Australia [Quenched]

by **AndyDufresne** on Thu Nov 23, 2006 5:27 pm

The crowded region to the south isn't so bad. I think I can pretty easily distinguish which names corresponds with which area.

I do like the new look the map has.

Also, about the 'puzzle piece' look, it might be beneficial to add it to areas with north/south borders, and not just east/west borders. (I.E. the Orange--Green border and the Purple--Blue border, and also perhaps the Blue--Sea Green border.)

Regarding Cow's suggestion about blocking Western Downs and Lake Eyre, and allowing a Broken Hill and Adelaide...that might just help make the south stronger. But, sometimes eliminating some 'Fronts' that don't necessarily decrease the number of borders can help the playability of a map. Perhaps we can look into a few others.

--Andy

by **KEYOGI** on Thu Nov 23, 2006 7:06 pm

What if I eliminated the mountains altogether and extended Adelaide northwards? So Adelaide would border Western Downs and Broken Hill. Lake Eyre would be completely cut off from Western Downs and still border Mt. Isa. It would mean increasing the number of countries in South Australia (lime green) that could be be attacked from, but it would mean Lake Eyre would be easier to defend.

The problems with the borders should be easily fixed. I'll take care of that for the next update.

by **KEYOGI** on Thu Nov 23, 2006 7:10 pm

I just had another thought. I could still eliminate the mountains, but move the lake in Lake Eyre to the east creating the impassable border between Lake Eyre and Western Downs.

by **cowshrptrn** on Fri Nov 24, 2006 12:42 am

What i meant to say is that i think the southeast corner has too many boundaries, and that you should allow broken hill to attack adelaide, makes for a more open game paly that fits in with the rest of the map.

by **gavin_sidhu** on Sat Nov 25, 2006 4:15 am

preferred the old ocean, this is too faded.

by **Hoff** on Sat Nov 25, 2006 12:46 pm

I liked the darker ocean alot better.

by **Lupo** on Sat Nov 25, 2006 1:04 pm

What do you think about the idea to put some desert area in this map?
In this way you could have more unpassable borders...

by **w3a2** on Sun Nov 26, 2006 8:06 pm

a few comments.

1. i like this better than the other Aus map.
2. i'm not sure about the mountain range on the NSW/SA border - is it even there?
3. I like the idea of using desert as a border rather than rivers
4. what about Tas -> Sydney as a sea-way line of attack. maybe also from TAS to Adelaide as well. opens up the VIC area (i'd like to have seen TAS as a 2 territory continent myself)
5. include NZ?

having said that, i like the look of it.

by **KEYOGI** on Sun Nov 26, 2006 11:02 pm

So I've finally got the key and title back in there, took a while to get something I was happy with.

I've moved the mountains North to block Lake Eyre and Western Downs, opening up Adelaide and Broken Hill. Do we still need the mountains though, I can't even remember why they were put in? They're supposed to represent the Flinders Ranges, but they're too far North-East now.

I'm not quite sure how the desert idea is supposed to work. I've got four deserts represented already with Sandy, Gibson, Victoria and Simpson. But considering something like 70% of the country is desert, it's only going to be the territories along the coasts that aren't desert. Feel free to elaborate on the idea, I just can't see how it would implemented.

by **reverend_kyle** on Sun Nov 26, 2006 11:12 pm

I'd say this is final forge worthy about right now.. I dont have any problems with it...

I am starting to dislike the puzzle piece look though.

by **gavin_sidhu** on Mon Nov 27, 2006 12:55 am

Maybe you should move lake eyre so it blocks of Simpson from any other continent, this would make N.T. much more desirable. The border between WA and SA r not perfect, as with NT and SA.

Also, you moving the mountains has allowed the person who owns queensland to take out NSW without adding to his borders, not sure thats a good thing.

by **Marvaddin** on Mon Nov 27, 2006 8:01 am

KEYOGI wrote:Do we still need the mountains though, I can't even remember why they were put in?

The mountains were to give Southern Australia one less border, and now they are useless to it. I would still have them in the old place.

Why the black background in the legend / title? I also disliked their border.

by **KEYOGI** on Mon Nov 27, 2006 8:08 pm

Marvaddin wrote:Why the black background in the legend / title? I also disliked their border.

Why not? You got a better colour?

by **KEYOGI** on Tue Nov 28, 2006 3:36 am

Moved the mountains a little south.

