Minor Proposal: Reduce the number of provinces in the British Isles

[alex86]

So Britain , the region we know nothing since Boudica is more important than Hellas, Italy or Asia Minor. 5 regions for Britain is more than enough. We are in 272 b.c. Action in Britain starts 55 b.c.

Clearly not, given how prominently Rome and the Hellenic factions are featured in EB -- and that has little to do with # of cities. While the Pritanoi appear to be (albeit well-designed) way out on the edge of everything.

And I agree. If historically action in Britain really only starts 868 turns into the campaign, why have them there at all? As an entire faction, they could easily be abstracted as a "Trade from Beyond the Map" building.

But they're there and as long as the province slots are being deployed to good use, it's fine. "Good use" here is sounding to me like a Belgic faction is strongly being considered to be added to the mix up there. I haven't really played much as Saba/Nabatean so I don't know if there are complaints about not enough cities in those areas, so I dunno. While the present plan may be imperfect, it doesn't sound bad, and getting closer to completion has to be an important consideration, too.

SachaVykos has I think some very interesting ideas in that post, by the way. +1.

[demagogos nicator]

And I agree. If historically action in Britain really only starts 868 turns into the campaign, why have them there at all? As an entire faction, they could easily be abstracted as a "Trade from Beyond the Map" building.

So what you want to suggest is that nobody did nothing in Britain unitl the Caesar has come? To me is sounds like claimng that nothing had happend in central Italy before Rome get into war with Taras and Pyrhos arrived or that nothing had happend in Iberia before Hamilcar Barca arrived.

[pirro]

So what you want to suggest is that nobody did nothing in Britain unitl the Caesar has come? To me is sounds like claimng that nothing had happend in central Italy before Rome get into war with Taras and Pyrhos arrived or that nothing had happend in Iberia before Hamilcar Barca arrived.

It was of little importance during this time period. Greece and Anatolia were much important, even Hispania and Gaul were.

[Anubis88]

The problem here is that everyone thinks of the independant cities as "rebels" that offer no action and are just there to be conquered. Mentioning the action starts at 55bc for example. I think EBII is quite fun even when playing vs rebels, as they are not just some gray stacks that need to be destroyed. Maybe the AI rebels could be beefed up there, making it really tough for the Pritanoi to expand, or maybe even have it extremly hard to conquer the entire island due to unrest or stuff.

So imho 8 provinces are too much, but i would definetly leave like 6, and add 2 to Syria for example, which seems to be the most underrated part of the map in it's historical importance

[Rad]

There's been an official response to this on The Org:

How about merging a few provinces? That way all the hard work the team put into research, descriptions, unit design etc stays; Britain gets nerfed and there's a city or two to redistribute elsewhere. The team already did it, I believe. In EB1 Asturia and Cantabria are separate provinces, now they're one, Asturia-Cantabria and it's all well. Both the Asturian axemen unit and Cantabrian cavalry will make their way into later releases.

On the other hand, if the Belgae get in, which I strongly support, Britain becomes a more fun place to be and the number of provinces should stay... with larger rebel garrisons to make it more difficult.

[alex86]

So what you want to suggest is that nobody did nothing in Britain unitl the Caesar has come? To me is sounds like claimng that nothing had happend in central Italy before Rome get into war with Taras and Pyrhos arrived or that nothing had happend in Iberia before Hamilcar Barca arrived.

No, I'm suggesting that there was little interaction with the other factions until this period.

[BrennusEBII]

No, I'm suggesting that there was little interaction with the other factions until this period.

Actually there was quite a lot of interaction between southern Britain and northern Gaul prior to this period. Evidence suggests that there was intense contact between Armorica and south western Britain from the Middle Iron Age until the invasion of Caesar, whilst in the case of south eastern Britain there were strong contacts, and population exchange with the Belgic tribes, from c.120BC onward. There is also a possibility, albeit slight, that there was contact across the North Sea at some point in the Pre-Roman Iron Age.

[QuintusSertorius]

How about merging a few provinces? That way all the hard work the team put into research, descriptions, unit design etc stays; Britain gets nerfed and there's a city or two to redistribute elsewhere. The team already did it, I believe. In EB1 Asturia and Cantabria are separate provinces, now they're one, Asturia-Cantabria and it's all well. Both the Asturian axemen unit and Cantabrian cavalry will make their way into later releases.

