Discussion: The Map

[ahowl11]

Here is where everything concerning the campaign map should be discussed.

For the first version we do not need to really worry about the faction starting positions since the first version is kind of like an introductory BETA to the public.

However the second version is where things will get interesting. I've asked Mausolos to take a look over the map and report his thoughts here. I suggest the rest of you do the same, especially those who claim to know their history
I will also take a gander at the map and together we will come up with a list of changes to be made. I am in contact with a mapper, I do not yet know if he will want to help, but hopefully he will

Before looking over the map and making suggestions, here are some details about the map and how it will fit this mod:
-It was originally the Mundus Magnus map made by ngr
-Philadelphos, the creator of Rome: Total History (RTH) completely revised the map to make it very historically and geographically accurate.
-He made the map based on 280 BC but in some areas such as Germania the term 'time is relevant' applies
-There are navigable rivers, many landbridges, and mountain passes which the AI exploits well
-Currently after much testing the AI expands well
-The mod will start in the year 280 BC

Here is a list of issues that we have found (only the top ten will be fixed for the next version)

-Iconium to Laodicea (not necessary, Laodicea was not founded until 261 BC. If anything, rename Iconium to Rhodas.)
-Londinium - Verlamium
-Mogontiacum? Alternative? Volubilis
-Argentorate? Alternative? Heraclea Pontica
-Arausio - Vienna
-Lugdunum - Bibracte
-Tarraco - Emporiae
-Toletum - Segobriga?
-Tigranocerta - Thospia

*Ongoing discussions

Other issues:
-Some Cities are too close to mountains (Thebes)

[Mausolos of Caria]

I can't access the game at the moment (see other thread, and I don't have the RTW disk here anyway). Maybe someone could make a few screenshots for me, of the problematic areas?

[Bercor]

Pics for Mausolos:
(Warning, there's a LOT of images)

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

In regards to the map, there's some glitches in cities near to mountains, with the mountain occuping half of the city (Thebes, for example), maybe a slight relocation is in order. Also, take Bagacum from the britons and give it to the gauls or make it rebel.

[Jubal]

One major niggle I have with these is why the settlements in Britain, France, etc are all the major settlements from much later into the Imperial era... Londinium, Camulodunum, etc, all Roman foundations. So when the game starts they shouldn't really even have been founded yet.

I mean, it might be a fair bit of work I guess, but it might be a nice feature to actually have native settlements/settlement names. It's not like this mod is currently that short of researchers or manpower after all!

[Bercor]

One major niggle I have with these is why the settlements in Britain, France, etc are all the major settlements from much later into the Imperial era... Londinium, Camulodunum, etc, all Roman foundations. So when the game starts they shouldn't really even have been founded yet.

I mean, it might be a fair bit of work I guess, but it might be a nice feature to actually have native settlements/settlement names. It's not like this mod is currently that short of researchers or manpower after all!

Well Camulodunum was there before the romans invaded and was the capital of the Trinovantes, so I guess it should stay. I agree with you about the other settlements though.

[Mausolos of Caria]

Cheers for the pictures! First of all the choice of cities looks splendid. A first idea:

Iconium It has been choose on Rome II as well, but actually I don't know why. There were much more significant towns in that region during our timeframe and I'd rather put another city...

Laodikeia (Laodicea) on the Lycus It was a rich city and even independent for a while. The problem is that Antiochos II only founded the town in 261 BC or later, but it seems likely that there was a little town before (let's not forget that ''founding'' a city often meant that there already was smaller city which would then get walls and a new name). As Iconium also seems to start without walls, we would only need to  move it northwards a tiny bit.
It was called Rhodas before.

Sure, under Roman rule Iconium was the main city in the area, but not yet in the 3rd century. It's not a mandatory change, though.


Aracillum and Asturica

I'm definitely not an expert for Spain, but a scientifically approved map only puts the cave of Altamira and Veleia near Aracillium for this time frame. Aracillum was definitely besieged by the Romans in 25 BC, though, when they fought against the Cantabrians. I know a guy from Galicia on TWC and will ask him about Asturica.

