Small changes for authentic bridge-, settlement- and border-placements

Rhyuus

Recruit
Best answers
0
Small changes for authentic bridge-, settlement- and border-placements

Wandering through Calradia I came across some places where the placement of bound settlements, borders and bridges is questionable.
Some small changes like swapping 2 bound settlements or moving a bridge can make a huge difference for explaining how the counties would have developed and why settlements/castles/bridges are where they are.

Some thoughts about this:
  • Bound settlements should have a direct connection to their castle/city within their own county. Currently some bound settlements are cut off their castle/city by a river or a mountain and the villagers have to cross the neighbours land to get to their castle/city.
  • The bound settlements would have developed (1) were they have the resources but they would have stayed (2) where they are defendable and where they can be overlooked.
  • Rivers and mountains are natural borders and were often used as a defensive feature, but currently a lot of counties in Calradia don't make use of their geography. Instead some counties are split apart. Some settlements are literally served their neighbours on a silver plate begging to be raided.
So here are my examples for minimal changes that help pushing the realism of this beautiful world:
(maps thanks to Vesper_: https://forums.taleworlds.com/index.php?threads/🦅-map-of-calradia-1084-update-15-04-20.385748/)

1. Thorios
a bridge might be missing here to hold this county together:


2. Husn Fulq
another bridge to maintain power in a cut-off region:


3. Epicrotea and Mecalovea
Macelovea is so small and so close to Epicrotea, it doesn't seem to be a serious independent county:


4. Phycaon + neighbors
Phycaon needs a connection to it's bound settlement Spotia, if there was no bridge, they would have claimed Chanopsis:


5. Rhotae
some changes considering road connections and natural borders:


6. Khuzait Mountains
a huge natural border:


7. Tyal and Urikskala
a very provoking position:


8. Drapand
a lot of natural borders:
(...if I had to choose a position for Drapand Castle, i would place it besides the bridge that holds my land together...)


9. Rhemtoil
a risky position for a village:


10. western Battania
the most chaotic locations and divisions on the map:


-> What do you think about it? Do you have similar examples?

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Dannydehz

Recruit
Best answers
0
Completely agree and a lot of good suggestions. It seems like most of the natural borders are ignored. A lot of castles are also placed in terrible spots. For example, I think in your 5th post, south-west of Jamarys, there is a castle all the way on the southern coast, but it is protecting nothing. The castle should be more to the north (where Arpotis is), with its bound villagers to its south.

Combined with the strategic positions, I also think the products produced often don't make sense. Olives and grapes are produced in provinces that have a permanent winter, for example. I believe the developers have attempted to give every kingdom/region a diverse economy, but the game needs a lot more specialization of goods in certain regions.
 

Rhyuus

Recruit
Best answers
0
...south-west of Jamarys, there is a castle all the way on the southern coast, but it is protecting nothing. The castle should be more to the north (where Arpotis is), with its bound villagers to its south.
True, Oristocorys Castle would have a perfect strategic position with it's bound settlements to the south.

...I also think the products produced often don't make sense. Olives and grapes are produced in provinces that have a permanent winter, for example. I believe the developers have attempted to give every kingdom/region a diverse economy, but the game needs a lot more specialization of goods in certain regions.
Yes, you're not the only one who is surprised about the Winter-Olives, etc. I've seen some threads pointing out single villages.
 

Old One-Eye

Sergeant at Arms
M&BWBWF&S
Best answers
0
Very good suggestions! I've noted some of them myself, especially 1, 2 and 5 are very messy currently. The Tyal area is easily accessed from Khuzait and Northern Empire territory but in order for Sturgia to project force into the Tyal area it has to pass through a thin bottleneck around Glavstrom village that often gets swarmed by Sea Raiders and Bandits. I think all your solutions are good but am especially fond of Husn Fulq and Phycaeon.

A small note is that the splitting of the Empire is a very recent event at game start, so bridges and borders etc between North, West and South doesn't need to make sense as they have not been enemies until recently.
 

Rhyuus

Recruit
Best answers
0
Very good suggestions! I've noted some of them myself, especially 1, 2 and 5 are very messy currently... I think all your solutions are good but am especially fond of Husn Fulq and Phycaeon.
Thank you! Yes, Husn Fulq and Phycaeon are minimal changes that make a big difference. (I even think, if Phycaon had no bridge, Chanopsis would have developed into a bigger city because it is a real crossing point.)
... splitting of the Empire is a very recent event at game start, so bridges and borders etc between North, West and South doesn't need to make sense...
I shouldn't have called it enemies land... but it still would make sense for the empire to subdivide it's land in a way that every province(/county/...) had connecting roads and bridges within their borders and that every single one is (more or less) independent and defendable in case of invasion.
 

Maahes

Recruit
Best answers
0
Oristocorys Castle's location only makes sense if there is naval movement in the game, to provide some sort of naval base for transports going from Zeonica to Ortysia. If you think about it, Jalmarys is in the heart of imperial lands, so there's no real reason to keep a large fortress by the river, especially when the enemy would have to push through Garontar/Ortysia from the south and Lageta/Hertogea/Rhotae in the west. But without naval transportation in the game, yeah, Oristocorys should be further north by Vinela.

