Byzantium (Constantinople/Istanbul) vs Antheia (Sozopolis)

[ChairmanCrassus]

Why is that regions capital Antheia? Why not Byzantium?


I think Byzantium's location is allot more strategic and epic of a location (even if Antheia was more developed at the time). If we have the ability to change capitals, it would make an excellent location for any faction in that region looking to relocate its capital. If I was playing as Pontus (which is the first campaign I intend to play), Byzantium would make an excellent capital for my Pontic empire after I conquer Greece, Asia Minor, and the Black Sea coast.


In both RS2, EB & Rome 1 Vanilla, Byzantion was that regions capital.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

I think it should be that regions capital again in Rome 2.

[Julio-Claudian]

Surely Byzantium was of very little consequence at that time.

[ChairmanCrassus]

Surely Byzantium was of very little consequence at that time.

Perhaps of less significance than Antheia, but its at such a great location and it was obviously of enough significance to be included in both the EB and RS2 mods (both very well researched).

[Stavroforos]

I think when it comes to Byzantium, we think too much of what it was to become rather than what it was at the time, so if Antheia was indeed more important and developed at the time, that should be the city which should be on the map.

And Pupludeva should be renamed.

[ChairmanCrassus]

I think when it comes to Byzantium, we think too much of what it was to become rather than what it was at the time, so if Antheia was indeed more important and developed at the time, that should be the city which should be on the map.

And Pupludeva should be renamed.

Well its a game played by people in 2013 not more than 2000 years ago so it matters considering how significant and great of a location the city is at. I only say that Byzantium should be that regions capital because CA probably isn't going to give us the ability to create cities. At the very least I hope Byzantium is a town that I can pour development money into and eventually make it my Pontic capital. At the rate CA is going they probably won't allow us to even change the capital of our faction (something that many factions used to do, i.e. Parthians).

[Kadoken]

Well its a game played by people in 2013 not more than 2000 years ago so it matters considering how significant and great of a location the city is at. I only say that Byzantium should be that regions capital because CA probably isn't going to give us the ability to create cities. At the very least I hope Byzantium is a town that I can pour development money into and eventually make it my Pontic capital. At the rate CA is going they probably won't allow us to even change the capital of our faction (something that many factions used to do, i.e. Parthians).

Shogun 2 has tools to make new cities. They indeed have been able to split regions. Why wouldn't Rome 2?

The Instructions: http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...split-a-region
http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...without-a-town
Put into action: http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...2-new-regions)

[Hannarr]

Well its a game played by people in 2013 not more than 2000 years ago so it matters considering how significant and great of a location the city is at. I only say that Byzantium should be that regions capital because CA probably isn't going to give us the ability to create cities. At the very least I hope Byzantium is a town that I can pour development money into and eventually make it my Pontic capital. At the rate CA is going they probably won't allow us to even change the capital of our faction (something that many factions used to do, i.e. Parthians).

We live in 2013, so things that happened 2000 years ago don't matter. fantastic argument.

[Sherm]

If I have Rome, I don't need Byzantium
but if it were in the game could be good

[ChairmanCrassus]

Shogun 2 has tools to make new cities. They indeed have been able to split regions. Why wouldn't Rome 2?

The Instructions: http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...split-a-region
http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...without-a-town
Put into action: http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...2-new-regions)

Thanks for that, I hope one can do that in Rome 2. +rep

I would like to add that historical accuracy wasn't the reason for the replacement of Byzantium with Antheia. Antheia (which was, actually, renamed as Apollonia) was pretty insignificant (we mainly know about her, because of its coinage and not of its inexistent interventions in ancient history) and always much less important politically and financially than Byzantium, during the Antiquity.

In contrary, Byzantium, even before Constantinus reforms, has always played a major role in the hellenistic, political events (especially, if we compare it with Antheia) and was considered a rather rich city, which exploited the trade between the Black Sea and the Mediterranean.

Anyway, CA, being given its several, controversial decisions, such as the ones regarding the Iceni, the Seleucids, Corinth etc., has shown that its respect about historical accuracy shouldn't be considered as indisputable.

So, personally, I suppose that they preferred Antheia to Byzantium, because of possible gameplay issues, like like the disruption of the passage between Asia and Europe or the difficulties concerning the depiction of battles with a complexed geography (e.g. Marmaras Sea, Gallipoli Penninsula etc.), in the right scale.

Good point about game play issues, that might be why they didn't do it.

We live in 2013, so things that happened 2000 years ago don't matter. fantastic argument.