Apart from that I'll continue later but I think it might be necessary to go into the library, so I can use the Barrington Atlas.

[Mausolos of Caria]

Iberian Peninsula:

Corduba: Rome II puts it on as Kartuba, but if wikipedia can be trusted this was the name given to the town by the Carthaginians when they refounded it and before that nothing is known about its name and history, but there was a settlement. The Ancient History Encyclopedia (AHE from now on) map shows Astygi instead but confirms, that Corduba already existed. Both would be okay, I can't find a lot on Astygi either.

Toletum Only founded in 192 BC. I can't even find a city in that area, tough, perhaps the Carpetani didn't build proper towns? I'll try to look that up on the Barrington Atlas.

Osca was named Bolskan before the Roman conquest. Near it lies Bilbilis which might have been more important in 280 BC, according to AHE. Bolskan was the capital of the Illergetes, Bilbilis a Celtiberian town, which could make us choose Bolskan anyway, because we already have Numantia as a Celtiberian city.

Tarraco was called differently at this time. Either Cissis (Livius), Kissa (Polybios) or Kesse (RTR VII, coins). Need to check that on the Barrington, too, but I'm afraid they might have put Tarraco. Also, we are not 100% certain if Cissis actually WAS the same town as Tarraco.

Mastia seems to be legit, but it's mentioned as a Tartessian community and it's doubtful if it really was Carthago Nova/Cartagena. We could also put the Phoenician colony Akra Leuka/e North of it or, if we want a native town, Sexi, west of Mastia.

TBC with other parts of the map.

[ahowl11]

Excellent work Mausolos. Being a friend of Philadelphos, I know he created the map with the intentions of giving players the well known names. He wanted the mods time frame to be relevant so that Italy represented 280 BC but Gaul etc represented a later date. It can be changed.

[Jubal]

Yeah, my thought is possibly that Camulodunum should possibly replace Londinium if the London province can be extended north a little (and the town position could be moved a square south happily too), with what's now Caistor St Edmund (Venta Icenorum) being the capital of the East Anglian province (as the main Iceni settlement). I don't know, I don't have the relevant maps to check if that's a dumb idea - it would be quite nice to have the Iceni capital in there though.

EDIT: misremembered, it was Caistor not Thetford.

[ahowl11]

I believe Verlamium was a capital at that time

[Bercor]

I believe Verlamium was a capital at that time

We should choose between Verulamium or Camulodunum and the create Venta Icenorum in North East Anglia. Personally, I prefer the second, seing how it's more famous (Asterix in Britain, Camulodunum's rugby team, anyone?). And what about Eburacum? We need to replace that settlement aswell.

[Bercor]

[Mausolos of Caria]

Hehe 

Yeah of course that decision is up to you, but if we only want towns that actually existed during that time frame I would also look it up for the rest of the map. So... should I? 

As for Galicia and Asturia... In Galicia, according to my friend, the best choice for a tribal town would be either Brigantium (the native name isn't known, though, but Rome II also puts Brigantium) or Lugo, which is still named Lugo today, but seeing that it was named after the Celtic deity Lugus it seems likely that it also had this name back then (the Romans called it Lucus Augusti). The Roman capital of this region was Bracara Augusta (Braga).

[ahowl11]

Yes you should! I rather have the native settlements since I want everything to be relevant to 280 BC for the final Grand Campaign version.
It's going to be tough in regards to Britannia, Germania, Dacia and Sarmatia though.

Philadelphos pretty much gave the most knowledgeable locations.

Remember this though, altering too many locations and settlements will have it's effects on trade routes and AI expansion. I've learned from Philadelphos and Anarchon (who will be doing the mapping soon) that there is a fine line between historical accuracy and gameplay.

[Mausolos of Caria]

Aye I can really understand why he did it. So far all alternative settlements I proposed are really close to the other ones, apart from the two for Mastia I'll keep it in mind.