# of provinces in Anatolia

[Jazz19]

Hi.

Just wondering how close you are to your 199 settlement limit?

I was hoping there might be thought into increasing the number of settlements in Anatolia. I find the 10 or so currently does not do much justice to the tug-of-war between the E Romans and the Arab then especially the Turkish factions.

Having played Broken Crescent (with close to 30 settlements in Anatolia) really brings out the realism and difficulty in conquering the entire area and the effort needed in changing the balance of power (see map http://img235.imageshack.us/f/provin...tingpofq3.jpg/ )

Any thoughts?

Cheers, and Happy New Year all!

[Morfans]

Hi.

Just wondering how close you are to your 199 settlement limit?

I was hoping there might be thought into increasing the number of settlements in Anatolia. I find the 10 or so currently does not do much justice to the tug-of-war between the E Romans and the Arab then especially the Turkish factions.

Having played Broken Crescent (with close to 30 settlements in Anatolia) really brings out the realism and difficulty in conquering the entire area and the effort needed in changing the balance of power (see map http://img235.imageshack.us/f/provin...tingpofq3.jpg/ )

Any thoughts?

Cheers, and Happy New Year all!

I'll second that.

SV, maybe some of the insular settlements can be given up - they are generally of limited interest in a campaign - and pose some mapping pb too.

BC 30 settlements are probably too much for Chivalry, but 5-6 extra regions in Anatolia would be great. I know you are very busy - but if you could think about it ...

-

[VINC.XXIII]

Happy year also

In my self-mod I had divided the provinces between "steppic/continental" and coast cities, and isn't only a question of number of province. Simply the script need to be improved with rebel revolts(Paulicians, Turkish, for exemple.

[Morfans]

Happy year also

In my self-mod I had divided the provinces between "steppic/continental" and coast cities, and isn't only a question of number of province. Simply the script need to be improved with rebel revolts(Paulicians, Turkish, for exemple.

Agreed, the position of the settlements makes a big difference, besides their density. Effects on economy and faction balancing must be carefully evaluated - it may be too much stuff for 4.0 ...

As to scripting, I am no expert, but my concept of the campaign script is that it should be mostly used to adjust those basic aspects of the game play that aren't quite satisfactory - AI cash, garrisons, etc. On the other hand, I am not much in favor of proliferating the exact replication of historic events, like revolts etc: because they are predictable, they somehow spoil the game. I would rather aim at reproducing as accurately as possible the dynamics (military, economic, political) that may bring to such event ... and see how alternate history scenarios evolve. Under this respect, Chivalry II is one of the best mods, with very accurate & detailed models. In other words, I would love to fight Pechenegs & Paulicians at Mount Levounion in my BtR EE campaign, but only if that happens to be the result of many concurring factors - not deterministically: on any new campaign at the same year, same armies, etc.

Happy 2011 to you Rus-Bey and to all Chiv fans.

-

[VINC.XXIII]

I understand, but some rebellions are simply needed by realism: Paulicians, Welshs(from dark era to the 14cent.), Irishmen, Italian city-states, the Swiss(since 15cent), etc...
All this rebellions "according to" history.

I think(and many people I hope) that the "slave/rebels" aren't the anarchist/heretic party in MTW2, simply its impossible to have 100 factions, 31 is the hard coded limit.
The slaves should be a mix of all factions non-represented as playables, some very respectables like the City of Florence, and others totally mad like the french Jacques(peasants), or the "Grandes Compagnies"(mercenaries less employer). This examples are about France, but all lands should have their bogeymen.

For exemple, maybe Irishmen could have a scottish lord as King, but certainly not a Anglo-Norman lord...
Idem, Lithuanians people could have a polish lord as King, but not a mongol lord...

If SV agree, he will see that, if not, I will try to scripted all as sub mod. I had many difficulties about codding!
The basic script for this rebellions could be the AD/Deus Lo Vult rebellion script.

" if that happens to be the result of many concurring factors",
I think its some hard to give so numerous factor
but 3 to 5 factors should be possible.

