How Many Cities

[Sir Robin]

It has been stated in the developer diary that if you conquer the city then the province/region is yours.

Despite some earlier opinions this gives a very good indication that provinces still exist and that there is only one city per province.

Apparently influence, population, etc... only affect the size of the city and its appearance. Not the size of its region or province.

I don't really have a problem with this. Since movement is no longer based on provinces/regions this will still allow much greater strategic maneuvering.

Also the ability to construct forts, which apparently still is a feature of RTW, will allow players to defend choke-points. Adding more strategic flexibility to the game.

The big question for me about this is now...

How many cities/provinces will there be in RTW? http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-inquisitive.gif

http://www.strategyinformer.com/pictures/screenshots/rometotalwar-1.jpg

This screen shot gives us a good idea of how many cities there will be.

I doubt CA would settle for the same number of provinces/regions as were in MTW. So there should be more than the 100 or so in MTW.

There seems to be fewer provinces in some places but more in others. Since the map will include more of the Middle East and Africa I will guess that there will be roughly 150 Cities/Provinces.

Supporting this assumption is the mini-map in the above screen shot. Looking closely you see one little white dot in each province.

Looking at the viewed portion of central and northern modern-day Germany you see four cities. Three roughly positioned to match the dots in three of the five red provinces. The fourth aligns with the province covering modern-day Denmark.

There are two other "village" styled indicators along the coast without corresponding dots. However these do not have a name and may be camped armies or some sort of provincial buildable improvement such as ports or fishing villages.

So there you have it, mystery solved. Now to solve the whole world peace thing. Maybe if I just gave everyone over the age of eighteen a gun but took away the bullets...

[jLan]

doesnt seem to be 150 provinces on the mini-map though :p

[Sir Robin]

Yep, unlike previous mini-maps this one should be scrollable.

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

Well, from what I can see most of your assumptions seem correct. Questions are:


-Capturing the capital province gives you access to all of the province's economic benefits, or do you need to capture all ports and encampments to achieve it?

-How many battles to conquer a "province" area? Fixed or variable according to the number of armies and forts in the region?

-How will religious and cultural influence spread trough a region? Will it be linked to the partial control of the provinces mentioned above? Accordingly, how will rebellions work?

-Are capitol cities fixed in place? Can we choose the implementation of a capitol city in a strategical advantageous position?

[crazyviking03]

I just hope there are enough cities to fit in my belly. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/tongue.gif

[RisingSun]

From what I see, the provinces are far, far larger than MTW. Sure, places like Greece are more divided, but I only have to fight a measly four battles to work my way all the way from the Alps to the tip of Denmark? Come on. And the province system, disappointingly, seems exactly the same, except with the cities taking the place of castles, which is sad. The new strategic system had so much promise, too...

Oh, and pardon the expression but... Where the fluck is the Rhine??? http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif

[Sir Robin]

This is a screenshot of an early build, I imagine. I would hope rivers have been worked in by now. Oops, its there in the lower left. Disappears in the woods and comes out by the village/port/camped army.

I believe ownership of provincial improvements/forts go to whoever controls the province's city. Unless an enemy has troops physically occupying it. To simplify things, if I am right, CA might have enemy forces "auto-destroy" unguarded improvements/forts.

If these improvements/villages/whatever can be attacked individually then it would be a great way of weakening the province's economic value without having to conquer the city.

If they are villages it would be a great way of reducing the provinces population and possibly keep the owners from producing that elite unit which requires a particular level of population.

However we have no official word that these "non-city" locations on the strategic view are in the latest build or whether they can be attacked seperately.

I do hope that as the population/influence of a province grows that "villages" would appear in the province. Difficult to implement in the smaller "provinces/regions" but should fit well enough in the larger ones.

If they can have at least minimal defenses then hopefully your troops can garrison them.

Of course that is assuming that these "non-city" locations are provincial improvements/spawned villages and not just camped/fortified armies.

Unfortunately I think cultural/religious influence may work similarly to MTW. If you own the city then your culture/religion will slowly grow in percentage. Which can be increased faster thru building construction and perhaps strategic agents.

Rebellions is a tough one to narrow down.

