Fast vs. Slow Expansion

[dvk901]

I am in a bit of a quandry because a few people have said they like fast expansion, which a more open and 'accessible' map leads to, and 'maybe' more geographically correct (I'm not sold on that).

This is, too me, sort of contradictory, since so much talk (and work) has been put into a Free People system (including both those factions) to SLOW expansion. Supporters of the former have also supported the latter, which to me makes little sense. Not that I'm trying to point fingers or start a fight , it's just that we have a faction slot used to PREVENT something that people are saying they like!

I can beat my head against the wall here, trying to prevent expansion, which has sort of been the 'landmark goal' of this mod in the Free People...but if that isn't really what people want.....why am I bothering to do all this work?
And why waste a faction slot on a 'device' that seeks to prevent something people want to happen anyway?

I can make the Slaves as mean and nasty as anyone ever saw in an RTW mod in their entire lives. I can give them any 'real' faction unit in the game, make them recruit them wherever I want, and no one will ever have the problem of the Free People coming after them and attacking them....because the Slave faction basically just protects itself (except in rare high difficulty cases), it doesn't try to expand.

So I guess I'm looking for some dialogue here as to why we're using this PRECIOUS faction slot for something that maybe isn't all that desireable?

[aja5191]

Well, when I was searching for mods after waiting for Hegemonia: City-States to come out for months, this was one of the many, many mods that I downloaded and tried out. However, something that inexplicably drew me to this was the aggressiveness of the Rebel faction. It was only when I came onto the forums here and saw that, not only were they tweaked, but they were totally redone. I think that something that makes this mod stand out from all the others is your (our) portrayal of the Free People as something they actually were: Many separate, free states, were the status of Europe and Asia at the time, not one conglomerate state. Each state would not have submitted willingly to rule by anybody, and would produce it's own armies and such.

Removing the Free People from the "britain" faction slot fundamentally changes the identity of the mod.

In my opinion, to do so, would be irresponsible to the consumers.

[Drtad]

I want the Free People to stay the same, but I just want accurate geography so that the factions can tear each other apart without having to find a small pass in an impenetrable forest. It is Total War isn't it?

[cherryfunk]

Supporters of the former have also supported the latter, which to me makes little sense.

I don't think the two are contradictory; in fact I like both open maps and slow expansion for the same reason -- they're both a better recreation of reality.

I prefer slow expansion because, for most of the time frame the game represents, expansion was slow. There were long periods when there was very little change in political/cultural boundaries.

And a more open map also seems a better mirror of reality. If you'll recall, one of the hallmarks of the Roman army was its engineering capabilities. Not only were the legions famous for the roads they built, but they were also parcelled out all over the empire to act as civil engineers. So it seems kind of arbitrary to me to put up too many barriers to movement, especially in flat, dry terrain like Germany. The Roman campaigns in Germania under Augustus and Tiberius DID build roads and advance into hitherto impassible terrain. So did their campaigns in Gaul under Caesar, or Britain under Claudius. The Romans built roads wherever it would help them expand and control, and they could build roads almost anywhere.

And I'm not against patches of dense forests, those add character to the map. But really long stretches with no breaks in them just don't make sense -- not when an army could cut its way through if it had to. Same with mountains -- of course there should be impassable stretches, but there should also be passes at decent intervals, because there really are passes through most mountain ranges. Even Thermopylae could be flanked by a little-known path.

But can we have both a more open map and slower expansion? I think so. I believe if the Free people are strong enough, and with the new faction balance we'll have, it will be possible to open up the map a bit to give the player more strategic options AND to keep expansion slow. I don't see why both can't be done.

[dvk901]

I don't think the two are contradictory; in fact I like both open maps and slow expansion for the same reason -- they're both a better recreation of reality.

I prefer slow expansion because, for most of the time frame the game represents, expansion was slow. There were long periods when there was very little change in political/cultural boundaries.

And a more open map also seems a better mirror of reality. If you'll recall, one of the hallmarks of the Roman army was its engineering capabilities. Not only were the legions famous for the roads they built, but they were also parcelled out all over the empire to act as civil engineers. So it seems kind of arbitrary to me to put up too many barriers to movement, especially in flat, dry terrain like Germany. The Roman campaigns in Germania under Augustus and Tiberius DID build roads and advance into hitherto impassible terrain. So did their campaigns in Gaul under Caesar, or Britain under Claudius. The Romans built roads wherever it would help them expand and control, and they could build roads almost anywhere.

