Sardinia: A plea for a 2nd settlement

[Zarax]

"Nationalism" aside (yes, I'm a sardinian and that for sure will only detract from the point), imho the actual representation of Sardinia leaves vast room for improvement.

Right now the island is represented by having Karali (a punic commercial port, where most of the island trade passed through) as regional capital and Olbia (a former greek trading settlement IIRC, please correct me if i'm wrong) as docks.

I'm fully aware of the settlement limit and the RTW engine limitations for such a representation but there is serious room for improvement.

First of all, at game start Nora was the punic administrative and military capital for the island (http://www.isolasarda.com/nora-storia_e.htm I apologize for the shoddy link but I'm sure you will find confirmation in more academic sources), while Karali was the trading hub.

Olbia was a smaller port and while still important served no inland trade to Karali.
Between them there was what the romans called Barbagia, the wildest part of the island populated by various independent tribes.
While they were relatively friendly (used as a loose term) to the carthaginans nevertheless there still was extensive raiding going on and no major merchant route ever passed through their territories.

In fact, reading about the first punic war in Sardinia you can find that Olbia and southern Sardinia were in fact two very distinct strategic theaters.
While the romans counted on capturing Olbia to help them establish naval supremacy over the thyrrenian sea it never was considered a serious base for inland expansion.

Another factor that should be counted for the inclusion of a 2nd settlement is the native population.
Carthage never completely controlled the interior of the island, although after the 5th century their relationship stabilized reasonably enough to quell most of the endemic conflict (although the balares and other sardi pelliti tribes would keep raiding the southern settlements from time to time) the mountains and central Sardinia in general was still under the nuragic culture.

Rome itself didn't conquer the island swiftly.
While the mercenary rebellion made the punic settlements a relatively easy prey the nuragic population was not tamed in any way and rebelled often with the major uprising in 216BC where a coalition of nuragic tribes supported by troops from Carthage fought the romans in a large battle.

After that guerrilla warfare continued for more than a century, with the last pockets of resistance subdued in the early imperium, with Cicero describing the nuragics as "Sardos Venales", referring to the fact that they made worthless slaves, ready to kill their "owner" at the first chance.
In this Sardinia had many parallels with the conquest of Iberia.

Possible candidates of an interior settlement could be Macopsissa (modern Macomer), Nukor (modern Nuoro) or some more coastal settlements like Tharros or Turris.
Finally, here's the best example of nuragic civilization in Sardinia, the complex of Su Nuraxi: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Su_Nuraxi_di_Barumini

[A Very Super Market]

Hmm. Personally, I think Sardinia is just too small an island and population to warrant another territory. Following your argument, Italy would be made up of one province for each group of people, plus Rome itself divided into 6 different cities. TW doesn't particularily lend itself to simulation of guerilla warfare, and most with the nature of the game itself, the second settlement probably wouldn't last very long either. Besides, you haven't explained which province you want to remove.

On you point about the island being misrepresented, this also goes for numerous other provinces. By this argument, North African provinces should be separated into coast and desert, and mountain ranges should have their own province. Again, the province limit comes into play.

I think that Sardinia is fine as it is. Very few players (And the AI, except for that hellish patch in M2) do not spend much time there at all. I don't see the point in giving a small, (Forgive me, but) dull island two territories.

Of course, I don't speak for the EB2 team. My own opinions.

[Zarax]

Err... small? Dull?

Let's compare:
Sicily (3 settlements): 25,708 km²
Sardinia (1 settlement): 24,090 km²

And if guerrilla warfare doesn't implement itself well, why not reducing Iberia and Gaul to 4-5 settlements while we're at it?
You could make the case that Aleria was pretty much useless too, so why not get away with it too?

[bobbin]

I'd have to say that there areas of the map much more deserving of a extra city than Sardinia, India and Baktria would be at the top of my list, get rid of Gawjam Gotanoz and Aguila and give the provinces to the east!

Also remember in EBII they will be making use of the permanent stone forts do simulate other important cities in a region. Not an ideal solution to you problem but it helps a bit.

[A Very Super Market]

Sicily was a historic battleground, with a land link to Italy in the game. Then there is Syracuse, which might be made into a playable faction.

Gaul was historically divided and filled with a bunch of different tribes. The Aedui and Arverni need space to expand, as do the Sweboz and Romans.

Aleria is a separate island. I don't see where you are going with this.

[CaesarAugustus]

Since there is a limit of 199 as the amount of provinces which can be included, and half of Eurasia is being represented on the strategy map, I think it is reasonable that Sardinia only has one province, especially seeing that it did not have an overly large population during 272 BC, and was controlled by only one *major* faction, the interior being tribes. The comparison with Sicily based on land area is kind of is kind of weak; it would mean that the steppes should be broken down into more provinces too, regardless of their sparse population. I could not find any online estimate of the Sardinian population circa 272 BC, but it could not have been close to that of Sicily, considering Sicily was a rich agricultural island supporting one of the largest cities in the Mediterranean, Syrakousai. I think that the EB team decided to devote three provinces to Sicily because a) it was an important crossroads of Mediterranean trade and a strategic island to hold, b) it was divided culturally and politically, being controlled by the Phoenicians in the West and Greeks in the East (not to mention its native populations, largely fallen under the spheres of influence in 272 BC), and c) It was the primary site of a very historic war during that period.

