Seamus76 wrote:- XML question, regarding the 1v1 starting numbers. Is there a way to keep them at 14, and include the Exploration Route terts? Rather than go to 18? I don't like that at all, way too many.
u can start all exploration route regions with n1 neutrals to make them easy to conquer, except for base camps being n3. if u do this, then each player in 1v1 will start with 14 regions and no-one will have an unfairly large number of exploration route regions.
Seamus76 wrote:- Tert Names. Koontz and I talked about them early on but I was a little lazy in updating them. Did a ton of research, and using multiple maps from 1867 through 1895 I have updated all of the territory names to be in line with the date of the map. So there were 3-4 terts that have been updated including Anchorage which is gone.
- The other somewhat major thing is the renaming of the map to District of Alaska, which in 1895 was the official Governmental designation for the state.
excellent. this cuts out some of the anachronisms.
Seamus76 wrote:iancanton wrote:the use of the word region in the legend is confusing. area or district might be better.
I like area better than district, but technically they are referred to as the "five regions of Alaska", plus isn't "region" what most players would associate with the bonuses I'm excluding them from?
every time a player starts a turn, he sees in the game log that he has received some troops for holding a number of
regions. unless the use of the word
region in another sense is essential to the theme of the map, it's good to use a word in the legend that does not contradict the game log.
Seamus76 wrote:So, the more I look at the map, the more I think everything works very well, from the old time look and feel, to the more modern and relatable bonus regions and names.
on examination, a lot of it does work well (not surprising, given the amount of time that u and koontz have spent on it) and, though they aren't 100% accurate, most of the bonus areas have a closely-equivalent 1890 census district. i'm therefore pleased to accept the gameplay layout in its current form, broadly unchanged, except for two minor tweaks, being to extend the central mountains to protect sleetmute from talkeetna and to put kodiak in the kadiak (southcentral) bonus by connecting it with kenai instead of with egegik.
Dukasaur wrote:Evocative names with personality are easier to visualize and remember (Arctic Village) and thus lead to a better player experience than dry algebraic names (like First, Second, Third, or like East, West, North).
taking into account
Dukasaur's comments about not using boring names based on numbers or directions, i recommend that u use the descriptive 1890 census district names (which are consistent with the time period):
arctic for
far north,
yukon for
interior,
kuskokwim for
southwest,
kadiak for
southcentral and
unalaska for
aleutian islands; i don't like
southeastern as much as the existing
inside passage or the older
sitka.
Seamus76 wrote:I also think the combined Aleutian Island/Inside Passage Super Region bonus makes sense. From an eye perspective, they are the on each side of the map and are the two smaller regions which go nicely together, from a game play perspective they might be the most attractive Super Region bonus on the map.
although i disagree that it makes good sense, it's not necessarily bad for gameplay, so let's try it like this.
Seamus76 wrote:Speaking of the Aleutian Island bonus, as we bounced around, would it make you feel better if it was only a +1 rather than +2? Keep in mind I'm going off the number Koontz ran over a couple of days so I'm really not too sure they should, or need to, actually be changed.
despite the fact that i don't like it a lot, +2 isn't unfair and it can be attacked by most of the other bonuses. to avoid dutch harbour always being taken in preference to bethel and therefore probably being the first land bonus taken in nearly every game, i suggest that dutch harbor starts with one more neutral troop than bethel does, creating some variety.
after the changes just mentioned (and the more restricted port attacks), i recommend that north becomes +2, northwest becomes +5, yukon (interior) becomes +4 and kuskokwim (southwest) becomes +4. i subtracted 2 from the last two because of the presence of base camps.
ian.
Yes it would be pretty much a complete redo at this point, and that's not really something I have in me unfortunately.
