Campaign map overview (picture)

[Laman]

Man there are sure some hard people to please in this forum thats for sure. OK so the map isn't the most historically accurate map in the world. But if you want that play europa universallis or crusader kings. The map has to be accurate but it has to be balanced (Portugal starting with Pamplona for example) so that CA don't get complaints that its too hard to play with some factions and that others are easy etc.. so they have sacrificed some historical accuracy to ensure that all the factions will be competitive and that hopefully no 2 campains will be the same.

Still there are things such as Scania NOT part of Denmark. It wouldn't even have to be it's own province but part of the same province as the rest of Denmark if they have to have one province only, or having Croatia and Serbia in one province. That kind of errors that should have never been made had any basic research been done are the worst. I wish that it was only which province should be had by whom and what cities that it should be would be only thing to complain about (such as France should not have Provence, if any faction should have it it should be HRE, since it didn't become part of France until ~1480 IIRC), but alas it is not.

[JR-]

does M2 have more Eurasian provinces than were found in the original M?

[Perplexed]

does M2 have more Eurasian provinces than were found in the original M?

If you mean in the continent of Eurasia then yes.
If you mean in Russia then no.

[JR-]

If you mean in the continent of Eurasia then yes.

yes i did, is it known what the difference is?

[Dr_Who_Regen#4]

Tough crowd on the Map...

However, I bet for 98 to 99% of the people who buy M2TW (most of which don't even step foot in a forum like this) the map will be more then fine. Things may not be historically accurate or provinces broken out the way poeple want, but I am hoping it is based on CA trying to strike a good balance and provide different difficulties by faction starting position. Also it gets a bit tedious to have too many provinces to manage so CA has to make a choice on the actual total number. I am sure this impacts things like Croatia and Serbia being in the same province.

Anyways I am looking forward to playing and do not think the map will detract from my game play in any way as it just provides the framework around which we play.

I do actually have 1 question. I think there are going to be land bridges in the game. Anyone know for sure what provinces they will link?

[Ituralde]

Since I don't know the exact province names I'll just go by the names of their capitals:

Constantinople --> Nicae
Naples --> Palermo
Aarhus --> Stockholm
Edinburgh --> Dublin
That's all I know of for sure.
Could also be one across the Straight of Gibraltar, but I'm not sure about it.

Cheers!

Ituralde

[Aracnid]

Are you sure about Edinburgh-Dublin I can understand all the others but the Northern End of the Irish Sea is quite stormy and difficult to cross so I would imagine they would require ships to cross, all the others should be land bridges.

[Phalaxar]

Still there are things such as Scania NOT part of Denmark. It wouldn't even have to be it's own province but part of the same province as the rest of Denmark if they have to have one province only, or having Croatia and Serbia in one province. That kind of errors that should have never been made had any basic research been done are the worst. I wish that it was only which province should be had by whom and what cities that it should be would be only thing to complain about (such as France should not have Provence, if any faction should have it it should be HRE, since it didn't become part of France until ~1480 IIRC), but alas it is not.

That's nice and such, but you missed the point of the guy you were quoting/replying to. He said that they were probably conscious choices made by CA to improve gameplay; you replied, "hey, look, they made these basic errors!".

Yes, there are historical errors, but as he was saying, they were most likely purposely put there to enhance gameplay.

No amount of pointing out flawed historical accuracy will change that.

[Laman]

That's nice and such, but you missed the point of the guy you were quoting/replying to. He said that they were probably conscious choices made by CA to improve gameplay; you replied, "hey, look, they made these basic errors!".

Yes, there are historical errors, but as he was saying, they were most likely purposely put there to enhance gameplay.

No amount of pointing out flawed historical accuracy will change that.

Although they won't "enhance gameplay". What they do is kill whatever immersion this game could have had. With the Scania example it is something that doesn't even necessarily mean a new province! One might as well rename Novgorod to the Soviet Union to "enhance gameplay", or give the Mongols machine guns or the Papal States Roman Legionaries, it is essentialy the same thing (that is stupid things that shouldn't be that way).

[Ferret]

Has anyone noticed the mistakes in that map:
Bologna should belong to HRE
Nicosia should belong to the Byzantine Empire
Iraklion should belong to Venice
and not all of the Thesalonika region is shaded in (the island to the East)

I know this because of the screenshots the swedish guy posted.

[Phalaxar]

Although they won't "enhance gameplay". What they do is kill whatever immersion this game could have had. With the Scania example it is something that doesn't even necessarily mean a new province! One might as well rename Novgorod to the Soviet Union to "enhance gameplay", or give the Mongols machine guns or the Papal States Roman Legionaries, it is essentialy the same thing (that is stupid things that shouldn't be that way).

No, that's not the same thing. Changing who owns what province, what town is called what where etc. is to change minor details around so that they are historically inaccurate but make for a more fun game. Calling Novgorod Soviet Union doesn't make it any more fun. Mongols with machine guns would completely change the game mechanic, not just change a minor detail. That really does matter a lot to the outcome of the game, while a province here or there doesn't matter anywhere near as much. And again, Papal States with legionaries - how does that make it more fun at all?

