Even bigger map?!

I love this much larger map that you guys have made (for one thing it doesn't make the Seleucids into a joke) and I know there's only 200 provinces allowed, but does anyone know of a way to maybe up the number of provinces without wrecking the game and with that in place maybe a way that the map could be extended all the way to China and maybe the majority of the Indian Subcontinent? :D I guess maybe one that follows this map? http://www.antiquemaps4u.com/images/maps/1844_World.jpg Except with a wee bit more of China. It would be nice to conquer the majority of the Old World, if you had enough time to. :3

FYI I do know next to nothing about modding this game, so please go easy on me in your replies. :embarassed:

The province limit is hardcoded, meaning it cannot changed by anyone except the company that made the game (CA) and their not about to do anything like that, people have tried to convince them in the past with no sucess.

Also consider how long it would take to research and make all the extra factions that such a map would require, it took around four years for EB 1 to reach its final state the map your suggesting would be doubling or even tripling the number of factions, not to mention the need for more hardcoded limits to be removed (such as the unit and faction limits).
Sadly such a map is not possible unless CA come up with a new game that doesn't have these hardcoded limits.:no:

Man that's lame. :/

Meh, you could just take the lazy approach and just put in the warring Chinese states and the Mauryans (maybe the Xiong-nu as well) and just make all the rest rebels with a nice little descriptor building. :D

Hmm, Earth: Total War! Spanning several centuries and the entire globe! :D Now that would be EPIC (and taxing on one's comp! :p) You know like EEIII without sucking. Oh well I can still dream! :(

Another rason is the impracticalibly of taking an army from Rome, Carthage, Macedonia or any other would-be conquerer of China to its actual destination. RL it would not be possible (unless you were the Mongols or Huns), and the Team has thus, AFAIK, decided that it will not include China as it would be as much fantasy as the Roman Ninjas of Vanilla.

There are several threads here dealing with these subjects. I dunno if you tried the "Search" Function? Thatt is always a good idea to try ;-) but sometimes one has to get the wording just right for the function to find what one is looking for.

And welcome, always good (and amusing) with a new enthusiastic EB-junkie.

on a revelant note... i have just finished reading Arian's "alexandrou Anavasis" and it turns out that Greek knowledge of eastern geography (at the time of Alexander anyway) was pretty distorted. Alexander really believed that crossing the Ganges river and marching some humble distance he would reach the "great ocean" that encircles Asia. Earlier in his campaign when they reached the Caspian Sea they believed they have reached the same "great ocean" that encircled Asia (this time from the north).Obviously they believed that the Scythian nomads inhabited a somehow narrow coastal area of the northern Asian periphery (clearly underestimating the vastness of the central-Asian stepe).When they reached the Hindus river they believed they had actually found the banks of ... Nile!!! (bc both rivers featured crocodiles).What amazed me the most was that the Persians have not corrected the Greeks in their misconceptions (perhaps sharing the same distorted and limited view of geography??? ).

Had Alexander and the Greeks decided to march against the Scythians (past modern-day Afghanistan) or deep past the Ganges river they would be in for some nasty surprises :yes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Amun Nefer

Hmm, Earth: Total War! Spanning several centuries and the entire globe! :D Now that would be EPIC (and taxing on one's comp! :p)

---

That...would...be...awesome!

I think I asked a very similar question in a thread not too long ago, my dream game would probably be an EB like-esc game which covers the whole globe (bar the new world) but it would be extremely historically inaccurate.

Here's the link anyways,

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=120453

Macrille, that assumes I have time to search through thousands of threads :p Besides when I try such things it's usually a thread completely irrelevant to my q. This ain't my first forum after all. :3

Thanks, lol. I've used it for years since .8 I think, but only just registered on this forum.

If Alexander had lived longer he might have gone into China after taking Arabia, Carthage and Italy (although invading would have been a problem given how big their pop already was as well as actually getting into China with a large army through its natural defences of the mountains and deserts.) Alexander thought the River Ocean was beyond the Ganges yeah, but it's suspected the actual reason he turned back was that he was prophesied to conquer Persia sucessfully, but if he went further his fate was uncertain. He did go a bit further, but still he didn't intend to go further. (and didn't really mind since he thought that was the end of the earth anyway.) Don't give me any of that mutiny junk though because he had had many of those and they weren't a real trouble. :p I hate to be a jerk, but he reached the Indus in modern-day Pakistan, not just Afghanistan, then proceeded to sail down the river.

