Indochina Map [Done]

by **AndyDufresne** on Wed Apr 26, 2006 8:42 pm

Once I've an open spot I'll give it a shot. Don't get me wrong, I've nothing against you, just your rush to see this map finished. I just want CC to have the best possible maps.

Edit: I've got a game up and running and once I finish it I'll give a detailed analysis of how it went.

--Andy

by **Marvaddin** on Wed Apr 26, 2006 10:26 pm

This map sucks because the continents arent well designed. They have much more borders than they should. The single exception is Tonkin. 31 is a fucking number. You should use a different font for the oceans, too (Gulf of Tonkin seems a name of a country). Textures would be welcome...

By the way, you was trying do the worst legend ever, too... This isnt difficult, centralize the longer name, put the names exactly under the others, use bars of same width...

Its much less ridiculous than the previous version, I admit. But if you dont increase the playability, it will be a forgotten map very soon. All map is more played in the beggining, then the better ones are more played. The Crossword "map", as I warned, is the less used. And yours will be the same too, believe me.

by **AndyDufresne** on Thu Apr 27, 2006 7:31 pm

Okay, I recently finished a game on the current Indochina map that is up for playing. These are some things I've noticed from doing a playtest.

________________________________________

---The southern portion of the map is extremely powerful. Once you take over say Cochinchina and cambodia, you can limit yourself to 2 borders in the center of the dumbell bottleneck. This gives you a quick 7 for 2 borders. Annam is impossible to hold, as I stated before, especially when the tactic of taking over the southern portion of the map is employed. The northern portion is not as strong as the south, but obviously better than the middle. In the north a bonus of 3 can easily be gotten, and you can also limit yourself to 2 borders in the center bottleneck. Laos is also nearly impossible to hold for this reason.

---The bottleneck is a main problem with how the map currently is. The map really only seems to have 3 areas. The Strong South with two continents, and the North with 1, and then lastly 'No Man's Land' in between--the 7 countries that make up the bottle neck. This nearly becomes only a war on 1 front. Now I played a 3 person game, and the person toward the south had the greatest advantage. The person in the north was still doing alright, but the player in the middle was utterly screwed due to lack of any continents worth holding.

---I'm not sure how you can change the bottleneck, without adding more countries (which surely a few should be added considering there are only 31). Impassable borders would greatly benefit Laos and Annam. Perhaps then the map might not then divulge into a 1 front war.

--Andy

by **lilwdlnddude** on Thu Apr 27, 2006 9:13 pm

Yeah im in 2 indochina games and annam is REALLY hard to hold because maybe, 9 countries are bordering it?? it is touching every "continent" on the map. same with laos only cochinchina isnt touching it. but maybe thats the point of the map. to have a "no mans land". I dont know... I guess it just requires alot of quick decisions, and if thoes are bad decisions then your screwed.

by **Marvaddin** on Thu Apr 27, 2006 9:15 pm

Andy, sometimes I think you are crazy. Did you REALLY play THIS map?? I cant believe :lol:

by **AndyDufresne** on Thu Apr 27, 2006 9:31 pm

Yeah, I played it. It was one of the weirdest games of my life. I figured I would give it a shot in play, and as it stands now it failed. But its going to be worked one (and maybe even with impassable borders!)

--Andy

by **freakshow** on Fri Apr 28, 2006 6:48 am

Yeah I was looking at a map of Indochina and I figured I may as well do a mock up of my map with realistic uncrossable borders, what do you think?

by **kevinc** on Fri Apr 28, 2006 8:24 am

I've been playing games with this map and seems like it has a lot of promise. Hard to say if the two big continents are good or bad yet.

I think it's good if every map doesn't have the same dynamic as the classic map, so it's not neccessarily a bad thing.

(Also, I actually liked the simplicity and strong colours of the original map more than the new one)

by **Black Jack** on Fri Apr 28, 2006 9:37 am

IMO, this map has potential as a Triples game.

One team is the "gov't" and the other is the "Viet Minh" :wink:

I looked at a couple of strategic VietNam game-maps... that I own.

Both use a combination of mountains and rivers to regulate movement.

The Mekong and several other rivers... are not insignificant bodies of water.

by **freakshow** on Sat Apr 29, 2006 7:31 am

What I was wondering is if anyone had any advice on which borders are needed in which places, Marv I know you'll have a say in this and I will take your considerations to heart.

by **Black Jack** on Sat Apr 29, 2006 9:55 am

A couple of online maps... showing the rivers of Indochina:

Map #1 - Rivers

Map #2 - Rivers

I'm still searching for a good map that shows the mountains.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Found a good one:

Map #3 - Mountains

by **Marvaddin** on Sat Apr 29, 2006 10:46 am

Oh, well... the problem is the bottleneck, and it will still be there after these mountains. I edited it a bit, and its much more playable now, but it cant be the final version.

http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f44/M ... alarge.png

I want suggest you some things:
1) You can add Thailand and Malaysia to the map
2) Split some countries would be good. Examples: Sainyabuli, Cao Bang, Ko Kong, Pleiku, etc.