You're either picking from low hanging fruit or you didn't read the rest of the thread.

[Stavroforos]

No, regions will only have one city, so there will be no Byzantium, even as a developing town.

But I mean, should we have Paris the capital of Gaul simply because it became the capital of France?

[ChairmanCrassus]

But I mean, should we have Paris the capital of Gaul simply because it became the capital of France?

Paris doesn't have a location as strategic as Byzantium.

[Stavroforos]

Paris doesn't have a location as strategic as Byzantium.

Well, besides the fact that it is on the Seine river which offers easy and quick navigation throughout much of Gaul and a path to the Atlantic, Byzantium's location is not very relevant since it would not have been developed enough for its location to matter.

[ChairmanCrassus]

Well, besides the fact that it is on the Seine river which offers easy and quick navigation throughout much of Gaul and a path to the Atlantic, Byzantium's location is not very relevant since it would not have been developed enough for its location to matter.

Not saying Paris isn't, it just isn't AS strategic of a location. There's only one place to build Byzantium to get its benefits: A choke point for both land and naval forces; An excellent location for building defensive walls; The meeting point for the East and West and hence an excellent location for trade. In my view, if RS2 and EB had Byzantium, and if they were well researched mods, then Byzantium should be in the game.

[saxdude]

Not saying Paris isn't, it just isn't AS strategic of a location. There's only one place to build Byzantium to get its benefits: A choke point for both land and naval forces; An excellent location for building defensive walls; The meeting point for the East and West and hence an excellent location for trade. In my view, if RS2 and EB had Byzantium, and if they were well researched mods, then Byzantium should be in the game.

They had Byzantium because there were regions and no provinces.

[StealthFox]

I used to always conquer Byzantium so I could RP with me making it into a huge capital and world city. It will be a shame not to be able to do this in Rome II.

[Prince Regent George]

I would like to add that historical accuracy wasn't the reason for the replacement of Byzantium with Antheia. Antheia (which was, actually, renamed as Apollonia) was pretty insignificant (we mainly know about her, because of its coinage and not of its inexistent interventions in ancient history) and always much less important politically and financially than Byzantium, during the Antiquity.

In contrary, Byzantium, even before Constantinus reforms, has always played a major role in the hellenistic, political events (especially, if we compare it with Antheia) and was considered a rather rich city, which exploited the trade between the Black Sea and the Mediterranean.

Anyway, CA, being given its several, controversial decisions, such as the ones regarding the Iceni, the Seleucids, Corinth etc., has shown that its respect about historical accuracy shouldn't be considered as indisputable.

So, personally, I suppose that they preferred Antheia to Byzantium, because of possible gameplay issues, like like the disruption of the passage between Asia and Europe or the difficulties concerning the depiction of battles with a complexed geography (e.g. Marmaras Sea, Gallipoli Penninsula etc.), in the right scale.

[Xerrop]

I would like to add that historical accuracy wasn't the reason for the replacement of Byzantium with Antheia. Antheia (which was, actually, renamed as Apollonia) was pretty insignificant (we mainly know about her, because of its coinage and not of its inexistent interventions in ancient history) and always much less important politically and financially than Byzantium, during the Antiquity.

This is also my understanding. Byzantium was one of the richer Greek Cities at this time afaik.
They controlled the sea trade between the Black Sea and the Mediterranean. This is not something that became only important after 330 AD. No Emperor would create a new capital from scratch in an uninhabited and poor desert without any solid basis.

[Lanciarius_90]

Lol. In Rome TW and mods I always take Byzantium with Brutii or Greek faction for capital city and make East Roman empire befor Hristos.

Some cities become important during time or in later period.

[Cvetko]

Hold ur horses Bros, well see Constantinople in BI or Justinian expansion...

[bojieh]

@Stavroforos Yes, Pulpudeva should be Philipopolis for a few decades at the start of the game.
As far as Anthea vs Byz, I'd have to side with the CA. Anthea was one of the first settlement on the Black sea's west coast. It had good relations with Miletus, Rodes, Lesbos, Athens, Corinth, Chios AND the Thracian tribes close to it. It was later in close relations with the Odryssai, wasn't conquered by Philip or Alexander. It had far bigger impact on trade than Mesembria , Odessos and Byzantium. After it was renamed Appolonia, it was known as Appolonia Pontika or Magna.
Both cities were local powers, yet Anthea exceeds Byzantium at the starting date, and continued to do so for almost 500 years after that. No conquering Constantinople this time