria and Dutchy of Samogiria should be changed to Zemaitija (Žemaitija) and Dutchy of Žemaitija,(Aukštaitija).

1, everywhere where you think is "r" (Auksrairija) is "t" - it´s all style font, look at Memelbrug how "r" looks.
2, I used latin or german names for regions or settlements. it was common and I think also better, because when I will use Lithuanian names I should also use Estonian names, Latvian names. maybe the best will be when I also change Polish names to latin or german than...

while Sudovia becomes Suvalija or Suduva (Sudūva). I have no idea what Clarsovie is

1, Sudovia/Sudova/Suvalija(not Suvalkija?) is maybe for longest discussion. I understand you, you are from there (Lithuania) so you can see Lithuanian names on the map

"In recent years there has been a public debate as to which name, Suvalkija or Sudovia, is preferable. Historians have argued that Sudovia is an anachronism that refers to the land in the 13th and 14th centuries.[9] One commentator labeled the effort to rename the region as "neotribalism" – an artificial attempt to find connections with the long-extinct tribe.[10] Supporters of Sudovia protested against using a term imposed on the region by the Russian Empire, especially since the city of Suwałki is in Poland and the current region has no connection with it.[11] They have also argued that the term Suvalkija is a fairly recent and artificial political development, popularized by Soviet historians, and that the more archaic Sudovia more correctly reflects the region's historical roots.[12] The suffix -ija is not generally used in the Lithuanian language to derive placenames from city names (the only exception is Vilnija, used to describe the Vilnius Region).[13] An official petition from the Council for Protection of the Suvalkija Regional Ethnic Culture to the Commission of the Lithuanian Language, requesting an official name change from Suvalkija to Sudovia, was rejected in 2005.[9] The Commission based the decision on its finding that Suvalkija prevails in both academic literature and everyday life. The decision was not voted on by the inhabitants of the region."

2, Carsovie (not Clarsovie - again old style font confused you) - "Pirmą kartą Jurbarkas minimas 1259 m. P. Dusburgiečio kronikoje, kai Prūsijos ir Livonijos kryžiuočiai, atplaukę Nemunu, abiejų magistrų lygiomis lėšomis Karšuvos srityje, ant šv. Jurgio kalno (in terra Carsovie in monte Gergii) pastatė Georgenburgo pilį. Tai viena seniausių kryžiuočių pilių Lietuvoje, daug kartų minima ordinų kronikose." or http://wiki-de.genealogy.net/Die_Kuren

I hope that helps

yes, I´m open to advices

[Commander9]

1, everywhere where you think is "r" (Auksrairija) is "t" - it´s all style font, look at Memelbrug how "r" looks.
2, I used latin or german names for regions or settlements. it was common and I think also better, because when I will use Lithuanian names I should also use Estonian names, Latvian names. maybe the best will be when I also change Polish names to latin or german than...

My bad. I probably should've used my glasses Well, I could still get the real names for latvian/estonian settlements without any problems (estonian would be the harder ones).

The thing about using latin names, a lot of settlements (okay, not a lot, but few) have been very minor and weren't too influential in that period (like Kaunas). In fact, Trakai (the capital after Kernave, but before VIlnius) has been one of the major cities and a lot of treaties have been signed there (some treacheries too!). It's your map and I will like it however you will make it, but I'm just trying to be helpful.

1, Sudovia/Sudova/Suvalija(not Suvalkija?) is maybe for longest discussion. I understand you, you are from there (Lithuania) so you can see Lithuanian names on the map

"In recent years there has been a public debate as to which name, Suvalkija or Sudovia, is preferable. Historians have argued that Sudovia is an anachronism that refers to the land in the 13th and 14th centuries.[9] One commentator labeled the effort to rename the region as "neotribalism" – an artificial attempt to find connections with the long-extinct tribe.[10] Supporters of Sudovia protested against using a term imposed on the region by the Russian Empire, especially since the city of Suwałki is in Poland and the current region has no connection with it.[11] They have also argued that the term Suvalkija is a fairly recent and artificial political development, popularized by Soviet historians, and that the more archaic Sudovia more correctly reflects the region's historical roots.[12] The suffix -ija is not generally used in the Lithuanian language to derive placenames from city names (the only exception is Vilnija, used to describe the Vilnius Region).[13] An official petition from the Council for Protection of the Suvalkija Regional Ethnic Culture to the Commission of the Lithuanian Language, requesting an official name change from Suvalkija to Sudovia, was rejected in 2005.[9] The Commission based the decision on its finding that Suvalkija prevails in both academic literature and everyday life. The decision was not voted on by the inhabitants of the region."