Poros is in a mindboggling location. I get it, it was probably a castle originally to protect the grassland villages, then got larger as it protected trade moving west. Buuuuut, there's this annoying valley pass just north of it making its trade protection useless, so you may as well move it to be just southeast of Canoros, so it would've been overseeing trade in the valley and east/west. I get why there's the cluster of Vostrum/Lavenia/Danustica/Odrysa to prevent an Aserai steamroll, but if the devs don't move Vostrum to the mouth of the river to its west you may as well move Poros nearby.

Since the game lore has the Khuzait taking the eastern province from the empire, I'm kind of thinking the empire started at Phycaon, which means if you have a capital city upriver, you're most likely going to have a city at the mouth of the river to protect/get rich off of trade going upstream. Poros or Vostrum should really go there.

Another big nit-pick of mine is Argoron. Why is it there? Like, at all? There's this big ol' island and it's not a port city, but...a river one? But wait, if you look closely that river doesn't end nicely, but rather with rapids. Who in their right mind would build a city there, let alone who would live there? I get the balance reasons to keep the city focused to protect Amprela, so I think the easiest thing to do is move the rapids to the south part of the island so Argoron can be a river port city.
 
Last edited:

Rhyuus

Recruit
Best answers
0
some good ideas

Oristocorys Castle's location only makes sense if there is naval movement in the game, to provide some sort of naval base for transports going from Zeonica to Ortysia. If you think about it, Jalmarys is in the heart of imperial lands, so there's no real reason to keep a large fortress by the river, especially when the enemy would have to push through Garontar/Ortysia from the south and Lageta/Hertogea/Rhotae in the west. But without naval transportation in the game, yeah, Oristocorys should be further north by Vinela.
Yes with naval movement the location could make sense. We are also collecting some ideas for ships here (maybe TW gets inspired by this): https://forums.taleworlds.com/index.php?threads/ships-in-bannerlord.421964/

Poros is in a mindboggling location. I get it, it was probably a castle originally to protect the grassland villages, then got larger as it protected trade moving west. Buuuuut, there's this annoying valley pass just north of it making its trade protection useless, so you may as well move it to be just southeast of Canoros, so it would've been overseeing trade in the valley and east/west. I get why there's the cluster of Vostrum/Lavenia/Danustica/Odrysa to prevent an Aserai steamroll, but if the devs don't move Vostrum to the mouth of the river to its west you may as well move Poros nearby.

Since the game lore has the Khuzait taking the eastern province from the empire, I'm kind of thinking the empire started at Phycaon, which means if you have a capital city upriver, you're most likely going to have a city at the mouth of the river to protect/get rich off of trade going upstream. Poros or Vostrum should really go there.
True, trading route crossings and river mouths would be the best locations for cities. Maybe they rethink some positions with roads in mind. Yangbangs thread about roads caught their attention: https://forums.taleworlds.com/index...radia-needs-roads-in-detail-heres-how.415656/

Another big nit-pick of mine is Argoron. Why is it there? Like, at all? There's this big ol' island and it's not a port city, but...a river one? But wait, if you look closely that river doesn't end nicely, but rather with rapids. Who in their right mind would build a city there, let alone who would live there? I get the balance reasons to keep the city focused to protect Amprela, so I think the easiest thing to do is move the rapids to the south part of the island so Argoron can be a river port city.
think it's an island, rivers usually don't split. Yes, Argoron could make sense as a port city.
 
Last edited:

Terco_Viejo

Spanish Gifquisition
Sergeant Knight at Arms
Best answers
0
@Rhyuus
Strategic settlement and deployment according to the orography; I absolutely agree and swear that this is of great interest to Taleworlds (@MArdA TaleWorlds ). I see that this thread can result in a huge amount of feedback and I propose you a task (if you want); which is the following. Just as you have developed sectors of the map to let us know your concerns, I encourage you to do the same but on a global scale (the whole @Vesper_ 's map) and arranging the road network in a logical way (I see that you have a certain background in the matter).

This interactive map will help you:
ORBIS: The Stanford Geospatial Network Model of the Roman World (click on the map image to access the interactive map)

Also, I would like that when you have a moment you take a look at this thread: (Debate Area) Is the map really designed to use navigation effective?
 

Rhyuus

Recruit
Best answers
0
Terco_Viejo & MArdA TaleWorlds, thank you for the interest. Your words are very encouraging indeed. I have the layer file of the map in front of me… let’s see how this goes

But I have to say:
  • I can’t tell you how long it takes / how much time I have for it / how much I can make …but I’ll let you know if I come up with something good.
  • I’m not a graphic designer, I try to use the pnd-layer-file but please don’t expect a map as beautiful as Vesper_’s.
  • I also haven’t studied history or geography. My background only comes from interest and attention (...museums, travelling, docus, a lot of hours viewing and drawing maps/castles/… in my childhood/youth....)
Terco_Viejo I haven't read all yet, but for what i've seen so far, the Orbis side seems to be a great source to get inspiration for the road system and you also brougth up some good points about the rivers!

