RFC Classical World

no thats what I'm going with. I only moved 1 tile in Sicily, aside from moving it north. I don't think they are distorted any more than the tiles make necessary. Italy was much too long before. the toe of it was far to the south of features it should be north of. Italy does bend more to the northeast after you pass Rome. the coastline south of Rome should face south more than it faces west. I agree the old Italy was a nicer looking shape, but the new Italy is in its proper position relative to the other major features in the area.
 
Could you make Italy skinnier in that case? Cut off some tiles on its west coast, that'll restore it to its proper proportions. I also think Sicily kind of looked better with its old shape; in any case, its east coast should be straight at this scale, otherwise it just looks wrong.
 
the Rome city site is on that western bulge. if you move it 1 tile east it really squeezes Neapolis. also I think Italy just needs those tiles or its too small. I thought the shape was weird at first but I'm getting used to it. as for Sicily, it does have a distinct northeastern peninsula.
 
So let them start earlier with only 1 core Province Parthia. With less troops. Let human player experience gradual rise of empire.

The Parthians may have been independent before then, but they didn't really have a large scale influence before Mithradates, similar to the Bactrians and Tocharians. Personally I'd agree with srpt's approach to the Parthians of only spawning when they began to expand at a rapid pace and became a true civilization, rather than a tribe.

If you made them spawn earlier then I think they would just become far to easy for a human player, given how powerful their UP is.

Even if this was not exact situation in 320 BC more than a century of Antigonid rule afterwards would be more accurately resembled with a capital in Europe not Asia!

Maybe give the AI Antigonids a conqueror event for Greece around 300BC? It would definitely make them a tougher challenge for human Seleucid, Ptolemy and Rome, as at the moment Athens and Pella are usually an easy grab for any human player that wants them. I guess it would be possible to code for the Antigonids switching their capital to Pella once they capture it.
 
the Rome city site is on that western bulge. if you move it 1 tile east it really squeezes Neapolis. also I think Italy just needs those tiles or its too small. I thought the shape was weird at first but I'm getting used to it. as for Sicily, it does have a distinct northeastern peninsula.

You could just move Rome NE 1 tile. Italy is actually pretty small and thin in terms of land size; you could just remove some of those hills if Rome becomes too poor (it's not like it has that many grassland tiles at the moment anyway).
 
the Rome city site is on that western bulge. if you move it 1 tile east it really squeezes Neapolis. also I think Italy just needs those tiles or its too small. I thought the shape was weird at first but I'm getting used to it. as for Sicily, it does have a distinct northeastern peninsula.

Personally I would look to have Tarranto or Brundisium instead of Neapolis. Whilst Neapolis was an important centre of culture, Tarranto and Brundisium were much more important from a strategic point of view, as they were the ports which connected Italy to Greece and the east. Personally I never found Neapolis as Rome, as it has no connection to the east, and so puts Rome at a major strategic disadvantage.

Brundisium is reported as having a population of 100,000, which would make it close to Neapolis in size and importance. It also remained important as the Lombards and others invaded in the 5th century, with the Byzantines using it as a port to reinforce Italy and maintain the Exarchate.

With the changes you've made to Italy, I would say you could put Brundisium in the middle of the 'heel', move Rome to the east, and thus remove that bulge, which doesn't look great imo.
 
You could just move Rome NE 1 tile. Italy is actually pretty small and thin in terms of land size; you could just remove some of those hills if Rome becomes too poor (it's not like it has that many grassland tiles at the moment anyway).

Rome doesn't look right to me when its not at the same latitude as the southern end of Corsica and Corsica can't move north.

Personally I would look to have Tarranto or Brundisium instead of Neapolis. Whilst Neapolis was an important centre of culture, Tarranto and Brundisium were much more important from a strategic point of view, as they were the ports which connected Italy to Greece and the east. Personally I never found Neapolis as Rome, as it has no connection to the east, and so puts Rome at a major strategic disadvantage.

Brundisium is reported as having a population of 100,000, which would make it close to Neapolis in size and importance. It also remained important as the Lombards and others invaded in the 5th century, with the Byzantines using it as a port to reinforce Italy and maintain the Exarchate.

With the changes you've made to Italy, I would say you could put Brundisium in the middle of the 'heel', move Rome to the east, and thus remove that bulge, which doesn't look great imo.

