This will be the base of my new map:



I think there are 3 main factor in this map:

1. the center is safe in the beggining and split the map into two half
2. the left side has small bonuses (fast to take) but low reserves
3. the right side has bigger bonuses (slow to take) but more reserves

And the size of the Holy Roman Empire gives time to preparation before the final battle comes. Of course there will be waterways in north and south too. The too small countries will be left. Small bonuses will have 1-4, mediums 5-9, bigs 10-15 territories. And there will be some minor changes.

So what do you think? Opinions wanted.

good map idea, but bonuses need to be further discussed.

Yeah this is why I posted it. I think they need only minor changes.

Smallest states will be lost it is sure. I check this map too and here are some differencies:
http://worldhistorymaps.info/images/East-Hem_1000ad.jpg

Here are no "Red Russia" what is part of the Kievian Rus, and the baltic states are united, but the others seems roughly accurate.

I like that this is a tall map projection of Europe, instead of the wide projection what is in the most Europe maps.

I like your other maps, and I think this one will be pretty good! But don't use the map shown above for the landmasses as they are not accurate with how it was in the year 1000. You can clearly see Flevoland, which is a huge piece of land the Dutch reclaimed between 1940 and 1968. That's the first thing I look at when I see a historic map of Europe ;)
But you can still use it for the bonuses if you want, although this map shows others (http://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/attachment.php?attachmentid=13255&stc=1&d=1148810040)

Thanks, I want to compare it against other 1000AD maps to get a more accurate view. Your map looks good, just the source is a little bit suspicious (alternatehistory.com)

England in your map is the same as in my secondly linked map, so maybe this is the correct splitting and this seems more playable.

As I see something wrong in Hungary too, because it should be contain only the Carpathian basin without the land of the Gyula and Ajtony, so the northeast edge need a cut.

What I want anyway keep from the first map it is the scale of projection, other things can change, now just talk about it and things will be clearer hopefully.

Yeah, as I said that region was hungarian (called Halics) but in 981 Vladimir the Great of Kievan Rus took the area over on his way into Poland, so in 1000 it was part of the Rus.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galicia-Volhynia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galicia_(Central_Europe)

Maybe "Red Russia" in first map is this overtaken way into Poland.

I want invite for test or First game, this map looks amazing

don't invite theGifer.

can i be invited too it looks great can't wait till release.

why not me? whats your problem with me?

Haha, I didn't even notice it was from Altarnatehistory.com Good catch!
But I was merely talking about the coastline. The kingdoms, tribes and empires may be very different.

holy roman empire should be divided into its major constituent parts.

roman empire might be better named as something else: eastern roman empire, greek roman empire, byzantium empire.

ireland as one bonus would be nice. same thing with britain. regional mini bonuses could be used there too.

adding major rivers (with bridges) or mountains (with passes) might be cool. eg: loire, rhine, danube, pyrenees, alps, etc.

adding important cities might be interesting too.

Thanks for the ideas, my opinions about them:

Roman Empire: They believed themselves the real descendants of the Roman Empire and called they empire as the old one, but the Byzantian or Eastern Roman Empire seems to me good names as well.

Ireland and Britain: Yeah I think in order to playability some Ireland states need to be united, but borders of England is incorrect in first map, check this, this is more playable I think:
http://www.euratlas.net/history/europe/1000/index.html

Cities: good idea but in 1000AD much more cities were in West-Europe and in east just a few.

Rivers and mountains: Im thinking on it and if it not endanger the playability maybe possible.

Holy Roman Empire: This is a possible solution too, but I like the idea that this huge bonus split the map into 2 half in the beginning.

These are the first changes but not the last:



What changed:

1. The british island. In the original map this island was completely wrong, I think now it is accurate. Maybe a tiny change will be here: Orkney will give a little terrirory to Alba, but I believe the others is okay. I didnt change Ireland yet, Im thinking what will be with that small regions.

2. The east. I removed "Red Russia" because I didnt see this entity nowhere else. Removed Novgorod because in all other map this is part of the Rus. Give some territory to Pecheneg tribes. Made the land of Hungary and the two rebel tribe (Ajtony, Gyula) more accurate.

And I have two questions:

1. The baltic states were independent in 1000 or have they an alliance or personal union?

2. Three balkanian states (Dioclea, Rashka, Bosnia) are independents in some map, but in other maps they are part of Bulgaria. Someone know that they are independent or not in 1000AD?

And if somebody can show me a map about whichever region what contains the contemporary subregions of a state please share with me! Thank you.

will you make a scenario for this one? it will be awasome, i never red anything about baltic states in history, I mean thet they where idipented nations up there...:/

It is sure that there were estes, livonians, lithuanians, and prussians, but this map contain more mistakes and I dont want to let them until dont see this borders in other maps too.

There were many nations in this time who have no ruler class and organized state just live their life under the influence of neighboring powers. Many maps show this region as white where are no states. In this case I will make baltic region as one bonus, just I need hard proofs.

I will certainly find it in the age of internet, just if someone know the right answer that can speed up the things.

source, centenia
i see estonia, wich is under fins influence, southern and in the middle of baltics are the Letts and in the south are Lithuanians, Letts are under Lithuanians

As I know from history, its not roman empire but Byzantine Empire...

byzantines never called themselves byzantines. that is a name invented by historians after the byzantine empire ceased to exist.

Yea, thats a point, ok whatever but still I think Byzantine empire would be more acurate, they dont even have rome...xD