MArdA TaleWorlds one thing I would like to say to the design team: Calradia’s physical map is easily one of the most beautiful maps I’ve seen in a game! The inspiration from Europe, northern Africa, western Asia and the attention to plates, winds, climate zones, etc make it so believable! simply beautiful.
 

Old One-Eye

Sergeant at Arms
M&BWBWF&S
Best answers
0
With regard to the original topic, not a proposed change but rather just an observation from the game as it stands now. (Beta 1.4.1)

Ormangard Castle.
It sits in a canyon in northern Vlandia which connects to both Battania and the contested land with two Vlandian castles and one Sturgian at game start. No matter who holds it, anyone can pass through the canyon, friend or enemy does not matter. But with a normal-sized garrison (ca 250 troops in my game) and a player-controlled army staying in the castle, you can deny exit or entry to northern Vlandia by any enemy for a very long time. The only criteria is that the AI does not like the odds of beating the combined strength of army + garrison. Villagers, bandits, enemy-aligned caravans and armies will basically bounce when trying to pass through the canyon. I assume the effect would be the same if an AI army stays in the castle.

I am aware that the AI count garrison forces as an available ally and attacks when it shouldn't etc, but here I think it works.

I personally hope this can be kept (if AI miscalculation for garrisons is a bug and not intended behaviour) because it adds a strategic layer for Vlandian conflict. If you are Sturgia or Battania you can choke the northern Vlandian villages and castles, denying any force less than ca 400 strong or so to pass through. If you are Vlandia, this is your most important castle to control. The only other way in or out for Vlandia is to go all the way around the mountains. It also makes sense that it is possible to traverse the canyon if there is no mobile element present in the castle as it is built into the rockface of the southern part of it. A garrison guards the castle, not the surrounding area.

This is imo a great example of how castles can be placed in strategically important spots so that castles become something more than just objectives with little strategic value. Hopefully we can get more of these!
 

Bulwaii

Recruit
Best answers
0
If i could also make a suggestion
You have Caleus Castle (slightly North of the above mentioned Ormanfard Castle) and the two bound villages which are vlandian but are cut off to their city Rovalt. The Villagers need to undertake a quite risky road to reach Rovalt and inbetween you have a battanian village.
I think there should be a other way for the villagers of Deriat and Caleus to reach Rovalt.


Kuruluk which is bound to Tepes Castle I think you should switch to the other side of the River
also with Baltakhand move the city a little more north and the bound town asalig also of the north side of the River because it would make more sense.
Fisnar and Kaysar should be switched. So the "new fisnar" is bound to baltakhand and Kaysar is a little bit closer to Kaysar castle and it would make more sens (in my opinion) with the borders between kaysar castle and Baltakhand.

And +1 for Rhyuus
 

Rhyuus

Recruit
Best answers
0
If i could also make a suggestion
You have Caleus Castle (slightly North of the above mentioned Ormanfard Castle) and the two bound villages which are vlandian but are cut off to their city Rovalt. The Villagers need to undertake a quite risky road to reach Rovalt and inbetween you have a battanian village.
I think there should be a other way for the villagers of Deriat and Caleus to reach Rovalt.


Kuruluk which is bound to Tepes Castle I think you should switch to the other side of the River
also with Baltakhand move the city a little more north and the bound town asalig also of the north side of the River because it would make more sense.
Fisnar and Kaysar should be switched. So the "new fisnar" is bound to baltakhand and Kaysar is a little bit closer to Kaysar castle and it would make more sens (in my opinion) with the borders between kaysar castle and Baltakhand.

And +1 for Rhyuus
@Bulwaii you're right, in terms of accesability Caleus is like a enclave for Vlandia. The Sturgian Nevyansk has the same problem... and in almost all savegames we can see how instable this region is ... a real war hotspot for Vlandia,Sturgia and Battania. I think It would especially help the Sturgians if they don't have to worry about a enclave.

If you're interested, in the meantime i've made a thread with this kind of suggestions for the whole map:
I've also thought about Caleus and Tepes that you've mentioned
 

Chiya

Regular
M&BWBWF&SNWVC
Best answers
1
So would you like to make whole of the map?
And would you like you make an update for this map? Because something is wrong with warbands era.
 

Rhyuus

Recruit
Best answers
0
So would you like to make whole of the map?
And would you like you make an update for this map? Because something is wrong with warbands era.
@Chiya I think it was even more important to describe the ideas for the changes than posting my suggestion for the whole map (=> whole map suggestion). After all TW has do make the decisions and changes.
The adjustment to Warband positions was addressed (in the other thread) by forum moderator Piconi and Terco_Viejo. Terco even posted a map suggesting city positions which are closer to the Warband-locations (his update of my suggestion)! :wink:
 

Chiya

Regular
M&BWBWF&SNWVC
Best answers
1

Chiya

Regular
M&BWBWF&SNWVC
Best answers
1

With social science.
Bannerlord mountains.
Warband mountains.
Rhodok's dumbies.
Valleys etc.
Streaks.
Warband rivers.
Bannerlord rivers.
 
Last edited: