I agree with natty (and by the transitive property, myselfnatty_dread wrote:Well, I think Gaya would still be relatively weak, due to small size and each territory being a border. But I also understand your reasoning, so I'll go ahead and change Tang & Wa.Industrial Helix wrote:Wa... yeah. i can get behind that so long as it still retains that -4 for holding any capital with the bonus.Anyway, all other points are good, I would support these changes:
Wa = +2
Tang = +3 for 2
Gaya = +1 for 1
Tang... I can get behind that as well. Tang needs to be a strong area, but perhaps I might have over done it.
Gaya... I'm not liking it. I don't like the idea of Gaya being a good place to hole up and use as a base of operations. I think it make Gaya too powerful. Their historical function was to be a weak confederacy that was absorbed by Baekje and Silla, the map ought to reflect this towards the middle part of the game.
Three Kingdoms of Korea [Quenched]
Moderator: Cartographers
Forum rules
Please read the Community Guidelines before posting.
Please read the Community Guidelines before posting.
- Victor Sullivan
- Posts: 6010
- Joined: Mon Feb 08, 2010 8:17 pm
- Gender: Male
- Location: Columbus, OH
- Contact:
Re: Three Kingdoms of Korea v7
Beckytheblondie: "Don't give us the dispatch, give us a mustache ride."
Scaling back on my CC involvement...
Scaling back on my CC involvement...
- natty dread
- Posts: 12876
- Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2008 8:58 pm
- Location: just plain fucked
- Victor Sullivan
- Posts: 6010
- Joined: Mon Feb 08, 2010 8:17 pm
- Gender: Male
- Location: Columbus, OH
- Contact:
Re: Three Kingdoms of Korea v7.2
That's a reasonable solution, I think.natty_dread wrote:I wonder if making it +2 for 2 would work.
Beckytheblondie: "Don't give us the dispatch, give us a mustache ride."
Scaling back on my CC involvement...
Scaling back on my CC involvement...
- Industrial Helix
- Posts: 3462
- Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2008 6:49 pm
- Gender: Female
- Location: Ohio
Re: Three Kingdoms of Korea v7.2
Sorry, a bit lost... +2 for which two territories? Gaya? If its Gaya I think it might be too much. I mean, plus 4 for a region that is only four territories in size? Even if they are all borders... that's a little steep.
Name Pending -> Lushun
Name Pending -> Lushun
Sketchblog [Update 07/25/11]: http://indyhelixsketch.blogspot.com/
Living in Japan [Update 07/17/11]: http://mirrorcountryih.blogspot.com/
Russian Revolution map for ConquerClub [07/20/11]: http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewto ... 1&t=116575
Living in Japan [Update 07/17/11]: http://mirrorcountryih.blogspot.com/
Russian Revolution map for ConquerClub [07/20/11]: http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewto ... 1&t=116575
- natty dread
- Posts: 12876
- Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2008 8:58 pm
- Location: just plain fucked
Re: Three Kingdoms of Korea v7.2
Man, I wish there was something in between... 1 for 2 seems a bit low, and 2 for 2 seems too high.
I mean, if you don't also hold Silla, then holding all of Gaya is really hard because Geumgwan-gaya is separated from the rest and behind Silla's capital... So a bonus of 2 really doesn't seem worthwhile for holding all of it. But then a bonus of 4 is too much, because Gaya will be an easy addition to Silla, making Silla + Gaya too powerful...
I think, unless we can find a good compromise, I will side with IH here, we should keep it at 1/2.
I mean, if you don't also hold Silla, then holding all of Gaya is really hard because Geumgwan-gaya is separated from the rest and behind Silla's capital... So a bonus of 2 really doesn't seem worthwhile for holding all of it. But then a bonus of 4 is too much, because Gaya will be an easy addition to Silla, making Silla + Gaya too powerful...
I think, unless we can find a good compromise, I will side with IH here, we should keep it at 1/2.

- natty dread
- Posts: 12876
- Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2008 8:58 pm
- Location: just plain fucked
Re: Three Kingdoms of Korea v7.3
After some discussion, we ended up on Shabei for the name of the new territory.
And also, after some thought, I think 1/2 for Gaya makes most sense historically. Gaya was not a player in the big league. If it was, the period would be called "Four Kingdoms of Korea"...
So anyway, in a gameplay sense, it should be easy to take for a quick bonus. So how about we lower Bon-Gaya:s neutrals to 2 (as opposed to 3 for other capitals)?
And also, after some thought, I think 1/2 for Gaya makes most sense historically. Gaya was not a player in the big league. If it was, the period would be called "Four Kingdoms of Korea"...
So anyway, in a gameplay sense, it should be easy to take for a quick bonus. So how about we lower Bon-Gaya:s neutrals to 2 (as opposed to 3 for other capitals)?

