[Abandoned] Central Asia 2020

[Raskholnikov]

Things that need adjustment.

Indian Ocean - can it attack the tanker at Khartoum? If yes, it would be nice to make the passageway at the bottom of the map (sanaa) a bit bigger to clear this up.

Yes it can. As you can see in the Sea Control Legend, it says "... Indian Ocean (including Persian Gulf and Red Sea)..". This is quite clear.

N.S.A part of the legend.
It wording can cause confusion. By saying requested I assume you mean attack and by cyber bombard, you mean bombard. So why not just say attack and bombard?
So something like this:
can be requested (attacked) by any capital
can bombard any metropolis

Good idea, thanks.

By adding the one word (attacked) and removing cyber, you clear up any potential for confusion over what it does and still allows you to keep the flavour of the idea you have got here.
The same can be said for the Al-Mahdi part as well. Where you say revealed, add attacked in brackets afterwards.

Same here. Will do.

Metropolises, I reckon you could lower the neutral to a 3.

They are +1 self-deploy and together, a winning condition. Should they be so easy to take?

Idea.
You have these huge blue lines on the map for the fleet attacks. You have no crossover attacks so why not colour the tankers differently and say that. By removing the lines, you will clear the map up and also allow players to not have to think so much. Great for those speed games. Under each fleet name and number you could add bombards all tanker icon of a colour.
As I said, this will allow you to lose those two blue lines, keep the idea and allow for a quick reference for players. The only extra thing to do for the legend is to add the second coloured tanker under the one you have now.

Actually, we like the blue lines. It makes it look more like a real HQ strategy and military planning map. Also, just using colors may not be as useful for CBs who may have trouble making out the colors. So I think the lines are better from both points of view.

Thanks so much for the ideas and suggestions. If you have anything else please let us know. As well, we'd appreciate an overall assessment of what you think of the map and gameplay so far.

Raskh

[koontz1973]

Indian Ocean - can it attack the tanker at Khartoum? If yes, it would be nice to make the passageway at the bottom of the map (sanaa) a bit bigger to clear this up.

Yes it can. As you can see in the Sea Control Legend, it says "... Indian Ocean (including Persian Gulf and Red Sea)..". This is quite clear.

No it is not, as it does not say the seas name anywhere. This will need to be made clearer.

Metropolises, I reckon you could lower the neutral to a 3.

They are +1 self-deploy and together, a winning condition. Should they be so easy to take?

On second thoughts, you need 11 of them for the win condition, lower them to a 2 neutral. That is still 22 neutrals needed for that win condition and having them spread around, no one is going to bother at 3 or 4 to get them for the win condition. Only for the +1.

Actually, we like the blue lines. It makes it look more like a real HQ strategy and military planning map. Also, just using colors may not be as useful for CBs who may have trouble making out the colors. So I think the lines are better from both points of view.

OK, but lower the opacity over the land by 50% so they do not distract.

As for colour blindness, a black boat with your current blue one would of worked best. As for military planning, I doubt the modern military uses blue lines on maps anymore.

[Raskholnikov]

Indian Ocean - can it attack the tanker at Khartoum? If yes, it would be nice to make the passageway at the bottom of the map (sanaa) a bit bigger to clear this up.

Yes it can. As you can see in the Sea Control Legend, it says "... Indian Ocean (including Persian Gulf and Red Sea)..". This is quite clear.

No it is not, as it does not say the seas name anywhere. This will need to be made clearer.

Metropolises, I reckon you could lower the neutral to a 3.

Ok, will do - sorry for ASSUMING people actually KNOW where the Red Sea and Persian Gulf are.... What was I thinking... lol

They are +1 self-deploy and together, a winning condition. Should they be so easy to take?

On second thoughts, you need 11 of them for the win condition, lower them to a 2 neutral. That is still 22 neutrals needed for that win condition and having them spread around, no one is going to bother at 3 or 4 to get them for the win condition. Only for the +1.

They can attack each other for exactly this reason. We could lower them to 3 but not lower, since it would make it way too easy then - unless someone goes for the NSA bombard...

