Nordic Countries [Quenched]

[natty dread]

Updated version where North Norway is a +2.

Now are there any more gameplay tweaks that need doing? Or should I start pushing the map to graphics workshop?

If you have any suggestions for the gameplay, let's hear it. Do you want the baltic island bonus back? Do you want different bonus system for Svalbard & Faroe? Do you think any part of the game dynamics is unbalanced? Now is the time to speak up. I'm open for all suggestions.

v.32a

Click image to enlarge.

[alster]

Updated version where North Norway is a +2.

Now are there any more gameplay tweaks that need doing? Or should I start pushing the map to graphics workshop?

If you have any suggestions for the gameplay, let's hear it. Do you want the baltic island bonus back? Do you want different bonus system for Svalbard & Faroe? Do you think any part of the game dynamics is unbalanced? Now is the time to speak up. I'm open for all suggestions.

v.32a

- Couldn't find any good translations, sorry. Seems like they don't really do it, but rather just use the regions names "as is" in English.
- Would tweak the Skåne/Småland border a bit north (a bit more than the coast belongs to Bleking which is consumed by Skåne.
- Would also tweak Värmland/Bohuslän border, probably a bit south so that whole of Dalsland is consumed by Värmland.

- North Norway bonus +2. Seems low. The key to bonus areas is not so much how many areas you have to take, but rather how many areas in which you have to defend once you get the bonus. North Norway can be attacked in 4 areas, that's a lot for just +2. +3 seems fairer here (personally though, unless it's easy or I otherwise have to, I rarely bother to try to grab/hold bonuses that doesn't at least give me a 1/1 ration, i.e. for each area I comit to defend, I would want 1 bonus troop next round).

[natty dread]

- Couldn't find any good translations, sorry. Seems like they don't really do it, but rather just use the regions names "as is" in English.

Ok, I'll just go with the current ones.

- Would tweak the Skåne/Småland border a bit north (a bit more than the coast belongs to Bleking which is consumed by Skåne.

This is doable...

- Would also tweak Värmland/Bohuslän border, probably a bit south so that whole of Dalsland is consumed by Värmland.

... but this I wouldn't like doing, since it would also disrupt the border between the bonus areas (also being a whole lot more work, but that's not the reason, honestly )

Dalsland is considered to belong to Götaland, so I wouldn't feel comfortable merging it with Värmland, which belongs to Svealand.

- North Norway bonus +2. Seems low. The key to bonus areas is not so much how many areas you have to take, but rather how many areas in which you have to defend once you get the bonus. North Norway can be attacked in 4 areas, that's a lot for just +2. +3 seems fairer here (personally though, unless it's easy or I otherwise have to, I rarely bother to try to grab/hold bonuses that doesn't at least give me a 1/1 ration, i.e. for each area I comit to defend, I would want 1 bonus troop next round).

Yeah, it only has 3 borders though (maybe I need to make it more clear, but Lofoten only borders Troms and Nordland) but I guess I'll just change it back to +3.

[natty dread]

Click image to enlarge.

[ManBungalow]

At the moment I'm thinking that the Denmark bonus is quite under-valued, having 5 regions.

In games that are sequential and/or have more players, the larger bonuses (Finland, Norway and Sweden) are really out of the question due to the sheer number of borders they have. For that reason, you may want to consider making the auto-deploy on the capitals a +2 (assuming they start as neutrals) seeing how they will be the focus. Additionally, I think you could add in some more auto-deploy bonuses (large cities and so on) which might only be +1.

Also, the "Island boni" section could be a little more obvious at a glance.

As for the graphics...well, they're almost kiss-able

[natty dread]

At the moment I'm thinking that the Denmark bonus is quite under-valued, having 5 regions.

Ah, but Köbenhavn is included in the Denmark bonus, which makes Denmark a +3 really. And with Faroe, you get a total of +4 with only 2 borders to defend. You think it should be higher then? Well...

In games that are sequential and/or have more players, the larger bonuses (Finland, Norway and Sweden) are really out of the question due to the sheer number of borders they have. For that reason, you may want to consider making the auto-deploy on the capitals a +2 (assuming they start as neutrals) seeing how they will be the focus. Additionally, I think you could add in some more auto-deploy bonuses (large cities and so on) which might only be +1.