That is true. I mean some of them were able to do wonderful things like almost accurately calculate the size of the planet, but it's weird how they envisioned the world even though they knew about places like China and even traded with them yet they weren't reflected all that well in many maps (sometimes not at all). :/

Meh, Think of it as a simplified version of what the world would have been like in those times except with much more permanent conquest. :3 'Twould be awesome even if it isn't all that accurate... I'm sure that people like the EB team might feel motivated enough to make it accurate. :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ARCHIPPOS

on a revelant note... i have just finished reading Arian's "alexandrou Anavasis" and it turns out that Greek knowledge of eastern geography (at the time of Alexander anyway) was pretty distorted. Alexander really believed that crossing the Ganges river and marching some humble distance he would reach the "great ocean" that encircles Asia. Earlier in his campaign when they reached the Caspian Sea they believed they have reached the same "great ocean" that encircled Asia (this time from the north).Obviously they believed that the Scythian nomads inhabited a somehow narrow coastal area of the northern Asian periphery (clearly underestimating the vastness of the central-Asian stepe).When they reached the Hindus river they believed they had actually found the banks of ... Nile!!! (bc both rivers featured crocodiles).What amazed me the most was that the Persians have not corrected the Greeks in their misconceptions (perhaps sharing the same distorted and limited view of geography??? ).

Had Alexander and the Greeks decided to march against the Scythians (past modern-day Afghanistan) or deep past the Ganges river they would be in for some nasty surprises :yes:

---

I think it impossible that the Achaemenid nobility would think that the Indus and Nile were the same river.

You have to remember though that at that time the Hellenistic civilization was at the height of what could be described as their philosophical revolution (or evolution maybe). The way that they thought about the world was quite different to how the achaemenids did. They were an ultra conservative society, with all that implies about intellectual curiousity etc. I imagine it unlikely that they would have engaged in many of these proto-scientific/philosophical conversations.

errrrr i think an Indian guy (or was it a Persian???-i'll have to check it up) stepped up and corrected Alexander in the matter of Hindus not being the Nile... however the argument still stands. I also want to point out that Alexander had indeed conceived a masterplan of creating a seatrade route extending from the Indian coasts to Babylon (from the Indian ocean through the Persian gulf and up to Euphrates river). Considering the relatively low costs of sea-trade compared to land-trade (sea trade is approx. 2,5-5 times cheaper) and the amazing wealth that could be amassed (exotic spices,slaves and valuables) and the amazing advantage of completely bypassing the vast northern steppes with its unruly nomads and the harsh terrain of Afghanistan with its hostile mountain-people i was very surprised that the Achaemenids have not already instituted such a route...

Indeed their were many great thinkers during the Hellenistic Era ie. Archimedes of Syracuse and earlier on Euclid.

I never heard of that story before would you happen to have a source for it so I can look it up? :) The thing is that he should've known the difference between the two given the fact that it doesn't make sense logically. I mean they knew about the "Pillars of Hercules" in the West and the "Tin Isles" in the Northwest.

Hmm, you'd think a trade setup like that already existed like you said. I guess that maybe they were busy putting down all the revolts in their empire lol. Then again the setup of their empire was to effectively have each satrap governed as its own little kingdom who basically independent as long as they paid taxes and levied troops needed by the Empire when called upon. If anyone knows about cases of the individual satraps doing this I'd really like to hear about it. :)

Sorry it's early right now. :3

So little survives of the Achaemenid administrative records, that it would be difficult to say from literary records. I don't know of any archaelogical finds relating to this, but I would put good money that they were trading with the rich markets in india. They had a diplomatic relationship with them, I'm pretty sure, and if there is one thing to rely upon its that people will always try and make money.

Foot

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Amun Nefer

Macrille, that assumes I have time to search through thousands of threads :p Besides when I try such things it's usually a thread completely irrelevant to my q. This ain't my first forum after all. :3

Thanks, lol. I've used it for years since .8 I think, but only just registered on this forum.

If Alexander had lived longer he might have gone into China after taking Arabia, Carthage and Italy (although invading would have been a problem given how big their pop already was as well as actually getting into China with a large army through its natural defences of the mountains and deserts.) Alexander thought the River Ocean was beyond the Ganges yeah, but it's suspected the actual reason he turned back was that he was prophesied to conquer Persia sucessfully, but if he went further his fate was uncertain. He did go a bit further, but still he didn't intend to go further. (and didn't really mind since he thought that was the end of the earth anyway.) Don't give me any of that mutiny junk though because he had had many of those and they weren't a real trouble. :p I hate to be a jerk, but he reached the Indus in modern-day Pakistan, not just Afghanistan, then proceeded to sail down the river.