Actually, we like the blue lines. It makes it look more like a real HQ strategy and military planning map. Also, just using colors may not be as useful for CBs who may have trouble making out the colors. So I think the lines are better from both points of view.

OK, but lower the opacity over the land by 50% so they do not distract.

Ok, will do this. We really want to keep the lines....

As for colour blindness, a black boat with your current blue one would of worked best. As for military planning, I doubt the modern military uses blue lines on maps anymore.

Well, think of bombard and missle ranges on video screens.... That's more or less what we're doing....

[koontz1973]

They can attack each other for exactly this reason. We could lower them to 3 but not lower, since it would make it way too easy then - unless someone goes for the NSA bombard...

And considering that the NSA is a n6, most games, players will go for it to knock out the +1 auto deploys and all games, it will be used when players get close to the 11. Having the Metros attack each other does not really matter. At a neutral 2 or 3, players will wait till they are sure they can not only attack the next one, but defend the ones they have and keep hold of any new ones. They are more likely to be used as a way to get around the board easily and bypass any stacks. Similar to the airports in USA 2.1. By having them at 3, players need to get 6 neutrals for a +1 AD twice. You need to give players an enticing thing to grab. So n3 it is.

Ok, will do - sorry for ASSUMING people actually KNOW where the Red Sea and Persian Gulf are.... What was I thinking... lol

We do have some stupid players and also some that are too young to even know. We even have some Americans who are in a class of there own.

[pamoa]

Middle East Geography for Dummies
I will try to add Red Sea and Persian Gulf on the map

the wording "request, cyber-bombard and revealed" are here to add flavour
but in the left-lower legend you have the proper CC wording
I conced you we can be more strict in the last two by using attack instead of conquer

Capitals
. one-way attack US Fleets or NSA
NSA revert to 6 neutral
. bombard any Metropolis
Uprisings
. one-way conquer Al-Mahdi
Al-Mahdi
. one-way conquers Cairo or Terrorists

the blue line bombard range apart of being part of the graphics
I remember you Fleets can also bombard Terrorist and Refineries
adding so many icon on the map would make it impossible to read
and an impossible task to fit in on the Persian Gulf or the Caucasus zone
and adding other colours would be more confusing

[koontz1973]

All good then. Changes then I will see what else needs doing before stampage.

[Raskholnikov]

So, to sum up:

1. move Tehran tanker from under the blue line, so it is clearly excluded out of 6th Fleet range;
2. Add Red Sea and Persian Gulf labels on map;
3. NSA: ... requested (attacked).. ; ... can bombard...
4. Al-Mahdi: ...revealed (attacked)....
5. all Metropolises go n3.
6.Fleet blue line ranges on map made 50% opaque as they pass over land.

This seems all we have. Any other suggestions before pamoa goes to the next version? Ideally we would get everything needing to be done, so the next version can be stampable.

Many thanks for the comments!

[koontz1973]

Lets get those done then I can take another look. But of the top, that seems to be the most of it. I need to check other things like bonuses, spellings and names or regions etc, but those are only minor changes.

[Raskholnikov]

Ok, great. Thanks so much for all the constructive feedback. Pamoa will work on it and post the new version when he's done.

Raskh

[Industrial Helix]

First off, I'm glad to see this map back on track.

Next, what I don't like about the map:
1)Tanker or refinery collection bonuses. I'm just not a fan of collection bonuses in general. but I think it's a real problem with this map because, let's say I hold a capital, now I have to find as many tiny tanker or oil symbols as I can and it's kind of a strain. Why not, just do a simple bonus of +1 per refinery or tanker with capital.

2) I feel like Al Mahdi should be more valuable. Yeah it's got some great attacks, but, no bonus? Come one give us at least a 1 autodeploy.

Things I'm not sure I understand?

1)Khartoum is the capital? Odd choice over Cairo.

2)Not that this map needs any more symbols or rules, but we've got refineries and tankers, but where is the oil?

3) No capital for Central Asia?

4) Is there a title somewhere or are ou just going to double use "Struggle for Oil" in the top left.

Honestly, it looks great. I'm really excited to have this map back!