Hmm, that's an interesting idea. I probably won't be adding any more cities though... the main reason being, there really aren't any large cities in the northern parts of the big countries. But beside that, it just seems to me it would complicate the gameplay needlessly...

...however, that +2 autodeploy for capitals might be something to consider. It would also give some leeway in making some other bonuses higher... Right now, we have problems with Finland and Sweden, since we have in both a southern and central bonus area, which will be too small when held alone, but when held together, the bonus will be high. Although, on the other hand that may work just fine: if you want quick and easy bonuses, go for Iceland or Denmark, or North Norway. And if you want a bonus you can build into a higher bonus, you can go for southern Finland or Sweden.

Also, the "Island boni" section could be a little more obvious at a glance.

Ok. How do you suggest accomplishing this? Some glow / drop shadow to accentuate the text more, or maybe a partly opaque text box to frame the text? I'll try both...

As for the graphics...well, they're almost kiss-able

Aww, you're making me blush

[natty dread]

OK, here's a version with ManB:s suggestion of +2 capitals, and other boni adjusted accordingly... I'm thinking, with a little tweaking, it could work. And, the capitals are really central to the Nordic countries. In Finland, 1/5 of the population lives in the capital. In Denmark it's 1/9 if I remember correctly. I'm not sure of the rest but you get the picture. So making the capitals more important in the map makes sense.

So, it's actually 2 versions, with 2 possible solutions for the Island bonus text (I know this is more graphical than gameplay, but let's let it fly this once).

V.33a - slight glow in the island bonus text

Click image to enlarge.

V.33b - frame & textbox for the island bonus text

Click image to enlarge.

[natty dread]

Going back to the bonus values a lá the bonus calculator...

It was suggested that the +2 autodeploy would make the capitals too strong. Them being only 1 territory each, and all. So if I was to go back into +1 autodeploys... and rethink the bonus structure.... Well, I was thinking if I'd just go with the numbers by the calculator, I'd have this:

Denmark 3.58 = +3 (+2 with capital taken in account)
Iceland 3.33 = +3 (+2)

N. Norway 4.16 = +4
S. Norway 5.58 = +5 (+4)

Sweden:
North 5.92 = +6
center 6.25 = +6 (+5)
south 5,08 = +5

Finland:
north 4.75 = +5
center 4.83 = +5
south 5.91= +6 (+5)

This would give the total country bonuses of

Norway: +10 (4+4+2)
Sweden: +18 (6+5+5+2)
Finland: +17 (5+5+5+2)

Again, they seem very high to me.

Therefore I'm going with a reduced scale. Denmark, Iceland and Norway are OK, but sweden and Finland seem like they would give too big a bonus when held as whole countries... Whole finland would only have 4 borders to defend, yet it would spit out a +17 bonus. +18 with the autodeploy.

I'm thinking that I need to substract 2 troops from each, so that sweden would be a total +16 and Finland a total +15.

So how about this:

Sweden: 6 4 4 (n-c-s)
Finland: 5 4 4

I need some ideas here... the +2 capital bonus seemed like a nice idea, but taking all other bonuses in account, it would make them too strong, making it unfair... anyone who manages to get a capital or two would get a too big head start in the beginning.

[natty dread]

Ok, so this is the alternate plan for the bonus system. Capitals back to +1:s, everything else closely following the bonus calculator, with a few adjustments in Swe and Fin.

Click image to enlarge.

What I didn't notice though, that's a lot of +4 bonuses on the map... don't see why that would be a problem though.

[Lufsen75]

If the map is in scandinavian laguage in all countries why not in the bonus areas in total to and not only Norrland?

Otherwise I really like it.

[captainwalrus]

I honestly don't like the capitals at all. It makes it so someone starting near a capital can get an easy +1 but everyone else has to fight it out for the larger +4 bonuses. I would be fine seeing them taken out.

[natty dread]

I honestly don't like the capitals at all. It makes it so someone starting near a capital can get an easy +1 but everyone else has to fight it out for the larger +4 bonuses. I would be fine seeing them taken out.