And I'm not against patches of dense forests, those add character to the map. But really long stretches with no breaks in them just don't make sense -- not when an army could cut its way through if it had to. Same with mountains -- of course there should be impassable stretches, but there should also be passes at decent intervals, because there really are passes through most mountain ranges. Even Thermopylae could be flanked by a little-known path.

But can we have both a more open map and slower expansion? I think so. I believe if the Free people are strong enough, and with the new faction balance we'll have, it will be possible to open up the map a bit to give the player more strategic options AND to keep expansion slow. I don't see why both can't be done.

And why DID the Romans build roads? Because of the difficulty in traversing the terrain. You've proved my point. And this is 280BC, not 100AD. The Romans have never touched these areas, and the Germans sure weren't going to build them roads and cut them paths thru the forests.

Please understand, I don't care. But, the whole reason, or at least one BIG reason for changing the start date was: 'expansion is too fast and unhistorical'..quote.
I sit here night after night watching AI campaigns wondering: "What the heck's going on? Why has this changed so much?", and then realize that the reason is that many of the impediments to expansion are being removed.

[Spartan_Shame]

I would say definitely keep them. Yes it does create an identitiy for the mod, and yes it does represent the many free people, each living in the shadows of titans, but as a whole, can really cuase mayhem.

Sorry to contradict myself, but maybe Drtad is right as well, really open up the maps. After all, the Free People slow expansion, so we can have more access to other factions. If expansion gets to much, just beef them up a bit.

[Drtad]

Actually, the forest in Germany never bothered me. It's just that one mountain chain south of Armenia that is really making me twinge. I am sure there are many historical Armenian mountain chains that can be used as buffers. After all, it was in one of these chains that Tigranes and Mithridates trapped and destroyed Lucullus' army, killing 150 centurions and 24 high officers.

[pseudocaesar]

Drtad, no offense, but every post you make is about Armenia and how we have to perfect it, it seems like from your point of view you want an Armenia total war. Im not trying to be insulting but it would be good to hear more generalised comments about the mod as a whole and not just relating to Armenia.

[dvk901]

Drtad brings a point of view to this team that no one else can, and to a very neglected faction in this game. He can talk about Armenia all he wants.

[Drtad]

Drtad brings a point of view to this team that no one else can, and to a very neglected faction in this game. He can talk about Armenia all he wants.

I'm touched.

@Pseudocaesar: The reason I usually post about Armenia is for the following

1. I was invited to the team specifically for that.
2. It's my speciality.
3. I am Armenian, so it should be expected.

More to the point, that was my view of it as a whole. Germany needs alot of dense forest to inhibit movement and make you get lost. This is how Arminius was able to trap the Romans at Teutoberg Forest. I am just saying that that onemountain chain to the north of Commagene is just driving me nuts since it has no pass. It's not lke the place was impenetrable or something, and Germany needs the forests because Germany is a big place that was historically hard to enter, and that should be implemented somehow, be it by large ahistorical dense forests, or a lack of fords in rivers.

I think I made my point.

[tone]

I think there's a difference beteen slow empire expansion and slow military build up. I like slow empire expansion (against the odds, battling every inch of the way) but I don't like slow military build up where you have to wait for turn upon turn just to get your army together. That's the key difference, I think.

So yes, open the map up, and yes keep the free people strong. Hopefully we get to have our cake and eat it.

[cherryfunk]

And why DID the Romans build roads? Because of the difficulty in traversing the terrain. You've proved my point.

Damn you, dvk, damn you! But seriously, I think what we've both proved is that the game mechanics really don't accurately model the movement of large armies. Logistics in all its forms is sadly missing, and frankly I haven't been won over by EB's use of traits to simulate supply, so I guess we're stuck with the breezy unrealistic movement of the RTW game engine.

And yes, you're right, giant blocks of impassible terrain is one way to model the difficulty of marching a hundred thousand men and their food and equipment. It's just not a method that I like. Hopefully we can reach a happy medium where there are enough blocks to limit expansion choices, and yet enough openness to let the player decide how to get from Point A to Point B.

