Campaign map overview (picture)

[edyzmedieval]

For Transilvania, use Bihor - Hungarian comitate founded in 1111.
For Moldavia, use Cetatea Alba or Hotin.
For Wallachia, use Targoviste.



Otherwise, nice map.

[Ultras DVSC]

For Transilvania, use Bihor

She's not even part of it...

Anyway, this map is awful - there remains no more but penetrative modding.

[darsalon]

Nice one for showing the map, very interesting.

My one complaint with the map is the starting position for the Portuguese where they should have them as an emerging faction? However, I am impressed with the number of provinces in the middle east as that has improved over MTW.

Now it's just a matter of waiting a week and a half to see how it will pan out in the campaign game. I'm sure CA are well aware of those of us who look at the historical accuracy of the whole thing but, they do need to have some sort of balance on the playability side and there may have to be a bit of artificial changing around of things in starting positions. This would help in making sure factions weren't removed out of the game too early and so on I would have thought.

Just a question to ask around as well, is there going to be such a thing as Early, High and I think Late Period selection as there was in MTW and if so, it'll be interesting to see what the starting positions will be for those?

[Ars Moriendi]

For Wallachia, use Targoviste.

and

For capital of Wallachia, Targoviste would probably be a better option

Yes, Targoviste would be better (Bucharest was irrelevant at the time), but probably not the best option. According to Wikipedia :

"Câmpulung was the first capital of the feudal state of Wallachia, until succeeded by Curtea de Argeş in the 14th century."

Targoviste became capital during the reign of Mircea cel Batran (~1400) which is kind of late for the period of time depicted in the game

[ProudNerd]

Over at TWC, nodey made a very nice looking map with all the cities and factions of the Grand Campaign. It is based on a beta screenshot ( http://www.g4mers.com/images/previews/shot_71_499.jpg ). The map was enlarged and then refined. From the demo files a list of cities could be extracted ( http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showp...5&postcount=17 ) and by researching the net + tips from other fans the cities were placed on the corresponding regions. America is not included though :-P

Enjoy!

(Oh yeah, it's 1080 AD.)



If interested, the thread is at: http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=66394

He sure used nice colors and fonts for it its extremely clear and pleasant. ill have to print it and hang it near my pc for planing conquests!

[Filipe24]

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.

[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.

[Wandarah]

She's not even part of it...

Anyway, this map is awful - there remains no more but penetrative modding.

Lucky modding! I do hope it isnt the first date.

[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.

[Richard The Tiger Heart]

Hi,

The map is not bad, i would like to point out that the lack of two provinces for Portugal

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

really

messes the gameplay. There should be two provinces, one north and another south.

South would be Lisbon, for its a very important city. By the way I heared someone say it was conquered by Crusaders. Well thats true, but the portuguese army commanded by Afonso Henriques was there to take it. Thats why there was no Crusader State there, like in the Holy Land or in Thrace.

North, well , Guimarães. It was the capital of the Count of Portucal which later gave the name to the coutry. In fact there should be no Portugal in 1080. There should be Aragon instead, and in other scenarios then there would be Portugal like it happened in MTW with the Russians.

[Richard The Tiger Heart]

Cant edit my post? Oh well, i wasnt to use the bold command and used the spoil one... too bad...

[satchef1]

Portugal does have 2, Portugal, and Navarre ()

Im not really liking the look of vanilla M2, too many daft choices based on things that the general public will recognise (Portugal over Aragon, Milan over Genoa, stupid city names etc.)
Wonder how quickly a proper campaign map and a better faction list can be nocked up?

[Ituralde]

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.

Look for yourself:
http://image.com.com/gamespot/images..._screen019.jpg

The green arrow represents the landbridge. I guess it's just to make the conquest of Ireland faster and give the Scots an easily accessible province.

Cheers!

Ituralde

[Redtemplar]

Maybe in Med III in middle and east europe there will be more provinces. Not just two for Poland and Hungary (I would suggest 3 or 4 if HRE has so many).