2, Carsovie (not Clarsovie - again old style font confused you) - "Pirmą kartą Jurbarkas minimas 1259 m. P. Dusburgiečio kronikoje, kai Prūsijos ir Livonijos kryžiuočiai, atplaukę Nemunu, abiejų magistrų lygiomis lėšomis Karšuvos srityje, ant šv. Jurgio kalno (in terra Carsovie in monte Gergii) pastatė Georgenburgo pilį. Tai viena seniausių kryžiuočių pilių Lietuvoje, daug kartų minima ordinų kronikose." or http://wiki-de.genealogy.net/Die_Kuren

Yes, SuvalKija (that was a mistype). The name was actually quite popular even before the soviets, but I definitely agree that they've influenced it's popularity and usage of today. IMO, best name would be Suduva (Sudūva), but If you're going with latin names, Sudovia is fine.

Ah, Karšuva. Lol, my bad again. Yes, I know what you're talking, so we can close this part.

yes, I´m open to advices

I'm just trying to be helpful.

[theBastard]

maybe it could be, that independent nations (Lithuania, Poland, and lands under the Germanic orders rule) will have their own names and others will use latin names. so for Estonian regions are not Estonian names necessary because Estonia was not realy independent (time to time was under rule of Teutonic Order or Danes).

I thought about Trakai, I could add it to the map and kick off Vilnius.

thanks for your help and if you will have time and intention, could you post all Lithuanian names here? thanks.

[Commander9]

maybe it could be, that independent nations (Lithuania, Poland, and lands under the Germanic orders rule) will have their own names and others will use latin names. so for Estonian regions are not Estonian names necessary because Estonia was not realy independent (time to time was under rule of Teutonic Order or Danes).

I thought about Trakai, I could add it to the map and kick off Vilnius.

thanks for your help and if you will have time and intention, could you post all Lithuanian names here? thanks.

Yeah, that would make sense (for me, anyways).

No, don't kick Vilnius out. If you're kicking something out, it has to be Kaunas as it was a very small settlement with a wooden castle and didn't even get the Magdenburg rigts until XV century (If I'm not mistaken) when crusades were over.

Which ones? I've already posted some, but I wouldn't mind adding some more. (If you'd specific, I'd gladly help)

Also, not sure about this, but have you thought off adding Battle of Grunwald (Battle of Žalgiris/Battle of Tannenberg)? Not sure if this wouldn't destroy the balance, but It could be either a victory condition (a neutral that starts with 30 and you'd have to hold on for a turn to win the game) or auto-deploy spot?

[theBastard]

Yeah, that would make sense (for me, anyways).

yup, so this is clearly.

No, don't kick Vilnius out. If you're kicking something out, it has to be Kaunas as it was a very small settlement with a wooden castle and didn't even get the Magdenburg rigts until XV century (If I'm not mistaken) when crusades were over.

Kovno I added because I need any Hanseatic town there (maybe Kovno was a member of hanseatic league later, but it was trade partner of Hansa towns). so kicking off Kovno will broke balance, maybe...

Which ones? I've already posted some, but I wouldn't mind adding some more. (If you'd specific, I'd gladly help)

thanks. o.k. I will look which ones i should used and which ones i will find. than I will write you for help if some will be missed...

Also, not sure about this, but have you thought off adding Battle of Grunwald (Battle of Žalgiris/Battle of Tannenberg)? Not sure if this wouldn't destroy the balance, but It could be either a victory condition (a neutral that starts with 30 and you'd have to hold on for a turn to win the game) or auto-deploy spot?

when you look at the earliest version of the map (in the first post) you can see there Grunwald. now there is Rhein, but I can chenge them. the victory condition is set up for now, it is map mostly about Crusaders. I thought about two versions of conditions:
1, hold Teutonc Crusaders stronghlods (how it is now)
2, unite Poland and Lithuania to Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth (so hold Polish/Lithuanians strongholds)

if there could be way to change victory conditions to this (2 versions) holding the Grunwald could be victory condition for both sides...

[Commander9]

Kovno I added because I need any Hanseatic town there (maybe Kovno was a member of hanseatic league later, but it was trade partner of Hansa towns). so kicking off Kovno will broke balance, maybe...