The blocks that I point out in screenshots are only the ones that I find most offensive; there are many more that I would prefer be removed, but can live with.

I'm not TRYING to be a pain in the butt! I promise!

Drtad brings a point of view to this team that no one else can, and to a very neglected faction in this game. He can talk about Armenia all he wants.

I agree, I love Drtad's posts about the east, because I LOVE playing those factions, yet I know almost nothing about them. The more info he gives, the better the mod gets. Don't stop, Drtad!

[pseudocaesar]

you misunderstand me, i appreciate his input and know he is far more worthwhile as a member than i am and i am not insulting him. i just merely say that he refers to Armenia in every possible post, which is a good thing, he just needs to really consolidate every issue and present it as a whole.

[cherryfunk]

Germany needs alot of dense forest to inhibit movement and make you get lost. This is how Arminius was able to trap the Romans at Teutoberg Forest.

The Romans weren't lost, they knew exactly where they were going and were making good time -- in fact the lack of scouts or proper march discipline indicates EASIER terrain, not more difficult terrain. They were ambushed, which is represented well in the game by having German units able to hide in SPARSE forests; they can't ambush from impassable forests because no unit can enter those at all. So lots of sparse forests that German units can hide in is a better depiction of reality.

[Drtad]

The Romans weren't lost, they knew exactly where they were going and were making good time -- in fact the lack of scouts or proper march discipline indicates EASIER terrain, not more difficult terrain. They were ambushed, which is represented well in the game by having German units able to hide in SPARSE forests; they can't ambush from impassable forests because no unit can enter those at all. So lots of sparse forests that German units can hide in is a better depiction of reality.

True, but unfortunately it is kinda hard to effectively have a historical devestating ambush. Perhaps all German units could be given the ability to hide in woods?

And Drtad, if you could, since I was thinking of this last night, would there be any special buildings that would be suitable for Armenia, suitable for their purpose or grandeur. Temples, gods....if you would, pack the Armenian thread with as much info as you can. After this patch...IF this dang patch....is releashed (), I really have a few things I want to learn and work on...Special buildings, the Free People, the new map, and basically culture specific issues and what can be done better with them.

Can do.

[dvk901]

There is a good point.....sparse forests do allow more ambushes.
And Drtad, if you could, since I was thinking of this last night, would there be any special buildings that would be suitable for Armenia, suitable for their purpose or grandeur. Temples, gods....if you would, pack the Armenian thread with as much info as you can. After this patch...IF this dang patch....is releashed (), I really have a few things I want to learn and work on...Special buildings, the Free People, the new map, and basically culture specific issues and what can be done better with them.

So anyone, anything provided would be useful in the appropriate thread for that faction, in the time period 220BC +

[Squid]

My $0.02 is this, the map should be open enough so that moving between any two points doesn't require a ridiculous amount of extra movement, but not so open that there are no barriers to movement; however, expansion should be slow as this makes a better mod.

[cherryfunk]

Perhaps all German units could be given the ability to hide in woods?

I think so. This would give them a bit of an edge on their home turf. With the Boii and Belgae on their borders, I think the Cimbri are going to have a tough time of it, at least until they can start producing iron-armed units.

[dvk901]

I think so. This would give them a bit of an edge on their home turf. With the Boii and Belgae on their borders, I think the Cimbri are going to have a tough time of it, at least until they can start producing iron-armed units.

What? You don't think they can kill things with broom handles and rocks?
Seriously, this would be a good reason to give them all of Scandinavia and Denmark, that way they have a well protected area to grow in before the Romans build all their roads up there and wipe them out. :

[cherryfunk]

Here's what I'm thinking: give them Denmark, and make it 2-3 regions. Give them 1 region in Scandinavia as their 'safety valve', and have another 2-3 regions in Scandinavia that they can expand into (like the Belgae can expand into Britain) so that if things get too hot on the continent, they can retreat into their vast forests and bide their time. So a Cimbri player will have 2 fronts, the northern front to subdue all the other Germans in Scandinavia, and the southern front to expand against -- or at least hold back -- the Celts.

That should make for a fun start to the campaign. And once they build up their population and start pumping out their powerful iron-armed units, they can come roaring out of their forest wilderness and loot and pillage!