Big Map or Mundus Magnus

[Jimexander the Mighty]

What map do you think is better? After you vote say why you voted for that map and what makes it better.

[Tyr]

I voted Mundus Magnus, for several reasons.

First are the flaws that I feel the Big Map has. I am bothered by the slightest Geographical inaccuracies in terms of map shape(such as the distorted shape of Britain and Scandinavia), and though these seem to bother no-one else, when I look at the mini map or are scrolling across the screen I think it really lets the whole ‘feel’ of the mod down. Also, certain positioning of cities, and region layout, is awkward, often historically inaccurate and sometimes doesn’t make sense. Certain geographical features also detract from this map, the almost non-existent Steppes, huge tracks of barricading forests – that look even less pleasing on the eye when they have a path cut through them - and huge mountain ranges that make movement, of both the player and the AI sometimes tedious.

The main benefit of such a map – more space between cities, more open spaces; is, I feel, not used to its full potential. Chances for immense geographical and terrain accuracy & detail have been by passed, and the fewer cities/more open spaces feeling of this map does not suit the presence of factions like the Bosporan Kingdom and Syracuse – and so, more cities have been added to compensate for this, there-by detracting from Ice Torques main aim when he created the original version of this map; and making the game “feel” more like it is being played on a normal size map.

Many point to a slower game and slower faction expansion, and of course such large distances do greatly add to this, but I feel slower faction expansion can be created other ways, and do wonder how much the AI is actually slowed down by some of the awkward movement-paths on the map, rather than the large distances.

Now, the may benefits of the Mundus Magnus. Firstly, an almost flawless layout of regions and settlements; as well as an aesthetically pleasing map that maintains an accurate shape throughout. It also allows the player a lot more flexibility, where I feel the Big Map is more suited for a Rome-centred campaign. On the Mundus you can attempt to literally conquer the “known world” of the ancients, the extra space creates extra depth for nearly all other factions. Even Rome benefits – you can actually try and re-enact Trajan’s Eastern ambitions, and are not limited to the actual confines of the empire; and the Pyrrhic war plays out more rapidly and historically

On top of this you have the potential offered by the Mundus Magnus. Baktria can be added, as can numerous other factions that dvk may one time desire to put in: Nubians, Saka, Sabaeans, Mauyran Empire, all unique factions that would greatly add to the depth of the game – but cannot be added due to restrictions imposed by the Big Map.

Faction expansion though faster at the moment could easily be slowed, and I feel this is no argument against the Mundus Magnus; especially when I think it’s due to the huge amount of movement points units have – another drawback of the Big Map that emerges to blight the Mundus Magnus. In fact I can find no real flaw with the Mundus Magnus, and though the changes of Northern Ranger improve the big map, it still does not compare to the Mundus Magnus in my opinion.

[swhunter]

I played the big map once and did enjoy the extra cites in GCS,
and other places, but hated the forrests ,and not seeing more towns on this map made me feel i couldnt expand the borders!

MM has more cities and maybe you can add more towns?
or villages. And do enjoy a better map with more that can be added!

thanks my vote is MM.

[dvk901]

I'm not going to vote for either one. Obviously, I liked them both or wouldn't have included them. As Tyr noted, the Mundus gives you a very good 'world view', and provides perhaps more of an 'Imperial' feel to the game because it encompasses so much of the then known world...and effectively, all of the world that Rome felt that destiny said was theirs. The Mundus is, however, very 'crowded' in some areas because of it's small scale.
The Big map, when it comes out in Patch9, will look very different. The senseless forests in the steppes areas have been removed, a number of mislocated cities have been moved to where they should be, and quite a few regions added (while others were combined) to put more regions where the real action is. This map simply offers a different 'feel', for the player who wants to expand slowly and not constantly feel threatened by short distances. It offers an interesting sense of historic isolation. Long distances between cities and the sheer size of the map make you feel like your little kingdoms are vast in themselves...even if you hold a very few regions. And, such areas as Sicily, Greece and the Aetolian Pennisula have been greatly enhanced strategically with more regions to fight for. Indeed, Sicily is a little world of it's own, and once you conquer it you feel you've really gained something. Your kingdom is rich, isolated and powerful! When I do play, I have played both....they just offer something of their own for each campaign.

