Talk:Role-Playing Nations/restored/@comment-3112181-20130729163523

Also, while I'm here, a little note to whomever is in charge of the maps...

- Assuming that greyish-pink mass in Germany is suppose to be Bavaria, it's much too large. Should be broken up into Westphalia, Hesse, etc.

- Prussia is way too masive. It never had that much of Poland, at this time it really owned Brandenburg and the Berlin area in northern Germany, Pomerania in northwestern Poland, and Konigsburg (Kaliningrad).

- Likewise, Poland is much too large and not where it supposed to be. Obviously, the modern day country of Poland itself should be given to Poland, not Prussia. Poland-Lithuania only owned a bit of southwestern Belarus, and only the extreme western point of Ukraine (Galicia), not extended all the way to Kiev.

- I believe Schleswig-Holstein is Danish at this time period, not Prussian. I might be wrong on that.

- Austria is wayyyy too large here. All they really owned at this time were Austria itself, and parts of Slovakia, Czech Republic, Slovenia, and maybe Croatia. Everything else should probably be given to Hungary (which was its own kingdom at this time, not yet combined with Austria).

- Although the Italian Peninsula itself looks pretty good, I'd give more land to the Venetian Republic. They definitely owned more of the Croatian coast, as well as some of Albania and the Greek island of Korfu.

- The Faroe Islands (tiny archipelago north of Great Britain) have never been British; at this time, they were Danish.

- It's very generous giving Greenland to Sweden/Finland, but if you're going to give Iceland to Denmark, Greenland has to be Danish also.

- Russia bought Serbia and Montenegro from the Ottoman Empire in the same deal that gave us Cyprus, both as satellite oblasts.

- Likewise, Russia also has Georgia and Azerbaijan (excluding the Nakhchivan exclave of Azerbaijan, which is correctly Ottoman).

- The Ottoman Empire extended well down the western coast of the Arabian Peninsula, to include the cities of Mecca and Medina.

- The Boys from Britain are going to give me hate for this, but it's simply ridiculous to say, especially at this point in history, that Britain owned the entire Indian subcontinent plus Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Bhutan. Historically, they'd barely scratched the surface of India by 1745, and wouldn't even defeat the Mughal Empire (the dominant region of India) until more than a century later, in 1858. Not to mention France, Holland, and Portugal had major influences in India at this time, even more-so than the British. Persia probably owned the southwestern fraction of Pakistan, whilst the rest was either Mughal or independent. Britain owned the Bombay-Gujarti area of India, parts of the southeast and interior, as well as Calcutta-Bengali area. However, it's completely ridiculous and an insult to history to exclude the Dutch (who owned Ceylon (Sri Lanka)), the French (who owned much of the eastern coast of India), and the Portuguese (who owned the parts of the western coast, as well as parts of the Deccan Plateau and some regions around the Ghats). As for Bhutan, that's its own independent kingdom at this time.

- Tibet was also still its own kingdom at this time, not being incorporated into the Qing Empire until a century from now. Also, China didn't extend that far west into the Gobi Desert, which was basically no-man's land/unclaimed territory.

- China and Russia have agreed to simply split Mongolia, to avoid further conflicts.

- Again, Britain didn't extend that far up on the Malay Peninsula, certainly not going into Thailand. They simply had Singapore, Malacca, and the surrounding areas on the lower Malay Peninsula, and the rest was either property of the small Malay Kingdom(s) or Siam.

Also, perhaps we could create a detailed colonial map of Africa and the Americas? ^_-