Since provinces still exist but are in 3D then where will the rebels show up? They will probably spawn in a random location somewhere within the provinces borders.

The problem with this is that they will have to be some tough rebels to break thru a city's defenses. Maybe those all artillery rebellions in MTW were setting the stage for RTW?

Or it might be that weak rebellions will not even attempt to take the province. They may be coded to attack "non-city" locations within the province.

I doubt that cities in RTW can be destroyed/built/placed in the campaign. Hopefully they can be "modded" to show in different locations at the start. Of course I initially doubted that RTW would have a fully 3D tactical battlefield too.

All to be taken with a grain of salt but this is my best educated guess with the evidence at hand.

One more thing, anyone else notice the garrisoned trrops? Apparently this version has the flag itself filling as more troops are placed in the stack.

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

Quote[/b] (Sir Robin @ Mar. 26 2004,14:30)]I believe ownership of provincial improvements/forts go to whoever controls the province's city. Unless an enemy has troops physically occupying it. To simplify things, if I am right, CA might have enemy forces "auto-destroy" unguarded improvements/forts.
It would be better if certain improvements, like mines and ports, could be conquered separatelly. Accordingly the city could be blockaded faster or unable to give full income, instead of the 0 income of MTW.



Quote[/b] ]If these improvements/villages/whatever can be attacked individually then it would be a great way of weakening the province's economic value without having to conquer the city.
Preciselly my point.



Quote[/b] ]If they are villages it would be a great way of reducing the provinces population and possibly keep the owners from producing that elite unit which requires a particular level of population.
Well, not reduce population in itself, but allow for an occupying nation some income of the surrounding villages. As I told before, it would be good if the besieged city could still have some income too.



Quote[/b] ]However we have no official word that these "non-city" locations on the strategic view are in the latest build or whether they can be attacked seperately.
Let's hope...



Quote[/b] ]I do hope that as the population/influence of a province grows that "villages" would appear in the province. Difficult to implement in the smaller "provinces/regions" but should fit well enough in the larger ones.
Don't see why not. The number of possible ones would depend on the size and wealth of the province. Not that hard to implement, if they are already spawned automatically.



Quote[/b] ]If they can have at least minimal defenses then hopefully your troops can garrison them.
Preciselly. That would mean a much more complex strategical approach, not allowing the famed rushes in MTW, as well as making it much more engaging tactically.



Quote[/b] ]Of course that is assuming that these "non-city" locations are provincial improvements/spawned villages and not just camped/fortified armies.
If they were only fortified armies it would only improve the tactical part of the game. With villages it would add a much greater strategical and organizative depth to the game.



Quote[/b] ]Unfortunately I think cultural/religious influence may work similarly to MTW. If you own the city then your culture/religion will slowly grow in percentage. Which can be increased faster thru building construction and perhaps strategic agents.
It would be significant that, if the spawned-villages concept worked (I'm assuming that these spawned-villages would have a completelly independent loyalty-income-religion data-system from provincial cities), the religious influence of them would be in opposition to the religious influence of the city.



Quote[/b] ]Rebellions is a tough one to narrow down.

Since provinces still exist but are in 3D then where will the rebels show up? They will probably spawn in a random location somewhere within the provinces borders.
Not random if the concept we've been discussing would work. They would spawn in a particular village or city with low loyalty.



Quote[/b] ]The problem with this is that they will have to be some tough rebels to break thru a city's defenses. Maybe those all artillery rebellions in MTW were setting the stage for RTW?
Not if the city's population itself would rebel. It would be fun to get the following notice:

"The population in Bracara Augusta has rebeled and killed the city garrison. The city is now under Rebel control"

It would be a frustrating, but very historically realistic, event. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-wink.gif Basically you would have to send a new consular army to besiege and re-conquer the city.



Quote[/b] ]Or it might be that weak rebellions will not even attempt to take the province. They may be coded to attack "non-city" locations within the province.
That could also be a factor for rebellions that would happen in spawned-villages. Then we would have to fight 2 kinds of rebellions. One more dangerous (city rebels) than the other (spawned-village rebels). Economically and socially we would have 2 very different situations. In the first one you would be in hostile territory without a base of opperations, without construction facilities, etc. In the other you would be in charge and only crushing some specific minor rebellions. Of course, one rebellion would fuel a probable one somewere near, even in the city itself. It would make RTW a very difficult juggling game...



