
Originally Posted by
TinCow
I think you're judging it a bit too harshly based on their comments so far. As I understand it, the size of the map will factor into this in a major way. CA have rather boldly stated that the map is much larger than RTW, and has "hundreds" of regions. They don't typically give out campaign map info like that on release day, which indicates this is a big change in some way. It sounds to me like it's meshing with the province management system. Essentially, it sounds like they're combining the ETW/TWS2 system with 'dispersed' production within a region, with the system used by all the other games. Take the existing TWS2 system, but then make all of the individual 'buildings' in its own region, and allow that region to be conquered by an enemy, not just 'damaged.' Simply repairing the building would not restore your production, you'd have to send units out to get the thing back. So, probably more field battles, which is a good thing.
Similarly, loss of the capital may prevent you from producing anything in the province, but controlling nothing but the capital of the province would probably have a similar impact on your enemy. So, you would not see provinces instantly churning out troops for the other side... that ability would only start showing up after all the associated regions are conquered as well. In general, it sounds to me like a way of reducing the frequency of siege battles. Sure, there will probably be many to take whatever the 'capital' of the province is, but the fate of the province might actually hinge on field battles fought in defense of the regions long before the capital is threatened. That's a change that I'm at least optimistic about. Sure, they could implement it in a manner that is poor, but it could also be a welcome improvement.
At least, that's what I'm imagining based on the very limited info provided.
Bookmarks