[SicilianVespers]

I agree that we need more provinces in Anatolia. Some of the provinces, like Iconium, are just way too big.

[Jazz19]

I agree that we need more provinces in Anatolia. Some of the provinces, like Iconium, are just way too big.

Has the mod reached the 199 settlement limit?

[SicilianVespers]

Has the mod reached the 199 settlement limit?

Yes, we have reached the 199 settlement limit.


I am liking this. We could reclaim some provinces by replacing the Aegean island provinces with Stone forts, and reducing Ireland to two provinces. That would give us at least four to work with.

I think something like this would have to wait until after 4.0, as The campaign balancing would severely delay the release.

I reall like the idea of starting Armenia as a land-locked mountain Principality in early

[Bruce the Silver-Tongued]

SV,

What about the North American provinces, South American provinces, and the sub-Saharan African provinces? (Mississippi, Timbuktu, Cuba, etc.) If you removed those, you could gain approximately 11 provinces.

Adding Anatolian provinces is an awesome idea, and I think it would give a greater challenge and experience to a Byzantine, Turkish, or Crusader State player.

Dropping the Aegean Island provinces would undercut the maritime empire building ability of Venetian, Genoan, Sicilian, and (late era) Greek Kingdoms. Also; the Byzantine Empire was a major sea trading country - by dropping the island provinces, a Byz player would lose that income generated from those islands. The game dynamic provided by the Aegean islands lends realism and balance to the mod in terms of trade, naval capacity, and strategic military elements.

Love the mod! Its the best one out there, by a long shot. Keep up the good work, and thanks for many hours of epic conquering!

[Jazz19]

Yes, we have reached the 199 settlement limit.


I am liking this. We could reclaim some provinces by replacing the Aegean island provinces with Stone forts, and reducing Ireland to two provinces. That would give us at least four to work with.

I think something like this would have to wait until after 4.0, as The campaign balancing would severely delay the release.

I reall like the idea of starting Armenia as a land-locked mountain Principality in early

SV,

What about the North American provinces, South American provinces, and the sub-Saharan African provinces? (Mississippi, Timbuktu, Cuba, etc.) If you removed those, you could gain approximately 11 provinces.

Adding Anatolian provinces is an awesome idea, and I think it would give a greater challenge and experience to a Byzantine, Turkish, or Crusader State player.

Dropping the Aegean Island provinces would undercut the maritime empire building ability of Venetian, Genoan, Sicilian, and (late era) Greek Kingdoms. Also; the Byzantine Empire was a major sea trading country - by dropping the island provinces, a Byz player would lose that income generated from those islands. The game dynamic provided by the Aegean islands lends realism and balance to the mod in terms of trade, naval capacity, and strategic military elements.

Love the mod! Its the best one out there, by a long shot. Keep up the good work, and thanks for many hours of epic conquering!

I also agree with Bruce, the Aegean island provinces are important to this mod, for the reasons he outlined above.... and I think having them included is unique to your mod.

That is why I asked if you were near/at the limit, hoping you weren't....

[tbain5]

SV,

What about the North American provinces, South American provinces, and the sub-Saharan African provinces? (Mississippi, Timbuktu, Cuba, etc.) If you removed those, you could gain approximately 11 provinces.

Adding Anatolian provinces is an awesome idea, and I think it would give a greater challenge and experience to a Byzantine, Turkish, or Crusader State player.

Dropping the Aegean Island provinces would undercut the maritime empire building ability of Venetian, Genoan, Sicilian, and (late era) Greek Kingdoms. Also; the Byzantine Empire was a major sea trading country - by dropping the island provinces, a Byz player would lose that income generated from those islands. The game dynamic provided by the Aegean islands lends realism and balance to the mod in terms of trade, naval capacity, and strategic military elements.

Love the mod! Its the best one out there, by a long shot. Keep up the good work, and thanks for many hours of epic conquering!

