Moderator: Cartographers

Originally I intended to have only 1 space - The Barbarian Tribes. But after much consideration on the subject I ended realizing that might a good idea to have a second line from where you could retake the 'Base Tribe' - It would make it harder for the emperor to control these points from his seat.Industrial Helix wrote:I think i favor the second version, but only if you put the same painting texture that you used int he first example. Red is more Roman to me.
Out of curiosity... what's the logic behind having two Barbarian spaces instead of one?
I agree with this method for the Barbarians... but I wonder if maybe Scots would do better for where the Saxons currently are and I'd like to see the Alamanni as one of the tribes... after all, its where half of Europe gets the word German from.Kabanellas wrote:As for the barbarian tribes that should be included here, I think we should keep the more representative ones even if they might be a little 'offside' in this time-scope.
Like I said before: this map is not totally restrained to a closed period in Europe and Roman History - the players will make their own History
Thanks a lot HelixIndustrial Helix wrote:This one is ready for a move... here's hoping for a speedy trip through the gameplay workshop.
I might be wrong, but as far as I know the Alamanni never really crossed the borders and settled in the empire regions......Industrial Helix wrote: I'd like to see the Alamanni as one of the tribes... after all, its where half of Europe gets the word German from.
yes they crossed and banished Romans from area known as Agri Decumates. it was around Rhyne river. but they were never too important and later they were included to Frankish Empire.Kabanellas wrote:I might be wrong, but as far as I know the Alamanni never really crossed the borders and settled in the empire regions......Industrial Helix wrote: I'd like to see the Alamanni as one of the tribes... after all, its where half of Europe gets the word German from.

Diocesis capitals will not start neutral so they shouldn't' yield any bonus alone. Also, I don't think that conceptually, Barbarians having autodeploy-bonus would mean that capitals should have it tootheBastard wrote:when Barbarian outpost are autodeploy, also capitals of Dioceses could be...
than Romans are realy in assKabanellas wrote:Diocesis capitals will not start neutral so they shouldn't' yield any bonus alone. Also, I don't think that conceptually, Barbarians having autodeploy-bonus would mean that capitals should have it tootheBastard wrote:when Barbarian outpost are autodeploy, also capitals of Dioceses could be...
This map is unfortunately not going anywhere until it has met the gameplay standard. Broadly speaking, that means:jigger1986 wrote:Just release it now! It looks incredible and I cant wait to play it.
Understandable that you don't want to make many graphical changes if the gameplay will mutate wildlyKabanellas wrote:the big part of what you stated here (very valid concerns I might add) belong to the graphics part and I would feel more comfortable of leaving that study for when we settled the gameplay - I'm used to see things changing a lot and graphics become outdated due to game-play changes...
I share this worry as well. I'm not a huge fan of how the Barbarian tribes are all going to get into each other's hair right away, except one. Personally I'd like to see them more spread out, but history also plays a part here... still I think there are historical incursions that could be included that might serve this purpose, if the idea worked with the concept that Kabs has in mind.Nola_Lifer wrote:I think you need to spread the Barb tribes out more or get rid of Sassanid or add Muslim/N/ African tribes. All of the Barb tribes are in Europe and right on top of each other while Sassanid stands by itself. Seems a bit unbalanced there.
Maps can be bigger now, so space might not be a problem anymore. I don't personally mind the lack of accuracy arising from merged provinces (maybe you could go with the "_____ & _____" format?) if we can keep the map more "historical" and less looking like a chess board with all the codes (AF IV) and stuff.Kabanellas wrote:ohhh... How I wish. Unfortunatly I don't have the space for it especially on the small map. Also, I've merged some provinces in some areas of the Empire, so, if for some we could actually refer to them by their accurate historical name on the merged ones we couldn't.Rodion wrote:Should be a great map, Nuno!
One thing I'd like to see is territories with real city/province names instead of codes like AFI, AFII, AFIII, AFIV and AFV. Do you think that can be done?
I support this. I'd prefer territory names to alpha-numeric code.Rodion wrote:Kabanellas wrote:Rodion wrote: Maps can be bigger now, so space might not be a problem anymore. I don't personally mind the lack of accuracy arising from merged provinces (maybe you could go with the "_____ & _____" format?) if we can keep the map more "historical" and less looking like a chess board with all the codes (AF IV) and stuff.