Position of settlement on the strat map ?

[Redshank]

I suppose now, with the release of 1.1, is as good a time as any to make a 1st post. First, I'd just like to say what a wonderful project EB is, and to congratulate everyone involved. I'm loathed to refer it as simply a 'mod' due to the sheer extent of content that has been added and how radically it has transformed the game from vanilla.


Well deserved praise aside, I do have an observation which has arisen from my 2nd campaign in 1.0 as the Casse. This being the only time thus far I've played a western faction, I hadn't previously given anything west of the Dardanelles any real attention. At any rate, I'd just formed an army up in southern Scotland in anticipation of 'paying a visit' to Navan Fort on the subsequent turn, so to speak. With just enough movement points left to cross the land bridge I threw my FM into Ireland where he stopped just short of Lough Neagh. After another few turns I'd put it to the sword, but what strikes me as rather odd is how exceedingly westerly the settlement is located. By rights, it should be almost directly below Lough Neagh in what is now Country Armagh, whereas its positioning on the strat map is considerably closer to being in what would now be Counties Roscommon or Leitrim (at a glance, seemingly). Broadly speaking, the place in question is somewhat of a locale to me. One of the tourist websites has a very nondescript map of what I'm attempting to describe, but it does at least identify the location with a big ol' red circle. I won't clog this up with the picture though unless it's requested.

This is, of course, providing that there are not two places called Eamhain Mhacha - Macha's Brooch or Macha's twins afaik depending on which theory is linguistically preferable, of which I'm definitely not in a position to guess at . In any case, I'm referring to the capital of the Uliad / Voluntii (?) as described in the Ulster Cycle which to my knowledge is the only one. Care to confirm this anyone ?



There's evidently a strong impression exuded by EB that accuracy not only historically but geographically has been a consistently strong concern which is highlighted not least of which by how amazingly detailed the map has been made. With that in mind, I thought perhaps this sort of observation, providing the aforementioned settlements are one and the same, might help contribute to that desire, if only slightly. I'm not however intending this as a criticism. Quite the converse in fact. Iirc, Vanilla's 'Hibernia' had one single settlement - probably Tara, which wasn't incredibly important until later than the game's ostensible time frame. So, any improvements made upon that state of affairs is infinitely preferable.


Although, I'm guessing that to make such a superficial change (as this would invariably be) would take an inordinate amount of effort, and perhaps this sort of thing has even been brought up before but limitations of the engine have constrained the positioning of settlements somehow ? Apologies btw if this is indeed the case . Perhaps this suggestion is something that could be borne in mind for the map in progress for EB2 though?