Eurasia Map [Old thread]

natty dread · Post by **natty dread** » Sun Jan 22, 2012 1:43 pm

Can't we get this stickied again? So people will know to post any gameplay concerns now if there are any...

natty dread · Post by **natty dread** » Mon Jan 23, 2012 4:34 am

I think Mongolia could be reduced to 2, as it's another 3-region bonus... although, unlike the other 3-region bonuses, it has 3 borders and can't be reduced to 2, and it's also in a more central location. However, when held together with Manchuria it only adds 2 borders to it, so 2 could be more in line with the gameplay in general...

DoomYoshi · Post by **DoomYoshi** » Mon Jan 23, 2012 12:55 pm

British Islands are way too powerful I think. Bonus of 1 would be more fitting, or add an extra border there to balance it - Scotland to Faroe?

The Bison King · Post by **The Bison King** » Mon Jan 23, 2012 1:47 pm

DoomYoshi wrote:British Islands are way too powerful I think. Bonus of 1 would be more fitting, or add an extra border there to balance it - Scotland to Faroe?

Disagree.

natty dread · Post by **natty dread** » Mon Jan 23, 2012 2:18 pm

This has already been discussed before... the brits are fine as they are now, especially now that there are 2 other 3-region bonuses on the other side of the map balancing it.

natty dread · Post by **natty dread** » Mon Jan 23, 2012 3:17 pm

I made the change of Mongolia -> 2. With this I think the bonus scheme is now as optimal as can be expected.

[bigimg]http://img718.imageshack.us/img718/8943/eurasia22.jpg[/bigimg]

AndyDufresne · Post by **AndyDufresne** » Mon Jan 23, 2012 5:06 pm

You could change "Indian Peninsula" to "Indian Subcontinent" as the region is sometimes known as, since "peninsula" most likely exclude areas not touching water or nearly surrounded by it (Nepal, Assam, Delhi, Kashmir). But Peninsula is shorter and probably sifts in your legend better so I don't think there is a real issue.

Additionally, subcontinent itself may be a confusing term, because this map has superbonuses.

--Andy

natty dread · Post by **natty dread** » Mon Jan 23, 2012 5:27 pm

From what I gather, the term "Indian Peninsula" is used pretty much interchangeably with "Indian Subcontinent". They even direct to the same page on wikipedia.

The Bison King · Post by **The Bison King** » Mon Jan 23, 2012 6:10 pm

natty_dread wrote:From what I gather, the term "Indian Peninsula" is used pretty much interchangeably with "Indian Subcontinent". They even direct to the same page on wikipedia.

Yeah, I think he knew it was "Interchangeable" thus the suggestion to change it. I like "subcontinent better but it really doesn't matter. I think that India is big to the point where it just seems goofy to call it a peninsula. Like yeah it's surrounded by water on 3 sides but so is Europe, or sub-saharan Africa, and those are not considered peninsulas. This goes hand in hand with the argument that Australia is an Island and a continent (which is stupid), because, yeah, it is surrounded on all sides by water but so is Antarctica or the America's, but no one calls those islands. Islands are apart from continents and continents are too big to be considered islands. If one can be both, both definitions loose meaning.

Of course the terms are interchangeable, the question is which term is more desirable? I would say subcontinent for the reasons mentioned above, but it really doesn't matter since despite my dissenting opinion on the definition of peninsula, it is considered a valid term for the region. So it is entirely subjective and up to the preference of the map maker.

TL:DR

Whichever (I just felt like writing)

natty dread · Post by **natty dread** » Mon Jan 23, 2012 6:15 pm

I'm choosing Peninsula purely because it fits better in the legend.

The Bison King · Post by **The Bison King** » Mon Jan 23, 2012 7:20 pm

natty_dread wrote:I'm choosing Peninsula purely because it fits better in the legend.

Lol, totally legit. K.

DoomYoshi · Post by **DoomYoshi** » Mon Jan 23, 2012 9:02 pm

natty_dread wrote:This has already been discussed before... the brits are fine as they are now, especially now that there are 2 other 3-region bonuses on the other side of the map balancing it.

Mongolia has 5 borders and South China has 9... How is that balanced?

Victor Sullivan · Post by **Victor Sullivan** » Mon Jan 23, 2012 9:29 pm

DoomYoshi wrote:
natty_dread wrote:This has already been discussed before... the brits are fine as they are now, especially now that there are 2 other 3-region bonuses on the other side of the map balancing it.

Mongolia has 5 borders and South China has 9... How is that balanced?

Maybe connect England to Benelux? You could add the connection or put that instead of the connection between it and France.

-Sully

The Bison King · Post by **The Bison King** » Mon Jan 23, 2012 10:46 pm

DoomYoshi wrote:
natty_dread wrote:This has already been discussed before... the brits are fine as they are now, especially now that there are 2 other 3-region bonuses on the other side of the map balancing it.