No need to throw the baby out with the bathwater.

The immersion for me, in this game, is not in the fact that the starting map is exactly that what I thought it would be.

[Furious Mental]

Amazing though it may sound when I boot the game up and see that Scania, wherever that is, is not part of Denmark, I will not punch my monitor in frustration and then die of disappointment.

[Laman]

No, that's not the same thing. Changing who owns what province, what town is called what where etc. is to change minor details around so that they are historically inaccurate but make for a more fun game. Calling Novgorod Soviet Union doesn't make it any more fun. Mongols with machine guns would completely change the game mechanic, not just change a minor detail. That really does matter a lot to the outcome of the game, while a province here or there doesn't matter anywhere near as much. And again, Papal States with legionaries - how does that make it more fun at all?

No need to throw the baby out with the bathwater.

The immersion for me, in this game, is not in the fact that the starting map is exactly that what I thought it would be.

What I was complaining about was not who own's which province (since that is easily modded if one wants to) but the actual provinces which are an insult. I mean all they did was use the bad map from MTW and made it RTW style. There are some changes in provinces, but not large enough (and in the case of Serbia and Croatia the changes are actually much worse, having them in the same province makes no sense, it would make more sense to have all of France in a single province (and noone sensible wants that)). So these things are the same, moronic things without any sensible justification, but those things I wrote are actually preferable IMHO to the current map since they are atleast easily modded (that is only a text editor will be needed).

Amazing though it may sound when I boot the game up and see that Scania, wherever that is, is not part of Denmark, I will not punch my monitor in frustration and then die of disappointment.

Well Scania (together with Blekinge and Halland) was an integral part of Denmark throughout the middle ages. Nowadays it is just the southern part of Sweden but that is just because we conquered it in the 17th century.

[Kavhan Isbul]

The rebels are great if you want to build an empire in five turns (or even less). Just bribe one or two, conquer another one or two and there you go, you already are the biggest faction. If all you want is a quick victory, then there is nothing greater than plenty of rebels.
However, if you want a decent and realistic challenge, having more and bigger factions at the start of the game is key. In MTW in all the mods that had more factions and less rebels, the game was better balanced - it was harder to expand both for the AI and the human, and overall it took longer for superpowers to develop. Even in the vanilla version there were less rebels, than what seems to be the case in M2TW. And looking at the mods, noone seem to want more rebels, on the contrary, there was much improvement by adding more factions and improving the game's toughness and realism.
I do not mind rebels, but a only in a few provinces, which were not under the control of a ruler or a state. Valencia with El Cid might be a good example, and so are some of the Baltic lands. But to have York and Prague as rebel is ridiculous.

[Phalaxar]

What I was complaining about was not who own's which province (since that is easily modded if one wants to) but the actual provinces which are an insult. I mean all they did was use the bad map from MTW and made it RTW style. There are some changes in provinces, but not large enough (and in the case of Serbia and Croatia the changes are actually much worse, having them in the same province makes no sense, it would make more sense to have all of France in a single province (and noone sensible wants that)). So these things are the same, moronic things without any sensible justification, but those things I wrote are actually preferable IMHO to the current map since they are atleast easily modded (that is only a text editor will be needed).



Well Scania (together with Blekinge and Halland) was an integral part of Denmark throughout the middle ages. Nowadays it is just the southern part of Sweden but that is just because we conquered it in the 17th century.

You say that there's no actual reason/no sensible justification, but you're wrong.

It doesn't matter if CA don't defend every decision they make, if they don't justify every detail like the map. Just because they havne't doesn't mean they can't.

Purely speculating on my part, I'm willing to bet that the decision was made every time in the interests of gameplay. Stop attacking them for every little decision they make and realise that they aren't out to ruin the game, aren't out to confuse the general populace on important historical issues, but are just trying to make a fun game. Whether you think this incarnation is fun or not is, of course, irrelevant.

[Kavhan Isbul]

Phalaxar, you seem to live the role of a CA defender, which is completely unnecessary, as this is far from a CA bashing thread. I cannot understand why you need to feel so offended, when people point out the obvious mistakes CA made in naming cities to the East. For the most part, they simply chose whatever city is an important one today, and simply did not do their research. I do not see how putting cities in, which did not exist or were small insignificants settlements in 1080 makes the game more fun. I like the game because it allows me to recreate the Middle Ages to an extent, and anything that takes away from the realism diminishes the enjoyment, at least for me. For all practical purposes, lumping Croatia and Serbia together and putting in Helsinki and Bucharest would be the same as simply replacing Novgorod with St. Petersburg. It is simply out of context.
Cities names and provinces are small details, true. But they are very noticeable ones, as you stare at them on the strategic map, and correcting them should be extremely easy. Having proper names may not exactly enhance gameplay, but it will most deffinitely enhance the overall enjoyment from the game for most people.