The true point: the bottleneck cant be of both Laos and Vietnam, it will kill the map!!

by **freakshow** on Sat Apr 29, 2006 6:17 pm

Marv, thanks for the input but If it add Thailand and malaysia I lose the fact that it's the French colony of indo china. Splitting countries will be hard as I'm fairly pressed of space already. I was considering adding some ports and possible the ability to conquer areas like the tonkin gulf and the southchina sea, this could bring the country count up to 36, which I know you like. Your edits are interesting but totally unreasonable as they ignore any historical borders that exist. In real life French Indochina was divided into the areas I have on my maps, today Cochinchina, Annam, and Laos form Vietnam. I'm willing to sacrifice some things for playablity but throwing away any historical accuracy is going a little to far.

by **Marvaddin** on Sun Apr 30, 2006 2:10 pm

Well, I dont know if your map is historical or a normal geo map...

I undertsand, and I think you are right, but no need to be 100% accurate. You will need change some borders. And I cant believe you are talking its difficult split some countries there...

But in fact, the truth is: the central region cant belong to 2 continents. You can call it "Central Indochina" or anything, but split it into 2 continents is impossible. How about the following continents: Central Indochina, North Laos (or another name), Tonkin (or Norht Vietnam), Cambodia, and South Vietnam (or Annam)? We can forget Cochinchina, or with some new countries we can maybe have 3 continents in the south side of the map

Sea ports? Are you serious? It will be worse, since we had already excess of borders...

Seriously, I know we can have 36 countries. And we need get free from the bottleneck. After that, the rest we can correct.

by **Black Jack** on Sun Apr 30, 2006 3:18 pm

And we need get free from the bottleneck.

I would think that the use of ports... would help break-up the bottleneck.

I think five ports should be added ... this brings us up to 36 territories.

Ports are only connected to other adjacent ports... movement/attacking is no different than from Brazil to N. Africa.

There are now three north-south lines of advance... instead of two.

Also, as Marv said... be flexible with your continents.

Balance is more important... than historical accuracy.

by **AndyDufresne** on Sun Apr 30, 2006 3:21 pm

I believe I've got to throw this out there.

---I know you've worked quite hard on this map, and fought various suggestions and comprimised throughout the way. This map, as many map makers say, is there 'baby'. You want to see it grow, and prosper, flourishing into the new realm of fun playability. But sometimes maps need to orphaned. I'm not sure that without doing some sort of drastic changes, this map will ever be as near playable, and fun as the others. As it stands now, and how you want the pursuit of the map to go, I'm not sure there currently is or will be enough to change the map for the good. Perhaps it's time to give the map a final rest, and let it go the way of the wind as a few other defunct maps.

=========================

--Andy

by **HighBorn** on Sun Apr 30, 2006 3:23 pm

well said....

by **freakshow** on Sun Apr 30, 2006 3:29 pm

AndyDufresne wrote:I believe I've got to throw this out there.

---I know you've worked quite hard on this map, and fought various suggestions and comprimised throughout the way. This map, as many map makers say, is there 'baby'. You want to see it grow, and prosper, flourishing into the new realm of fun playability. But sometimes maps need to orphaned. I'm not sure that without doing some sort of drastic changes, this map will ever be as near playable, and fun as the others. As it stands now, and how you want the pursuit of the map to go, I'm not sure there currently is or will be enough to change the map for the good. Perhaps it's time to give the map a final rest, and let it go the way of the wind as a few other defunct maps.

=========================

--Andy

Thanks for the vote of confidence Andy. Any way I'll add my sea ports dispite Marv's suggestions, with the use of naural impassable borders I'll keep the number of borders fairly reasonable. In addion the way I plan on having the ports work it will alow crazy things like attacking from Tonkin to Cambodia which will take alot of stress off that bottle neck.

by **kevinc** on Mon May 01, 2006 10:19 am

freakshow - I've played a few games on this map, and they've all been great.

I've been playing around with some interesting ideas for strategies on it, and I think ultimately that's what's needed. People will have to play a different type of game on this map. That's okay, that's good. You can't compare it straight to the classic map, and different rules apply.

by **Fieryo** on Mon May 01, 2006 4:35 pm

I personally am a fan of the map. however i do agree that the bottle neck is too easy to control and once you do, you have basically won the game. My suggestions are:

1) darken the color of Cochinchina, right now it blends in with Cambodia too much.

2) i know you are a Vietnam person (i sit next to you in both classes) and i can understand the earge to resist adding Thailand, but i would find it acceptable to make it the "French Indochina and Surrounding Areas Map".

3) I also like the idea of adding water-based "countries" it would make the map even more unique and it would solve the isse of the bottle neck-which i dont think is a bad idea, just make it harder to control

Other than that, hooray for a job well done (so far

)