This map is looking awesome now! I'm a bit worried about distributions though, as when doing 1v1v1v1 or 2v2 city conflicts, Rome will obviously have an advantage in being able to expand with little disruption, whereas the other cities are all close together so will have trouble expanding. And of course, rome has easy access to all of western europe :D

Stepping aside from cities and more into the traditional side of the map, spain is an incredibly good starting point, as it is very dense and borders with possible enemies are easy to manage.

If based on looks and concept alone, this map would be absolutely perfect. As long as some clever distributions are worked out before the map's release, people will be able to have great games with it.

I don't know what your map will include when it's finished, but why did you include Ethiopia? It was generally as irrelevant as it can get when it comes to the crusades. Sure, it was Christian, but I don't think the Arabs interacted much with the Horn of Africa. Also, there's a large gap between Hungary and Bulgaria; I understand if you can't do the Eastern European countries, but I think you should at least include what's in between (Romania, I think?).

Edited 10/30/2014 23:06:27

Why not Ethiopia? This map of religions at the time, Ethiopia is a Christian country.
You also also do Russia?
I have something to fix you in Israel, Tel Aviv subjects were established only ~ 100 years ago.
Tel Aviv where you can write Samaria, and instead of Netanya, you can write Jezreel Valley.
Rafah was not even really exist, write instead of Gaza, and Arad did not exist you can write instead of Arava.

Edited 10/31/2014 12:04:32

Very accurate I give you that, doesn't mean it gives a very strategic map however. The gap in Romania just looks weird, add something in there. Adding those three small kingdoms at the bottom of the middle east/horn of Africa is nice for accuracy not for gameplay, they are isolated but then leaving them out leaves a massive gap in the bottom east. What's happening with the east, you are drawing something there?. East vs west, you will have to see in the test games, this is the most important part of the map. Map is accurate and will be used for Crusader games, needs to be balanced east vs. west. Would have been cool adding boats maybe. General design and layout looks good though, good job.

If based on looks and concept alone, this map would be absolutely perfect.

A bit of an overstatement, no maps are perfect unless made by Ra.

Edited 10/31/2014 12:33:54

Still wondering why zxctycxz took a vacation.

I'm back guys. It looks like you're all a bit puzzled about my choice of which nations have been included, so I'll just explain. When I started this map, I thought I would've run out of memory by the time I got to Persia, but that hasn't happened (I've only used up about 3/4 of the limit with file compression). This means that I'll be able to add more, starting with the Orthodox nations of Rus', the Pagan Baltic, Romania and so on. If there's still enough memory after this, I can go onto Islamic India.

I included Ethiopia simply because it was Christian at the time, some of you picked up on that anyway, I think.

As for territory names, there's no real way of finding a consistent map of what individual territories were called at the time, so I've had to use Google Maps for a lot of it. If you have suggestions about changing territory names, as elroi did, you're very welcome to tell me.

But I have a few things to sort about before I get back into it, so I can't start right away.

Ok, it looks like it will be a pretty comprehensive map. Sterling work.

Some province name changes:
Jerusalem:
-Madaba - Al-Karak
-Samaria - Asqalan
-Jezreel Valley - Jaffa
Sinai:
-Arish- El-Arish
-Said - Farama
-Southern Sanai can just be condensed into one sinai province (it wasn't densly populated or rich)
Nile Delta:
-More provinces are needed at the delta (it was densly populated, rich, centre for trading and the capital for some caliphates such as Fatimid)
-isamailla- Isma'illa
-Cairo - Manupura
-Fayed - Sarqihya
-Suez - Cairo

The dominant caliphate in 1150 was the Seljuks who were based in Esfahan (modern day central iran). This was towards the end of the first crusade which is when christians were most successfull. They conquered Jerusalem and were occupying it so the muslim caliphates were not doing so well. The even conquered Tripoli.

MrOobling: Yeah I'll change those names, but I don't think I can put any more territories there - http://imgur.com/xlijMkT - it's pretty tight already. If this were before 1092, I would be quite happy to make the Suljuqs dominant, but with the empire being divided after this date between the Rum Sultanate, the Emirate of Damascus and Persia. I may be wrong, but it doesn't look like they controlled any culturally significant cities either (other than the Syrian cities that belong to the Ayyubids by the time this map is set).