Yes, Anatolia needs more provinces (so for example Trebizond can remain in Roman hands at the start of the 1080 campaign instead of being a rebel settlement like it is now), but please do not remove provinces from the Aegean islands

[Drtad]

Yeah Iconium is a bit large. Attalia seems like the practical city to include to split it (theme of cibyrrhaiots I think).

Perhaps Cilicia could be split as well? I was thinking this because in 1080 when the early campaign begins, the Rubenids had not yet secured control of the coastal plains cities. Perhaps Sis could be moved a little northeast and be landlocked, while Tarsus can represent the coastal plains/port cities? This way the 1080 start position could be landlocked in the mountains and be more historical, though it's quite possible that the map scale is too small to do this.

[VINC.XXIII]

Its simply possible also to redone the size of provinces according the Campaign. For my self-mod, some provinces are useless during the Renaissance Era, Bourgogne is too meridionaly axed. England have too many provinces(but usefull during the unification of the early times...)
I had also done Venice as a kind of island, and increase his capacity to build ship.
Asia minor need certainly more provinces during the Early times, but no during the Renaissance Era, at this step, 3 states was really importants: Osmanlis, Karaman and the White Sheep Hord for the East. The surviving Despotat of Trazbon was just a big port with some little land around, as all know.
The most important war scene for the Osmanlis should be the Balkans. Well its just my point of view.

I think, when SV 4.0 will be released, I will simply do a sub mod with the Valois's Duchy of Bourgogne. This faction is never represented. I'm not a burgundian fanatic or anything. Just this part of France had many many power in Europa in this time, and most important than the moribund Kingdom of Chypre. I have a big book about this Duchy, and Bourgogne had the same income of money that Venice at the 15 century:
Well sorry, I left of the thread^^

[Drtad]

Yeah I definitely enjoy the dynamic provided by the island provinces... Perhaps just some "here and there" provinces like one from Britain, one from the steppes, Africa, etc.

[SicilianVespers]

These are the reasons I added them to the map. After rethinking this, island forts will not work, the AI will just ignore them. The island settlements add too much to be removed. I know Corfu is a ALWAYS a three way fight between Sicily, ERE, and Venice in my campaigns.

I will find the provinces somewhere else...

[sputnik]

I am liking this. We could reclaim some provinces by replacing the Aegean island provinces with Stone forts, and reducing Ireland to two provinces. That would give us at least four to work with.

I agree, 4 is too many in Ireland but please done lose any on mainland Britain I still think you need one more border province in SE Scotland, NE England.

[Bruce the Silver-Tongued]

> 4 is too many in Ireland <

The four provinces of Ireland fully represent the historical divisions of Ireland: Connacht, Munster, Leinster and Ulster. Say you switched to one province/city like Dublin instead of four: the conquest of Ireland would be very simple. An English player or Scottish player would not have to divert resources and time to pacify a large, historically less populated (and thus harder to administer) island. Case in point - for hundreds of years, English rule was confined to the English Pale around Dublin, and not for lack of trying.

In game (DA, VH, H), I have to divert at least a full stack and a couple spies to take all of Ireland. Doing so leaves me open to invasion by the other two factions on the British Isles; during the initial invasion campaign, and especially the garrisoning effort afterwards. The experience of risking resources on a campaign is well-represented there. Of all the provinces, perhaps Connacht (spelling?) could be dropped, due to it being the least populated of all the regions historically, and the difficulty of the campaign might be preserved with three regions. (Reminds me of Stainless Steel mod).

Of course, whichever way he chooses, I'm sure SV will be able to strike a balance for the mod. The construction of the other releases are testament to that.

[Drtad]

Well Ireland could have fewer provinces but be bulked up militarily a bit perhaps? That is if another solution can't be found...

[Drtad]

Just as a refresher for later, the first map of the "Barony" on this page is quite accurate for 1080 (except Partzerpert would be the main castle).

http://www.armenica.org/cgi-bin/arme...menia==1=3=AAA

[codix105]

No I think greece stays and ireland moves I love the greek islands