Good Reason Why NTW GC Map Should Be The Same As ETW

I think the GC map in NTW should have been the same as the European theater map in ETW, the reason (besides wanting more factions to conquer) being that if we had access to northern Africa and the middle east then all of the seasons would have a strategic use on the campaign map.

For example in Russia and Northern Europe during winter there is winter attrition but we are missing the summer heat attrition. This of course would be in effect in Northern Africa and the middle east.

So in one GC we would have the full range of weather and corresponding attrition

Better to conquest during the summer in Russia and the winter in Africa/Middle East...

Thoughts?

I agree, they should have at least included North Africa, Anatolia and the Middle East. Didn't Napoleon and the Coalition battle it out in the sandy deserts of Egypt? I know it's covered in its own mini-campaign, but still. Control of the Suez, amongst other landmarks in North Africa and the Middle East, would be vital to your campaign. I personally don't understand what the reason for their exclusion is.

Lol. They don't even include Malta, which Napoleon took and which was an important naval base. And the barbary pirates should have made a comeback as they used the distractions of the war to raid shipping. The map is way too small.

The attrition system only makes sense with the current turn system.

If NTW went to the GC of ETW, itd have to keep the 2 week turn system in order to make sense

the campaign map is also physically larger in NTW than in ETW

Originally Posted by QuinZeEskimo

The attrition system only makes sense with the current turn system.

If NTW went to the GC of ETW, itd have to keep the 2 week turn system in order to make sense

Well of course the turn system would stay the same, that is the whole point. I just want both winter and summer attrition all in one campaign.

what im saying is keep everything the same as in NTW just add North Africa and the middle east...

I dont want them to change the regions back to ETWs those sucked of course!

Etw map was good but it was not detailed at europe.Countries like France only had 2 regions at europe and that was not good.In NTW europe map is 10X better then ETW but i think they should included northern africa,middle east and all meditaranian sea

Originally Posted by Jazx

Etw map was good but it was not detailed at europe.Countries like France only had 2 regions at europe and that was not good.In NTW europe map is 10X better then ETW but i think they should included northern africa,middle east and all meditaranian sea

it is just me or im the only one prefering NtW map, then ETW map?? i mean i give you that it should been north africa and midle east. in NTW... but the ETW map in my opinion, is the worst of the Total war games. The lack of regions, in europe, it doesnt make sence. Europe map of Napoleon, is much more complete, and fun. if only they made north africa, egypt,and anatolia, and midle east. it would be perfect. But no way ETW map is better.

Originally Posted by Knight of Heaven

it is just me or im the only one prefering NtW map, then ETW map?? i mean i give you that it should been north africa and midle east. in NTW... but the ETW map in my opinion, is the worst of the Total war games. The lack of regions, in europe, it doesnt make sence. Europe map of Napoleon, is much more complete, and fun. if only they made north africa, egypt,and anatolia, and midle east. it would be perfect. But no way ETW map is better.

yeah the only thing ETW had going for it was the other theaters but other than that the campaign maps sucked bad...

In addition to North Africa and Middle East id like the NTW map to have all of the northern countries too like all of Sweden and Norway and all that

I personnally think the ntw map is more reasonable proportion wise to the 2 weeks turns. In etw, it took like 2 years to travel let say from London to Istanbul on sea (4 turns), Paris to Toulouse takes a year and half on land? what the heck.

NTW map is not without flaws. The western trade nodes, what are those? There are more provinces but less towns?

Originally Posted by kokonut666

I personnally think the ntw map is more reasonable proportion wise to the 2 weeks turns. In etw, it took like 2 years to travel let say from London to Istanbul on sea (4 turns), Paris to Toulouse takes a year and half on land? what the heck.

NTW map is not without flaws. The western trade nodes, what are those? There are more provinces but less towns?

The NW ones are NA, and the southern ones are from CA and SA.

I really do miss the extra regions, but the Europe map in NTW is a huge improvement over ETW. North Africa/middle east/india would have been nice to include, but I suppose I'll get over it.

I only got ETW 2 months before Napoleon and before that i had been playing RTW and M2TW i got a rude shock that map is so bad

I hope they will include in som DLC or Patch an extension to the GC maps, adding Norther Africa (even a full African Continent as a new Theater would be lovely) the same with MIddle East/Asia/India.......and to top it of....North/South America, but the best would be the small islands in Indonesia, so many naval battles, Pirates could be brought back into the game........................comon CA....DO SOMETHING....this is not enough....WE WANT bigger maps......

When the new "zoomed in" campaign map was released, I thought: Oh, this is the way they solve the passive factions and naval invasion bug? After a campaign I quickly realised that I love this new, smaller map, but a larger one ( ETW ) would be greeted with open arms for it's replayability value.

To make the ETW map but zoomed in as close as the NTW map is would be a monumental effort. Also it'd be a hell of a tough thing to play on, imagine sending a fleet to India and not getting to use them again for months! Even if you were generous with the speed it would take about twenty turns for a fleet to get to India or America. I'd love for them to do that of course, because I always want more of a good thing, but I can respect the fact that just because NTW has a geographically smaller map doesn't mean it was a walk in the part to build. It's very detailed and has more depth to it because of the attrition system and so on. If they could redo the whole ETW map to that level of detail I'd love to see it but it would clearly be a massive project.

Just wait till Zulu: Total War when we will have South Africa available to us...

Well, its bound to happen. It matches TW formula perfectly... European settlers and conquerers... local tribes fighting back... lots of money and trade/export potential in diamonds etc... territorial disputes... heck it just fits the bill.

Anyways.....

i love the new NTW map. Much more detailed then the plain, boring ETW map.

If CA would have made the map like this with the same amount of detail as the Europe campaign map it would have been epic.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

The new map also affects the battles more than ETW. Sometimes in ETW the battlefield was in no relation to the location on the campaign map.

I agree North Africa should be included as in all the other European games. And not all of Europe is represented, ever looked at Scandinavia? Only 1/3 of Scandinavia is there. Malta for sake is not even in there! Napoleon conquered it on his way to Egypt. And it stayed a nice naval base until the British Navy took it and held it for another century.