Guess I'm not getting this game...

[screwtype]

As I put in another thread, I think it would be a large improvement over the RTW campaign map if you could move large distances through your own territory but less in enemies provinces. This would symbolize supply lines, unfriendly natives, ect. This would allow you to move at a good rate though your own empire and yet not be able to rush enemy settlements. The disparity between attacker and defender movement points would also make it easier to intercept invading armies before they reach a settlement, creating more field battles

I totally agree with your comments. It seems a very obvious thing to do to solve the problem of the unrealistic movement rates in the game.

And what is CA's solution to the same problem? Apparently, to "get away" from the concept of turns as discreet units of time. It's difficult to imagine a more superficial solution. Basically, they're just going to pretend that turns aren't really as long as logic says they are.

Edit: It occurs to me that the simple way to implement such "strategic movement" would simply be to allow units to have cheaper movement costs in undisputed friendly provinces. So for example instead of movement along a road costing say six movement points, it costs only one in friendly territory.

"Friendly territory" would be defined as any friendly controlled province (including allied provinces) that doesn't contain any enemy units. So for example, the appearance of a rebel army in a friendly province would mean you couldn't use the faster movement rate through that province. That would have the additional effect of making the appearance of rebel armies more strategically significant.