Military harbors

[Quinn Inuit]

Anyone have any ideas where to put the harbors that can build major warships? So far, I'm thinking of the following:
Tarentum
Rhodes
Sinope
Athens
Carthage
Gadir
Antioch (we don't have Pieria as a separate settlement anymore)
Ephesus
Dalmatia
Alexandria (Egypt)
Charax
Byzantium
Macedon
Brittany (Gaul)
Massilia

Added:
Tyre
Tarsus
Syracuse
Cyprus (Salamis)
Thessaly (Demetrias)
Heraclea Pontica

[Metaluis90]

errr... maybe Syracuse? and a major harbor in Phoenicia would do the job, i think

Thalassocracy entry in Wikipedia states that maritme empires such as... Minoic civilizatin, phoenician metropolis, etc, etc, made their wealth based on their maritime commercial and military power

[Wien1938]

Tyre or Sidon would do.

[Quinn Inuit]

Thanks! I totally spaced those. I've added Tyre and Syracuse to the list.

Update:
Oops, forgot Tarsus.

[Sardaukar One]

Salamis, Heraclea and Demetrias. Assuming you are going to include Demetrias.

After Ipsus, Demetrius was able to retain a fairly large armament, especially at sea, where he surpassed the other dynasts in power. Demetrius was able to do so in large part because he held Cyprus in addition to Sidon and Tyre. As the largest city in Cyprus, it makes sense Salamis should be able to produce warships of all types. The greatest periods of Antigonid naval supremacy seem to have come when in possession of these territories and cities.

Heraclea seems to have been the strongest naval city on the Black sea coast in Asia minor at the start of the game. It was a key acquistion for Lysimachus in the campaign against Antigonos as it provided him with a harbor that could be easily defended and gave him a strong fleet. Though it was probably no match for the Antigonid navies, it was all the same a nice addition for Lysimachus.

Demetrias was the port built by Demetrius in Thessaly. Along with Corinth and Chalcis it was named one of the 'fetters of Greece' by which the Macedonians were able to dominate central Greece et al.
Demetrius used it as a base to build his ships and its role does not seem to changethrough the years.
I think the Romans opted not to try and siege it as they considered it too tough a nut to try and crack.
It would seem they considered it easier just to by-pass.
If you are not going to include Demetrias, then perhaps Larissa should be able to produce warships of all types.

What about Pergamum? Didn't they have a pretty good navy too?

[Quinn Inuit]

I haven't read anything about Pergamum's navy, certainly not like that of Rhodes.

Demetrias won't be in there by itself, but it seems like a reasonable warport addition.

Salamis = excellent idea.

Heraclea? Are you sure about a war port there? I'm not finding a whole lot of information about them having a major fleet. Sinope, sure, but not Heraclea.

[Carados]

Did Rome have a major shipbuilding port thing in the South of Italy somewhere? I don't know if it corresponds to the Tarentum region, I just heard about it.

[Quinn Inuit]

I think that was Tarentum. If not, we'll add whatever it was. Not sure how to show this all in-game.

[Sardaukar One]

I haven't read anything about Pergamum's navy, certainly not like that of Rhodes.

Neither have I, but seeing as they were a pretty dominant local power, it seems possible that they could have had ship building capabilities.

Demetrias won't be in there by itself, but it seems like a reasonable warport addition.

Demetrias was, I believe, a city too.

Heraclea? Are you sure about a war port there? I'm not finding a whole lot of information about them having a major fleet. Sinope, sure, but not Heraclea.

I thought they got into a number of naval skirmishes with some of the other black sea and aegean states. I want to say they contributed to a fleet that fought Gonatas early on in his reign. And I want to say that they were participants in a number of other little naval wars with other cities etc.
I know that it was a boon for Lysimachus when he got Heraclea. It gave him a secure landing site for troops from Europe during the Ipsus campaign when Demetrius had cut off the Hellespont.
Heraclea seems to have had some serious ship building capabilities. As a big trade hub on the Black sea, it seems that they would have at least been proficient in their navy.
I think Pontus put them under a lot of pressure too.

[Metaluis90]

Did Rome have a major shipbuilding port thing in the South of Italy somewhere? I don't know if it corresponds to the Tarentum region, I just heard about it.

Brundisium, If I recall, was one (if not) the most important harbor in Italy... but I don't know if that importance lied upon the military

[Quinn Inuit]

Neither have I, but seeing as they were a pretty dominant local power, it seems possible that they could have had ship building capabilities.

I'm sure they could build ships, but there's a difference between that and a major warfleet center. I mean, Rome was a big port, but they didn't build large warships there.

Demetrias was, I believe, a city too.