Quote[/b] ]I doubt that cities in RTW can be destroyed/built/placed in the campaign. Hopefully they can be "modded" to show in different locations at the start. Of course I initially doubted that RTW would have a fully 3D tactical battlefield too.
I doubt it too. But we can dream a bit, can't we? http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-wink.gif



Quote[/b] ]One more thing, anyone else notice the garrisoned trrops? Apparently this version has the flag itself filling as more troops are placed in the stack.
That doesn't differ from MTW, does it? Or are you refering to the Roman army (encampment?) ?

[longjohn2]

That's a rather old and horrid looking shot of the map.

[RisingSun]

Good to know. I most certainly hope more (many more, in fact) provinces have been worked in???

I thought that might be it, but it looked more like some kind of road (though the riverbanks kind of gave it away) and it looked quite feeble for the mighty Rhine.

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

Quote[/b] (longjohn2 @ Mar. 26 2004,17:37)]That's a rather old and horrid looking shot of the map.
Yeap. Good to know. Thanks for the relief note... http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-2thumbsup.gif

[spmetla]

Quote[/b] ]That's a rather old and horrid looking shot of the map.

That's some of the best news I've heard in a while. Nice to see your input Longjohn http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/bigthumb.gif

[Ashen]

exactly what I was thinking lol.

First thought - Oh my word that GUI can't be finished.
Second - Those trees are ugly
Third - Nasty looking troops and cities.

Nice to hear its going to be better ;)

[Scipio]

yeah looks like Warcraft 3 :shudder:

[RisingSun]

I JUST NOTICED SOMETHING.

Everybody says the Scipii are green- but that screen has the blue Roman emblem, yet the general is the faction heir to Scipio... Unless he married into the faction or something... http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif

[masp_82]

Hm, in the gamestar 09/03 there were showed some factions and the Scipii were blue and the Bruuti green. Iam very sure this are the correct colors. Dont know what the source for the rumour, that Scipii are the green ones ?

Btw, the screenshot from the strategic map here in this thread is also from the gamestar 09/03. So you can see, this screenshot is from August 2003 or so and very outdated.

In Gamestar 01/04 there is a newer screenshot of the strategic map and all what i can say is that there are many improvments http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-2thumbsup.gif

[Kraxis]

No Scipio has always been blue in my eyes... They have had that wolfhead banner since the early days, and that has always been blue.

[The Wizard]

Seeing that, I'd say there is a provincial capital as well as more cities in the province.

Pity they didn't stick to the hinterland system though.

Edit:: Longjohn, thanks so much that you denounce this as old and horrid looking Hears to a better looking, more atmospheric map http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/cheers.gif



~Wiz

[RisingSun]

I always heard the Scipii were green. And look at the map- green is where the Scipii should be- Southern Italy.

[Scipio]

I dunno it looks a tad blue on sicily and the south western tip of the boot http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

[Monk]

Quote[/b] (RisingSun @ Mar. 29 2004,21:44)]I always heard the Scipii were green. And look at the map- green is where the Scipii should be- Southern Italy.
Perhaps the brutii have conquored most of the Scipii cities and forced them off the Itialian landmass?

[Scipio]

Anyway it is an old pic maybe it was a glitch? http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/rolleyes.gif

[RZST]

is jerusalem going to be on the map?
i want to stop the spread of christianity..hell even stop judaism alltogether.

