No huge cities? / Differentiating population centers

[Camcolit]

Playing a Hayastan campaign and just noticed the building browser doesn't contain any info for huge cities. Also I can only build the small version of a granary and thus could never reach the required population anyway. Anyone have info on this? Sorry, it's been a while since I played, but I remember as KH I had huge cities all over the place.

This brings me to a related question - as KH I did not really enjoy spamming huge cities, though it was optimal. It made every province seem the same, and is unhistorical. I remember there was an old mod I used which was either for EB1 or Rome Total Realism called 'City Mod'. Basically capped most settlements at 'city' level, with fewer 'large' cities, and only a handful of potential 'huge' cities on the map. I really liked this mod since it gave more strategic importance to population centers as opposed to backwaters and made places like Rome, Carthage, Athens, Antioch etc. stand out. Any thoughts on a similar system for EB2?

Thanks!

[RodriguesSting]

What defines the maximum size of cities in the mod is, for the most part, the character of the civilizations. "Civilized" peoples, like Hellenes, Phoencians, Romans, and Parthians (at least post settling) can get the biggest cities and, GENERALLY, the highest levels of all building trees. Then come the Barbarians and most Nomads, one tier less in cities, and more restrictive lines. Finally, the primitive Barbarians, like the Pritanoi, Sweboz, who can JUST get to sizeable urban centers and not much after it.

I think Hayastan are probably being ranked something like the Barbarians, probably due to their hostile environment, and persistent tribal societal model. Also, never Hellenized, and not even Persianized for that matter, making them a REAL stand-out in the area.

[Roma_Victrix]

Huh, that's weird. If the Parthians are able to build huge cities then the Armenians should be able to as well considering historically they were an urban dwelling people.

Since the AI rarely builds huge cities, I made sure to have several from the very start in my latest Koinon Hellenon campaign by editing the "descr_strat" file. That way I did not have to wait around and rely on the AI to make Rome, Carthage, Syracuse, Athens, Rhodes, Alexandria, Antioch, Seleucia, Babylon, Persepolis, or Taxila into huge cities. That almost never happens otherwise under the AI without my interference by forcing "add_population" in the shell command.

In fact, pathetically, the only cities that were made into huge ones by the AI were in Arabia by the Sabaean faction. I had dozens of huge cities across the Mediterranean and Black Sea basin regions by the time I ended my Koinon Hellenon campaign on turn 1000 (in the year 23 BC). However, the other big empire on the map under the Parthians in the east (my longtime allies) never built their own huge cities, only a bunch of large cities. The only huge cities under the Parthians were the ones that I made into huge ones from the very beginning of the campaign.

[Camcolit]

Since the AI rarely builds huge cities

I guess pop growth is too tied to specific buildings lines which the player can focus on but the ai doesn't see them as more valuable than any other building.

Total War is really simplistic at its core anyway so limited in what can be done. Personally I'd like more railroaded and pre-set growth levels depending on historical development of the provinces. For a quick fix, up the growth rate all round, and cap settlement growth to approximate what they achieved historically. This would avoid having to tinker too much and preserve the value of pop growth buildings while allowing the ai to develop its cities properly.

KH, with the ability to build huge cities left right and center, is hugely overpowered in gameplay terms. I really like playing KH but I remember giving up the last campaign because I had nothing but huge rich cities everywhere and could take on the whole world at once, while potential rivals were lagging painfully far behind.