Yeah, Kaunas only became a member in mid XV a. I do agree that it helps the balancing map out, but historically that's incorrect Then again, Kernave and Trakai were also mainly castles, so it's already a bit off. However, I'd suggest to change Kernave to Trakai as Kernave already lost most of it's importance and two main cities were Vilnius/Trakai.

thanks. o.k. I will look which ones i should used and which ones i will find. than I will write you for help if some will be missed...

Sounds great

when you look at the earliest version of the map (in the first post) you can see there Grunwald. now there is Rhein, but I can chenge them. the victory condition is set up for now, it is map mostly about Crusaders. I thought about two versions of conditions:
1, hold Teutonc Crusaders stronghlods (how it is now).
2, unite Poland and Lithuania to Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth (so hold Polish/Lithuanians strongholds)

if there could be way to change victory conditions to this (2 versions) holding the Grunwald could be victory condition for both sides...

Well, in my humble opinion, both #1 and #2 are biased towards a particular faction(s). However, Grunwald was the most important battle during whole period of Baltic Crusades and its outcome would virtually eliminate the faction that lost it. While Teutonic Order did survive, shortly after it became a Vassal of Poland and it stopped being a threat. (Well, stopped being a threat till it became Prussia ) so it would make a lot of sense for it to be the victory condition.

If you would agree with this, the question would be how much to have on it

[theBastard]

there is no problem to change some castles/towns. the main question is gameplay.
1, will it be about Teutonic Order and their campaign in Baltic tribes?
2, will have also other fections important role?
3, will it be build on conflict between Teutons and Lithuanians/Poland?

will you help me with setting gameplay? or you have only interst and could help with some things? I ask because when we will change victory conditions and map idea it means much changes on the map. so if we will do together gameply I will do what is possible for interesting gameplay. when you will not work on gameplay I will only edit some things which are non accurate by history and also use yours advices about Lithuanian names and so on...

[Commander9]

there is no problem to change some castles/towns. the main question is gameplay.
1, will it be about Teutonic Order and their campaign in Baltic tribes?
2, will have also other fections important role?
3, will it be build on conflict between Teutons and Lithuanians/Poland?

will you help me with setting gameplay? or you have only interst and could help with some things? I ask because when we will change victory conditions and map idea it means much changes on the map. so if we will do together gameply I will do what is possible for interesting gameplay. when you will not work on gameplay I will only edit some things which are non accurate by history and also use yours advices about Lithuanian names and so on...

Well, I could try helping you with the concepts and gameplay, if you'd like, but I'm not much of a grapher.

[theBastard]

I know something from graphic, not enough for now, but I learn quickly

o.k. let think about concept. at the first: will it be set up fot Teutons or for more nations?

thanks for your interest and help

[Commander9]

I know something from graphic, not enough for now, but I learn quickly

o.k. let think about concept. at the first: will it be set up fot Teutons or for more nations?

thanks for your interest and help

IMO, it would be better to discuss through PM's or emails (maybe messengers) as I do tend to forget to reply here sometimes

No problems, I really like this project.

Well, IMO, it would have to be more than just about teutons as they have never actually managed to win there and everything was decided in the battle of Grunwald (which they lost). I think this means that the epicentre of the map should be Grunwald and both Teutons and the Baltics should be portrayed as roughly equals. So Grunwald should be the victory condition which would be large enough to not let anyone get it fast (or get it fast and die), but small enough that it would matter. Thoughts?

[theBastard]

this could be good base for gameplay, I think.

Click image to enlarge.

[Industrial Helix]

You're going to need to have a starting neutral on a few territories to prevent a player from getting an unfair advantage by lucky drop. Usually this applies to any bonus under 3 territories, so a neutral in the P. of Rugen, and maybe the non-colored territories.

You should specify on this map what role the non colored territories play.

[theBastard]

there will be some changes... ofcourse the map needs to do good balance. I have some things in the head and Commander9 also has good advices.

the non coloured areas are simply "lands of nobody"... nothing special....

[MarshalNey]

this could be good base for gameplay, I think.

Click image to enlarge.

I really, really, like this as an objective. Looking at the previous discussion, it would be nice to indicate on the map that Grunwald was a battle... just to show the history and why it's part of the victory objective. Maybe a tagline somewhere on the map, something like, "In 1410, a Polish-Lithuanian alliance fought the Teutonic Order at Grunwald in a climactic battle for mastery of the Baltic States."

[theBastard]

yes good idea. the map needs to do more things, but this one I will add there.

