Mercy i had more to say

I think a Eurasia Renovatio or Afro-Eurasia Renovatio is possible. Of course it would be in Technostar's original style, or as close as possible. and of course it would use the map and colors of the starting map of EU4

I love the idea! I personally have wondered about a global version. Where europe is ER, north America is DSA. Asia, SA, Africa (and islands) all need to be filled out though. One downside is it would take 100+ people to play

hmm interesting concept

I was thinking about making an actual eurasia renovatio map to tack onto europe.

korea, timurids, ming dynasty entering the game. maybe make it 48 or 50 players for eurasia?

One issue is you'd have to have enough people in the "asia" part of Eurasia to make it similar to the ER map, or you'd have to remove people from the ER map. Otherwise yo'ud have a very crowded Europe and a very sparsely populated Asia that leads to major imbalance. And if you add too many people, you get a map that is very hard to get played.

i am working on an ASIA renovatio project
with 36 player upon an asian map

I share your thoughts Dave. But as drano pointed, it has a lot of downsides. When I tought about this, my idea was to use the CK3 map, but I found it too hard to balance. I lean more towards a possible Transposia map which incorporates Mediterranean Sea, Japan and much more into North America. The amount of historical accuracy would drop, but on the other hand a lot of interesting and unusual connections could be revealed.

Europa Renovatio is an amazing piece of work, as are quite a few of the variant on this site. I would love to test a variant with a 100 players. It would be a total mess!

drano i don't think that will be a problem. it will be balanced. the 36 in ER plus some more. 45-60 total.

kazan
nogai
uzbek
four oirat
timurids
eastern chagatai
mahra

korea
ming
ashikaga
derge

bengal
bahmanis
vijayanagara
jaunpaur
delhi

that is 16.

Lei Saarlanien how far along are you?

I think 36+18=54 would be the perfect number. 1.5 times the size of ER, and the same as adding half. a fun addition.

I mean, isn't Asia like 4x the size of Europe? Having 4x the size and 1/2 the powers means you're going to have to massively simplify the Asian map so that they can realistically interact with the Europeans.

Just look at the detail of the territories in the ER map. With that type of detail, the Chinese powers would never ever have any chance to interact with someone in the west.

So you'd end up having to have massive provinces to facilitate interaction between E and W, and with massive provinces come simple stalemates.

The thing you don't want to do is have a map where it's basically two separate games because of the distance between powers.

And if you want any level of detail in Asia, you'll end up with that problem most likely.

it would be larger territories sure. but remember that the original ER has some spillover into siberia and middle east.

I feel like you're minimizing the difference in size though. Again, Asia is roughly 4x the size of Europe. And with 1/2 the powers you'd have to have average territories about 8x bigger in order to have the same level of interaction as in the ER map. Which will inevitably lead to easy stalemate lines with big territories.

Also remember Asia doesn't have a large sea running through the middle of it like the Mediterranean. The Mediterranean really facilitates a lot of interaction between approximately half of the map. That's missing in Asia, with the oceans firmly on the outside, meaning no easy transit with sea lanes to cut across the map.

I'm not saying this can't be done, but having 1/2 the powers on 4x (approx) the size map doesn't seem super smart. If anything I'd recommend cutting some ER powers out, adding more to Asia, and at least trying to get a 1-1 power balance between the east and west.

in the middle of asia is easy to use desert like territories facilite interaction
desert style territorie are not sea lane but can permit lot interaction
and indian ocean & pacific will work as another med
but problem is elsewhere europe didnot get a leviathan like china and i do not believe it is possible to get something appealing with one united china
and 1444 isnta period of scattered china

yeah there is the desert in north and west china. and the indian ocean facilitates a lot of movement similar to the med.

alrighty, the territories will be quite bigger on the asian side. but I don't have to include all of siberia

While it might not be historically accurate, we could remedy the problem of very literal interaction between asian and European players by having one player control two powers, kind of like in the Colonial 1885 map. I personally love that map for its splitting of powers, it has some cool things where you can be allied with someone in Europe and not in another part of the world...

It would keep the player number to 36, so games wouldn't take literally forever to fill up, and if Africa or the Americas are added eventually in later variants, they could be added in a similar fashion so each "power" consists of a European power, an Asian power, an African power, and an American power?

and nah it would definitely be fine if ming dynasty never interacted with burgundy. but timurids could interact with qq, the turkic tribes could interact with muscovy and gh, and mams and portugal have an easy way into asia too.

but interesting idea

It would also be interesting if Africa was added; people would not be able to go south by Morocco and instantly pop up in Egypt!

I like the idea, the big variants always have the most interesting games. I believe it could definitely be balanced out, especially if there was some playtesting.

However, technostar hasn't played a game on vdip since mid-2020, and I haven't seen him around on the diplomacy discord anytime recently either. So such a project would probably have to be just an imitation of his style.

Rivers could be expanded in size (stylistically) so as to facilitate "inland" waterways/seas...

Deserts could also act like sea-lane OZs - only without the convoy ability. The Himalayas would be interesting to map without it simply becoming impassable - you could use "mountain-ranges" to prevent certain territories connecting to others.

Trade winds in the Indian Ocean could be mapped in an interesting way - kind of an extended & long sea-lane - to connect strategic regions from the Persian Gulf all the way across to Indonesia.

You could even grab some of the code from Zeus5 to create country only/specific supply centres (yurts) to simulate the nomadic nature of the powers in that region (ie. they only act as supply centres for steppe tribes - but don't act as SCs for more centralised countries.

Various strategies "passes" could be added to shrink certain regions on the Asian map as well - making some territories closer to other by virtue of having "silk-road" connections as well (basically skipping geographically large areas of Asia - in a similar way to Youngstown's treatment of the ocean regions)

Balkanising Asia in ways like this could create quite a bit of strategic depth, without the issue of not having an inland sea like Europe does.

@spermbank
i just look at your sixteen
this not include south east asia or africa and use united china
for me that not work

Kaner -

I LOVE the ideas, the major problem I'd see is that if we have to start adding in a handful of pretty major rule changes just to make it work, it becomes complicated, and skews towards heavily favoring those of us who are Dip Nerds and memorize and exploit all the rules. :P

We see a similar phenomenon in the PBEM games if NWO where the "nuke cycle" is exploited by experts who dominate the game easily.