Moderator: Cartographers
n.n. wrote:@skeletonboy: sorry, pls help me understand what do you mean by "add border countries faintly round the edge" ? Do you mean that the border lines should be rounder rather than broken like they are now or?
n.n. wrote:Thank you skeletonboy, i understand now what you meant and i am definitely adding the neighbor countries borders, that puts the country in a political/geographical context.
I have given much thought to the idea of adding bonuses for holding capitals, that was the original idea too, but i was i afraid that would also lead to more complicated gameplay.
Right now i am thinking about adding not "1 armies for 3 capitals, 2 for 5 etc." rule but rather the "X armies for holding any Y capitals" rule - it would be less complicated i think. Don't have idea what numbers X and Y should be though.
Another similar idea is to include the "X armies for holding Skopje + Y other capitals" rule instead, Skopje being the capital of the country.
Thoughts on this one (armies for capitals / gameplay implications, X=?, Y=?) ?
isaiah40 wrote:As for Skopje, you could have it set for +x auto deploy as well. Bonuses for holding x amount of capitals wouldn't necessarily make it more complicated, it just adds a little more strategy I think.
As for x armies for holding Skopje and y capitals would also work very well. Looking at your map I'm leaning towards the latter, hold the capital and x capitals to receive y troops. It would very well for this map.
skeletonboy wrote:I like this, maybe add border countries faintly round the edge.
Evil DIMwit wrote:Ah, much better. Now we can start the analysis.isaiah40 wrote:As for Skopje, you could have it set for +x auto deploy as well. Bonuses for holding x amount of capitals wouldn't necessarily make it more complicated, it just adds a little more strategy I think.
This map is too small and there are too many capitals to put auto-deploy on every one. Almost a quarter of the territories are capitals -- that gameplay element would take over the map. In any case, capital auto-deploys are far too common nowadays.
Evil DIMwit wrote:Random idea: represent the other countries entirely in shadow and just have the map pop above that, as it does now.
Either way you can keep the arrows.
isaiah40 wrote:Evil DIMwit wrote:Ah, much better. Now we can start the analysis.isaiah40 wrote:As for Skopje, you could have it set for +x auto deploy as well. Bonuses for holding x amount of capitals wouldn't necessarily make it more complicated, it just adds a little more strategy I think.
This map is too small and there are too many capitals to put auto-deploy on every one. Almost a quarter of the territories are capitals -- that gameplay element would take over the map. In any case, capital auto-deploys are far too common nowadays.
Let me rephrase here. You could put an auto deploy of x armies on Skopje only, not on every capital, OR you could go the way of x armies for holding y capitals. NOT both.
Evil DIMwit wrote:Ah, I see. Well, my thoughts on auto-deploys still stand: at this point, you need a more compelling reason for auto-deploy than "it's the capital."
n.n. wrote:The Skopje continent actually has 4 territories (Skopje, Crna Gora, Studenicani, Petrovec) - is it not clear?
If it is not clear enough please suggest how to make it clearer - maybe add thin black border lines on the edge of the river?
n.n. wrote:Also, i am very much leaning towards no special bonuses for holding capitals and also no auto-deploy, i guess i am a bit old school but i like things as clean and as simple as they can be and i would really like to have that with this map and its gameplay.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users