There are smaller +2 and +3 bonuses to take as well... I don't want to remove the capitals, because basically, they offer an easy way of snatching some bonus troops, and they balance out the huge mainland bonuses somewhat. But anyway, I can up the neutral count on the capitals a bit. How's 4 troops sound?

Also, I can code the territories connecting to capitals as starting points, so everyone will have equal chance to grab them. Let's see:

Reykjavik -> 2 territories
Köbenhavn -> 3 territories
Stockholm -> 2 territories
Oslo -> 1 territory
Helsinki -> 2 territories

Total: 10 territories connecting to capitals. If all of these are coded as starting points... it means that whatever the number of players, everyone will get a chance to start near a capital.

Thanks walrus, for giving me the idea!

If the map is in scandinavian laguage in all countries why not in the bonus areas in total to and not only Norrland?

Otherwise I really like it.

Thanks, will be taken in consideration.


---

edit: here's some calculations on the starting point idea...

edit2: miscalculated! Åland connects to 2 capitals. So the total starting point territories are 9.

9 starting points (territories that connect to capitals), 48 other territories.

Now, when the starting points are not coded neutrals, any unused starting points will be put back in the pool of normal territories, and given out as usual. Thus this arrangement should not disturb the perfect harmony of the #57 territory count...

2 players: 4 starting points each, 49 territories divided -> 16 each, 17 neutral = total: 20 starting territories each. Still within optimal, you need to kill 3 territories to knock the other player down to 5 troops...

3 players: 3 starting points each, 48 territories divided -> 16 each, 0 neutral = total: 19 starting territories each. Still optimal

4 players: 2 starting points each, 49 territories divided -> 12 each, 1 neutral = total: 14 territories each. optimal

5 players: 1 starting points each, 52 territories divided -> 10 each, 2 neutral = total: 11 territories each. optimal

6 players: 1 starting point each, 51 territories divided -> 8 each, 3 neutral = total: 9 territories each.

7 players: 1 starting point each, 50 territories divided -> 7 each, 1 neutral = total: 8 territories each.

8 players: 1 starting point each, 49 territories divided -> 6 each, 1 neutral = total: 7 territories each.

It will work out just fine!
Neutral count will be very low on any setting, and nobody gets to start with an advantage.

Of course, one could argue that the first 5 players to go first in any 6-8 player sequential game have a slight advantage, but I think we can let that fly.

[Blitzaholic]

If I am reading this right, you have:

Denmark 3.58 = +3 (+2 with capital taken in account)
Iceland 3.33 = +3 (+2)

N. Norway 4.16 = +4
S. Norway 5.58 = +5 (+4)

Sweden:
North 5.92 = +6
center 6.25 = +6 (+5)
south 5,08 = +5

Finland:
north 4.75 = +5
center 4.83 = +5
south 5.91= +6 (+5)

This would give the total country bonuses of

Norway: +10 (4+4+2)
Sweden: +18 (6+5+5+2)
Finland: +17 (5+5+5+2)


Looking at this first glance, it just seems to me that the total country bonus's are a little too high natty.

Norway: +10 (4+4+2) maybe +8
Sweden: +18 (6+5+5+2) maybe +15
Finland: +17 (5+5+5+2) maybe +14

totals

[natty dread]

Yes, already amended them. The current ones are:

Norway 9 (10 with capital, 11 with svalbard)
Sweden 16 (17 w/capital)
Finland 15 (16 w/capital)


editing post again...


Let's quote the gameplay guidelines a bit to see which areas of the map need development.

The development of solid, balanced gameplay is one of the first challenges of map development. In order to meet gameplay expectations and make your map successful, you will need to incorporate the following elements:

Balanced deployment - It should be unlikely that one or more players can start the game with a major advantage as a result of the initial drop or getting the first turn. Conquer Club is primarily a strategy game, and we therefore like to minimise as many of the luck factors as possible - the dice are randomness enough!

Deployment is balanced, territory count has been optimized for balanced deployment, also adding to the balance is the coding of territories near capitals to starting points, which gives everyone an equal chance to grab capitals at the start of the game.

Reasonable bonus structure - Bonuses should make sense given the size/style of the map, and be based on a consistent formula. Consideration should be given to balancing the strength of the board, ensuring that no specific area of the map gives an overwhelming advantage from the start of a game.