Oh, of course, it's just that we wouldn't have room for another city in that area, so it'd have to just be represented by Larissa's port tile. So were major fleets built there, or just housed there?

I thought they got into a number of naval skirmishes with some of the other black sea and aegean states. I want to say they contributed to a fleet that fought Gonatas early on in his reign. And I want to say that they were participants in a number of other little naval wars with other cities etc.
I know that it was a boon for Lysimachus when he got Heraclea. It gave him a secure landing site for troops from Europe during the Ipsus campaign when Demetrius had cut off the Hellespont.
Heraclea seems to have had some serious ship building capabilities. As a big trade hub on the Black sea, it seems that they would have at least been proficient in their navy.
I think Pontus put them under a lot of pressure too.

Tempting, but with Sinope right there, I think I'd rather not have another major port city right next door. I'd like to spread them out a bit.

Brundisium, If I recall, was one (if not) the most important harbor in Italy... but I don't know if that importance lied upon the military

IIRC, Tarentum's port is currently where Brindisium would be, so we're covered there.

[Caesar Augustus]

I want to say Massilia should probably have the ability to construct a military harbour

From Wikipedia:

Massalia was one of the first Greek ports in Western Europe,[13] growing to a population of over 1000. It was the first settlement given city status in France. Facing an opposing alliance of the Etruscans, Carthage and the Celts, the Greek colony allied itself with the expanding Roman Republic for protection. This protectionist association brought aid in the event of future attacks, and perhaps equally important, it also brought the people of Massalia into the complex Roman market. The city thrived by acting as a link between inland Gaul, hungry for Roman goods and wine (which Massalia was steadily exporting by 500 BC),[14][15] and Rome's insatiable need for new products and slaves. Under this arrangement the city maintained its independence until the rise of Julius Caesar, when it joined the losing side (Pompey and the optimates) in civil war, and lost its independence in 49 BC. It was the site of a siege and naval battle, after which the fleet was confiscated by the Roman authorities. During Roman times the city was called Massilia. It was the home port of Pytheas. Most of the archaeological remnants of the original Greek settlement were replaced by later Roman additions.

And some details about the siege of Massilia, again from Wikipedia:


The Siege and naval Battle of Massilia was an episode of Caesar's civil war, fought in 49 BC.
Lucius Domitius Ahenobarbus had become proconsul of Gaul and was sent to gain control of Massilia (modern Marseille) in order to oppose Caesar. As Caesar marched to Spain (en route to the Battle of Ilerda), the Massiliots closed their gates to him, having allied with Ahenobarbus and the Optimates. Roused by their hostile actions, he commenced a siege against Massilia. He also placed Decimus Junius Brutus Albinus in charge of his fleet there.[1]
After the siege had begun, Ahenobarbus arrived in Massilia to defend it against the Caesarian forces. In late June, Caesar's ships, although they were less skillfully built than those of the Massiliots and outnumbered, were victorious in the ensuing naval battle.[2]
Gaius Trebonius, Caesar's legatus, conducted the siege using a variety of siege machines including siege towers, a siege-ramp, and a "testudo-ram".[3]. Gaius Scribonius Curio, careless in adequately guarding the Sicilian Straits, allowed Lucius Nasidius to bring more ships to the aid of Ahenobarbus. He fought a second naval battle with Decimus Brutus in early September, but withdrew defeated and sailed for Spain.[4]
The Massiliots valiantly defended against the siege machines and works. They threw down burning pitch and pine-shavings and the Caesarians undermined the foundations of their city walls. At one point they seemed likely to surrender and declare a truce, but at night they cunningly destroyed the siege works in a gross violation of the treaty. They were then near surrender.[5]
At the final surrender of Massilia, Caesar showed his usual leniency and Lucius Ahenobarbus escaped to Thessaly in the only vessel that was able to escape from the Populares. Afterwards, Massilia lost its independence and was absorbed into the Roman Republic. [6]

[florin80]

So you`re saying that only those settlements would be able to build major warships? Why? What are you basing it on? The presence of important navies in real history it seems from your commentary on Heraclea. What does that have to do with anything? Harbors can be changed, port facilities can be upgraded, shipping construction escalated and large fleets created and maintained. It`s a matter of money, not something else. Did Sparta have a powerful navy or any real naval tradition at the start of the peloponnesian war. It did not. Did it build a large enough and trained enough fleet to match and then overthrow the athenians during the peloponnesian war? It did. How? With persian money. Historically some of those you`ve considered had more than others, at one time or another, but if you cripple regional development(of the player`s choice) so as to be in line with whatever naval history has survived to reach us, you might as well skip the campaign and settle for historical battles.

[Quinn Inuit]

I agree wholeheartedly about Massilia. That's why it's been in the list from the beginning.