[Raskholnikov]

First off, I'm glad to see this map back on track.

Hi,

Thanks for your comments.

Next, what I don't like about the map:
1)Tanker or refinery collection bonuses. I'm just not a fan of collection bonuses in general. but I think it's a real problem with this map because, let's say I hold a capital, now I have to find as many tiny tanker or oil symbols as I can and it's kind of a strain. Why not, just do a simple bonus of +1 per refinery or tanker with capital.

We have 24 tankers and 27 refineries. We don't want to flood the game with bonus armies, esp. at the start. So we are using the same system as the swords in Napoleonic Europe, which has been well tested and is working quite well. Also, since the game only has the standard +3 armies with no additional bonus per number of regions, we want players to choose a strategy how they will get bonus armies: some will go for Metropolises, some for Terrorists and Mahdi, some for tankers and refineries. If we make tankers and refineries sooo easy, everyone will choose the same strategy and this will make the game less interesting.

2) I feel like Al Mahdi should be more valuable. Yeah it's got some great attacks, but, no bonus? Come one give us at least a 1 autodeploy.

Al-Mahdi gives +2 units for every terrorist unit one holds at the same time with him. I think that makes him extremely valuable, and also shows the effect he has on terrorist units. I think this is much more valuable that just a simple +1 auto-deploy, and also brings character and meaning to the Mahdi himself.

Things I'm not sure I understand?

1)Khartoum is the capital? Odd choice over Cairo.

Cairo is a border region, and we didn't want to place the Capital right on the border. Plus Khartoum really lies more centrally in the African zone. In addition, we needed an economically important city as well for the Metropolis, and bedsides Cairo we didn't have much choice. So, we went with Khartoum as Capital and Cairo as metropolis.


2)Not that this map needs any more symbols or rules, but we've got refineries and tankers, but where is the oil?

This game is not a static one, about owning oil supply countries with oil in the ground (useless there), but a dynamic one about mastery of the oil flow: takers taking oil to and from refineries, refineries transforming the crude into useful stuff. So, there are countries with lots of oil but with few refineries, which have to ship the oil abroad to have it refined so it can be used.

3) No capital for Central Asia?

No. It's a "neutral area" aiming to attract players to the center of the board because of its bonuses (tankers, refineries, metropolis).
That's where the "great game" of major powers fighting for oil supply is really played.

4) Is there a title somewhere or are ou just going to double use "Struggle for Oil" in the top left.

It was supposed to be Central Asia 2020: Struggle for Oil". Let me look into that.

Honestly, it looks great. I'm really excited to have this map back!

Thanks a lot for your input!

[pamoa]

below SMALL map version 08
superzise stamp : large 1000x1000 and small 800 x 800

Click image to enlarge.

NUMBER OF REGIONS

68 freely distributed starting regions
29 neutral regions
97 regions in total

_6 Eastern Europe zone
10 Russia zone
10 Kazakhstan zone
_6 Turkey zone
_3 Caucasus zone
_4 Central Asia zone
10 China zone
_6 Africa zone
10 Middle East zone
_6 Iran zone
_6 Afpak zone
10 India zone

_2 contested regions
_1 al-mahdi region
_1 nsa region
_2 fleets
_4 seas
97 regions in total

LEGENDS TEXTS

> OIL MASTERY
When Demand Outstrips Supply
- by Raskholnikov, pamoa, ender516
To WIN, control oil flow for one round
- hold either the Mahdi and all 10 Terrorists
- or 1 Capital and all 11 Metropolises

> AL-MAHDI
The Prophesized Redeemer of Islam or
The Occulted Twelfth Imam :
- can be revealed by any Uprising
- can conquer Cairo or any Terrorist
- gives +2 for each Terrorist controlled

> N.S.A.
National Security Agency, the United States
signals intelligence or cyber-army :
- can be requested by any Capital
- can cyber-bombard any Metropolis
- reverts to 6 neutral following round

> SEA CONTROL
Black Sea, Caspian Sea, Mediteranean Sea
and Indian Ocean ( including Red Sea and
( P.G.) Persian Gulf ) :
- each connects to all bordering Tankers
- all revert to 3 neutral following round