[bighairyman]

i think each city should grant you resources, so you don't have to capture every city in the province to gain control. But Of course the capital city should grant more taxes, more pop(usually the biggest city), and better trained soldiers. Once you capture all the cities, then you can fuse it together and then the resource comb-inly counted. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wacko.gif

Where do troops appeared now, once they're trained, i think we should train soldiers in one city, and then they appear in the city as trained. Sry if that's been covered before http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-lost.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-speechless.gif

[dessa14]

i think provinces should flux with city size, so a large city like rome has a big province, but if it burns to the ground, the province becomes smaller.
but it would be silly to program, or to compute.

thanks, dessa

[Lazul]

hehe, just realised that sweden is on this map...hehe, not much worth fighting for during ancient times but hey ITS THERE so im defently gonna mod this game http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

Quote[/b] (bighairyman @ Mar. 29 2004,22:23)]i think each city should grant you resources, so you don't have to capture every city in the province to gain control. But Of course the capital city should grant more taxes, more pop(usually the biggest city), and better trained soldiers. Once you capture all the cities, then you can fuse it together and then the resource comb-inly counted. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wacko.gif
Not a bad idea. It goes in consent with my ideas expressed earlier.



Quote[/b] ]Where do troops appeared now, once they're trained, i think we should train soldiers in one city, and then they appear in the city as trained. Sry if that's been covered before http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-lost.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-speechless.gif
But that is already I STW and MTW, right? http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-wink.gif

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

Quote[/b] (dessa14 @ Mar. 30 2004,01:32)]i think provinces should flux with city size, so a large city like rome has a big province, but if it burns to the ground, the province becomes smaller.
but it would be silly to program, or to compute.

thanks, dessa
That would indeed be great And very CIV style, I might say. Logical and appealing, but it will probably be very difficult to implement in a strategic map like STW/MTW.

[bighairyman]

Quote[/b] ]Where do troops appeared now, once they're trained, i think we should train soldiers in one city, and then they appear in the city as trained. Sry if that's been covered before

But that is already I STW and MTW, right?

No, in STW and MTW, the troops appeared in the province Now that's multiable cities in a province, can you choose which city to raise troops and then after they're trained, they will appear in that city. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-gossip.gif

[Big King Sanctaphrax]

From the .Org FAQ-

Quote[/b] ]
4)To boil it down, are there more than one city per province?


A) The game doesn't work in this fashion. The assumption is that 'provinces'
are fixed areas on the map, which they aren't. Each settlement has a region
around it which can be exploited by that city. It'll only exploit the whole
region when it's properly developed.


Interesting...

[Sir Robin]

I believe that this is slightly misleading...

You could classify "provinces" the same way in MTW/STW. Until you built every building and every upgrade, the region around the castle was not "properly developed."

We have yet to hear any evidence stating that "cities" can be relocated or created by player/AI factions.

We have yet to hear any evidence stating that settlement "regions" have growing/shrinking borders/frontiers.

If there were I imagine that this feature would have been broadcasted already.

I do not mind still having regions/provinces/counties/etc...

I do mind having a limited number of cities that can only change hands throughout the game.

Still considering the size of the strategic map, and the distance an army could conceivably cover in a half-year turn, a large number of cities could devolve a campaign into simply a series of sieges.

Hopefully CA has found a good balance between the two extremes.

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

Quote[/b] (bighairyman @ April 02 2004,10:28)]
Quote[/b] ]Where do troops appeared now, once they're trained, i think we should train soldiers in one city, and then they appear in the city as trained. Sry if that's been covered before

But that is already I STW and MTW, right?

No, in STW and MTW, the troops appeared in the province Now that's multiable cities in a province, can you choose which city to raise troops and then after they're trained, they will appear in that city. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-gossip.gif
Ah OK. Now I understand what you've meant. I don't think it will be like that. I believe that only the main city, which contains the training facilities, will be the one that "recieves" the troops after training. Which is in fact, quite logical.

[Sir Robin]

I agree...

Whether there are additional "villages" or not you will only get troops appearing "in" cities that you have the buildings required to produce them.

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

Quote[/b] (Big King Sanctaphrax @ April 02 2004,10:50)]From the .Org FAQ-

Quote[/b] ]
4)To boil it down, are there more than one city per province?


A) The game doesn't work in this fashion. The assumption is that 'provinces'
are fixed areas on the map, which they aren't. Each settlement has a region
around it which can be exploited by that city. It'll only exploit the whole
region when it's properly developed.


Interesting...
In fact, this seems quite CIV-style to me. Growing degrees of influence in a city. Something like CIV's cultural influence expansion, which results in border expansion.