That is true. I mean some of them were able to do wonderful things like almost accurately calculate the size of the planet, but it's weird how they envisioned the world even though they knew about places like China and even traded with them yet they weren't reflected all that well in many maps (sometimes not at all). :/

Meh, Think of it as a simplified version of what the world would have been like in those times except with much more permanent conquest. :3 'Twould be awesome even if it isn't all that accurate... I'm sure that people like the EB team might feel motivated enough to make it accurate. :D

---

Alexander didn't make it very far into India before finding established civilisation. There was a whole subcontinent waiting for him beyond that. And even farther, the jungles of Southeast Asia. China was isolated for so long because there was practically no way to bring a large army within its boundaries.

:tongue2: phewwwww... here is the passage (in Greek). I must admit i roughly remembered the general idea but the details i mentioned are somehow faulted (weak memory :shame:) so here goes...

Arrian, Alexandrou Anavasis, Book 6.1
Ἀλέξανδρος δέ [...] πρότερον μέν γε ἐν τῷ Ἰνδῷ ποταμῷ κροκοδείλους ἰδών, μόνῳ τῶν ἄλλων ποταμῶν πλὴν Νείλου, πρὸς δὲ ταῖς ὄχθαις τοῦ Ἀκεσίνου κυάμους πεφυκότας ὁποίους ἡ γῆ ἐκφέρει ἡ Αἰγυπτία, καὶ {ὁ} ἀκούσας ὅτι ὁ Ἀκεσίνης ἐμβάλλει ἐς τὸν Ἰνδόν, ἔδοξεν ἐξευρηκέναι τοῦ Νείλου τὰς ἀρχάς, ὡς τὸν Νεῖλον ἐνθένδε ποθὲν ἐξ Ἰνδῶν ἀνίσχοντα καὶ δι´ ἐρήμου πολλῆς γῆς ῥέοντα καὶ ταύτῃ ἀπολλύοντα τὸν Ἰνδὸν τὸ ὄνομα, ἔπειτα, ὁπόθεν ἄρχεται διὰ τῆς οἰκουμένης χώρας ῥεῖν, Νεῖλον ἤδη πρὸς Αἰθιόπων τε τῶν ταύτῃ καὶ Αἰγυπτίων καλούμενον ἢ, ὡς Ὅμηρος ἐποίησεν, ἐπώνυμον τῆς Αἰγύπτου Αἴγυπτον, οὕτω δὴ ἐσδιδόναι ἐς τὴν ἐντὸς θάλασσαν. καὶ δὴ καὶ πρὸς Ὀλυμπιάδα γράφοντα ὑπὲρ τῶν Ἰνδῶν τῆς γῆς ἄλλα τε γράψαι καὶ ὅτι δοκοίη αὑτῷ ἐξευρηκέναι τοῦ Νείλου τὰς πηγάς, μικροῖς δή τισι καὶ φαύλοις ὑπὲρ τῶν τηλικούτων τεκμαιρόμενον. ἐπεὶ μέντοι ἀτρεκέστερον ἐξήλεγξε τὰ ἀμφὶ τῷ ποταμῷ τῷ Ἰνδῷ, οὕτω δὴ μαθεῖν παρὰ τῶν ἐπιχωρίων τὸν μὲν Ὑδάσπην τῷ Ἀκεσίνῃ, τὸν Ἀκεσίνην δὲ τῷ Ἰνδῷ τό τε ὕδωρ ξυμβάλλοντας καὶ τῷ ὀνόματι ξυγχωροῦντας, τὸν Ἰνδὸν δὲ ἐκδιδόντα ἤδη ἐς τὴν μεγάλην θάλασσαν, δίστομον τὸν Ἰνδὸν ὄντα, οὐδέν τι αὐτῷ προσῆκον τῆς γῆς τῆς Αἰγυπτίας· τηνικαῦτα δὲ τῆς ἐπιστολῆς τῆς πρὸς τὴν μητέρα τοῦτο τὸ ἀμφὶ τῷ Νείλῳ γραφὲν ἀφελεῖν.