Adjusted the transparency of the key and title backgrounds.

I tried a number of options with the lake to help with borders, but none of them looked right. Hard to explain.

by **reverend_kyle** on Tue Nov 28, 2006 3:46 am

I still dislike the puzzle piece look and think there's enough color differentiation but I like the legend/title...

Final forge i'd say.

by **KEYOGI** on Tue Nov 28, 2006 4:17 am

reverend_kyle wrote:I still dislike the puzzle piece look

I'll look at adjusting that next update. I just forgot this time around.

by **gavin_sidhu** on Tue Nov 28, 2006 4:20 am

umm.... so what are the mountains for? They dont seem to be blocking much. Also I can see people getting confused with the names Mt. Gambier and Grampians. Position Grampians so it clearly refers to the territory Grampians, and not Mt. Gambier (remember that people usually take there turns quickly and if it takes more than a while to notice which is which, they will have already made the mistake)

by **KEYOGI** on Tue Nov 28, 2006 4:39 am

gavin_sidhu wrote:umm.... so what are the mountains for? They dont seem to be blocking much. Also I can see people getting confused with the names Mt. Gambier and Grampians. Position Grampians so it clearly refers to the territory Grampians, and not Mt. Gambier (remember that people usually take there turns quickly and if it takes more than a while to notice which is which, they will have already made the mistake)

The mountains are blocking any attacks between Western Downs and Adelaide, but that can be done without mountains. I think they should go, but that's the problem with making a map, everyone has different ideas of what works best.

I've mentioned the Mt. Gambier/Grampians thing before. Andy felt it was clear enough, but I can easily change the name of the Grampians to something shorter that will hopefully fit within its territory.

by **gavin_sidhu** on Tue Nov 28, 2006 4:57 am

I think ur right, its best to be without the mountains, if you block S.A. to anything, you make it to easy to take NSW from Queensland (no more borders). The only way I see the mountains working, is if you make Lake Eyre border Broken hill and then block Adelaide to Broken Hill.

I know that your Victoria territory is where the desert is, but i think you should rename it, to stop confusion with Victoria the continent. I remember when I first played the US map, i spent a long time searching for the territory Washington in the area around Washington D.C., when the state is on the other side of the country. Victoria as a territory is too confusing.

The border between W.A. and S.A. is still wonky.

by **jaydog** on Tue Nov 28, 2006 7:13 pm

sorry, but this map looks as though you've ripped of gonzo and jas_in_obits map.

by **Marvaddin** on Tue Nov 28, 2006 9:08 pm

I really think South Australia should have 3 borders, not 4, so Im up to totally block external attacks to Adelaide. Do you realize its the single region that borders all others?

You can move Mt Gambier name a bit to North and West, I think it will look better. And maybe give to Melbourne some more land from Grampians and Gippsland... its too smal, and maybe numbers will cover the borders.

The legend looks better now, but there is some wasted space there. Like, will you put something over Western Australia, or Mountains?

by **sfhbballnut** on Tue Nov 28, 2006 9:30 pm

Is western austrailia really worth a bonus of six? If you have alice springs as well its got only three borders. It is visualy amazing, but I think that the bonuses are a little off or some of the borders

by **gavin_sidhu** on Tue Nov 28, 2006 11:56 pm

sfhbballnut wrote:Is western austrailia really worth a bonus of six? If you have alice springs as well its got only three borders. It is visualy amazing, but I think that the bonuses are a little off or some of the borders

But if you take Alice Springs you will have 10 countries and 3 borders, N.A. in classic has 9 countries, 3 borders.

by **KEYOGI** on Wed Nov 29, 2006 12:28 am

I'm considering reworking some territory borders for the next update. My options really are limited with the geography of the country and its states. So if people have suggestions for how many territories should border in each state and what bonuses should go with that, I'm open for suggestions.

Victoria, New South Wales and Queensland are pretty much set. I'm keen to try and solve some of the issues in Western Australia, Northern Territory and South Australia though... without resorting to mountains or rivers or any other impassable borders to solve problems.

by **reverend_kyle** on Wed Nov 29, 2006 3:02 am

jaydog wrote:sorry, but this map looks as though you've ripped of gonzo and jas_in_obits map.

as far as I know there arent alot of different ways to divide australia..

Australia [Quenched]

Who is online