Let's go through the bonuses one by one...

Iceland: +3 total. Earlier Iceland was a concern, given that a player who could expand from Iceland to N.Norway would have a very strong position. Well, now that has been addressed I think... let's say you start from Iceland, you're getting +3 bonus... you can either expand to N.Norway, which is 5 more territories to take - you need to take Svalbard, but the Svalbard bonus will not help you until you have secured N.Norway too. When eventually you hold both Iceland, Svalbard & N.Norway you're getting a total of +7 bonus, but you'll need to defend 4 borders to hold all of them. Expanding to Denmark is also a possibility, but this will be even harder - more territories to take.

Denmark: this may be a nice place to start as well. You get +3 troops, 2 free and 1 autodeployed in the capital. Thus, in a normal multiplayer game you get 5 troops to deploy, you can deploy 3 on the Nordjylland border and 2 on the capital which already gets the autodeploy. Possibilities to expand into South Sweden, which however gives you 3 more borders to defend, although it pays off in bonus (+4) which would make your total bonus +7 for 4 borders... The same as Iceland/N.Norway. The possibility to take Faroe for that +1 extra troop should also be a nice incentive to go for the Denmark bonus. You could also try to expand to Iceland, but most likely scenario will be that another player is already holding it...

South Norway: Gives a nice +5 bonus, of which 1 goes to Oslo. Has 3 borders to defend. Possible to expand into N.Norway to grab the All Norway bonus. Seems to be balanced to me.

N.Norway: Also a good place to start, only need to take 4 territories but you'll need to defend 3 of them. The +3 bonus is a bit small, but you can add Svalbard to it and get +4. Possibility to expand into S.Norway or Iceland.

S.Sweden (Gothland): Gives 4 troops for holding 4 borders. Fair enough. Lets you expand into Denmark, also a good place to start.

Central Sweden (Sw.proper): gives 5 troops, and possibility to expand into Finland. A hard place to hold, but has potential.

N.Sweden (Norrland): gives 6 troops with 4 borders to hold. Not a good place to start, but a nice bonus for the later half of the game.

N. Finland (lapland): 5 troops for 4 borders. Pretty much same as above

Central Finland: 4 troops for 4 borders. Not a good starting place, but can be used to expand from southern Finland for a nice position that is easy to hold with only 2 borders.

Southern Finland: A tricky place. 5 troops and 5 borders to defend. Hard to hold in the beginning, but if you manage to do it and expand into Central Finland, you'll gain a very strong position where you get +9 troops and only defend 2 borders.


So it seems to me there are various ways to start and advance in the map, which should make for many different strategies for this map.

Game type flexibility - The map should support various game types and not be designed with specific/limited game settings in mind (standard, assassin, fog of war, 2 players, etc.). Maps designed for fewer than 8-players should be discouraged, and will only be approved if the map is really something special.

2 players: Each player starts with 20 territories, of which 4 are next to capitals. There are 5 capitals so they won't be even if both go for capitals... However, different strategies can be applied in the start. One can go straight for the capitals, or jump on his opponent straight away, or go for the smaller bonus areas.

3 players: should also work. Each player starts with 3 territories that are next to capitals. 2 players can get 2 capitals each, while third gets one but may go for a bonus while others concentrate on holding their capitals.

4 & 5 player games should also work. Each can grab a capital in up to 5 player games...

However, strategies will be different in 6,7,8 player games. Everyone can not get a capital. So players need to plan ahead, some will choose to grab capitals, some will choose to go for bonuses. Even so, in 8 player games, 5 players get a capital each, that leaves 3 players to contend for bonus areas. Since players holding capitals will probably try not to let the remaining 3 take any bonus areas that include capitals, that leaves N.Norway, S. & N.Sweden and C. & N. Finland. Of these, North Norway and South Sweden are probably the strongest possibilities.

Well, no spoils & flat rate 8 player games may be troublesome, and decided by dice more than other game types, but this is quite common in many maps. 8 player escalating however should be balanced, as bonuses won't matter that much.

Assassin games should be feasible on the map. There are plenty of attack routes on the map, but also plenty of spots where you can block another player's kill.