a very rugged translation...
"Alexander... having previously seen that amongst other rivers, crocodiles lived only on Indus with the exception of Nile. And also having observed by the banks of Akesinis (river) broadbeans, which also grow at Egypt. Having heard that Akesinis pours into the Indus he thought of exploring the sources of Nile.He believed that the Nile originates from some place in India, crosses a vast desert wasteland where the river loses its name "Indus" and later reemerges in populated areas.There it is renamed by Aethiopians and Egyptians as "Nile" or as Homer claims "Aegyptos River" like the country the river traverses.Then the river flows into the inner sea (=Medditeranean Sea).When Alexander wrote to his mother Olympiada concerning India , he mentioned among other things that he thought he has found the sources of Nile- reaching a conclusion over such grave matters from such trivial and circumstantial evidence.However when he studied with greater accuracy the known facts concerning Indus, he has learnt from Indian natives that Hydaspis river flows into Akesinis and that Akesinis river flows into Hindus, thus fusing their waters and mixing their names.And also that Indus pours into the Great Ocean and has no relation whatsoever with Egypt.He thus erased from his letters to his mother his assumptions concerning the Nile."

The current map is satisfyingly huge, to the point of being too huge for the AI to handle that well.

Sadly there's no mechanism, in the game for "Your stack of gold chevronned elites decides it wants to go home, or at least back to Babylon", or "You marched into the desert? Nincompoop!" but given the AI's wandering ways its a good thing.

How I long for a system that features supply, attrition, multiple recruitment methods and marries it to CA's attractive battle engine, and an AI that can plot a strategy to meet supply, combat, economic and social agendas.

I guess I'll just have to be satisfied with real world: the one engine that delivers, although all I ever get to do here is read AAR's.

don't forget desertion, plagues, pathfinding, manpower, infrastructire and social stabilty :dizzy2:

Well maybe if a certain Basileus hadn't burned down the palace at Persepolis we wouldn't have that problem. :p Well the clearest indication would be pottery, wares and coins from the different parts of the Empire in India and in India would be the clearest indication.

AVSM I said that though. :p The reason being he probably felt he shouldn't go far beyond the borders of Persia. He probably would have kept going and eventually the Pacific. If Alexander could turn Tyre into a Peninsula and was willing to cross Gedrosia I doubt he would have considered a trip into China to be too big a task.

Oh! That makes a lot of sense actually and would account for the bit of Africa in the map I showed in the OP where Africa and Asia are connected!

Maybe for you, but satisfaction is relevant and a cartophile like me likes huge game maps! :beam: You mean kind of like the one they have in EU III and HoI3? When you have a more realistic set up of course your empires won't grow all that large :p I guess they figure if you make the game too realistic, the level of difficulty would turn people off.

Huh, you talk about Alexander conquering the whole world if he had the time, but one of his last battles was against an Indian king at the Hydaspes river, which he won, but it pretty much all the other indian kings started to unite against the threat of Alex, so they were preparing an army of about 200-300,000 troops with hundreds, perhaps of elephants and chariots. Alex only had 15-20,000 troops, the same phalanx and medium cavalry as always. All the genius and tactics in the world could not have helped him defeat those armies. He could never have conquered all of india, not to mention China, with the piddly little army he had, no matter how experienced each one was. It was good that he turned around when he did, or he would be remembering for meeting a bad end with his army at the end of a very successful campaign.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AncientFanTR

Huh, you talk about Alexander conquering the whole world if he had the time, but one of his last battles was against an Indian king at the Hydaspes river, which he won, but it pretty much all the other indian kings started to unite against the threat of Alex, so they were preparing an army of about 200-300,000 troops with hundreds, perhaps of elephants and chariots. Alex only had 15-20,000 troops, the same phalanx and medium cavalry as always. All the genius and tactics in the world could not have helped him defeat those armies. He could never have conquered all of india, not to mention China, with the piddly little army he had, no matter how experienced each one was. It was good that he turned around when he did, or he would be remembering for meeting a bad end with his army at the end of a very successful campaign.

