Minor Cities Project

[ahowl11]

This is where our research will be stored for our minor cities project. For discussion on the topic, let me know and I'll invite you to our discussion on slack.

[Jubal]

What be this?

[ahowl11]

Check the slack for details jubal@rtrproject is your sign in

[Jubal]

Will do at some point soon - sorry, ultra swamped at the moment and not terribly well so I'm lagging with everything.

[ahowl11]

For now, I am going to put this project on hold (I had added a few cities in Italy) due to the fact that it may not be a good idea to do this. Some cities like Ancona, Corfinium, Croton, etc are necessary and there would be room, but others like Tibur and Praeneste, Nola, Cales etc just are too small and too insignificant. Once Muizer and co. develop a working map we can revisit this.

[Gigantus]

Are you using permanent forts or trading resources?

The choice is fairly simple (unless RTW cannot handle permanent forts to start with):
- the AI cannot handle forts
- they create path finding problems due to their ZoC especially if too dense
- they will create massive income loss (devastation) for the AI if the region changes ownership and the forts are not taken (which the AI doesn't do)

Recommendation:
- use trading resources, it even simulates income from those cities. Simply change the model and the pip for the resource together with description.

[Mausolos of Caria]

The idea with trade resources sounds very reasonable. Maybe we should go that way and test it out with just Italy first?

[ahowl11]

I think it is a good idea too, however I still feel like the most imporant cities should have a fort with a garrison. I have committed and pushed a small portion of minor cities to the western half of the map:
region Area106A
famine_threat 0
fort    117 121      ; Brindisi

region Area107A
famine_threat 0
fort    114 112      ; Croton

region Area147A
famine_threat 0
fort    77 144      ; Taurasia

region Area115A
famine_threat 0
fort    98 107      ; Panormus

region Area119A
famine_threat 0
fort    83 102     ; Utica

;region Area120A
;famine_threat 0
;fort    87 91      ; Thapsus

region Area124A
famine_threat 0
fort    83 83      ; Tacape

region Area118A
famine_threat 0
fort    53 118      ; Palma

;region Area137A
;famine_threat 0
;fort    48 128      ; Tarraco

;region Area144A
;famine_threat 0
;fort    58 137      ; Narbo

region Area147A
famine_threat 0
fort    67 142      ; Arausio                        
            
region Area146A
famine_threat 0
fort    66 150      ; Lugdunum

region Area152A
famine_threat 0
fort    44 168      ; Condate   

region Area151A
famine_threat 0
fort    61 168      ; Lutetia Parisiorum

region Area149A
famine_threat 0
fort    66 161      ; Alesia

The ones that are commented out are due to the fact that they are already present as forts.

Now they need a garrison to be effective, as well as the spy with an immortal and immobile trait but its something to start with. I think if we limit the amount of these garrisoned forts, and use the rest as ports and resources, itd be a good mix. A nice idea might be to put the forts on top of the resources so that they generate income as well as providing a chokepoint.

However, I fear Gigantus will be right due to his experience, and we may not be able to have any garrisoned forts without some bad gameplay, but it's worth a try.

I will add more after work today.

[Gigantus]

Keeping permanent forts at a limit is fine, having them at choke points however isn't a good idea as the AI tends to vacate forts asap and they will remain in the ownership of the previous occupant, regardless of region ownership. The AI hardly attacks forts, so putting one at a choke point is close to making the choke point impassable. You will also have to make forts unbuildable because otherwise you will end up with more forts then raisins in in Christmas cake.

Building forts on a resource is a classic M2 exploit: simply place 20 merchants into it and you have a safe source of income.

[ahowl11]

Well I don't want to purposely put them in choke points, but lets test to see if RTW differs from M2TW much, if at all.

It's too bad merchants aren't in RTW, or else that would be a neat idea.

[Gigantus]

Regarding resources: does stacking them (same co-ordinates) work in RTW? In M2TW only the last listed resource shows on the map but the other resources (same or different) are reflected in the trading screen.

[ahowl11]

We can definitely try it, but for what reason?

[Gigantus]

assorted resources: Setting a region as major trading hub with multiple resources without sprinkling the individual resources allover the place.
identical resources: increasing income for a specific resource without sprinkling the individual resources allover the place.

Limited application, I know, just a thought that crossed my mind when discussion the trade forts

[ahowl11]

Thats a cool idea, would be a lot easier for placing resources at least.

Anyways here are the rest of the minor cities for testing, honestly its just nine more. I don't want to add too many and then remove them all. Now we just need to garrison them, add a general and add an immortal/immobile spy. Then we can see how they really work. If they work okay then we can start sprinkling more in. I had an idea with all the ports. Many ports in our map are accurately placed cities. I think itd be cool to add a fort on the pixel next to them, so that they can truly be represented. You could take an enemies fort-port and blockade it to choke it, and vice versa. Plus it'd be an interesting layout for some siege battles having a port and fort on the battle map.
Like I said, it's all for just testing purposes.
If we were to use cities as a resource, what would you propose which resource should be replaced?

region Area199A
famine_threat 0
fort     142 111        ; Thebes
               
region Area200A
famine_threat 0
fort     141 105        ; Argos       

    region Area201A
famine_threat 0
fort     136 104        ; Megalopolis

region Area178A
famine_threat 0
fort     122 145        ; Sirmium

region Area192A
famine_threat 0
fort     133 160        ; Dacidava

region Area249A
famine_threat 0
fort     189 22        ; Napata

region Area253A
famine_threat 0
fort     211 148        ; Phasis

region Area278A
famine_threat 0
fort     286 104        ; Persepolis

region Area159A
famine_threat 0
fort     52 217        ; Devana

A few notes:
Napata needs to replace Axum as a city
Devana is a current city, these coordinates above are the accurate ones. Devana's current place is actually Alauna.

[Gigantus]

If we were to use cities as a resource, what would you propose which resource should be replaced?

Fish, I think one can safely assume that any port should have some fishing industry - and you have to place the resource on land anyhow to make trading use of it. Mildly superfluous I would think and therefore ideal for the cities.