[theBastard]

I made some edits by advices hin the topic:

Commander as you can see: trees in the border of Kuyavia are gone, so there are more way to attack Poland. Trakai is castle now, Vilnius only town. there is no dirrect way to Visby. the penalty for holding religious icons is not -2 but only -1. the bonus for Hanseatic towns when you also hold Visby is not +1 for each but +1 for 2. Narva castle was changed to Wenden castle as Teutonic´s stronghold.
I asked about Grunwald as killer neutral. it is impossible to have condition as killer neutral. so maybe it shoud start as 5 neutral? I will work on the position soon.

Marshal, I add to map that Grunwald was place of battle between Teutons and Polish-Lithuanian forces. for more is not enough place, unfortunately...

Click image to enlarge.

[natty dread]

Your bonuses seem really, really high... For example, Estonia which only has 4 territories, and 4 borders to defend, gets a total of 8 troops... Courland is 4 territories with only 1 border and it gets 9 troops.

You should probably cut all the bonuses in half...

[theBastard]

at the previous version is one error. here is current version, Courland has two borders to hold.
bonuses could seems a little peliculiar, I did them quickly. threfore is map here - to resolve them...
so you, natty think that all regional bonuses could be cut in half?

Click image to enlarge.

[natty dread]

I think all bonuses should be cut in half. Castles, towns, regions. +4 autodeploy per castle is too much considering you have castles all over the place... Make it +2 for castles and +1 for towns and hanseatic towns, you can keep the visby bonus as it is for hanseatic towns.

Then cut all the regional bonuses in half, and we can adjust them from there.

[theBastard]

some edits by yours advices. I add to castles +3 auto-deploy, because if Hanseatic towns will have +1 and bonus +1 for 2 if you have Visby I can have castles stronger. about regional bonuses, I did not cut all if them in half, for example Principality of Rugen now has +1 but Duchy of Estonia could not have also +1, I think (Rugen - only 2 regions to conquer/Estonia - 2 regions, 1 castle, + Hansa town to conquer).
but no problem to change them

one question: if Grunwald is condition for "both sides" will it be better that is will be not part of Lordship of Prussia? so it will be nobody´s land (coloured by sand colour?)

Click image to enlarge.

[natty dread]

for example Principality of Rugen now has +1 but Duchy of Estonia could not have also +1, I think (Rugen - only 2 regions to conquer/Estonia - 2 regions, 1 castle, + Hansa town to conquer).

But those castles and towns will also add to the Estonia bonus so you shouldn't count them when thinking of the bonus.

See, if you make Rugen and Estonia both +1, you'll still be getting +5 from Estonia and +1 from Rugen...

one question: if Grunwald is condition for "both sides" will it be better that is will be not part of Lordship of Prussia? so it will be nobody´s land (coloured by sand colour?)

Yes, that might be better.

[theBastard]

But those castles and towns will also add to the Estonia bonus so you shouldn't count them when thinking of the bonus.

See, if you make Rugen and Estonia both +1, you'll still be getting +5 from Estonia and +1 from Rugen...

this is right. but there is difference between auto-deploy units and manual-deploy units. and when player holds castle and town of Estonia he everytime gain auto-deploy units, but to unite all Estonia should gain bigger bonus as Rugen. it is harder to conquer two regions (Rugen) as two regions + castle + town (Estonia)... or I´m wrong?

Yes, that might be better.

and ones more question: the position is good or maybe move it to the south so Grunwald will have also border with Mazovia? I think there should be more way to attack Grunwald as only from West Prussia...

[natty dread]

this is right. but there is difference between auto-deploy units and manual-deploy units. and when player holds castle and town of Estonia he everytime gain auto-deploy units, but to unite all Estonia should gain bigger bonus as Rugen. it is harder to conquer two regions (Rugen) as two regions + castle + town (Estonia)... or I´m wrong?

The difference between auto-deploy units and manual deploy units depends on game type. If you play with unlimited reinforcements then the difference is practically none. On chained or adjacent the difference is larger...

And the amount of regions to conquer isn't really the only thing that decides the bonus, you need to also consider how hard the area is to defend, and this depends on how many borders it has, and how many territories can attack them. There are formulas for calculating bonuses, and bonus calculator spreadsheets, those can be found on the foundry discussion forum.

and ones more question: the position is good or maybe move it to the south so Grunwald will have also border with Mazovia? I think there should be more way to attack Grunwald as only from West Prussia...

IMO the current position is fine..