Doubles games will definitely be fun on the map. There are plenty of places where teammates can work together to hold a bonus, one holds and the other defends...

Triples and quads should also work well enough: the other side will be likely to grab Iceland, Denmark and Norway, while the other team grabs Finland, And Sweden becomes a battleground. This is just one possibility though, there are various ways the game may play out in team games. All in all I think the gameplay will lend itself well to team games.

Player-friendliness - Any information you need to know to play a map should be easy to gather by looking at the map itself. The legend should be clear, concise and consistent; the map itself should be free of unnecessary or cumbersome rules that push it over the line separating complex from confusing.

Well, I think everything is fairly easy to understand. If there's anything in the map that's hard to understand I'll be grateful if someone points it out to me.

Open-play - There should be many ways a game might progress on a map, and many roads to victory. Such features as unpassable borders should enhance, not limit, gameplay, and every effort should be made to limit the number of dead ends and bottlenecks in a map, unless they are justified by the desired play of the map. The map should be fun to play, not frustrating.

I think this part is also well covered within the map. Anyone disagree?

Function trumps form - The style of the graphics should not detract from ease of play: borders should be clear, titles and numbers easy to read, colors easy to distinguish, etc...

Should be, I think. The minimap will help anyone who may have problems with the colour scheme.

[Industrial Helix]

Wel, I've said it a couple of times but I really don't like the capitals. This map is huge the way it is, I think that capitals only crowd the graphics and map as well as add a layer of unneeded confusion. I think, given that this map has a large amount of territories, you should drop the capitals.

Speaking of having large amount of territories... the lack of choke points makes me want to stray away from this map. I feel like if I ever secured a bonus that I could never defend it. I feel like it removes a lot of strategy and opens a lot up to chance.

The large amount of territories also seem, to me, uncharacteristic of Scandinavia. I mean, I've never been there so I might be full of it but my perception is that there's a lot of expansive space. Having many territories is reflective of lack of space, and this map kind of gives the perception that Scandinavia is as crowded as Tokyo.

So in summation, I'd favor grouping some of the territories, especially up north, and reducing a few of the bonuses to give some players a chance at getting a bonus.

[natty dread]

Wel, I've said it a couple of times but I really don't like the capitals. This map is huge the way it is, I think that capitals only crowd the graphics and map as well as add a layer of unneeded confusion. I think, given that this map has a large amount of territories, you should drop the capitals.

Thanks for your opinion, but... the capitals are a crucial part of the gameplay. There's too few small bonuses without the capitals, they are acting as a balance towards the openness of the Finland/Sweden area.

Speaking of having large amount of territories... the lack of choke points makes me want to stray away from this map. I feel like if I ever secured a bonus that I could never defend it. I feel like it removes a lot of strategy and opens a lot up to chance.

Lack of choke points?

Svalbard? Faroe? Åland? Oulu? That's four right there. If we look at bonus zones and the borders they need to defend:

Denmark 2
Iceland 2
N. Norway 3
S. Norway 3
N. Sweden 4
C. Sweden 4
S. Sweden 4
N. Finland 4
C. Finland 4
S. Finland 5

That seems pretty much a complete scale to me... 4 out of 10 bonuses have less than 4 borders. Then there's 6 with 4-5, and if you count the capitals, that's another 5 with only 1 border... another reason to keep the capitals.

The large amount of territories also seem, to me, uncharacteristic of Scandinavia. I mean, I've never been there so I might be full of it but my perception is that there's a lot of expansive space. Having many territories is reflective of lack of space, and this map kind of gives the perception that Scandinavia is as crowded as Tokyo.

I'm sorry IH, but that just sounds like BS to me. First of all this map is not about scandinavia, this is about Nordic countries. That's 5 (five) countries, with different cultures each. Granted, the population is relatively low, and the density of population too, if you compare with places like USA. We don't have any cities with 20-30 million people. But I don't see why that should mean an accurate representation of the area could not be made. To me, the amount of territories reflects the variety of culture in the area. Even within the same countries, the culture is very different in different parts of the countries.

So in summation, I'd favor grouping some of the territories, especially up north, and reducing a few of the bonuses to give some players a chance at getting a bonus.

