安装 Steam
登录
|
语言
繁體中文（繁体中文）
日本語（日语）
한국어（韩语）
ไทย（泰语）
български（保加利亚语）
Čeština（捷克语）
Dansk（丹麦语）
Deutsch（德语）
English（英语）
Español-España（西班牙语 - 西班牙）
Español - Latinoamérica（西班牙语 - 拉丁美洲）
Ελληνικά（希腊语）
Français（法语）
Italiano（意大利语）
Bahasa Indonesia（印度尼西亚语）
Magyar（匈牙利语）
Nederlands（荷兰语）
Norsk（挪威语）
Polski（波兰语）
Português（葡萄牙语 - 葡萄牙）
Português-Brasil（葡萄牙语 - 巴西）
Română（罗马尼亚语）
Русский（俄语）
Suomi（芬兰语）
Svenska（瑞典语）
Türkçe（土耳其语）
Tiếng Việt（越南语）
Українська（乌克兰语）
报告翻译问题
30 
举报此帖
When it comes to place names, I have a few things I remember from @Draiochts ramblings in both the Americas and South America;
Provinces should be drawn around a mix of colonial borders, pre-colonial cultural borders and the geography of an area. Rivers are great for provinces, but possibly less so for names.
During the South Africa overhaul, many, many places had "PROVXXXX" for a while as the main issue was finding native names for the area. A province's name should be in a native language, and not in English/Spanish/French etc. If you had a province called "Mississippi", that should be a localised name for English rather than the actual name, (I have little more knowledge than the wiki page does) the province might be called "Mníšošethąka" which is the Dakota name for the river.
Just a few points, but I'll follow this with interest.
Show every major creek town, splitting Muskogee to Upper Creeks (primary towns being Coosa st first and Abihka and Tuckabachee later) and Lower Creeks (the Ochese creeks, Coweta and Kashita) with the former integrating the Alabama and the latter integrating the Hitchiti. Creeks are where I'm sti reading and learning.
There are a lot of fake placenames and etymologies there. Sucks trying to show early start dates, and the best I can do is show things as they were when first found
Sounds very interesting! I'll look forward to checking it out.
I'd really have to see specifics to know if full integration is possible (not that I'm asking... much to busy at the moment anyway), but regardless I'm glad to have someone else looking at North America!
And yeah, placenames are a challenge in the region. I don't know offhand how much better/worse it is here than any other given region, but one if often left to decide between several bad options... Representing things as they were at first contact is probably going to be our best bet, though. Especially in places where first contact was 16-17th century, as opposed to 18th-19th century.
I've got a good resource for southeastern placenames and historic tribes rendered in Chickasaw modern language. Creek is hard because Richard Thornton (the Mayan-Muskogee ethnogenesis conspiracy theorist) has poisoned the internet on the subject, though the early 20th century research from John Swanton is almost everything else on the subject (which seems pretty good)
Well the PNW/BC/Cascadia/Columbia actually has it pretty good, with pretty obvious etymologies, rather late and decently documented contact, and some solid archaelogical work done proving certain peoples were in certain regions are certain times, as well as proving in many cases the large hypothetical populations and a certain level of societal advancement. Still a couple outstanding questions, of course, but really better than most anywhere else... not too surprising though, considering the area had a very high pop density and massive cultural variety compared to the rest of the continent.
The NWT, California (east of SNs), & Alaska are usually not too bad, either, usually due to small populations and late first contact, but I faced some similar issues in the US Great Plains, Four Corners, California (proper), & Canada (proper), with Newfoundland being the worst of all. I sympathise with the issues you're facing =D.
Good luck, and I look forward to seeing more ideas & research on the area.
Edit - Typo
Sure! I'm slowly working my way around. These are from when I had done LA, MS, AL, FL, GA, & SC.
Area map mode, zoomed in enough to see most province names.
https://psteamcommunity.yuanyoumao.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1495958120
Culture (I've split Alibamu & Koasati since then and given Koasati most of the upper TN river valley, going off the theory that Chiaha, Chalahume, etc were Muskogean towns that De Soto visited which soon crumbled and were replaced by Cherokee):
https://psteamcommunity.yuanyoumao.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1495958061
Countries 1444 (since there's no good history before 16th & 17th centuries for most areas, I kinda have to freeze things in place from when they were first encountered by Europeans, maybe extrapolating from some archaeological sites when there's a known historic polity to tie them too. Like De Soto only ever heard about some big badass chief named Quigiltam in the vicinity of Natchez, and they ran the gauntlet past Natchez without exploring anything, but I'm extrapolating from archaeological sites that Natchez held sway over some stuff at that time) (I've added Pensacola, Mocama, Tocobaga, & Mayaca, and I need art for Potano):
https://psteamcommunity.yuanyoumao.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1495958090
I've since added NC, drafted TN, and started poking at AR. But this is after 1.26 so I'm just playing with files without seeing it in game yet until BT10. Here is my province.bmp file overlayed with a transparent rivers.bmp file in GIMP so I can keep my bearings as I carve provinces up.
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/465215558523027457/492215784563671041/TNdraft.png
TN is a struggle since western and middle tennessee were essentially depopulated and used as hunting grounds (deer pelt trade) and a military buffer zone between Chickasaw & Cherokee who hated each other and various northern tribes and particularly Iroquois who ♥♥♥♥♥♥ up everyone near them. So I don't have a lot of placenames to work with.