On the other hand, if the Belgae get in, which I strongly support, Britain becomes a more fun place to be and the number of provinces should stay... with larger rebel garrisons to make it more difficult.

I think some merging like that to free up 2-3 provinces would be a good idea.

No, I'm suggesting that there was little interaction with the other factions until this period.

Indeed, Britain for much of antiquity was merely an obscure place tin came from that most people didn't even believe existed. The Karthadastim were aware of it, and obviously the various Keltoi tribes of Gallia were, since they were all parts of the trading route. Beyond that, though, only a local concern, or at most a regional, but certainly not global one.

[Darth Red]

There's been an official response to this on The Org:

Oops he actually tried to post that here twice. Sorry about that Brennus, looks like you got trapped by the spam filter for some reason. It should be sorted now, if you have any more of these troubles don't hesitate to pm me or any mod/hex.

[alex86]

Actually there was quite a lot of interaction between southern Britain and northern Gaul prior to this period. Evidence suggests that there was intense contact between Armorica and south western Britain from the Middle Iron Age until the invasion of Caesar, whilst in the case of south eastern Britain there were strong contacts, and population exchange with the Belgic tribes, from c.120BC onward. There is also a possibility, albeit slight, that there was contact across the North Sea at some point in the Pre-Roman Iron Age.

I was going to stick a caveat there that I could be wrong, and it turns out that I should've, because I was. Cheers

[SachaVyKos]

The best way to justify the current territorial investment in Briton would be by adding a Bolga faction. Given that the extra territories exist and that the Bolga have an unimpeachable place in history and would serve the game greatly by filling that barren part of the map. I would take it for granted that they will be added.

Personally I greatly look forward to a Bolga-Pritanoi war zone, and I definitely appreciate the novelty of having a truly primeval Celtic faction in the form of the Pritanoi duke it out with a modestly behind the times Belgian faction. (No slights intended) With enough cash and the proper conditions (and an AI willing to swim) they'll add a very interesting what if scenario to the game.

If the Bolga aren't added than yeah, drop a few territories from the game. That said, that rung of anti casse/pritanoi fanboy has reared its head again and I hope some of those people come to terms with the fact that archeological fact is as strong a basis for in game representation as written records are. Its been nine years, go through each stage of grief and understand that the British faction isn't going to be cannibalized to pepper in a few cities elsewhere.

[Nicov55]

The best way to justify the current territorial investment in Briton would be by adding a Bolga faction. Given that the extra territories exist and that the Bolga have an unimpeachable place in history and would serve the game greatly by filling that barren part of the map. I would take it for granted that they will be added.

Personally I greatly look forward to a Bolga-Pritanoi war zone, and I definitely appreciate the novelty of having a truly primeval Celtic faction in the form of the Pritanoi duke it out with a modestly behind the times Belgian faction. (No slights intended) With enough cash and the proper conditions (and an AI willing to swim) they'll add a very interesting what if scenario to the game.

If the Bolga aren't added than yeah, drop a few territories from the game. That said, that rung of anti casse/pritanoi fanboy has reared its head again and I hope some of those people come to terms with the fact that archeological fact is as strong a basis for in game representation as written records are. Its been nine years, go through each stage of grief and understand that the British faction isn't going to be cannibalized to pepper in a few cities elsewhere.

So we now know that the mod is very strongly "barbaric factions" oriented with a lot of settlements in Britaine, Gaul, Germania...
I still think the Hellenistic factions, on the contrary lack settlements. The importance of Syria, Asia Minor, Greece and Egypt is not depicted as it should. I really do not understand why there are more settlements in Britain than along the Nile. But that's the mod team choice and i respect it. Therefore i'll just play DBM if i want to incarnate a Hellenistic sovereign and EBII if i want to pick a "barbaric faction".

[qwertykov]

the Scots might have something to say about this... being lumped together with the barbarians from the South of the island....

[QuintusSertorius]

The best way to justify the current territorial investment in Briton would be by adding a Bolga faction. Given that the extra territories exist and that the Bolga have an unimpeachable place in history and would serve the game greatly by filling that barren part of the map. I would take it for granted that they will be added.

