- Joined
- Oct 2, 2009
- Messages
- 3,962
Don't worry at all about graphics - if the map reaches that point we can hammer that part out later together. And while I wouldn't suggest that you completely disregard history and geography, I think we can take some liberties here and there to assure that the map is playable.
So playing catch up: it sounds as if you are - or were - suggesting three different layers of bonuses, in order here from micro to macro:
1. Capital Bonuses. Hold a major national capital and a troop is auto-deployed to that region.
2. National Bonuses. Hold all regions in a politically defined country, such as France, and get a bonus for that command in addition to the Capital Bonus for holdin, say, Paris.
3. Regional Bonuses. (This confused me at first, because we use the term region to refer to a single, capturable space on the board.) Hold a command made up of a large cluster of 'regions' that may or may not be a part of a national bonus and receive a bonus in addition to nested National Bonuses.
OneEyed is understandably irked by the configuration of the National Bonuses; some countries don't warrant bonuses while other regions that aren't countries get a National Bonus. The political regions of Austria, Switzerland, the Czech Republic, and the North Caucasus each have populations of 8-10 million people, yet the only area that gets a National Bonus on this map is the one that isn't an independent nation. One could argue that while the Caucasus occupies a larger area of land, it would be less important economically and strategically than the Czech Republic.
What will likely happen early in games is that players are simply going to pull their troop out of the central part of the map because Austria and its neighbors aren't worth anything. I see that as both an accuracy problem and a gameplay problem. You've just created a dead area right in the center of the map that nobody wants.
As with every other map thread that I've tried to help with for the past year, my solution would be this: simplify. Before you start adding layers of commands, get the basic structure of the map figured out. It's really hard to think about how cross-map nuclear bombardments will work if you don't have a map that people are happy with to begin with. I bet once you have a kick-ass design, you won't feel the need for the whistles and bells.
And consider working backwards.
First, figure out how and where you want your basic commands. In some cases, political countries make sense - Germany, France, and the UK are logical countries to turn into commands. What you did with "Former Yugoslavia" was wise - group small countries together to make a larger, more inclusive command. However, you could have expanded that command to include more countries and called it the Balkans - a term that current residents of the area might have a better reaction to than "Yugoslavia."
Next, configure your commands to have a mix of large and small bonuses. I'd say that on a map this size you would want to have no more than seven or eight or so commands that are +1 or +2... and no more than ten-twelve commands that give +1, +2, or +3. You want players to scramble for them early in games, and in a 12p game it's OK if somebody has bad luck and has to go after a +3. You don't want to have the small commands all clustered together, because if they are the first player to get a bonus is going to easily overwhelm the neighboring bonus. Spread them out across the map so that there is action everywhere.
edit: almost forgot this piece... At this point you need to think about impassables. Mountain ranges and rivers should go between commands to limit their borders, not in the middle of commands to limit movement.
If you still want to have major capital bonuses, you should have even fewer small commands, because everybody will have quick access to extra troops. I actually like the capitals bonus idea for this map - it means large commands still have appeal. For example, if Russia was one huge command players would still commit resources to holding the region that got the Moscow bonus.
After that, the commands should be harder to take, so that players have to be strategic about how they use their troops. Look at the Classic maps: the easiest bonus to hold is Australia, and anybody would be happy to start there... but then what do you do? Controlling Australia and getting the quick bonus does not guarantee the win. On this map, I think it's OK to have a big Russia command next to the South Caucasus +1, or a big Balkans command next to a small Greece +1. Iceland gives a quick bonus - why not make the British Isles and Scandinavia harder to conquer? Portugal could be buried under a behind Spain & Andorra command.
Finally, now that you know where your commands should be and how big they should be, start drawing the borders between regions within those commands.
Right now, I think this map is making the choices really for players; abandon the center of the map, grab as many little bonuses as you can, hope that you get better luck than the guy who's doing the same thing on the other side of the map. There's no challenge to that. Give players something to think about - yes, I conquered Iceland, but now I'm stuck in Iceland. Yes, I control the South Caucasus, but do I now attack the eight regions of Turkey or do I attack the ten regions of Russia?
Last edited:
. 