I may be wrong, but it doesn't look like they controlled any culturally significant cities either (other than the Syrian cities that belong to the Ayyubids by the time this map is set)

That is just wrong. At that time in the middle ages the arabian world was much more prosperous, technologically advanced and therefore more densely populated than the western world. For instance the Kingdom of Sicily after the Norman conquest was more powerful that the Kingdom of Aengeland. Before the Conquest areas of the Kingdom were mainly Muslim or Byzantian, which led to its population growth.
Same goes for Al-Andalus in Spain. Under Muslim rule it flourished. Its economical decline came with the reconquista. Maghreb, Mauretania, Ifriqya and Egypt, all no exception. From Spain to India you had many major economical centers that dwarfed cities in western europe, all under Muslim rule.

In Spain:
Qurtuba (Cordoba) not as many people as under the Umayyads, reaching half a million, but still very important.
Qa'lat Garnata (Granada)

In the Maghreb:
Fes, with 150.000 to 200.000 inhabitants during the crusades.
Marrakech with 150.000

In Ifriqya:
Tunis (target of the seventh crusade)

In Egypt:
Cairo, 150.000 to 300.000 in that period. Very Important.

In Italy:
Palermo 150.000
for comparison:
Rome 20.000
Firenze Milan Genoa Venice around 50.000 getting more prosperous some hundred/ two hundred years later

In Western Europe:
Paris maybe less than 100.000, 150.000 hundred years after your time setting.

In the Seljuk Empire (persia):
Baghdad 250.000
Tabriz 100.000

That only were the major political and economical centres. Countless other Muslim cities were still bigger than most western cities.

Constantinople had around 250.000 at that time
And Jerusalem and Rome were only important as religous centres and symbols, not so much economically.



So if you think about important cities, with a few exceptions you think Muslim.


You have to understand how important irrigation techniques were at that time. There were times during the middle ages in which Japan managed to have a bigger population than whole Western Europe, thanks to advances in irrigation.

Edited 11/2/2014 12:58:25

Ironically, the rise of Western Europe came after the fall of Constantinople. It marks a very important point in world history. The exodus of many Greek scholars into the already prosperous Italian states fueled their economical, cultural and political rise even more. Many ancient scriptures that had been conserved by the byzantians for over 1000 years were translated and led to the Renaissance in italy. From there the rediscovered knowledge found its way into in Western Europe and became known as the era of enlightenment.

Interesting side note: Same goes for the Arabic world, it was a place of knowledge and enlightenment. The libraby of Cordoba had around 400.000 books.

Intersting side note 2: The fall of Constantinople gave birth to the discovery of the Americas. With the Silk Road falling into Ottoman hands, land trade for valuable good from beyond the orient was no longer possible, which led discoverers like Colombus and Magellan search for a new sea route to India to resume that trade.

I think he is a drug primarily holy cities and large
Though I think Baghdad was the center of Islam more than Damascus.

Abuse

Edited 11/2/2014 19:05:48

Yeah, it's kind of hard to make a map of a desert, that's why the Almohad Caliphate doesn't have a high territory density.

The territories on this aren't supposed to reflect the population density of the regions, if they were, I'd say

As far as the rest of your comment goes, I'm perfectly aware of the economic and demographic centres of the time, but I am limited to modern maps with which to draw them. If you can find an accurate and detailed map of 12th Century Baghdad or whichever you suggest I use, then be my guest, but if not, then there's nothing that can be done.

No need, it does not have to be perfect, has been structurally Damascus, so no need to change.

One thing I just noticed about this map: In Denmark, Nordtyland was still connected to the mainland; it separated in 1815, I think.

Really? I'l look into that when I can.

This should give you an overview about the size and importance of cities of that period:

One thing I just noticed about this map: In Denmark, Nordtyland was still connected to the mainland; it separated in 1815, I think.

During the Viking Age a passage existed. It closed in 1200 and in 1825 the north Sea broke through again. So, no need for a change.

What year map about?