Personally I greatly look forward to a Bolga-Pritanoi war zone, and I definitely appreciate the novelty of having a truly primeval Celtic faction in the form of the Pritanoi duke it out with a modestly behind the times Belgian faction. (No slights intended) With enough cash and the proper conditions (and an AI willing to swim) they'll add a very interesting what if scenario to the game.

If the Bolga aren't added than yeah, drop a few territories from the game. That said, that rung of anti casse/pritanoi fanboy has reared its head again and I hope some of those people come to terms with the fact that archeological fact is as strong a basis for in game representation as written records are. Its been nine years, go through each stage of grief and understand that the British faction isn't going to be cannibalized to pepper in a few cities elsewhere.

Even with the addition of a Belgic tribe, there would still be a disproportionately high number of provinces in Britain, I don't think that would justify it at all. How can it be right that Iberia, Greece and Anatolia have all had to lose provinces to accomodate the increase in number of factions, yet Britain hasn't? Changes to those regions impacted multiple factions, changes to Britain basically impact just one. It doesn't make any sense from a gameplay balance perspective at all. Why does the British faction merit a special, protected preserve that no other faction enjoys? And not just that, but one with a huge number of provinces, more than there are in Greece?

[Antonius]

In EB1 with 21 factions, there were 8 provinces in the British Isles. AI Casse, left to its own devices, never really did anything beyond consolidating this region, then just sat there. For the human player, this offered a challenging (because there were massive Eleutheroi stacks up there) but ultimately safe base from which to build a powerful empire that could then expand onto the continent.

In EBII with 28 (and eventually 30) factions, there are still 8 provinces in the British Isles. AI Pritanoi, as far as I've seen so far, still never does anything but consolidate the British Isles, becoming massively rich when they do so. I have seen the occasional building of navies and landing of troops in Gaul, but they never do anything beyond that. For the player, it a safe, protected space to carve out your own economic base without risk of interference from any other faction, before you have to consider turning your sights on the continent.

There are more provinces in the British Isles than in Greece proper. Or in Italy. Almost as many as in Anatolia. In moving from EB1 to EBII we actually reduced the number of provinces in Greece, a pretty pivotal and important area in the period. Given the hard limit in the number of provinces (200), and the need to share the spotlight around, I don't think so many provinces in so peripheral and marginal an area is justifiable. My experience of EBII so far says you only need three provinces to get an economically viable kingdom, I don't think the Pritanoi's starting position should merit them more than that.

So here's what I propose: reduce the number of provinces in the British Isles to 4, and redistribute those four freed up provinces elsewhere. Perhaps some to the Balkans more generally, if there's going to be a new faction there (like an Illyrian tribe or the Skordiskoi). Maybe some more in the east. Perhaps another province in Greece. Either way, I think gameplay would be improved by limiting AI Pritanoi and making human-played Pritanoi have to look to Gaul much sooner.

I 100% agree. More Greece, less Britain please

[athanaric]

Even with the addition of a Belgic tribe, there would still be a disproportionately high number of provinces in Britain, I don't think that would justify it at all. How can it be right that Iberia, Greece and Anatolia have all had to lose provinces to accomodate the increase in number of factions, yet Britain hasn't?

Are you sure you counted them correctly? Iberia had 11 provinces in EB I, and I'm pretty sure it has the same number in EB II, although with a different distribution.

[Ballpoint202]

Is there also a way to make consolidating the British Isles a much more time consuming, and much less rewarding endeavor? -- or, perhaps, going in another direction, much less *possible*.

The cities are all the same culture, so it is a piece of cake to absorb them into the Pritanoi. This should perhaps be balanced. Make the Prits work for it. Though they do have some of the tougher rebel armies to take on, with roving groups in the countryside (they are a bit of a shock the first time you play).

However, there's also a problem with the mod in general regarding the rapidity of development of towns and cities. It should be more costly and time consuming to develop cities and make them pay, and population growth should be slowed, though the culture changes seem well-handled to me as they are.

And foreign conquest in general is too easy -- something like a war chest should be needed: perhaps doubling of unit maintenance in foreign lands or requiring a cash payment to attack a city, or a leader trait that creates an economic penalty faction-wide when in foreign lands? Maybe just for the player, as the AI doesn't need any more problems.

Right now, the gamey slow movement rates are the only brake on expansion. I'd rather see more realistic brakes applied -- why didn't these factions take over the whole region between them in only 25 years in reality? Can those reasons be simulated in a fun-to-play manner?