> SPECIAL ATTACKS
Capitals
__one-way attack US Fleets or NSA
Metropolises
__attack each other
US Fleets revert to 4 neutral
__bombard in their range
__any Terrorist, Tanker or Refinery
NSA revert to 6 neutral
__bombard any Metropolis
Terrorists
__attack each other
__bombard Refineries in a range of two
Uprisings
__one-way attack Al-Mahdi
Al-Mahdi
__one-way attacks Cairo or Terrorists

> BONUSES
Regions + 3 regardless of number held
Capitals + 1
Metropolises + 1 auto-deploy
Uprisings - 1 each turn
Terrorists if held with Al-Mahdi
__+ 2 each
Refineries if held with a Capital
__+ 4 for first eight then +2 for every four
Tankers if held with a Capital
__+ 3 for first six then + 2 for every three
Kashmir + 2 if held with
__New Delhi, Islamabad or Beijing
Arunchal + 1 if held with
__New Delhi or Beijing

> ZONES' BONUSES
Eastern Europe 5
Russia 7
Kazakhstan 10
Turkey 3
Cuaucasus 3
Central Asia 5
China 5
Africa 2
Middle East 3
Iran 4
AFPAK 4
India 4

[Raskholnikov]

Excellent work pamoa, thanks!

Could we have the Game Play Stamp please?

[pamoa]

any courageous commentator here ?

[iancanton]

sorry for the delay!

first of all, a non-gameplay point concerning the wording of al-mahdi. i presume that al-mahdi does not refer to the mahdi army that is active in iraq, but to a made-up terrorist organisation. if so, then please change the name somewhat to avoid the impression that believers in the person of al-mahdi (which, unless i'm mistaken, includes most muslims), without needing a reason, are generally supportive of terrorism. also, change the descriptive text to say why al-mahdi is significant, for example the prophesied redeemer of islam who fights against satan.

i have to say that the map has taken a backward step with a new, relatively small corner bonus (africa) being introduced that draws the play away from the desired oil and central asia focus. u already have eastern europe as a barely-relevant bonus. africa as well is a bit too much. having said that, i like the addition of tripoli with the extra tanker in the mediterranean sea. i propose eliminating most of africa and using the space for al-mahdi. tripoli, cairo, jerusalem, beirut, amman and damascus can comprise a 6-region bonus, perhaps called near east; note that this borders more than one other zone bonus.

the current middle east is reduced to either a 6-region bonus or kept at 10 regions by the addition of kuwait, kirkuk, jeddah and either bahrain or an extra saudi city.

kazakhstan does not make real sense for anyone because it is virtually impossible to hold while always being at the mercy of the central asia 4-region bonus. the otherwise thematically-consistent concept of an overvalued central asia is completely at odds with it being the easiest zone to conquer. to solve this, why not make reduce kazakhstan to 6 regions that are not a bonus of their own, but part of a deliberately-overvalued 10-region central asia bonus of, say +15 to +18, in keeping with the title? the disappearance of the 4-region central asia will breathe life into kazakhstan as part of a 10-region central asia. let's face it, kazakhstan is part of central asia, so including it in the bonus is entirely logical.

kabul isn't a capital region, so there's no particular reason to eliminate the chinese border artificially. merging herat into kandahar and using quetta to represent the southwestern part of islamabad insulates the capital from iran while ridding ourselves of an oddly-shaped region (writing islamabad on two lines does not harm the map).

koontz has already covered the bombardments extensively and i'm fairly happy with what has been done with them.

ian.

[Raskholnikov]

sorry for the delay!

first of all, a non-gameplay point concerning the wording of al-mahdi. i presume that al-mahdi does not refer to the mahdi army that is active in iraq, but to a made-up terrorist organisation. if so, then please change the name somewhat to avoid the impression that believers in the person of al-mahdi (which, unless i'm mistaken, includes most muslims), without needing a reason, are generally supportive of terrorism. also, change the descriptive text to say why al-mahdi is significant, for example the prophesied redeemer of islam who fights against satan.