Mongolia has 5 borders and South China has 9... How is that balanced?

I agree that Mongolia should be +3 (If that's what you were Implying)

If you are further implying that the brits need adjustment I completely disagree and honestly cannot believe that this is still being discussed. +2 is just not that much on a map of this scale. It's fair. Get over it.

Victor Sullivan wrote:
DoomYoshi wrote:
natty_dread wrote:This has already been discussed before... the brits are fine as they are now, especially now that there are 2 other 3-region bonuses on the other side of the map balancing it.

Mongolia has 5 borders and South China has 9... How is that balanced?

Maybe connect England to Benelux? You could add the connection or put that instead of the connection between it and France.

-Sully

NO! It's fine.

natty dread · Post by **natty dread** » Tue Jan 24, 2012 1:05 am

DoomYoshi wrote:
natty_dread wrote:This has already been discussed before... the brits are fine as they are now, especially now that there are 2 other 3-region bonuses on the other side of the map balancing it.

Mongolia has 5 borders and South China has 9... How is that balanced?

No they don't, Mongolia has 3 borders and South China has 2. I think you're talking about regions that assault them which matters less. Way less. In fact it's borderline irrelevant in this case (no pun intended).

I reduced Mongolia to 2 because it's only 2 extra borders when held together with Manchuria. Like I always say, bonuses don't exist in a vacuum, you have to consider how they interact with each other, and on a map of this scale that is even more true.

That said, there's a case to be made for 3 as well, but I believe it will work better as a 2, so let's leave this up to beta - if it seems too weak then I can up it back to 3.

Victor Sullivan wrote:Maybe connect England to Benelux?

I don't see the point.

Britain is fine. Sure, by holding it with France you can hold it with only 2 borders, but what then? You're not going to win the game with a +2 bonus. You'll eventually have to expand to either West europe or Nordics, and either direction will increase your borders every step of the way. As a place to start, I'm not even sure Britain is the best option - there are many good alternatives, such as East India, South China, Manchuria...

Gillipig · Post by **Gillipig** » Tue Jan 24, 2012 10:19 am

Beautiful!

BadgerJelly · Post by **BadgerJelly** » Tue Jan 24, 2012 2:30 pm

relanzon joined the site 09 Sep 2009, 09:09
Let's take that again: He joined nine minutes over nine the ninth day of the ninth month (September) in the year 2009. Haha. I'm easily amused

Thats freaky! :lol:

natty dread · Post by **natty dread** » Tue Jan 24, 2012 2:46 pm

Gillipig wrote:Beautiful!

Oh, you noticed! I've been working out...

natty dread · Post by **natty dread** » Wed Jan 25, 2012 12:10 pm

So, any more concerns about the gameplay?

Djangoo · Post by **Djangoo** » Thu Jan 26, 2012 11:43 am

No, release it!

natty dread · Post by **natty dread** » Thu Jan 26, 2012 11:59 am

I'm not holding it captive...

natty dread · Post by **natty dread** » Thu Jan 26, 2012 1:47 pm

If there's no further gameplay input, I'll be starting the work on the small image soonish.

Victor Sullivan · Post by **Victor Sullivan** » Thu Jan 26, 2012 7:53 pm

Yeah, I think it's fine.

-Sully

natty dread · Post by **natty dread** » Fri Jan 27, 2012 11:47 am

I have created the small image.

[bigimg]http://img33.imageshack.us/img33/8202/eurasia22s.jpg[/bigimg]

natty dread · Post by **natty dread** » Fri Jan 27, 2012 1:37 pm

A worst-case-scenario army number test

[bigimg]http://img821.imageshack.us/img821/9066/eurasia22sn.jpg[/bigimg]

Eurasia Map [Old thread]

Re: Eurasia [22.1.12] pg35

Re: Eurasia [22.1.12] pg35

Re: Eurasia [22.1.12] pg35

Re: Eurasia [22.1.12] pg35

Re: Eurasia [22.1.12] pg35

Re: Eurasia [22.1.12] pg35

Re: Eurasia [23.1.12] pg36

Re: Eurasia [23.1.12] pg36

Re: Eurasia [23.1.12] pg36

Re: Eurasia [23.1.12] pg36

Re: Eurasia [23.1.12] pg36

Re: Eurasia [22.1.12] pg35

Re: Eurasia [22.1.12] pg35

Re: Eurasia [22.1.12] pg35

Re: Eurasia [22.1.12] pg35

Re: Eurasia [23.1.12] pg36

Re: Eurasia [23.1.12] pg36

Re: Eurasia [23.1.12] pg36

Re: Eurasia [23.1.12] pg36

Re: Eurasia [23.1.12] pg36

Re: Eurasia [23.1.12] pg36

Re: Eurasia [23.1.12] pg36

Re: Eurasia [23.1.12] pg36

Re: Eurasia [23.1.12] pg36

Re: Eurasia [23.1.12] pg36