Regions - Provinces

[⎛⎝ AlilSneezyPanda ⎠⎞]

Had interesting conversations about the map how it will be massive etc and Provinces will make up large areas of maps while having smaller regions which make up the province.

But im not sure as looking at the map im not sure I fully get it. Just as an example looking at Iceni - Camulodunon whnich is on the map in the factions page. Is that a province? So if its a province that means theres smaller individual regions to split up into. Or is it just one region?

Because if the map will be as big as its meant to be Camulodunon will be huge looking at the map so it makes sense thats theres smaller regions under it.

[DaddyJokee]

I wouldn't take the faction maps as an indication of the in-game map. I think those are more for historical orientation than precision of gameplay.

[Sebastian]

I think it'll be like this:

for example Athens:
Athens is the capital of a province (pobably called attica) that province will be devided into 2/3 regions. each of those regions has it's own capital. They mentioned Thebes and Conrinth in the preview so maybe those 2 cities will be the capitals of two regions in Attica. If you want to gain full controll over the province you'll have to conquer not only Athens, the capital, but also the capitals of the regions.

I thought they confirmed there are 54 provinces and 183 regions.

[⎛⎝ AlilSneezyPanda ⎠⎞]

ok thanks. I hope it is how you say. Im sure ive seen those numbers too I jsut wasnt sure how it actualy worked but thanks I get the picture now ^_^

[Llamedos]

i wonder if there will still be outlying buildings like farms and founderys etc.

[⎛⎝ AlilSneezyPanda ⎠⎞]

I think thats going to be much like the orignial. Few people have said its going to be like it was in shogun where theres 4 - 6 lots for buildings you have to choose. Other people have said its going to be much like the original where you build and upgrade what you want. Acroding to population size etc and what you can obviously afford. Which would be good imo. I liked the original way the only thing is its a little slower because you have much more buildings to build but that also gives you more to do.

[DaddyJokee]

I would prefere a combination of both. Build city buildings in the cities, and non city buildings outside.

[cojax8]

Ehh, i'd prefer it to be like how they did with Shogun 2, made it seem more plauseable IMO as you couldnt just stuff the city full of every building like you could in Rome.

[⎛⎝ AlilSneezyPanda ⎠⎞]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von cojax8:

Ehh, i'd prefer it to be like how they did with Shogun 2, made it seem more plauseable IMO as you couldnt just stuff the city full of every building like you could in Rome.

huh? What do you mean stuff the city, Im sure most if not all the buildings you could build in the original would have been built then.

You had to build up your cities by increasing population. The more pop you had the more buildings became available and then you upgraded them etc.

Shogun 2 was ok but it jsut simplifed it down and limited it so you couldnt have everything in 1 place you had to rely on regions next to each other supplying different troops. And then theres the trade part which meant if you owned special areas you could have specialized buildings which im sure will happen in Rome as well.

I dont see whats wrong with a city having many buildings lol.. But whoooah thats just me.

[Fluffy Fishy]

I am fascinated to see how the regions will work. I am also interested to see what kind of dynamics and such they will have with trade and such.

In regards to the cities, I think it would be nice to see a mix of having the ability to grow huge mega cities with ever building you could ever want and then having smaller more easily captured towns. These towns would provide specialist things, for example the attica from earlier in the thread could have Athens being the mega city which would be complimented by piraeus as the naval town, plataea as a more agricultural town and megara as a more industrial town.

This idea can add some kind of more tactical play when you can consider starving out your opponents and making it harder defensively to have to meet more armies in the open fields. the idea kind of supports what CA have said but they may have done it completely differently

Do you think they played some of the mods for the original rome to see what they could learn from them? A lot of those mods really do add ladders to the gameplay.

[cojax8]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von munchiefest:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von cojax8:

Ehh, i'd prefer it to be like how they did with Shogun 2, made it seem more plauseable IMO as you couldnt just stuff the city full of every building like you could in Rome.

huh? What do you mean stuff the city, Im sure most if not all the buildings you could build in the original would have been built then.

You had to build up your cities by increasing population. The more pop you had the more buildings became available and then you upgraded them etc.

Shogun 2 was ok but it jsut simplifed it down and limited it so you couldnt have everything in 1 place you had to rely on regions next to each other supplying different troops. And then theres the trade part which meant if you owned special areas you could have specialized buildings which im sure will happen in Rome as well.

I dont see whats wrong with a city having many buildings lol.. But whoooah thats just me.

yeah i know what you mean, but what i meant was that you could build everything in one city and then build all the same things in the next city, meaning there is no real diversity (besides the shrines as you could only have one god). i liked shogun's build sceme better because it actually made you plan out what you were going to build instead of just being able to build whatever you wanted with the only limitation being population. made it so the city of Rome could be no better then some random town in gaul. But like i said, it's what i'm hoping for, if they do it like Rome 1 then fine by me, i'd just prefer it the other way.

[⎛⎝ AlilSneezyPanda ⎠⎞]

Ok i get what you mean. I like Fluffy fishys take on it though something like that maybe. But i do reckon there will be more specialised regions that offer bouns like better minerals such as gold making you richer.. and horses, pitch n metals for armor n weapons that sort of thing. But i dont think they'll make it really so Gaul could have a city as great as Rome. But maybe? We're not playing history really if you can make gaul as rich and powerful as Rome and have the population then surely you want a big awsome city too.

[Llamedos]

i wonder if this civil war mechanic will tear provinces apart or will it just be whole provinces joining one side or the other.

[Fluffy Fishy]

Well there was no reason why gaul couldnt be as rich as rome, they will have to sacrifice something for balance, it would be horribly unfair if gaul could only manage wood mud huts and things and as soon as rome reers its big ugly head they just get flattened. I imagine if its the model I was wondering in the earlier post they would make it so some factions focus more on one huge centralised mega city where as the more tribal factions have both cheaper to build and medium settlements.

For example roman faction would model itself on something like:
Huge city, small town, small town, farming village.

which would be different from the Averni using a more
Medium, Medium, Medium, small.

I kind of see it as the huge city would be the main hub of the provence with a centralised government and such with the complimetning specialised smaller settlements giving more specialised services. In comparison the tribal factions would have a bit of everything in each settlement and this would compliment an ability to recruit hugely numbered armies as traditionally thats how they fought compared to the disciplined and well equipped armies of Rome

[Red_GreenLuger]

In any case im loving the province concept gives the game a bit more depth as far strategy, if i recall correctly i think Medieval 1 had the same kind of thing going

[Llamedos]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Red_GreenLugar:

In any case im loving the province concept gives the game a bit more depth as far strategy, if i recall correctly i think Medieval 1 had the same kind of thing going

no it just had a 2d map you moved counters around