WWII - Eastern Front-statistic page 1 [Quenched]5000 finish

Geoster · Post by **Geoster** » Fri Aug 03, 2007 11:30 am

This probably won't be a popular suggestion, but I think the map was better before taking the neutrals down to 3. Granted, when I saw those 6s, I was like, "this map is totally unfair," but having had a chance to play some on both sides of the change, I think the map had a much more interesting feel with the 6s.

Having only 3 attractive territories meant there was alot of action in the West, but it was still possible for a player to build strength in Russia while most everybody else fought over the German armies. It's kind of like the players were a disorganized German force trying to regroup in hostile Russian terrain, or else they were a decimated Russian force fighting off Germans with inferior numbers. Now it plays like pretty much every other map. Moreover, having neutral 3s in your territories is actually an advantage over having enemy troops alot of the time, making the superior Russian bonuses seem a little unbalanced now.

My personal recommendation would be to make the Russian capitals start with neutral 5s. I think that would be the best balance point. But I don't know. Is there any support for this sentiment?

G

Qwert · Post by **Qwert** » Fri Aug 03, 2007 2:18 pm

Well geoster,you read what people say,and also i se same thing,people dont try to conquer Russian Country,and go only for German Country.

Molacole · Post by **Molacole** » Sat Aug 04, 2007 7:20 am

good job!

fireedud · Post by **fireedud** » Sat Aug 04, 2007 10:10 am

Congratz qwert

Qwert · Post by **Qwert** » Sat Aug 04, 2007 10:57 am

Thanks molacole and fireedud

mno2go · Post by **mno2go** » Sat Aug 04, 2007 11:55 am

There's a spelling mistake: "Donets" should be "Donetsk" (note the k at the end)

Also, "Tallin" has two Ns: "Tallinn"

But otherwise, seems like a great map, I'm just playing on it...

RobinJ · Post by **RobinJ** » Sat Aug 04, 2007 12:01 pm

OMG! I've just come back to visit the forums after a month off and this is the best thing I've seen yet. WELL DONE qwert! (And before page 150 as well! :shock:

) Sorry if this is a few days late but I'm just so happy!

Qwert · Post by **Qwert** » Sat Aug 04, 2007 5:46 pm

mno2go
There's a spelling mistake: "Donets" should be "Donetsk" (note the k at the end) Also, "Tallin" has two Ns: "Tallinn"

But otherwise, seems like a great map, I'm just playing on it...

Hmm,you new here,and you dont follow mine topic,
1.Donets and Donetsk is two diferent things.
2.As concerne of tallin,if you have time go back and you will find map with Russian names(Sarema is rusian name,and saaremma is original name,also Lvov is Lwow)All names in map is Russian translation to english,because all these terittory belong to USSr,

mno2go · Post by **mno2go** » Sun Aug 05, 2007 2:23 pm

qwert wrote:Hmm,you new here,and you dont follow mine topic,
1.Donets and Donetsk is two diferent things.
2.As concerne of tallin,if you have time go back and you will find map with Russian names(Sarema is rusian name,and saaremma is original name,also Lvov is Lwow)All names in map is Russian translation to english,because all these terittory belong to USSr,

Yes, it's true. I didn't read the whole topic (a lot of pages

) I guess in response:

1. If you're referring to the region of Donetsk, then it's known as Donbass. I am not too sure historically, but I believe it was known as that since the times of the USSR. Which Donets are you referring to?

2. Lwow is actually not Russian, but Polish. That name stuck from the times of the Polish and Lithuanian empires. The Russian name has always been Lvov, and Ukrainian is Lviv. However, I don't argue about Tallin

Qwert · Post by **Qwert** » Sun Aug 05, 2007 2:38 pm

Think man. Why olveys must be name of some country or town or region,some bigest battles will hepend on river to.

mno2go · Post by **mno2go** » Mon Aug 06, 2007 3:41 am

Good point

MarVal · Post by **MarVal** » Wed Aug 08, 2007 7:39 am

CONGRATZ

Finally we can play this amazing map!

Grtz
MarVal

boberz · Post by **boberz** » Thu Aug 09, 2007 12:14 pm

yes well done qwert you deserved it

sorry about some of the tension between us before perhaps we could play on this map when i get back from my holiday in a couple of weeks

Qwert · Post by **Qwert** » Thu Aug 09, 2007 2:58 pm

boberz

Joined: 03 Dec 2006
Posts: 742

Posted: 09 Aug 2007 17:14 Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

yes well done qwert you deserved it

sorry about some of the tension between us before perhaps we could play on this map when i get back from my holiday in a couple of weeks

Forget it,and enjoy in game.

Timminz · Post by **Timminz** » Thu Aug 09, 2007 3:11 pm

Sorry if this has been brought up already, but the first few games I played on this map had 6 neutrals on each capital, and I just started in another one where there are only 3 on each. What happened?

Qwert · Post by **Qwert** » Thu Aug 09, 2007 3:27 pm

6 been very big for conquer,so i change to 3

Timminz · Post by **Timminz** » Fri Aug 10, 2007 11:36 am

thanks.

Heimdall · Post by **Heimdall** » Fri Aug 17, 2007 2:56 pm

I like the map, however I do not understand why Stalingrad and Rundstetd gets 5 armies while von Bock gets 4. Seems a bit unbalanced to me since von Bock connects to 4 other bonus regions while the other only connect to 2.

In a 6 player game, everyone is likely to end up with a bonus region each. Those in the middle are going to end-up the biggest targets.

hulmey · Post by **hulmey** » Fri Aug 17, 2007 8:09 pm

simple question and it deserves a simple answer...Dont go for the middle continents

I always go for the bonus 2 continent because this gives you a natural route to taking the top right hand continent and then you will have 2 continents but only 2 entrances to defend

Qwert · Post by **Qwert** » Thu Sep 20, 2007 4:36 pm

5000 games finished :!:

These is a great succes

Wisse · Post by **Wisse** » Fri Sep 21, 2007 5:14 am

i have to say your map has a great gameplay