Umm, not likely to happen. But tell you what: I'll look for a way to add some more impassables between the bonus areas. I'll search the maps for some rivers, forests, whatever, to reduce the borders on 2 or 3 bonuses in sweden & finland. And thus also reducing a few bonuses. That should be a happy compromise

[natty dread]

OK how's this?

Click image to enlarge.

Changes: Added lots of impassables. I didn't have lots to go on, Finland does have a shitton of lakes but they are all small and scattered and do not match the region borders at all. So they were practically useless for this. Rivers, pretty much the same thing, but there is Muoniojoki / Torniojoki which follows conveniently the Sweden/Finland border. So I added that, put some bridges on Käsivarsi... Because I didn't want northern sweden to lose border count, the map needs one big bonus area that is hard to hold, and N.Sweden being the most central one it seems appropriate. That however - with the Rovaniemi/Oulu forest - removed 1 border from North Finland...

So, no useful lakes, only 1 useful river, so I decided to add some forests. Why not? Finland is full of forests. Lots and lots of trees. Put some on Sweden too, but mostly on Finland. First, I put a small forest between Rovaniemi and Oulu territories as I said. Then, a forest on north Karelia (Pohjois-Karjala) which reduces 1 border from both South and Central Finland areas.

Then in Sweden, I just put a small forest between Västergötland and Södermanland, which reduces 1 border from southern Sweden (Gothland).

Now this gives us this border count:

2 borders: Denmark, Iceland
3 borders: N. Norway, S. Norway, S. Sweden, N. Finland, C. Finland
4 borders: S. Finland, N. Sweden
5 borders: C. Sweden

How's that IH? Now 70% of bonus areas have less than 4 borders.

[Industrial Helix]

I like the change, I think it balances the map out more. Before it looked too much like players were going to grab Denmark and Iceland or both and then win the game. I should have clarified that I thought it was the right side of the map that was like a giant Asia. But I think these new impassables help, especially given the terr. size of the map.

Might I suggest extending the forest to protect Kymenlaakso as well? I know that bonus down there can be reduced to 3 borders, but it's 8 territories large and you have to expand onto other areas as to protect.

[natty dread]

I like the change, I think it balances the map out more. Before it looked too much like players were going to grab Denmark and Iceland or both and then win the game. I should have clarified that I thought it was the right side of the map that was like a giant Asia. But I think these new impassables help, especially given the terr. size of the map.

Nice.

Might I suggest extending the forest to protect Kymenlaakso as well? I know that bonus down there can be reduced to 3 borders, but it's 8 territories large and you have to expand onto other areas as to protect.

But why? There's already only 3 borders in both central and northern finland. I fear that making southern finland only 3 borders would make it too easy to take whole finland. South Finland already has a capital, which makes it easier to take: you can first take the capital, then use the bonus to take the rest of the bonus area. I think having one extra border on the bonus balances this nicely. The same as in Sweden, the bonus with the capital has the most borders.

Btw I only count 7 territories in southern finland...


editous: I'm now thinking on connecting Kainuu to Kemijärvi, and making central finland 4 borders again. Reason? The way it is now, if you hold both south and central finland, it gives you an unreasonably high bonus (8) for only 2 borders to defend. So at least making it 3 borders, seems sensible to me. Then I'll switch around the values, so it's (from n to s) 3,4,3. It'll still amount to 12 for the whole country (2 extra for a whole country as always).

Ok so let's look at some bonus combinations under the new plan:

Small countries - Denmark, Faroe, Iceland: 7 troops, 2 borders
Norway & Svalbard - 11 troops, 6 borders
Sweden - 16 troops, 8 borders
Finland - 13 troops, 3 borders

Denmark, Faroe & S.Sweden - 7 troops, 3 borders
Iceland, Svalbard & N.Norway - 7 troops, 4 borders
S. Norway, S. Sweden, C. Sweden - 13 troops, 6 borders
N. Sweden, N. Finland - 9 troops, 5 borders

Almost everything seems fine to me, just a couple of glitches...

Finland as a whole gets a lot of troops for so few borders, but I think it is balanced against Finland being hard to take, and poor possibilities of expansion - the bottlenecks can work against you as well as for you.