[Master_Swordman]

I voted for the "Big Map". Not because it is better, as Tyr has made some very good points on the differences, but it gives me more of a "Roman" feel to the game I guess I could say. 9If that makes any sense to you then I'll be surprised )

[cherryfunk]

I love both maps, but the styles of play are very different. For me, the Mundus map looks like a board for a boardgame, while the Big Map looks like satellite photography -- so playing on the Mundus Map is like playing a boardgame, while playing on the Big Map is almost like directing my forces in a real world.

Both styles are a blast to play, but I have to give my vote to the Big Map -- it gives me goosebumps sometimes just looking at it, it feels so real -- and yes, the endless forests are GONE! I've played on Ranger's new map, and it looks fantastic. The Bosporans and Sarmatians can now duke it out on the endless steppes, as they were always meant to do...

[swhunter]

OK !! I love the big map to!!
DVK you make my mouth water!
Cant wait to see 9.0 !
And than 10 11 12 ect LOL
Great modd

Oh By the way iam glad you are fixing the greeks !
As romans i have over 24 stacks attaking me!!
i destoryed 8,000 but its only scratch! lol
so i sent a invastion force to hit as meny for their powerfull cities as i can to slow their income!
Nice war were haveing!
lol

[Jimexander the Mighty]

Oh oops I forgot to say what my answer was . I say Mundus Magnus because I like the world feel of the game. But when patch 9 comes out with all the changes to big map im going to try it out.

[Oswald von Wolkenstein]

I am going to try the Big Map after the patch but I like the Mundus Magnus because of all that has been mentioned but also because the AI Seleucid faction usually takes up the entire east, while if you are playing as the Romans, you're still fuddling around in the west. This means that by the time Rome hits the Seleucids they are very powerful indeed.

I have just had the opening engagements with the Seleucids and they have been able to throw a number of very elite armies at me and may prove to be my un-doing. I want to have Roman ships sail under the Arabian pennisua at some point. What happened was that I was involved in a long war with Greeks while allied with the Macedonians. While this was going on I was fighting the Carthaginians, the Gauls and the Free People in the West. Once I conquered the Greeks, the Getae came pouring across the borders but my legions just thrashed them with no problems whatsoever.

At the same time from Athens, I saw an opporunity to get Hallicarnassus from the Free people, but both the Pergamum Empire and Macedonians wanted it too. I took it. The Pergamums backed off but the Macedonians besieged me. So I fought them, and eventually elminated the Getae and the Macedonians, so -- what happens next???

The Seleucids attack and besiege Hallicarnassus (and Pergamum joined them shortly thereafter). So what to I do? I repelled the attacks and thought to hit them in the purse, by taking some of their wealthier cities and cutting off their trade in the Mediterranean. So I took Jerusalem and Sidon but these settlements are totally isolated from the rest of the Roman Empire because my only foothold in Asia minor, at this point, is Hallicarnassus.

Much to my chagrin, instead of diverting troops to Palestine, the Seleucids have been able to exert enormous pressure on my holdings in both Palestine and Asia minor. In the meantime, I have taken Nicomedia from Pergamum and Damascus from the Seleucids (Damascus is incredibly wealthy and that had to hurt) -- but at this point my legions are starting to get real thin and I am losing ground in Gaul.

I managed to get the Carthaginians out of Spain and the entire Western Mediterranean (they only have Lepcis Magna and the settlement to the east of that left.) I am still allied with the Iberians but they could turn on me at any moment. And if the Germans come pouring in now, I am going to experience a great deal of hurt.

So in short, I like the Mundus Magnus, but I miss some of the features of expanse in the Big Map -- it would be most fun to have a Big Map scale that includes all of the regions in the Mundus Magnus ---

[Jimexander the Mighty]

-- if would be most fun to have a Big Map scale that includes all of the regions in the Mundus Magnus ---

Good God it would be huge!

[pseudocaesar]

Good God it would be huge!

yes but i think it would be the best map in any rtw mod.

i voted mundus because i prefer the look, i dont like the choppy coastlines and stuff like that, il play it in patch 9 for sure but i prefer mundus

[Tankbuster]

I voted for Big Map, simply because it just FEELS more like reality. In MM Italy is very small, and the Peloponnesus only has 3 cities!
On the Big Map, it is also easier to really use lots of legions to their full potential.
The Big Map also slows down your expansion, and the AI factions are better balanced than on MM (probably because they have more regions).