I like this idea. it could solve both issues. I'll check when I get home.

come to think of it, there really should be a pre-placed Greek city in south Italy in 320BC.

I think I like Taras/Tarentum best
 
Maybe give the AI Antigonids a conqueror event for Greece around 300BC? It would definitely make them a tougher challenge for human Seleucid, Ptolemy and Rome, as at the moment Athens and Pella are usually an easy grab for any human player that wants them. I guess it would be possible to code for the Antigonids switching their capital to Pella once they capture it.

It's only 20 year difference and then Macedonia was Antigonid for 100 years. Not a very big stretch to give them Pella as capital.

Too many conquerors events are rather unrealistic. I would script unit spawning only in extraordinary situations...
 
It's only 20 year difference and then Macedonia was Antigonid for 100 years. Not a very big stretch to give them Pella as capital.

Too many conquerors events are rather unrealistic. I would script unit spawning only in extraordinary situations...

Not sure how giving them a city they didn't control at that time is realistic, but giving them an army to conquer the city isn't? Personally I think spawning units for the AI is fine if it increases the challenge for the human player.

Giving them Pella from the start would be a bad idea as it would unbalance the mod for the human player. The Antigonids are currently very challenging but well balanced, so I don't think their starting situation should be changed.
 
I like this idea. it could solve both issues. I'll check when I get home.

come to think of it, there really should be a pre-placed Greek city in south Italy in 320BC.

I think I like Taras/Tarentum best

Sounds good to me - I think Rome could do with a slightly stronger starting location in Italy. As it stands, Aquileia and Neapolis aren't strong enough production sites, so in order to get a good start on the 1st UHV I usually found Toletum in Spain with the second settler and only settle southern Italy after 75BC.
 
Italy's shape looks much better now. Perhaps the tile 1S3W of Ravenna (south of the marble) should also be made ocean? It's not like any city works it anyway.
 
Rome and Tarentum cover southern Italy perfectly:

Spoiler :

Looks good, although I would say Tarentum should be 1W and Rome 1N to be more historically positioned and have Rome on the seven hills. Also maybe move the sheep near Tarentum back onto the hills as Italy is lacking grasslands around that area.
 
Few more python exceptions to report (attached). The last one was annoying as it meant I couldn't see my income or expenses breakdown through F2.

I also think the 1st Arab UHV should be made more challenging (and realistic). I would include Makan, Armenia, Sogdiana, Sindh, Mauretania, Baetica, Iberia and Lusitania, so you capture the full Umayyad Caliphate. All those territories should be made historical for the Arabs, except Iberia which should be contested with the Visigoths.

It may seem too much, but imo it's very doable, particularly as you flip good production sites in Syria and can usually collapse the Sassanids pretty easily. Tho' I think the Levant should start with a few more pre placed farms and cottages / hamlets, and there should be a road between Alexandria and Cyrene, to reflect the good Roman infrastructure the Arabs inherited.

Oh, and the 2nd Arab UHV seems to be checking wrong - it goes to "YES" as soon as you are first in tech, rather than waiting until 800AD.
 

Attachments

  • Python exception.jpg
    Python exception.jpg
    170.7 KB · Views: 68
  • Exception 2.jpg
    Exception 2.jpg
    222.6 KB · Views: 64
  • Exception 3.png
    Exception 3.png
    129.2 KB · Views: 72
  • Exception 4.jpg
    Exception 4.jpg
    175.5 KB · Views: 50
Hi srpt.

Here you find city names for China Proper only.

I still see the old terrain in Manchuria and Xinjiang in the file. When you have that done I can provide cities also for that.

At least for now, the city distribution for Yuezhi/Tocharians and Gojoseon, Gogoryeo doesn't seem to be accurate.
 

Attachments

Italy's shape looks much better now. Perhaps the tile 1S3W of Ravenna (south of the marble) should also be made ocean? It's not like any city works it anyway.

It would very useful for Genoa or for a city that would be founded there. I often found in that location as a later civ and I think we shouldn't shave too much land off Italy since Italy is one of the most important parts of Europe in this time.
 
I'm very close to being able to do an update with the new maps. the 4 WBS files are finished except for some starting unit balancing, the city name map is updated and I've started the settler maps. I think it may be ready tomorrow.

this update will not include the Xingjiang and Mongolia changes requested by thrash4ever and Sitalkas. they will happen but I wanted to get these changes up first.
 
Back
Top Bottom