So you`re saying that only those settlements would be able to build major warships? Why? What are you basing it on? The presence of important navies in real history it seems from your commentary on Heraclea. What does that have to do with anything? Harbors can be changed, port facilities can be upgraded, shipping construction escalated and large fleets created and maintained. It`s a matter of money, not something else. Did Sparta have a powerful navy or any real naval tradition at the start of the peloponnesian war. It did not. Did it build a large enough and trained enough fleet to match and then overthrow the athenians during the peloponnesian war? It did. How? With persian money. Historically some of those you`ve considered had more than others, at one time or another, but if you cripple regional development(of the player`s choice) so as to be in line with whatever naval history has survived to reach us, you might as well skip the campaign and settle for historical battles.

That's a reasonable argument, but here's where I'm coming from. Sometimes too much freedom of choice is just as ahistorical as too little. Just like I'd like to see players building their fleets where they were built historically, I'd also be annoyed if they were building large fleets at the harbor in, say, Gedrosia. Some of these regions just aren't capable of supporting large fleets.

One of the overall goals of this mod is instructional: I'd like players to understand why things happened IRL the way they did. I don't necessarily want to force them to make the same choices, but I want them to see why the choices were made. And with the inability to make timber imports a prerequisite for fleet construction, I think limiting the cities is the best option in this case.

[florin80]

Ok, but if hypothetical timber imports aren`t acceptable, then Athens should go off that list since to the best of my knowledge it imported timber for ship building.

[Caesar Augustus]

I agree wholeheartedly about Massilia. That's why it's been in the list from the beginning.

I apologise good sir, I hadn't noticed it in the list

I think the direction to go is definitely timber imports or the timber resource. Anything else is a little too restrictive and may have a negative impact on gameplay IMO. However I completely agree that not every port should be capable of recruiting and maintaining a military fleet.

[Quinn Inuit]

Re: Demetrias
O.K., I just wanted to confirm that it was a construction center. It's in.

Re: Heraclea
I finally remember that we have Memnon's History... to check, and it confirms your claim. Heraclea's in.

[QUOTE=Caesar Augustus;9014804]I apologise good sir, I hadn't noticed it in the list

Quite alright, mate.

{Point also made by Mogan}
I think the direction to go is definitely timber imports or the timber resource. Anything else is a little too restrictive and may have a negative impact on gameplay IMO. However I completely agree that not every port should be capable of recruiting and maintaining a military fleet.

Hmmm...those two goals are contradictory, are they not? If I'm going to restrict recruitment, why not just skip the timber resource and just use the fleet_constr resource in a broader fashion?

O.K., how's this for an idea? You link the ability to recruit large ships to either the fleet_constr resource or the presence of a huge city. Huge cities will be hard enough to build that you're unlikely to get there randomly.

[Quinn Inuit]

That's reasonable, especially if we have a major harbor at Thessaly. Was Athens still a major shipbuilding power at this point, or were those days long gone?

[Sardaukar One]

I'm sure they could build ships, but there's a difference between that and a major warfleet center. I mean, Rome was a big port, but they didn't build large warships there.

Heraclea was under the cosh from Bithynia or Pontus. I forget which one of them took Heraclea out.
Navy doesn't do you that much good when you need soldiers to man your walls and fight off your enemies.
They sent a naval contingent to help the Romans in the Macedonian war, but it ended up being turned away.

I know that it made a lot of cash from trade. And that they would surely have had a competent navy to protect this trade income. A naval Palmyra if you will!
Lysimachus went out of his way to keep it in pocket.

Oh, of course, it's just that we wouldn't have room for another city in that area, so it'd have to just be represented by Larissa's port tile. So were major fleets built there, or just housed there?

Yes. It had formidable defences both on land and at sea. A double harbor I think, but i'm not 100% sure of that. It helped secured the land route from Macedon to Greece. Also, the Macedonians could circumvent Thermopylae if it was held against them by an enemy. From Demetrias, it was a simple matter to ship troops around Thermopylae. Demetrias could in turn protect any advance on Macedon from this direction.
It really reduced the importance of Thermopylae to the Macedonians and gave them a great naval base to boot.

I'm sure Wien can give his two cents on how important a base it was to the Macedonians. They used it to control Greece for a good 120 years. Corinth, Chalcis and Demetrias were known as the fetters of Greece.
The Macedonians used them to put a choke hold on the Greeks.

[Mogan]

Isn't it possible to make the higher tiers of ports require the timber resource, while also accepting a timber import buildkng? This could provide a sort of reasonable compromise between historical accuracy and gameplay friendliness. I don't feel too comfortable at all about being restricted too much.