- theBastard
- Posts: 994
- Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 9:05 am
Re: Three Kingdoms of Korea v7.3
looks good now.
just bon-gaya is only capital with junk - I mean only this one capital is possible to attack through sea.
just bon-gaya is only capital with junk - I mean only this one capital is possible to attack through sea.
- natty dread
- Posts: 12876
- Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2008 8:58 pm
- Location: just plain fucked
Re: Three Kingdoms of Korea v7.3
Actually, this brings up a good point.theBastard wrote:looks good now.
just bon-gaya is only capital with junk - I mean only this one capital is possible to attack through sea.
Tamna is one thing, but why would anyone want to assault Kyushu from Bon-Gaya, or vice versa? This seems like a pointless sea route, now.
I think the green junk in Bon-Gaya could be moved to either Muju or Hwang-Sanbeol.

- theBastard
- Posts: 994
- Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 9:05 am
Re: Three Kingdoms of Korea v7.3
also this...natty_dread wrote:Actually, this brings up a good point.theBastard wrote:looks good now.
just bon-gaya is only capital with junk - I mean only this one capital is possible to attack through sea.
Tamna is one thing, but why would anyone want to assault Kyushu from Bon-Gaya, or vice versa? This seems like a pointless sea route, now.
hwang-sanbeol will be good strategic region with green junk with acess to two capitals and one castle.natty_dread wrote: I think the green junk in Bon-Gaya could be moved to either Muju or Hwang-Sanbeol.
hm, maybe also junk from gyaongju could be removed... and from chonsong fortress...?
- natty dread
- Posts: 12876
- Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2008 8:58 pm
- Location: just plain fucked
Re: Three Kingdoms of Korea v7.3
I don't see any reason for doing that.theBastard wrote:hm, maybe also junk from gyaongju could be removed... and from chonsong fortress...?

- theBastard
- Posts: 994
- Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 9:05 am
Re: Three Kingdoms of Korea v7.3
it was just notice. as previous one. there is no more capital connect by junk. and also no more castle. if you are fine with this then I´m toonatty_dread wrote:I don't see any reason for doing that.theBastard wrote:hm, maybe also junk from gyaongju could be removed... and from chonsong fortress...?
- natty dread
- Posts: 12876
- Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2008 8:58 pm
- Location: just plain fucked
Re: Three Kingdoms of Korea v7.3
I don't see why it matters if capitals or castles have sea connections? Except for the Wa connection of course.theBastard wrote:it was just notice. as previous one. there is no more capital connect by junk. and also no more castle. if you are fine with this then I´m too

- theBastard
- Posts: 994
- Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 9:05 am
Re: Three Kingdoms of Korea v7.3
I have nothing against these sea connections, I just try to say that only one capital and only one castle have sea connections. so there is this difference between capitals/castles.
- natty dread
- Posts: 12876
- Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2008 8:58 pm
- Location: just plain fucked
Re: Three Kingdoms of Korea v7.3
I understand that, but I don't see why it matters?theBastard wrote:I have nothing against these sea connections, I just try to say that only one capital and only one castle have sea connections. so there is this difference between capitals/castles.

- Victor Sullivan
- Posts: 6010
- Joined: Mon Feb 08, 2010 8:17 pm
- Gender: Male
- Location: Columbus, OH
- Contact:
Re: Three Kingdoms of Korea v7.3
For the green junk (jeez, I feel like I'm saying something inappropriate
) Muju makes sense just because it's right there, but given that Tarina is a red/green striped territory, it might be good to put the green junk on Hwang-Sanbeol since it borders the red area. Either way I think is good, though I think I might lean toward Hwang-Sanbeol.
Beckytheblondie: "Don't give us the dispatch, give us a mustache ride."
Scaling back on my CC involvement...
Scaling back on my CC involvement...
- natty dread
- Posts: 12876
- Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2008 8:58 pm
- Location: just plain fucked
Re: Three Kingdoms of Korea v7.3
Hwang-sanbeol would make sense from gameplay perspective. Not sure about the historical perspective though. I'll let IH elaborate on that.

- Industrial Helix
- Posts: 3462
- Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2008 6:49 pm
- Gender: Female
- Location: Ohio
Re: Three Kingdoms of Korea v7.3
My reasoning behind the green junk is that Gaya had trade relations with Japan and were the primary exporter of technology to Kyushu. They also had political ties of some sort to Yamato Japan. So it makes sense for them to have some sort of sea ability and relation with Japan.
Though, if you guys want the junk to be place at Hwangsanbeol, that would work too as Wa was defeated by Goguryeo in the mouth of the Geum River (which is right about there).
My most favored solution would be another green junk to form a triangle between these three places.
Though, if you guys want the junk to be place at Hwangsanbeol, that would work too as Wa was defeated by Goguryeo in the mouth of the Geum River (which is right about there).
My most favored solution would be another green junk to form a triangle between these three places.
Sketchblog [Update 07/25/11]: http://indyhelixsketch.blogspot.com/
Living in Japan [Update 07/17/11]: http://mirrorcountryih.blogspot.com/
Russian Revolution map for ConquerClub [07/20/11]: http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewto ... 1&t=116575
Living in Japan [Update 07/17/11]: http://mirrorcountryih.blogspot.com/
Russian Revolution map for ConquerClub [07/20/11]: http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewto ... 1&t=116575
- theBastard
- Posts: 994
- Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 9:05 am
Re: Three Kingdoms of Korea v7.3
if there are records that gaya had relations with Japan, why there is -4 if you hold wa and any capital? what about -4 for wa and any capital except bon-gaya?Industrial Helix wrote:My reasoning behind the green junk is that Gaya had trade relations with Japan and were the primary exporter of technology to Kyushu. They also had political ties of some sort to Yamato Japan. So it makes sense for them to have some sort of sea ability and relation with Japan.
Though, if you guys want the junk to be place at Hwangsanbeol, that would work too as Wa was defeated by Goguryeo in the mouth of the Geum River (which is right about there).
My most favored solution would be another green junk to form a triangle between these three places.
- natty dread
- Posts: 12876
- Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2008 8:58 pm
- Location: just plain fucked
Re: Three Kingdoms of Korea v7.3
I think that would be too complicated. It would also make Gaya too strong, since you could hold Wa + Gaya. Gaya never conquered Japan, nor vice versa.theBastard wrote: if there are records that gaya had relations with Japan, why there is -4 if you hold wa and any capital? what about -4 for wa and any capital except bon-gaya?
Gaya is meant more as a small, easy bonus that is easy to annex to either Baekje or Silla.

