Page 1 of 3 1 23 Last

I wonder if there will be changes about the distribution of the regions on the map. Since every demand for more regions in area X is crushed by the team members and the community, I beg you all to not crucify me for this thread. ;)
In my opinion, there are to many regions in northeastern europe. There are no factions and the sauromatae or sweboz seem never to expand into that area. So why not taking away a few regions there and distributing them where ever they are needed.
I had some similar thoughts for Britain. I dont want to erase it entirely, the casse have to live somewhere, but why do we need all of it up north to Scotland and even Ireland?
Did they ever move so far? Wouldnt it be cooler if they'd invade the continent directly instead of leading this silly 'unite the islands' campain?

Maybe some of you have even better ideas where the team could cut away some regions?

Although I have to admit that I dont know where these new regions should be put most appropriatly and if they are REALLY needed...
cya

IIRC they already said in a twitter update that the EB 2 map is already done (province wise at least), and that it will be significantly different from the map of RTW. You can always ask for more details thougth... but another thing is that you get the information that you ask

I have a similar opinion, though it regards the Arabian Peninsula.

Though alot of work has been put into the Saba, I feel that their place in the history of the map is, besides trading, relatively limited. I could see maybe removing the Saba (free's up a faction slot), and then taking away the vast majority of Arabia's provinces. Leave a few on the coast for the Ptolies of course, but for the most part just make Arabia part of the vast desert no-man's-land province that already composes alot of Arabia, along with the Sahara.

I know there's a definite 'Equality for All' concept for the factions in the game, but the fact is the Mediterranean and the Turkey-Syria-Iraq-Iran-Egypt-Judea slice of the Middle East are far more important than the peripheries of the map, if nothing else because of the faction density in places like Greece and the Alps, or the broader area of Syria and Asia Minor.

I do believe, sir, that you are missing the point of this game. Let me elaborate:

1) Sab'yn are there to represent the culture of their region, which is neither Hellenistic, nor Egyptian, nor Persian. The Arabian loyalists need an appropriate faction to revolt back to.

2) From what I hear, considerable work has been put into the development of this faction, resulting in some nifty, historically accurate units that didn't make it into EB I.

3) You said "besides trading". You do realize how important trade is, do you? After all, the English (for example) carved out a huge empire for themselves by little more than trade and piracy.

4) EB strives to represent all regions and cultures equally. Or so the developers said. Seeing as there is (some) relevant information available on this faction, it can be portrayed realistically.

5) It is not as if South Arabia were a region devoid of ancient culture or of conflicts.

6) I for one am looking forward to having at least one Arabian faction in EB II. And if it were only to crush them.

maybe it could be possible to merge some regions in northern europe(thus getting rid of 1-2 provinces) and one in each arabia and Britain but more would not be worth it imoas it would take away to much focus from regions that were added only by eb in the first place. an other option would be to declare large quantities of the european steppes "eremos" this would sound a bit silly tho

still I'm fine with the EB 1 map and anticipate the EB 2 map to be even a little bit better

Some province redistribution has been done. We won't say from where and to where.

Except that Iran-area has received one extra province. Happy?

Yay! thats what i wanted to hear Iran was in desperate need of more provinces. I'm going to guess it was gotland that got the axe as i heard it was never intended to be captured by anyone but the player due to some quirk of the RTW region system.

Concerning the saba, i seem to recall a historical battle description where the arabs got the romans to invade parthia through their lands, and the romans got annihilated by parthia because of that. Maybe not quite in the time frame (not sure) but certainly shows arabs did play a role in things back then.

oh they want to chop of the map? sorry misread that as sticking regions together.
no never I like to invade mesopotamia from two sides! and the northern regions are imho somewhat important to have on the map aswell.

Those guys weren't Sabaeans though, they were just more or less local Arabs. Remember Carrhae lies to the North of Arab lands in EB's time frame.

Still, like you said earlier, the saba are there to represent their local culture.

They can just rebel to eleutheroi.

Doesn't work like that. They rebel to the sub-faction that the province belongs to. So to ensure that all rebel provinces don't look western greek (the culture for the slave faction), we give each province a sub-faction.

Foot

Hear, hear. That should put an end to the demands for Saba's removal.
Why, this is one of the top ten questions that pop up every two weeks, along with requests for LS and multiple Roman factions etc..

The Domain of the Sword mod will make a great use of PSF in the map to "break" in somw way the province limit, of course they will be only stone forts but could make a very useful simulation of cities.
So, maybe this could be interesting for some parts of EB map.

Do you mean Dominion of the Sword?

AFAIK the EB team is already using PSF's for that very purpose.

isn't there always a danger in making the provinces too close? i mean considering the AI's unwillingness to fight open battles, would this not result in total siedge warfare?

The map is being scaled up by 1.3x so there will be more space between cities.

Honestly, I would love EB2 to be Siege Total War. So much roleplaying...

Ugh, wat?

I hope (/trust) you're being sarcastic. There's too few large decisive major field battles as it is and too much besieging cities, sitting on your ass for a few turns, defeating sally attempts and moving onto the next siege. Add a few stacks of 2-3 units wandering around there and that's Total War for you.

aye, as a matter of fact, the most often used way to engage in a major battle for me is lay a siege when there is a large army around and wait for it to try to relieve the city. otherwise they just retreat before any decisive fighting starts even when outnumbering you 1:1.5 . i've tried to pursue with horse skirmishers but the casualties inflicted in this manner are neglectable. traps work sometimes but only if the terrain allows it.

however if the new map is 1.3 times larger then maybe there is more room for maneuvering. has there been an official preview of the new strategic map?

Not that I know of.

Not really. It could also start the demands for the removal of Arabia. At least the southern peninsula.

EDIT:
Nah, IMHO Sieges in the TW engine are badly done. Its always much less fun to me than field battles. Plus, among all the historical battles I know of, only a few were sieges.

Yes, sorry for the mistake.
I've seen some previews of the DotS map and it looks awesome.

So what then? The AI can't defend every PSF, so we'll just walk in. Also, the sight of so many cities and forts under my control would be very gratifying.

Fixed, I believe. The AI can always keep one or two units in every PSF. Very rarely have I seen the AI completely abandon a settlement. Plus, I don't think PSFs can rebel. Am I correct in stating this?

That means small-scale minor front sieges, even better.

Have you ever read books on Ancient arabia? If not, how can you judge their importance?

Well.... Tell us the importance of ancient arabia in the EB timeframe and why nobody ever bothered conquering all of it? I know the sassanids atacked the arabian peninsula a few times and defeated many arabian tribes, but still they didnt bother conquering it.
Or am I wrong?
Oh and the cultural influences as important as they may be are nothing, that are reflected in a total war game?

@Topic
I have great concerns about the new bigger map. I mean the Eb map was too big for the Ai to act at least a little bit intelligent. The ai factions were unable to defend their important cities form naval atacks, in my current Vanilla campain I was just flashed, when I atackes scipii carthago and they launched an counteratack with 5 fullstacks. Never seen anything like that in EB. Even the yellow death cant do anything against a full stack against alexandria.
But anyway maybe the Ai in MWII is different

I have launched many a surprise invasion against little defence many a time in MTW II.

Page 1 of 3 1 23 Last