Wow, talk about going off topic. Still, though, I think it all plays into why the Pritanoi take over the British Isles so quickly and easily.

[Sarkiss]

The cities are all the same culture, so it is a piece of cake to absorb them into the Pritanoi. This should perhaps be balanced. Make the Prits work for it. Though they do have some of the tougher rebel armies to take on, with roving groups in the countryside (they are a bit of a shock the first time you play).

However, there's also a problem with the mod in general regarding the rapidity of development of towns and cities. It should be more costly and time consuming to develop cities and make them pay, and population growth should be slowed, though the culture changes seem well-handled to me as they are.

And foreign conquest in general is too easy -- something like a war chest should be needed: perhaps doubling of unit maintenance in foreign lands or requiring a cash payment to attack a city, or a leader trait that creates an economic penalty faction-wide when in foreign lands? Maybe just for the player, as the AI doesn't need any more problems.

Right now, the gamey slow movement rates are the only brake on expansion. I'd rather see more realistic brakes applied -- why didn't these factions take over the whole region between them in only 25 years in reality? Can those reasons be simulated in a fun-to-play manner?

Wow, talk about going off topic. Still, though, I think it all plays into why the Pritanoi take over the British Isles so quickly and easily.

an added script that charges player for fielding armies and sending out agents would be nice, imho. like in DLV. it is historically accurate, would make expansions harder and a much more rewarding experience. likewise, maybe inflation could also be added (doubling all the cost, etc) when treasury goes over say 100k.

[SachaVyKos]

the Scots might have something to say about this... being lumped together with the barbarians from the South of the island....

At the time of this game there are no Scots even the Picts and Caledonians are centuries away. In Ireland you might have a few Milesian kings battling against the earliest waves of Armorican and Bolga warlords... That said whatever powers existed in Scotland did organize sufficiently by 100BC to start building those very impressive broch castle-fortresses that Mediterranean centric historians love to ignore.

--

As for the other issue. The real question here is how many territories does Briton need to recreate the political state of 300 BC. The feud between indigenous British elements and Belgian Celtic invaders is central to the games time frame and sets the stage for the entire course of British history thereafter. It is therefor an extremely important theater of war for the game. So my answer is the same as it was before. If a Belgian faction is added and the Pritanoi and Belgian elements are set against each other then the present number is correct. If the Pritanoi are left to conquer the isles and spend the rest of the game sitting in the shade then they have far to many.

I'm just hazarding a guess but I believe that the point is for the Pritanoi to have isolated refuges that will allow them to periodically reemerge and lash out against their Belgic rivals whenever they have trouble on the continent. The extra territories also allows the possibility for more than two factions to vie for control of the island at the same time. As was often the case.

At the end of the day it comes down to personal opinion. If your overly fond of Celts then the above scenario is fair if your overly fond of Greeks it isn't. That said in the spirit of "My Hulk can beat up your Thor" I submit this. When Briton enters a savage civil war nobody in Europe gets Tin. When Greece is embroiled in a savage civil war a Persian Shahanshah clasps his hands menacingly grateful for a chance to finally outdo daddy.

[QuintusSertorius]

When there are now 30 factions, rather than 21, as a very rough gauge all existing factions should have their number of provinces reduced by (21/30=0.7) 0.7 to allow room for provinces to be put in other places to accommodate the new arrivals (so for Britain 8x0.7=5.6 - so 6 provinces is about right). It doesn't make sense to me that a region on the far periphery, featuring just one faction, should not also have it's allotment reduced. I don't even find the addition of a Belgic tribe to be something that changes this arithmetic, that just make it less disproportionate since it would now affect two factions. Bear in mind a reduction of provinces in Greece affects three factions (Koinon Hellenon, Epeiros, Makedonia) immediately, and a host of others in the wider area (Pergamon, Getai, Ptolemaioi, Seleukids) who covet it too.

This isn't simply personal opinion about who needs more representation (and bear in mind we have five Keltoi factions), it's about balance of gameplay. A peripheral region shouldn't get to retain an already generous allotment of provinces even while central ones are being culled. Britain was not the only source of tin in 300BC, just a less-exploited one than Iberia, Anatolia and elsewhere.