Al-Mahdi does not refer to a specific terrorist organisation. IT represents ideological fervor, and draws on the 19th Century Sudanese leader who took the name Al-Mahdi, conquered Sudan and killed British General Gordon in Khartoum. This is just the most famous example when someone has claimed this title, and it is in that sense that we use it. This is just a historical fact and all we say is that it could happen again that a certain leader could assume this title. Anyway, this is a game not a religious debate. I don't think any reasonable person will confuse the two.

i have to say that the map has taken a backward step with a new, relatively small corner bonus (africa) being introduced that draws the play away from the desired oil and central asia focus. u already have eastern europe as a barely-relevant bonus. africa as well is a bit too much. having said that, i like the addition of tripoli with the extra tanker in the mediterranean sea. i propose eliminating most of africa and using the space for al-mahdi. tripoli, cairo, jerusalem, beirut, amman and damascus can comprise a 6-region bonus, perhaps called near east; note that this borders more than one other zone bonus.

How about a Levant Zone comprising: Tripoli, Cairo, Khartoum, Jerusalem, Beirut, Damas? and a Middle East Zone with three additional zones: Erbil, Kuwait, Jeddah?


the current middle east is reduced to either a 6-region bonus or kept at 10 regions by the addition of kuwait, kirkuk, jeddah and either bahrain or an extra saudi city.

kazakhstan does not make real sense for anyone because it is virtually impossible to hold while always being at the mercy of the central asia 4-region bonus. the otherwise thematically-consistent concept of an overvalued central asia is completely at odds with it being the easiest zone to conquer. to solve this, why not make reduce kazakhstan to 6 regions that are not a bonus of their own, but part of a deliberately-overvalued 10-region central asia bonus of, say +15 to +18, in keeping with the title? the disappearance of the 4-region central asia will breathe life into kazakhstan as part of a 10-region central asia. let's face it, kazakhstan is part of central asia, so including it in the bonus is entirely logical.

I'd rather leave Kazakhstan as is and take away the Central Asia and Caucasus bonuses, since they have no capitals and are not full zones anyway.

I want to have a balance of five 10-region zones and five 6-region zones, so I don't want to get rid of Kazakhstan. Merging it with the current Central Asia would leave the 3-region Caucasus totally isolated. So, again, taking away the two small Caucasus and Central Asia bonuses seems the best way to address your concerns without unbalancing our map.

kabul isn't a capital region, so there's no particular reason to eliminate the chinese border artificially. merging herat into kandahar and using quetta to represent the southwestern part of islamabad insulates the capital from iran while ridding ourselves of an oddly-shaped region (writing islamabad on two lines does not harm the map).

Actually, the reason Kabul does not border on China on this map is because of the greater Kashmir region, which comprises parts of India, Pakistan and China.

koontz has already covered the bombardments extensively and i'm fairly happy with what has been done with them.

ian.

Thanks for all the input. If you agree with my suggestions, and have nothing to add, we will make the required changes and then hopefully we can proceed without too much delay to the next level.

[iancanton]

first of all, a non-gameplay point concerning the wording of al-mahdi. i presume that al-mahdi does not refer to the mahdi army that is active in iraq, but to a made-up terrorist organisation. if so, then please change the name somewhat to avoid the impression that believers in the person of al-mahdi (which, unless i'm mistaken, includes most muslims), without needing a reason, are generally supportive of terrorism. also, change the descriptive text to say why al-mahdi is significant, for example the prophesied redeemer of islam who fights against satan.

Al-Mahdi does not refer to a specific terrorist organisation. IT represents ideological fervor, and draws on the 19th Century Sudanese leader who took the name Al-Mahdi, conquered Sudan and killed British General Gordon in Khartoum. This is just the most famous example when someone has claimed this title, and it is in that sense that we use it. This is just a historical fact and all we say is that it could happen again that a certain leader could assume this title. Anyway, this is a game not a religious debate. I don't think any reasonable person will confuse the two.

if al-mahdi represents religious fervour, then use a wording that inspires fanaticism; what is the cause of the al-mahdi fighters? the current wording doesn't inspire and it requires a level of knowledge way above that of the average cc player to appreciate it.

