Mad-elph wrote:I've just started on this map having not noticed it addition until last week. I really enjoy it for what it is, but I do have issues with the design in context of history. I have not read all 36 pages on this so maybe its been already responded to. I read the first 3 and the last 3. Anyway, I am a Classics and Political Science student and my senior seminar is on the Peloponnesian War, the work of Thucydides. I think this map's design is misguided for the Peloponnesian War. Its a great map but does not really capture the battles or real territory of dispute in the Pelo war. The fact that noone starts in the Peloponnese is a huge red haring, and going there does nothing for you really. I am guessing that you just took the Ancient Greece or Alexander map and fused them.
I would love to contribute to an accurate depiction, and don't want to dismay the designer, but I think its faulty in that it put more emphasis on fights in Asia Minor and Thrace instead of Hellas and some cycladic islands. Furthermore names such as Pontus, Romans, Persians are wrong for the era. In 431 Rome had not united Italy. Persia was in dismay and did little for either side in the war. Pontus was a Persian settlement that didn't do anything during the war. Instead of Rome you should have Sicily which is a big part of Athens War, as they wanted the Sicilian wheat and to dominate Syracuse, much to their failure.
Emphasis should be put to a lower level... It should be on empires and their vassal states, Athens should get a bonus if it holds Pylos, or Potidea etc. Sparta if it takes Delos or controls Attica or the Argives.
The map should exclude Asia for the most part. Rhodes, Crete, Halicarnasus (where most of my playing of the map have found to be the focal point) have minor involvement, acting only as tributaries to Athens in the later part of the War. Halicarnasus is from Alexander's exploits. As far East as the map should go is the inclusion of Lesbos as that is really as far as this war is concerned Eastward. To the north you can cut some too. I know this plays down the maneuvering there but its all wrong. There is a lot in the war over the Chalcidian lands.
If scaled right you could have more regions in the Peloponnese, a few in Chalcidia etc... the emphasis should be on cities here as that is how they battled. Laying siege to cities and commanding the surrounding area. When you wanted to attack someone you'd land an army, ravage the land so they had no food stuffs and if they came out of their fortress you'd battle them, if not you'd leave to fight another summer.
I'd love to help make an appropriate map... If you want me to I can try, but I can't do too much until Dec, when I finish my degree.
Ummmmmmm..........??????
Wow!!!!!!!!!!!!
Holy Crap Mad-elph your a little, and by a little I mean incredibly, late on posting that this map needs a complete and total overhaul. This map has been in production for nearly a year, and has been available for play for several months now. If you wished to make a post like this that time was about 11 months ago.
I love this map. It looks awesome, and it has excellent game play on several different settings. The objective of all 8 shields however is completely unrealistic and should be removed entirely, in my opinion, and not modified.
If this map's slight historical inaccuracies offend your college level understanding of this period that much then don't play it. Plain and simple.
Furthermore if qwert's depiction of this war truly offend you that much then just make a new map that doesn't offend your uni sensibilities. Don't expect a completed map to be changed simply because it doesn't agree with your little thesis.
Oh and by the way your vain attempt at showing everyone how smart you are has not impressed me in the least.
and the objective aspect has never been a consideration for me