---

Well... He did conquer the persian empire、which was bigger...:juggle2:

And by the way, if Alexander would have had the time, he would have assembled a huge armies composed of persians, baktrians, egyptians plus his greek and makedon soldiers. The diadochii wars showed the incredible manpower of his empire.

i think his major problems would involve suply lines and climate changes, not tactical challanges. throughout his cmpaign that dude showed remarcable creativity and adaptation as far as battlefield tactics went. few other generals in antiquity as well as later history showed such battlefield instincts and iniciative. however on a strategic level we got somewhat lucky wit hthe persians. i mean they were virtualy ripe for the taking, which i doubt could be said for India or china. i feel maybe he could campaign and possibly take northen parts of the Indian subcontinent and still maintain political unision and social stability, but not much further east or south. western mediteranean would be logisticaly more realistic goal :yes:

Both India and China were completely disunited at the time so his chances might have been good in that respect, Chandragupta Maurya is recorded as saying the Alexander narrowly missed making himself the master of India due to the unpopularness of the Nanda rulers.
Of the two India was the only region he could have conceivably conquered after raising fresh armies, China was too far away and he would have to pass through the territiories of varoius powerful steppe tribes to get there and defend what would be extremely streched supply lines from said tribes as well not to mention having to then fight the Chinese states when he got there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ARCHIPPOS

errrrr i think an Indian guy (or was it a Persian???-i'll have to check it up) stepped up and corrected Alexander in the matter of Hindus not being the Nile... however the argument still stands. I also want to point out that Alexander had indeed conceived a masterplan of creating a seatrade route extending from the Indian coasts to Babylon (from the Indian ocean through the Persian gulf and up to Euphrates river). Considering the relatively low costs of sea-trade compared to land-trade (sea trade is approx. 2,5-5 times cheaper) and the amazing wealth that could be amassed (exotic spices,slaves and valuables) and the amazing advantage of completely bypassing the vast northern steppes with its unruly nomads and the harsh terrain of Afghanistan with its hostile mountain-people i was very surprised that the Achaemenids have not already instituted such a route...

---

Sailing at this time was done using, uh, sails, which meant you were dependant on the wind direction/speed. Because it changed in India so regularly and stayed in the same direction for such long period of time because of the monsoon, it took several years to sail to the Eastern coast of India and back again. And getting through the Straits of Malacca would have been even worse.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bobbin

China was too far away and he would have to pass through the territiories of varoius powerful steppe tribes to get there and defend what would be extremely streched supply lines from said tribes as well not to mention having to then fight the Chinese states when he got there.

---

Thankfully with Asia ton Barbaroron, we shall prove that such petty things are useless, and shall have Phalanxes marching down the Yangtze in no time.

Err you do know Asia ton Barbaron doesn't go that far east?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bobbin

Err you do know Asia ton Barbaron doesn't go that far east?

---

Second this, it will go to roughly the beginnin of Singapore and just a bit of China, which is part of the Eremos.

Many be one day when we play EB III on Empire without testudo, phalanx or siege battles.... :shame:
At the moment empire is far beyond to make a roman mod with it.....

1.3

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Atraphoenix

Many be one day when we play EB III on Empire without testudo, phalanx or siege battles.... :shame:
At the moment empire is far beyond to make a roman mod with it.....

---

Here's hoping they make a R2TW game sometime in the future with awesome graphics and actually improve gameplay rather than diminish it!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AncientFanTR

Here's hoping they make a R2TW game sometime in the future with awesome graphics and actually improve gameplay rather than diminish it!

---

well, arguably Empire total war was a step in the right direction AI wise. but in everything else, I find it to be a half-dozen steps backward. its, for starters, WAY too beefy, gameplay somewhat overdrawn, and sieges on walled and entrnched cities are noticeably absent. the reason the last annoys me is because sieges were an Important element of eighteenth century warfare.

and honestly, we live in the year 2010: you'd figure the people making these games would figure out how to cut size without sacrificing "eye" candy. I know that there is/was a reformatt possible for .cas files in RTW that drastically cuts the size of the cas files (i think the new formatt is called a rum file-I could be mistaken)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bobbin

Err you do know Asia ton Barbaron doesn't go that far east?

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skullheadhq

Second this, it will go to roughly the beginnin of Singapore and just a bit of China, which is part of the Eremos.

---

Aww.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moros

1.3

---

Yayyyyy

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Foot

I'm pretty sure, and if there is one thing to rely upon its that people will always try and make money.

Foot

---

something about this makes me grin in a cheeky manner.... =D

Personally I understand that there is a hardcoded limit to provinces, however, I do feel that there is a (likely unintended) baises to the west and mid east provinces. The farther you go out the larger the provinces get. I would prefer to see an even larger map so that this discrepency can be changed.

As evidence to this point I would direct your attention to the fact that in the west many armies can travel to multiple cities in one turn, while the farther east you go, this ability decreases. You can point out the the eastern armies are heavily reliant on cavalry but that still doesnt make up for the sheer physical differences in the province sizes.


When I say east I mean like the far far east and far north