Sweden (as a whole) could get 1 more troop for having so many borders, and being so central.

Norway could also get 1 more troop. This way if they both get more, I could leave finland as it is. But I don't want to make Norway too strong again... I have a possible solution, which involves the Svalbard bonus... making it like this:

Svalbard: +1 if you also hold N. Norway. +2 if you also hold All Norway

This should make everything kosher... I'll make an update tomorrow.

[Gillipig]

Ok here's a map of Nordic Countries!



Latest versions

v.34

Click image to enlarge.

V.33a & 33b

Hi I like the idea but I think it needs some improvements !
Denmark should definitely have a higher bonus, give Denmark a bonus of 4 and an extra bonus of 1 if holding Färöarna and Bornholm and connect nordjylland with "västra götaland" (like we say in Gothenburgh) that way Denmark will be harder to hold. I also think that you should lower Norrlands bonus to 5 and raise what you call "Gothland" to 4 (I think South Sweden would be a better name) How about a bonus if holding all capitals? And a big bonus if holding: Rovaniemi, Kemijärvi, Pohjios lappi, Käsivarsi, Finnmark, Troms, Lofoten, Norra lappland and Norrbotten. The bonus could be called Lappland. I also think the route from Iceland to Svalbard should go through Reykjavik since it's from there EVERYTHING is controlled on Iceland (that would also give Reykjavik a bigger value!) And I aslo think that finland's great lake Saimaa should be an impassable. And aditionally I think that there should be some twist to it, maybe a war theme or something! I'm looking forward to play on this map however it turns out !
If I would say ONE thing that I would like to change over the others it would be the bonus of Denmark! Historically Sweden and Denmark are the superpowers of the region, so it's unfair to give Denmark a such a low bonus!

[natty dread]

Thanks for your input Gillipig!

Unfortunately I'll have to tell you that bonus values are chosen for gameplay reasons, they are not meant to reflect any real world structures.

I will also not be making Denmark harder to hold, the map needs bonuses that are easy to hold, Denmark & Iceland are the only bonus areas that have only 2 borders so I will not be adding any borders to either of them. This just can't be done.

The lapland bonus you suggest sounds intriguing, but I fear it would make the map too complicated. I don't see a feasible way to implement it.

Gothland is the actual translation of "Götaland". See here -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gothland

I will also have to turn down your idea of connecting Svalbard to Reykjavik. Again this is for gameplay reasons, I don't want to make Iceland only have 1 border.

Your worries about the bonuses of Denmark are unfounded, I assure you. It is probably the strongest areas in the map, it can be held with only 2 territories to defend, and can be easily expanded to create very strong bonus combinations: On one side you can expand to Faroe and further to Iceland, on the other you can expand to Gothland. It is a very strong area, I think you'll find that in most games players will be going for Denmark first, if they can.

As was explained earlier in the thread, the lakes of Finland are too small and scattered and do not match any of the territory borders. It would be impossible to use them as impassables in this scale. I'd like to, but it's just not feasible.

A bonus for holding all capitals, well, in a way you already get one: you get 5 troops for holding all capitals, although scattered all over the map... do you think they should give even more? How could that be balanced against the rest of the map? Do you see a way to do this without making the capitals too strong?

I feel a bit bad for shooting down all of your suggestions. Your ideas are good, but at this point in map development, they just don't fit the gameplay of the map. I really liked your idea of making a bonus for holding the lapland area, and actually I have been thinking something similar myself. But alas, I can not see a way to implement this without making the map too complex and confusing. Sorry.

Feel free to pm me if you wish to discuss these issues more in depth.

[natty dread]

Update as promised:

Click image to enlarge.

[natty dread]

Hehe, I'm sorry for double/triple posting, but I gotta post this, it's just too funny....

I put the forest in south sweden there because I needed an impassable there, just randomly like, you know.

Then look what I found in wiki... there actually are huge forests there, that have served as some kind of region borders in the past!



Well, I consider myself lucky... I was already fearing the Swedish fans of the map storming the thread, enragedly shouting "there's no forest there!!!"

[Gillipig]

Thanks for your input Gillipig!

