Warscape contra Battlemap-Campaignmap-Mapping

[Acroneos]

CA promised, that this time, we will no longer get predefined battlemaps but an automatically generated battlemap terrain, based on the actual campaign map parameters/tiles.

But the design of the campaign map gave me some concerns about that. First, the coasts are reduced drastically to some few beaches where ships can land - lets say, like 70 % of coast cannot be used for battles.

Same with the cities, as we no longer have every city siegeable, so possible battlefield variations are also reduced in that way. And last but not least, look at those forests around of every mountain on the map. Each mountain is surrounded of impassable forest, so the "battle-able" areal is once more reduced to a minimum. Look at those screenshots and discuss!

#1 - Whole coast battleable, forests battleable



#2 - Only beaches battleable, forests battleable



#3 - Only beaches battleable, forests unbattleable



You see - possible battle map terrain is reduced drastically in the third pic. That means, CA ca still make predefined battlefields but sell them as automatically generated terrain from campaign map tiles. This is done by reducing possible battle areas with cliffs, forests and unsiegeable cities.

Personally, for me, it is not a problem if terrain is not generated in the way like in Rome 1. But it shows once more, that Warscape engine is not really a good base for this game. Just think about the phalanx. About the "formations".

[Dan113112]

You do realize that there was a ton of impassible terrain in RTW as well, right? Yes, we know that there won't be as many hexes as we want the game to have. I think Modestus touched on this a while back. We'll have to wait and see. By the way, not all forest is impassible. In the new panorama released today you can see barbarian armies in the forest.

Edit: The cities are siege-able as far as we know. They just aren't siege battle cities. And they still have their own battle maps as far as I'm aware. Some may be automatically generated but I'm not sure. Most if not all field battle maps will be predefined.

[Acroneos]

You do realize that there was a ton of impassible terrain in RTW as well, right?

Rome 2 seems to have extremely lot of more impassable terrain. Terra incognita, most of caost are cliffs, extremely huge cities, non siegeable cities and possibly impassible forests. No comparison to Rome 1, where you only could not pass high mountains and dense forest (the least one was very scarce if you let away germania and scythia).

[Dan113112]

Rome 2 seems to have extremely lot of more impassable terrain. Terra incognita, most of caost are cliffs, extremely huge cities, non siegeable cities and possibly impassible forests. No comparison to Rome 1, where you only could not pass high mountains and dense forest (the least one was very scarce if you let away germania and scythia).

You can cross some forest in TWR2. You can see it happening in videos and screenshots. Of course it's going to have more impassible terrain. The map covers more geography than the previous game. Imagine all the time it takes to make those maps. They had to make a decision so that they would have time to complete the map.

[Acroneos]

Imagine all the time it takes to make those maps. They had to make a decision so that they would have time to complete the map.

Thats why a map.rwm-tile-based-campaign map engine would have been a better solution here. I just cannot understand, why it was not implemented in warscape. Anyhow, I think, the old engine was better than warscape. Medieval II had cool graphics, too.

[Dan113112]

Thats why a map.rwm-tile-based-campaign map engine would have been a better solution here. I just cannot understand, why it was not implemented in warscape. Anyhow, I think, the old engine was better than warscape. Medieval II had cool graphics, too.

You're missing the point. The tile/hex system is essentially the same as RTW and M2TW. It's just that there are allegedly less tiles in TWR2. Not that there couldn't be more it's just that CA doesn't have time for it.

The old engine was better? Maybe at certain things but Warscape offers a whole range of options that add depth and immersion to the game. The old engine couldn't give us those options.

[Bethencourt]

I agree with the OP. In the campaign map you are following the one path. This was made in Shogun II very clearly and it is repeated now.

[Bethencourt]

It is not about battle map, it is about campaign AI not making the fool arround.

It is said all the ways lead to Rome. In this map the only way leads the campaign AI.

[Jester]

i dont see how non siegable cities would reduce the map variation. if at all, the opposite is the case because you always had the same generic castle maps with only slight but completely irrelevant variations.

i m pretty sure the field battles will offer more variations. they re more dynamic anyway



also, while the generated maps in Rome1 were a nice and immersive feature, it had its own flaws. sometimes it generated maps which were totally ridiculous and didnt feel authentic by any means. you would ve never believed that two large armies would choose that battlefield to fight on.

[MathiasOfAthens]

I like the way the map looks.

[DogSoldierSPQR]

I think this is CA's way of making the enemy ambush us more successfully. AI usually stick to one path, us lot will take every and any route. If you limit pathways, the chances of running into an enemy ambush are higher. Anyone agree? It's the only thing I can think of tbh, guys.

[Reiver]

It's no coincidence that the best campaign gameplay since MTW was S2. Rome made the jump to free movement well before they had Ai capable of handling it. By reducing the movement options to almost that of the original games you had a more coherent and challenging enemy. it's not ideal but i'll take the compromise for the better overall experience vs. armies milling about stupidly.

[DavidtheDuke]

Where did they say maps were auto-generated? I read simply all the regions had many battlemaps made for each one.

[Spartacus041]

I guess we'll find out after release.