How about a Levant Zone comprising: Tripoli, Cairo, Khartoum, Jerusalem, Beirut, Damas? and a Middle East Zone with three additional zones: Erbil, Kuwait, Jeddah?

this has good potential.

I'd rather leave Kazakhstan as is and take away the Central Asia and Caucasus bonuses, since they have no capitals and are not full zones anyway.

I want to have a balance of five 10-region zones and five 6-region zones, so I don't want to get rid of Kazakhstan. Merging it with the current Central Asia would leave the 3-region Caucasus totally isolated. So, again, taking away the two small Caucasus and Central Asia bonuses seems the best way to address your concerns without unbalancing our map.

a clever solution, which is worthy of trying. i can see no obvious flaws in ur description.

kabul isn't a capital region, so there's no particular reason to eliminate the chinese border artificially. merging herat into kandahar and using quetta to represent the southwestern part of islamabad insulates the capital from iran while ridding ourselves of an oddly-shaped region (writing islamabad on two lines does not harm the map).

Actually, the reason Kabul does not border on China on this map is because of the greater Kashmir region, which comprises parts of India, Pakistan and China.

from the time of the 19th-century great game, the wakhan corridor has separated the british and russian empires and, at least theoretically, linked afghanistan with china. it does not form part of tajikistan or kashmir.

Wakhan District was the creation of the British and Russian empires at the end of the 19th century, designed as a buffer zone between their two empires.

http://www.wakhandev.org.uk/
http://www.wakhandev.org.uk/wakhan_area.pdf

ian.

[Raskholnikov]

Geat. It seems I addressed all your concerns. Regarding Al-MAhdi, I think the legend explains what players need to know to play this game and is in no way disparaging of any religious belief. Of course, anything can be interpreted by anyone in many ways, positive or negative. Other games have dicoceses, bishops, cardinals who are involved, without anyone accusing them of labeling all Christians as warmongering terrorists. I am all for cutural sensitivity, especially after having spend 8 months in Iraq, but Al-Mahdi is both a theological figure and an actual historical personality (as my Soudan link shows), and many leaders have tried to take on this name to legitimise their movements and actions. So we would like to keep this as is unless we get a significant number of overwhelming negative reactions either here or in beta.

As for the rest, we will make the agreed-on changes and come up with a new version of them map, after which we hope to move on to the next stage.

Many thanks for all your help,

Pamoa and Raskh

[Raskholnikov]

Any more comments re: gameplay from anyone before pamoa creates a new version of the map? Please "speak now or forever hold your peace"! lol Thanks

[Raskholnikov]

Ok so no comments for a month now.... We assume this means no one has anything to add.... I can just see floods of comments once we change the map to the new version... so please, if you have something to comment on, please do it now, so we can take your comments into consideration before we produce the next map version.. Thanks!

[cairnswk]

Ok so no comments for a month now.... We assume this means no one has anything to add.... I can just see floods of comments once we change the map to the new version... so please, if you have something to comment on, please do it now, so we can take your comments into consideration before we produce the next map version.. Thanks!

No comments for a month is a common practice these days Rash...
although wait for the BETA stage, then they'll flood you...

[delibekir]

Regarding Al-Mahdi, can we at least change the top definition to something like "Al-Mahdi is a self proclaimed Mahdi from Sudan...".
Mahdi is a general term and the definition does not help either

Also a small correction: region "Ajana" from Turkey should be "Adana".

Good work, good map!
I'd like to see the natural gas route wars in another map

[koontz1973]

Guys, any word on the next version?

[Raskholnikov]

We were waiting for a bit more feedback before producing the next version. Pamoa is working on it though and will post it as soon as his Real life duties allow.... Hopefully right after the holidays!

[koontz1973]

We were waiting for a bit more feedback before producing the next version. Pamoa is working on it though and will post it as soon as his Real life duties allow.... Hopefully right after the holidays!

Lets bave the next version so we can see changes. Looking forward to seeing one by the sooner.