Unfortunately I'll have to tell you that bonus values are chosen for gameplay reasons, they are not meant to reflect any real world structures.

I will also not be making Denmark harder to hold, the map needs bonuses that are easy to hold, Denmark & Iceland are the only bonus areas that have only 2 borders so I will not be adding any borders to either of them. This just can't be done.

The lapland bonus you suggest sounds intriguing, but I fear it would make the map too complicated. I don't see a feasible way to implement it.

Gothland is the actual translation of "Götaland". See here -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gothland

I will also have to turn down your idea of connecting Svalbard to Reykjavik. Again this is for gameplay reasons, I don't want to make Iceland only have 1 border.

Your worries about the bonuses of Denmark are unfounded, I assure you. It is probably the strongest areas in the map, it can be held with only 2 territories to defend, and can be easily expanded to create very strong bonus combinations: On one side you can expand to Faroe and further to Iceland, on the other you can expand to Gothland. It is a very strong area, I think you'll find that in most games players will be going for Denmark first, if they can.

As was explained earlier in the thread, the lakes of Finland are too small and scattered and do not match any of the territory borders. It would be impossible to use them as impassables in this scale. I'd like to, but it's just not feasible.

A bonus for holding all capitals, well, in a way you already get one: you get 5 troops for holding all capitals, although scattered all over the map... do you think they should give even more? How could that be balanced against the rest of the map? Do you see a way to do this without making the capitals too strong?

I feel a bit bad for shooting down all of your suggestions. Your ideas are good, but at this point in map development, they just don't fit the gameplay of the map. I really liked your idea of making a bonus for holding the lapland area, and actually I have been thinking something similar myself. But alas, I can not see a way to implement this without making the map too complex and confusing. Sorry.

Feel free to pm me if you wish to discuss these issues more in depth.

Don't feel bad for that I'm just brainstorming, if the ideas doesn't fit then you shouldn't use them! I see that you've come a long way with this map already so I understand that you're reluctant towards major changes especially when it comes to bonuses and game themes. In my ideal dreams this map would've had a war theme maybe about the Swedish Empire and then Denmark shoul've had more territs. And there should've been ships to conquer! But until there's a map like that this will be my favorite map!!! I'm thinking of creating a map myself but I don't really know how to do it. What programs do I need and etc?
I didn't know that Götaland translates into Gothland in English but since Göteborg is Gothenburgh in English I should've been able to guess it !

[natty dread]

Don't feel bad for that I'm just brainstorming, if the ideas doesn't fit then you shouldn't use them! I see that you've come a long way with this map already so I understand that you're reluctant towards major changes especially when it comes to bonuses and game themes.

Not really reluctant as such... You had some good ideas such as the lapland bonus, but like I said I don't see a feasible way to implement it at this point.

In my ideal dreams this map would've had a war theme maybe about the Swedish Empire and then Denmark shoul've had more territs. And there should've been ships to conquer! But until there's a map like that this will be my favorite map!!!

Thanks for that. Yeah, maybe a map like that could be made in the future, but this map is more a general representation of the modern day Nordics and their territories.

I'm thinking of creating a map myself but I don't really know how to do it. What programs do I need and etc?

Any graphics software that utilizes layers will do. I myself use paint.net. Most use photoshop or GIMP, though.

I didn't know that Götaland translates into Gothland in English but since Göteborg is Gothenburgh in English I should've been able to guess it !

Yeah. I think the english name sounds cool though. Gothland has a nice gothic feel to it...

The reason I wanted the bonus area names in english is, because a few of the bonus zones are whole countries (Denmark & Iceland) and also the superzones of "All Norway", "All Sweden" and "All Finland" should match the bonus zones under them... If for example finnish bonuses were in finnish, Finland would be Suomi and I don't think everyone knows that word. Norge and Sverige would be more obvious, but I want the bonus names to be consistent, and easily recognizable. I want the map to be easily approachable by others than europeans too. A great majority of CC players comes from the US... However, having the territory names in the local languages preserves some of the cultural flavour of the area.

I kept Norrland as Norrland though, since there is no proper translation for the name. I guess I could make it Northland or Nordland if it bothers people... but it hasn't so far...

Anyway, thanks a lot for your feedback on the map.