That being said, I am inclined to agree that if there were more province spaces, Sardinia should definitely warrant more than one, for the reasons already stated by Zarax, plus the fact that whoever controlled (coastal) Sardinia basically controlled (coastal) Corsica and the Tyrrhenian as well.

There is also the point about Nora being the Punic capital of Sardinia. Maybe this should be the case in EB2, with Karali as the docks and Olbia as a permanent fortress? Perhaps a permanent fortress in the interior of the island as well, occupied by Sardinian Eleutheroi, to represent the uncontrolled interior?

[MarcusAureliusAntoninus]

Sardinia's provinces have been discussed interally. It really should have at least three settlements (two coastal and one inland with difficult rebels), but provinces are a very rare resource.

The Carthaginians status in Sardinia and the situation of the natives will be better represnted in EBII.

[Zarax]

Since there is a limit of 199 as the amount of provinces which can be included, and half of Eurasia is being represented on the strategy map, I think it is reasonable that Sardinia only has one province, especially seeing that it did not have an overly large population during 272 BC, and was controlled by only one *major* faction, the interior being tribes.

The same could be said about many other places (germania, parts of gaul, parts of the balkans, ireland and UK), yet nobody has a problem with their assigned number of provinces.

The comparison with Sicily based on land area is kind of is kind of weak; it would mean that the steppes should be broken down into more provinces too, regardless of their sparse population. I could not find any online estimate of the Sardinian population circa 272 BC, but it could not have been close to that of Sicily, considering Sicily was a rich agricultural island supporting one of the largest cities in the Mediterranean, Syrakousai. I think that the EB team decided to devote three provinces to Sicily because a) it was an important crossroads of Mediterranean trade and a strategic island to hold, b) it was divided culturally and politically, being controlled by the Phoenicians in the West and Greeks in the East (not to mention its native populations, largely fallen under the spheres of influence in 272 BC), and c) It was the primary site of a very historic war during that period.

If you check a bit deeper you will find that Sardinia came right after Sicily as roman granary between the punic wars and kept an important place until egypt came into play.
This without mentioning its mines, which were an important source of income for both Rome and Carthage, although of course not on the same level as Iberia.
Sardinia was an important battlefield of the punic wars too, one could even argue that it decided the fate of the 2nd one as Hannibal's reinforcements were diverted there to support the native efforts to oust the romans.
While not as advanced as the greeks or romans in the EB timeframe the sardinians were on the same league up to the 6th century BC and built fortifications that were at least as good as the celtic oppida. Here's an example: http://www.imedia.sardegna.it/nuraxi...ESE/ukpn00.htm

The carthaginian themselves didn't have an easy time conquering the island and were pushed back a few times before getting ground inland by the balares and other interior tribes.

That being said, I am inclined to agree that if there were more province spaces, Sardinia should definitely warrant more than one, for the reasons already stated by Zarax, plus the fact that whoever controlled (coastal) Sardinia basically controlled (coastal) Corsica and the Tyrrhenian as well.

My plea came now as provinces are being reconsidered for EB2 and so the importance of the island has a chance to be reconsidered against others.

There is also the point about Nora being the Punic capital of Sardinia. Maybe this should be the case in EB2, with Karali as the docks and Olbia as a permanent fortress? Perhaps a permanent fortress in the interior of the island as well, occupied by Sardinian Eleutheroi, to represent the uncontrolled interior?

Fortresses could be an acceptable compromise to depict island situation in a more accurate way.
I am confident that the EB team will manage to find the best compromise between historical accuracy and engine limitations.

[MarcusAureliusAntoninus]

[Tellos Athenaios]

You, Hax, are in a position to *know*. Or at any rate, know before others do whether or not it was a good idea.

It is very true that the (excuse me) troublesome nature of Sardinia and its people make it somewhat `under valued' in EB 1. OTOH with all the trouble stirring in Iran for the Seleukids we can claim the same as well (especially seeing how a lot of the warfare seems to have focussed around obtaining/defending control of fortresses and important cities): Iran too is a bit too much taken for granted (Antiochos III did after all make a name for himself re-asserting control over what were almost independent states). And of course India, Baktria... Regions are a scarce resource indeed!

[Hax]

You, Hax, are in a position to *know*. Or at any rate, know before others do whether or not it was a good idea.

Well, MAA has at least mentioned the use of Permanent Stone Forts more than once, so I logically assumed that the use of Permanent Stone Forts in EBII was known. To what extent, I cannot say.

[Belisarius II]

I thought that if EBII had permanent stone forts, no one would be able to build forts at all. This was the case in mods made for M2TW.

[V.T. Marvin]

Well, despite the fact that I build forts quite often in EB 1, I think that having permanent stone forts representing minor cities and hard-to-control popuation is a good idea worth sacrificing the ability to build normal forts on the strat-map.

The fact that one can gain control over vast provinces by simply taking a city (and once taken the player´s control over that region is rarely challenged for the rest of the game) is IMO one of the great weaknesses of the RTW engine.

Looking forward to the EB Team´s solution!!!