[Aracnid]

Well it does make the Scots position less dreaful, now they can easily grab 3 regions so that when English turn against them they have a chance, though I reckon they will still get wasted nearly all of the time when its AI vs. AI.

[Aracnid]

Maybe in Med III in middle and east europe there will be more provinces. Not just two for Poland and Hungary (I would suggest 3 or 4 if HRE has so many).

That will be a while away, based on CA's record we will probably have either STW2 or RTW2, though I hope they go for Reformation/Early Modern/Renaissance Total War (1500-1800).

Edit: Woops double post sorry

[Drake]

Where's Malta? Or have I missed it?

Small, yes, but an important Med anchorage point that was the site of some serious intense battles and campaigns (Knights of St.John anyone?) For factions like Sicily, Venice, the Moors and Egypt to name a view it would be a very important territory to consider. Even in mordern times like WW2 Malta was a much fought over island.

[pyradyn]

I love history and im in School for History but when it comes to TW I really dont care because its close enough. Also for the history buffs You are so fast to point out whats wrong with the cities in 11th century but what happens if they changed it all and its the 15th century and you have ancient city names and they are no longer historicly accurate. Just a thought

[scourgeofrome]

I love history and im in School for History but when it comes to TW I really dont care because its close enough. Also for the history buffs You are so fast to point out whats wrong with the cities in 11th century but what happens if they changed it all and its the 15th century and you have ancient city names and they are no longer historicly accurate. Just a thought

They would complain about that too.I say just deal with it and mod the game if it bothers you so much.

[andrewt]

Lots of provinces could be separated into 2 cities, but gameplay-wise, the game would suffer if there would be too many cities on the map. It'll take forever to complete one game.

[Perplexed]

I love history and im in School for History but when it comes to TW I really dont care because its close enough. Also for the history buffs You are so fast to point out whats wrong with the cities in 11th century but what happens if they changed it all and its the 15th century and you have ancient city names and they are no longer historicly accurate. Just a thought

By the time you've reached the end of your campaign history will already have been irrevocably altered as a matter of course, so that sort of accuracy becomes irrelevant.

[Horatius]

Does Constantinople start as city or Castle since it could concievably be both.

[Kavhan Isbul]

Southern Europe:

- The capital of Bulgaria should be at Turnovo, not Sofia.

I disagree - Turnovo became capital only in 1187, after the leaders fo the Rebellion from 1185 failed to capture Preslav, the capital of the former Bulgarian State (it was Ohrid in Macedonia just before the Byzantine conquest, actually, but that was because Preslav was in Byzabntine hands with no chance of being retaken). Therefore, I do not think Turnovo would be historically accurate. I do not think that the choice of Sofia was a poor decision, as it was an extremely important fortress during the Middle Ages, even if not the official capital of Bulgaria. However, it should have been called with its period appropriate name - Serdika. I think a much greater inaccuracy is having Bulgaria as a rebel province - as much as I wish this was true, in 1080 Bulgaria was firmly in the Eastern Roman Empire, with the last major rebellion defeated a few years earlier and not another to come in almost a century.
I for one, am sceptical about the inclusion of so many rebel provinces on the game and its results on gameplay, but let's wait and see.

[Scipio Africano]

I for one, am sceptical about the inclusion of so many rebel provinces on the game and its results on gameplay, but let's wait and see.

I see them more as small 'independent' city states rather than rebels. If every one was a full faction there would be major chaos. They act as early buffers for expansion, imagine playing as French and being surrounded from Turn 1 by Catholic factions.

Anyone had the patience to count the amount of provinces?
Obviously appears to be less than RTW. Probably a good thing.

[alpaca]

Why? EU2 has a lot more factions than MTW2 and it didn't end in major chaos. The problem is that the factions wouldn't be very diverse (a lot of them would share the same units for example), but I'd rather have 100 factions than 21...