- natty dread
- Posts: 12876
- Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2008 8:58 pm
- Location: just plain fucked
Re: Three Kingdoms of Korea v7.3
For the green junk, we have 3 options:
- add a 4th green junk to hwangsanbeol
- move the bon-gaya junk to hwangsanbeol
- move the bon-gaya junk to aragaya
- add a 4th green junk to hwangsanbeol
- move the bon-gaya junk to hwangsanbeol
- move the bon-gaya junk to aragaya

- theBastard
- Posts: 994
- Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 9:05 am
Re: Three Kingdoms of Korea v7.3
the second is the best, I think.
- natty dread
- Posts: 12876
- Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2008 8:58 pm
- Location: just plain fucked
Re: Three Kingdoms of Korea v7.3
I don't know, IH has a good point about Gaya & Japan having had past relations, so having the connection in Aragaya would make sense.
Then again, Hwangsanbeol would make sense too, in the sense that the owner of Silla could easily use it to take Tamna which gives additional bonus to Silla - so it would sort of reward Silla for assaulting Baekje, which fits historical facts well.
So there are historical arguments for both options.
Then again, we could also have a green junk in both Aragaya and Hwangsanbeol (or Bon-Gaya & Hwangsanbeol), but it seems a little redundant to me since they are already adjacent to each other.
Then again, Hwangsanbeol would make sense too, in the sense that the owner of Silla could easily use it to take Tamna which gives additional bonus to Silla - so it would sort of reward Silla for assaulting Baekje, which fits historical facts well.
So there are historical arguments for both options.
Then again, we could also have a green junk in both Aragaya and Hwangsanbeol (or Bon-Gaya & Hwangsanbeol), but it seems a little redundant to me since they are already adjacent to each other.

- theBastard
- Posts: 994
- Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 9:05 am
Re: Three Kingdoms of Korea v7.3
there are 3 green junks while others are only 2. what about to do also other colour junks 3?
green junk move from bon-gaya move to aragaya.
add red junk to hwang-sanbeol. - historical connection as IH said. and hwang-sanbeol will be not connect by aragay over sea.
maybe add brown to lelang. - there will be more connections for tang bonus. and I think when these striped areas were part of tang there were any connections.
green junk move from bon-gaya move to aragaya.
add red junk to hwang-sanbeol. - historical connection as IH said. and hwang-sanbeol will be not connect by aragay over sea.
maybe add brown to lelang. - there will be more connections for tang bonus. and I think when these striped areas were part of tang there were any connections.
I had broken my right hand (4-5 month ago) and now I have wrong adherent knucklebone of the thumb. therefore I have some problems with it and I must end my works on maps.sorry my english
- Industrial Helix
- Posts: 3462
- Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2008 6:49 pm
- Gender: Female
- Location: Ohio
Re: Three Kingdoms of Korea v7.3
Aragaya and Hwangsanbeol.... this seems like the best option.
It just occurred to me... what happens if a player holds Namgyeong and Bongaya... a player shouldn't get both bonuses, the Baekje/Silla bonus system should override. Can we fit this in somewhere?
It just occurred to me... what happens if a player holds Namgyeong and Bongaya... a player shouldn't get both bonuses, the Baekje/Silla bonus system should override. Can we fit this in somewhere?
Sketchblog [Update 07/25/11]: http://indyhelixsketch.blogspot.com/
Living in Japan [Update 07/17/11]: http://mirrorcountryih.blogspot.com/
Russian Revolution map for ConquerClub [07/20/11]: http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewto ... 1&t=116575
Living in Japan [Update 07/17/11]: http://mirrorcountryih.blogspot.com/
Russian Revolution map for ConquerClub [07/20/11]: http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewto ... 1&t=116575
- natty dread
- Posts: 12876
- Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2008 8:58 pm
- Location: just plain fucked
Re: Three Kingdoms of Korea v7.3
Yes. How about "If both capitals are held, larger bonus applies to striped territories"

