Why is the campaign map so big?

**Dominick** · November 28, 2009, 01:02 PM

Why is the campaign map so big? I don't get it, what's so good about it? Except that you have to build a LOT of watchtowers...

I like the campaign map size of Medieval 2 vanilla and Kingdoms!

Everything in TATW is ... hmmm what is the word ... It is emmmm, un-..., unseeable?

Too much fog of war... Aren't you supposed to see what is happening inside your lands?

One more thing ... Campaign map models for town and large town should difer more, and cities like Edoras and Osgiliath should'nt really have huge stone walls. It is ridicoulous

Edoras should be a large town and not a huge city, and Osgiliath should be a city but ... but without walls ... and all ruined ... But hey im going to deeply now...

P. S. The MOD rulz just some things from which I have the feeling that there are like ... 4-5 men on the campaign map.

**Seleukos_I.** · November 28, 2009, 01:10 PM

If you would change Edoras or Osgiliath from huge cities to another one it would change it's look when it grows. And if you want more settlements take a look at the "expanded map"-submod.

**Dominick** · November 28, 2009, 01:15 PM

''If you would change Edoras or Osgiliath from huge cities to another one it would change it's look when it grows. And if you want more settlements take a look at the "expanded map"-submod.''

1. Oh... So you cant remove the walls?
2. No ... That wasn't my question ...

@Kilt in the wind

It annoys me too...
I knew that is a big undertake... it was more of a suggestion, than critycism

**Kilt in the Wind** · November 28, 2009, 01:14 PM

The size of the campaign map has annoyed me just a tad. Settlement should be much closer together.
PRIME EXAMPLE: Edoras to Minas Tirith. In RotK it took about 7 days for 6000 Rohirrim (mounted) to get from the muster (which I think was at Edoras, or Dunharrow, or closeby, to the Pelennor. In the campaign it takes about 5 or so turns! this is like 2 years or so! Is that ridiculous to anyone else?
Also the entire Quest of the Ring took about a year. This is from the Shire to Mount Doom. Now granted it was a small party without a baggage train etc but it was on foot and i'm guessing that men can move faster than hobbits. Anyway I tried to plot out how long it took in the campaign to go from Michel-Delving to Mount Doom and it was so far that the future trail line thing stopped changing colour after about 10 turns. The point is it takes like 10 game years to march there with an army. This is a bit excessive.
Two option to solve this that I can think of:
1) Shorter turns, so they are a month or so per turn (I know this will annoy people with their character ageing but it's a suggestion)
or 2) Compressed map or more moevement points.

On your point about city maps I know there is a big call for custom maps atm, but this mod is free and whatever KK and his team put in we should be grateful for so don't expect massive things like this, it just gets your hopes to high so you don't appreciate how good the mod is. Also modelling an entire city is a massive undertaking so for the modders this would have to come at the expense of updating a few factions etc. I know it 'sucks' but they are nice enough to do this stuff for us, so they can do it at their own pace. Have a look in the suggestions thread, there are a lot of calls for custom battle maps.

**Kilt in the Wind** · November 28, 2009, 01:30 PM

That's fair enough.
After I posted I realised it was exactly the same thing i'd had other people say to me, so sorry if it sounded harsh, unintentional. More of a suck up to the team than anything else I think :p

**Lordinquisitor** · November 28, 2009, 01:48 PM

One can either like the "huge" Campaign map or not.

I prefer the huge map- There`s simply more room. On smaller maps you basically get sieges, after sieges after sieges. Besides in my opinion a bit of room between towns etc. simply looks better.

**Kilt in the Wind** · November 28, 2009, 01:55 PM

That is a good point, you get far more field battles when there is more field to battle on.

**Myshkin** · November 28, 2009, 02:56 PM

Both have pros and cons.

I would go for the big map, if I had to choose, but I admit it would be also good fun to play on a smaller map.

**SirDestroyer** · November 28, 2009, 03:17 PM

I like the big map it means no more siege fests.

**Hermes Trismegistos** · November 28, 2009, 03:36 PM

I'm for the larger map, too. I needed a bit of acclimatization (at first I thought it feeled pretty empty) gives a lot of more different strategic options. And if you would quicken the turns so that it fits to the books you would never have your heirs growing up... plus when you look at the history of Middle-Earth in a larger space of time there never happened so much in all the time before the LOTR events and political changes generally took some time. You could never experience things like a 50 years war when one year would take 50 turns or something like that...

**Kilt in the Wind** · November 28, 2009, 03:47 PM

point taken.

So we have gameplay at the expense of lore, which aids other parts or lore

**Dominick** · November 28, 2009, 03:59 PM

Hmmm... But more movement points would be useful... You haven't talked about town-large town campaign map models (non)diversity though xD... That needs to be changed... As for me!

EDIT: I know there are submods ... But those aren't from the TATW crew so i don't want to screw up my game

**Myshkin** · November 28, 2009, 04:28 PM

Originally Posted by Dominick

Hmmm... But more movement points would be useful...

Yes, I like this one. More movement points would be very useful!

But this means Mordor will bring 10 more stacks per turn, I would leave it as it is...

**Kilt in the Wind** · November 28, 2009, 05:13 PM

I think the difficulty is that in some areas, such as between Minas Tirith and Minas Morgul, the distance and movement points work pseudo-realistically. Whereas in other places, like the distance between Minas Tirith and Edoras as I noted above, the distance seems far too vast and is traversed painfully slowly.

**Lordinquisitor** · November 28, 2009, 05:31 PM

Originally Posted by Kilt in the Wind

I think the difficulty is that in some areas, such as between Minas Tirith and Minas Morgul, the distance and movement points work pseudo-realistically. Whereas in other places, like the distance between Minas Tirith and Edoras as I noted above, the distance seems far too vast and is traversed painfully slowly.

In the end, we can`t make the movement speed accurate.

Just think about how far the Fellowship made it, in one year.

**Kilt in the Wind** · November 28, 2009, 05:34 PM

Exactly, there is no way we can satistfy every situation. So I guess we just have to deal with it by planning ahead in our campaigns

**TheArtfulDodger** · November 28, 2009, 07:29 PM

It is very lore based, there wer not cities right next to cities in middle earth. Someone could waste their time making all the little villages that were around but they would be useless, no really recruitment and would detract the feel of the mod. There are a few mods that add more settelements.

I would prefer smaller starting postison. just maybe as a side campagin. For example.
Gondor starts with--> Minas Tirith and Dol Amroth
Rohan--> Edoras and helms deep
etc

**Vifarc** · November 28, 2009, 09:15 PM

You don't need so many watchtowers (buit on a hill they see very far). I build 2, sometimes 3, for each settlement and I see almost all at home.
Use spies in enemy lands. Use diplomats in allied frontier settlements, where they must ask for trading or buying of strategic informations.