Campaign map differences?

[Pyro Fennec]

So while looking at the save/load window campaign maps lately, I noticed a bit of difference between the Vortex and ME maps, and I don't just mean the Old World being there - more to do with bits of Lustria and Naggaroth apparently shunted off the side. Albion seems to be gone as well, but, ah...

Well, thing is, I haven't actually played the game extensively yet, but I'd like to know how the situation actually looks. So, could someone a bit more knowledgeable perhaps lay out the map differences between Warhammer 1, Vortex, and Mortal Empires maps? For example, whether the Old World in ME has been stripped down to fewer provinces and such?

[Nick Naughty]

They cut whole section off all down the left side of the campaign map.

72 settlements were removed from the vortex campaign map when they made mortal empires campaign map, thats 32% of the vortex campaign map missing.

Mortal empires campaign has 295 settlements.

Old World campaign has 142 settlements.

Vortex campaign has 225 settlements.

Myself, I'm disappointed with the cut content that wasn't included in mortal empires campaign map.

[Wh♂♂par]

Basically: Skrolk's, Kroq'gar's and Teclis Startpositions in the Vortex Campaign were cut, you can kind of imagine the lines cutting it pretty much there. Slightly repositioning and fitting the map into the rotation that the old world was in before. In my eyes, that's fine. except for Mazdamundi's starting position, I don't see any loss. Sure, could've been more, but HELL it takes me 40 turns to just get my starting positions set up. Clearing enemies from the area and building up to a decent level. I'm not missing anything from the Vortex. Wouldn't ever have cared about the west of Naggaroth, neither about south-west Lustria. And the southlands? Nothing of value was lost.

[Viper]

Well the game has to be manageable. Imagine if the ME map had 367 settlements. Turns would take a couple of minutes apiece to resolve. Maybe when better CPUs are released or become more common.

[Nick Naughty]

Turns taking couple of minutes, try playing attila.

No, 72 extra settlements won't make that much of a difference to turn time if any.

[Wh♂♂par]

Yeah, unlike the extra 150 settlements, that already notably extended the turn-timers, 1/2 of that won't add all too much...Now, let's translate that onto the third game, and it'll be another 75 additional, which will add the same time that it already takes longer in ME on top of that.

[Kel'Thuzad]

Originally posted by Nick Naughty:

Turns taking couple of minutes, try playing attila.

No, 72 extra settlements won't make that much of a difference to turn time if any.

I believe it would only affect turn time if those 72 extra settlements meant additional factions. The same number of factions with extra territory wouldn't make a noticable difference.

[GrandHardy]

Originally posted by Kel'Thuzad:

Originally posted by Nick Naughty:

Turns taking couple of minutes, try playing attila.

No, 72 extra settlements won't make that much of a difference to turn time if any.

I believe it would only affect turn time if those 72 extra settlements meant additional factions. The same number of factions with extra territory wouldn't make a noticable difference.

Factions with larger territory just means those factions have longer turn times.

[Nick Naughty]

Originally posted by GrandHardy:

Originally posted by Kel'Thuzad:

I believe it would only affect turn time if those 72 extra settlements meant additional factions. The same number of factions with extra territory wouldn't make a noticable difference.

Factions with larger territory just means those factions have longer turn times.

No it won't increase turn time because settlement buildings are instant anyway.

Turn time is normally effected by movement of armies, armies attacking settlements and other armies, and agent actions.