New Continent Values

[Yonak]

I would like to see a trial of these new bonus army values on the current Classic Map which, in my opinion, would better reflect their relative attainability and defense :

Australia = 2 armies
South America = 3 armies
Africa = 4 armies
North America = 5 armies
Europe = 6 armies
Asia = 7 armies

[gimil]

should this be moved to the foundry?

[john1099]

I would like to see a trial of these new bonus army values on the Classic Map which, in my opinion, would better reflect their relative attainability and defense :

Australia = 2 armies
South America = 3 armies
Africa = 4 armies
North America = 5 armies
Europe = 6 armies
Asia = 7 armies

You're changing the original values of the board game, do not do this,
really stupid idea, you should go into a hole and eat some cake

[Yonak]

john1099 wrote "... do not do this, really stupid idea, you should go into a hole and eat some cake"

lol .. you Canadians !! Where's your sense of adventure ? If everything always stayed the same there would be no progress.

I'm only suggesting a test to see how the dynamics of the game change .. I'm thinking for the better, but I wouldn't know until we test it.

[hwhrhett]

buy the home game and try it at home with your friends, watch it will be slanted toward those in sa, or europe.

[hammockboy1]

I dislike how s america gives 2 like austraila when it has 1 more entrance, still don't mess around with the real board game

my vote is no

[gimil]

i think it would be intresting to TEST out. MAy open up the game to people other that who holds australia.

[RobinJ]

john1099 wrote "... do not do this, really stupid idea, you should go into a hole and eat some cake"

lol .. you Canadians !! Where's your sense of adventure ? If everything always stayed the same there would be no progress.

I'm only suggesting a test to see how the dynamics of the game change .. I'm thinking for the better, but I wouldn't know until we test it.

But unfortunately I also agree with him (although not quite so harshly). The only thing we need to do with the Classic map is to give it better colours. It is "Classic" ans so it should stay that way.

[ChaoticWraith]

I dislike how s america gives 2 like austraila when it has 1 more entrance, still don't mess around with the real board game

The reason why I believe Australia is 2 is because the only other place to expand to with connecting borders with is australia which imo is hard as h*ll for most people to do. South America is worth 2 because of the the availbility of places you can expand into which would be africa being 3 or north america being 5. You get a choice on where you want to expand and also they are a lot easier than asia to defend hence why in the original board game thats why SA is worth 2

[hecter]

No.

[gimil]

Despite being the "classic" map its still not identical to the origonal board.

i understand the want for change and i believe that it should be a least TESTED. It would take all of 3 seconds to change the XML and set up a test game.

i would really like South Amercia to be raised to 3. paticulary since it has 2 boarders. i mean to defence SA u need to split your force. while you dont have to for australia thats y most people win holding australia.

[RobinJ]

Despite being the "classic" map its still not identical to the origonal board.

i understand the want for change and i believe that it should be a least TESTED. It would take all of 3 seconds to change the XML and set up a test game.

i would really like South Amercia to be raised to 3. paticulary since it has 2 boarders. i mean to defence SA u need to split your force. while you dont have to for australia thats y most people win holding australia.

The only reason it is not identical to the original board is copyright

[magneticgoop]

classic means classic no changes at all or else it would not be "Classic"
keep it how it is. sure SA is harder to defend from invasion but AUS is harder to attack from because it is pretty obvious where you are attacking from.

[Yonak]

Let's have a tournament using the continent bonuses suggested in this thread .. a "Test Bonuses" Tournament. The number of entrants would be one test for the popularity of the idea. Then afterward (or even during) players could vote a yea or a nay as to whether this additional map should be available for general play.

[Caleb the Cruel]

This will be REJECTED in 5...4...3...2...

[Rocketry]

naah the classic map is called classic for a reason. you cant change it.

Rocketry

...1....

[Yonak]

Alright, then we can call it something else. Why get hung up on a name ? It was only suggested because some may find it an interesting map .. perhaps with more competitive continent valuations.

[john1099]

Alright, then we can call it something else. Why get hung up on a name ? It was only suggested because some may find it an interesting map .. perhaps with more competitive continent valuations.

It was a bad idea a month and a half ago when you suggested it, and its a terrible idea now as well!
Get it out of your head, classic map will never be changed.
Thanks,
-John

[Yonak]

It was a bad idea a month and a half ago when you suggested it, and its a terrible idea now as well!
Get it out of your head, classic map will never be changed.
Thanks,
-John

I have no problem whatsoever with anybody who doesn't like an idea. Believe me, John, I have come up with some hare-brained ideas that became very clear to me they were off base when the error in my thinking was shown to me, but what I really can't understand is why no one has come up with a cogent reason why the idea is bad. Plenty of people have said that you can't change the Classic Map, but I'm not even suggesting that (it's not like I'm changing the words to "Stairway to Heaven" or something) -- the Classic Map would remain in full effect in all its glory.

Now, you might say that trying out a new map, similar to the current Classic Map, except with different bonus values for Europe, Africa and S.America would create a relative imbalance between the continents, and that would be a logical argument, but how do you know without giving it a trial ? It may create a better balance, which is the reason for the idea in the first place.

[john1099]

It was a bad idea a month and a half ago when you suggested it, and its a terrible idea now as well!
Get it out of your head, classic map will never be changed.
Thanks,
-John

I have no problem whatsoever with anybody who doesn't like an idea. Believe me, John, I have come up with some hare-brained ideas that became very clear to me they were off base when the error in my thinking was shown to me, but what I really can't understand is why no one has come up with a cogent reason why the idea is bad. Plenty of people have said that you can't change the Classic Map, but I'm not even suggesting that (it's not like I'm changing the words to "Stairway to Heaven" or something) -- the Classic Map would remain in full effect in all its glory.

Now, you might say that trying out a new map, similar to the current Classic Map, except with different bonus values for Europe, Africa and S.America would create a relative imbalance between the continents, and that would be a logical argument, but how do you know without giving it a trial ? It may create a better balance, which is the reason for the idea in the first place.

If you're saying make a new map, then take it to the map foundry.
You will not get anyone to change the CURRENT classic map settings, because they are from the original board game, and they probably are copyright from it, so why change something that has been around for a heck of a long time, that no one except you is bitching about?
If you don't like it, play a different map, and quit suggesting it!