Currently i am playing my first playthrough at the "persian campaign"

I started as cathargo, the idea was to follow mostly the historic path, build colonies along the coast in North africa and Iberia, take the islands, make some tribals your clients and use them as mercs...later aim for italy if everything works well, oberserve the feud Persia vs Neighbours and maybe a lategamewar against the winner.

I thought Cathargo should be easier with Rome starting as a client and less tribal nations...but i was wrong

I.The new porperties of provinces
It seems that "advanced" provinces get mostly 1+ positiv properties, tribal provines have a moderate chance for negative and rare chance for a positive and neutral provinces get at least a negative.
10% of the negative properties can't be removed at all, 25% have a building as special condition with low chance of removal/turn, the rest can be either removed with prospecting or with a army+luck(maybe i was unlucky but on average it took 125% longer,25% with a army 500+= on average 4 Turns but average for me is 9 Turns)

Additionally many AI-Nations seem unable to deal with the negatives at all.
Finally..the distribution and debuffs don't fit, Rome had the pontian swamps..causing problems for centuries, the Entna on sicillia,...where are they
The way it works now it make colonizing, conquering from tribals and then developing even weaker and slower. While Itlay,greek, asia minor and parts of egypt are even more interesting targets as before.

II.The New "wandering Tribes", "tribal Warparty" and similar events
a)Most spawned armies where quite strong in number for the food the province had
b)It makes diplomacy more unstable and worthless, why wasting time and money to make the iberer a client if the next spawn on one of my provinces make them enemies again.

Same as I., together with the more frequent spawns from neutral provinces, the "outside" provinces" and the bandit spawns it makes "conquer greek, Italy, asia minor and parts of egypt stronger and everything else weaker"

III)Decicions
While thy are nice additions the system need some tuning, after some time some stack because i can't use them at all ore rarly and others are "sold out" most the time. After stored to many you get less and only after a random removal. I should get the option to remove some by myself maybe with some cost.

III.Persia itself
With all those buffs Persia is just steamrolling everything after it gets a foothold. Oberserving Persia was funny because it made Attica a client via diplomacy^^ and Sparta and Attica/Persia are at war forever but until now (Turn 150) no Persian troops in Greek because they're fighting in the deserts&steppes.
I.) While some of the buffs make sense others don't (esp. loyaltybonus&decadence reduction)...Persia was infamous for illoyal Satraps and decadent officials, Satraps trying to win a kingdom for themselves was one of the major reasons greek could fight persia and that forced clients could break free again.
II.) It seems that the AI is cheating, "my persia" formed 2 huge armys with 100 Units+...one need 86food, the other 97...they are fighting nomadics tribes in the steppes where provinces have 0-5 food..still they don't starve...i looked every turn for 15 turn and somehow they mange to get supplies all the time^^
I know that a special command allow scavenging but i tried this command often while fighting in iberia and north africa...50% i get xyz could'nt find and food or xyz wasn't able to search for food, 25% they found some food but not enough and only 25% of the time the army is fully supplied.
I still need to play persia or a greek state but the impression is...Persia is a 100% win if you get a food in the door and for the greek...get perisa before it's dangerous or die :)

Overall my impression of the new features is...
Mostly it makes the strong factions stronger and the standard path to victory easier and the random buildoption are even more unsiutable and annoying if you need Building x for a chance to remove a big fat debuff.