Give the "Crete" & "Cyprus" cities their names

I think it would be cool if the "Crete" and "Cyprus" cities used their actual names, those being Knossos and Arsinoe, respectively, rather than simply using their map names.

I totally agree with you. It would appear more acurate, and the game deserves it. But to do that, you would also have to give the right name to Persian, Babylon and Egipt.
 
I think it would be cool if the "Crete" and "Cyprus" cities used their actual names, those being Knossos and Arsinoe, respectively, rather than simply using their map names.
Great idea. It gives the game a little more depth and life to use the original names, and it makes the game both more intuitive and fun if the zone & city don't have the same name, any time that another name for the city is available.

For example, Babylon/Babylon. The name Babylon comes to us from a the Greek name for the city (and for it's empire), but the native name was in Akkadian, not Greek. I think it would be cool if the more Akkadian looking name of "Bābili(m)" was used for the name of the city itself.

Obviously this wouldn't work for Rome, since the City, the zone and the Empire were all named the same thing, even during the life of the empire, but anytime we can get past current common names and get back to a more original name for the city locations would be a nice touch in the game.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Crixler
I totally agree with you. It would appear more acurate, and the game deserves it. But to do that, you would also have to give the right name to Persian, Babylon and Egipt.
Not necessarily, making one change doesn't automatically require another change, as long as you use the same logic in every region/civilization.

There's nothing wrong with using he current best known name for the zone/civilization/empire, (e.g. Babylon and Egypt) while giving the individual locations inside of those zones more historical or at least individually flavored names. The idea is not to turn the game into course in historical names, only to give a little more flavor to the game by trying to avoid having cities with the same name as the region they're located in.
 
Not necessarily, making one change doesn't automatically require another change, as long as you use the same logic in every region/civilization.

There's nothing wrong with using he current best known name for the zone/civilization/empire, (e.g. Babylon and Egypt) while giving the individual locations inside of those zones more historical or at least individually flavored names. The idea is not to turn the game into course in historical names, only to give a little more flavor to the game by trying to avoid having cities with the same name as the region they're located in.
The change would make the game more precise in historic terms, there are players that care more than others when it comes to the truthfullness of a game, and if the rest wouldn't pay much attention to it, at least that percentage of players would have their play time quality improved :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ardeshir
It helps history buffs and it helps in being able to re-use existing regions in questpacks because you can add other points of interest/cities within the region without it getting confusing. Though I'm sure like any other change in game engines from 2010 era, it ends up being far more than some 2 minute change like renaming each city once or twice within one single file lol