Moderator: Cartographers
TaCktiX wrote:I really like what I see, no kidding. You've put a lot of thought and work into it already, which is going to pay off dividends as your map gets closer to quench. Could you please edit your Design Briefed map title into the topic title and note what pages the most recent version is on? Official policy to ease feedback by folks.
porkenbeans wrote:...The only thing that needs some attention is the mountains.
The bonus Hnal (I think that's how you spell it) at 4 is way too much. The whole map will revolve around taking this single territory to get a bonus of 4. It terms of gameplay that being a bonus of 4 or even a bonus of 2 ruins it for me. I think you could get away with it being a bonus of 2 but 1 seems plenty. Perhaps expand that Hnal to two territories and keep it a bonus of 2 or less.
Sorry if this has already been brought up, but, the size is way to big. It needs to be no larger than 840x800
The Bison King wrote:Wow, a lot of good responses.The bonus Hnal (I think that's how you spell it) at 4 is way too much. The whole map will revolve around taking this single territory to get a bonus of 4. It terms of gameplay that being a bonus of 4 or even a bonus of 2 ruins it for me. I think you could get away with it being a bonus of 2 but 1 seems plenty. Perhaps expand that Hnal to two territories and keep it a bonus of 2 or less.
The bonus is called "Ifnal" I'll try to make that more clear, or I might change it. That's definitely the territory that I have changed around the most. It's interesting, because if I you can build off that start building off that far western corner early enough you can defend a lot of territory with very little effort, but at the time, this is easy to recognize so it usually stays contested most of the early part of the game. We tried reducing it to 3 once, that worked ok. Another thing we tried is having that island "caspiar" hook up to the far western territory "Ionsfee". That actually made it kind of a pain in the ass to hold. It sort of works, but if we did that, it should stay worth 4. Over all I see you're concern that "he who controls that bonus controls the game" it definitely is a strategy that can work, but it isn't the only one. I've played 6 games on this map, 2 games were won that way, the other 4 were not.
Hmmm, I see you point about the western corner. All the same if I were playing this game and was next to Ifnal that's what I would go for every time. What if you make Ifnal start neutral 4-6. That way it's harder to conquer but is still a factor in the game that can be utilized. 5 neutral to me is perfect, but I think you might prefer less. At the very least this should start neutral if it doesn't already, someone getting a drop with a bonus of 4 to start is ridiculous.
The Bison King wrote:
hmmm... that's a thought, however that might be too much if every territory was neutral. Keep in mind no one starts with that bonus automatically. How about this. We bump the Ifnal bonus down to 3 and start Rolloland out as a neutral territory with 5 neutrals on it.
Yes, I have already mentioned that some of the territs are way too small. You have plenty of room, so just do some redrawing, and make them larger. This one detail is the only bad thing about this map. Otherwise, it is absolutely gorgeous.Industrial Helix wrote:I'd like to see some numbers on the map because I think the small map, and some places on the large map, are too tight to fit numbers. The map must accommodate most of the name plus the numbers.
I think if you fiddle with the names and borders you can make it happen. This should help as well:
viewtopic.php?f=127&t=48259
Users browsing this forum: No registered users