Reorganize native settlements?

[SimilarOwl0320]

I did not know that.

@tilanus

Generally speaking a good minor civilization is one that can be used on multiple maps.

I’m 110% with him here. This is not NatGeo. Obviously, I advocate for things are abnormally wrong but people are going a bit over the board with geo-representation while there are so many things to cover.

I live in Brazil and the maps of Bahia and Minas are not exactly right (just google it), but I don’t care because they’ve been added and they are in overall good positions. Plus, there are far more important things than pushing or pulling the limits so the regions can be “precisely precise”.

@tilanus

However, so called “one-map natives” just aren’t sustainable as they can’t get enough exposure, even if they’d make a single map more accurate

Again I fully agree with him. I rarely saw Tupis because I hate that Amazon map. Now I have more opportunities to use Tupi with Bahia and Minas.
Same thing with Caribbeans: I hate water-based maps which no ones plays (Carib, Amazonia, Hispaniola). But if they make a land map surrounded by water (similar to Borneo), tweak it and brand it as a “Caribbean island”, we’ll see more of the Caribbean tribe and geography. Same thing can be done in Asia and SA regions.

@tilanus

The current minimum of appearances per minor civ is 3 maps, which is not a good value (although it is only 2 civs) and one we hope to raise. 5-6 appearances on the hand can be considered solid. Fortunately that is a threshold all African and (by now) also all Asian minors have reached or surpassed by now.

Yep. Jesuits and Sufi feel like they are everywhere now. I don’t think it’s a problem. I think it’s noticeable because so many others are “one-map natives": Huron, Klamath, Seminole, Maya…