Conquer Club

MrBenn wrote:It's looking good (as always )

I've just noticed that the river starts just off the bottom edge of the map - is that intentional, or is it supposed to start off the map? I'm wondering if the river could have a slight bluey/green tinge to it, to emphasise that it's a river?

The attack rule for the British Ports could do with a little clarification - possibly changing it to "All British Ports connect to each other" will help people to realise that it's not just ports in the same sea.

Does British Egypt border Akbah? My intuition tells me 'yes', but I'm not convinced

The pink glow around Alexandria looks funny - should there be a glow on the British Egypt side of the boundary too? It's making me have strange doubts about whether the two territories border!

All done i beleive. Thanks MrBenn

Version 13 below:
As well and changes required from above, main change is the title formatted with turkish calligraphic flourish



[bigimg]http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s282/cairnswk/OTTOMAN%20EMPIRE/WW1_Ottoman_V13L.jpg[/bigimg]

The mouths of the Nile need to be fixed. Take a look at the large version, and you can see it really clearly.

I also think that the Dead Sea is a little distracting, but if you have the Nile, you may as well keep it too.

What are those gray blobs in the Bitlis territory and South of Yerevan?

The Neon Peon wrote:The mouths of the Nile need to be fixed. Take a look at the large version, and you can see it really clearly.

I also think that the Dead Sea is a little distracting, but if you have the Nile, you may as well keep it too.

What are those gray blobs in the Bitlis territory and South of Yerevan?

I would have like to put the Euphrates and Tigris rivers in also but there is too much congestion with all those lines.
I don't have to have the rivers, but i do think the Nile fills the Egyptian terts somewhat.
The large grey areas are inland lakes....don't know whether to keep them or not?

I have no problem with having rivers, and the nile fills up a lot of space that would have been left blank. Although the mouths of the Nile need some work done to them. Right now, the lines overlap, and create darker areas where they do.

It is a quick fix, I would think.

The Neon Peon wrote:I have no problem with having rivers, and the nile fills up a lot of space that would have been left blank. Although the mouths of the Nile need some work done to them. Right now, the lines overlap, and create darker areas where they do.

It is a quick fix, I would think.

Done....River Jordan & dead Sea axed...please F5
As are the two lakes near bitlis/biltis whatever.

cairnswk wrote:

The Neon Peon wrote:I have no problem with having rivers, and the nile fills up a lot of space that would have been left blank. Although the mouths of the Nile need some work done to them. Right now, the lines overlap, and create darker areas where they do.

It is a quick fix, I would think.

Done....River Jordan & dead Sea axed...please F5
As are the two lakes near bitlis/biltis whatever.

Gah - Just spent 5 minutes trying to find the Dead sea - and thinking that Neon Peon was imagining things - but you'd already taken them out!!!

Either way - this is looking good - reckon it's ready for some stamps?

Although have we had any gameplay discussion?

Did you run the continents through your bonus calculator?

C.

yeti_c wrote:....
Gah - Just spent 5 minutes trying to find the Dead sea - and thinking that Neon Peon was imagining things - but you'd already taken them out!!!
Either way - this is looking good - reckon it's ready for some stamps?
Although have we had any gameplay discussion?
Did you run the continents through your bonus calculator?
C.

No there has been no gameplay discussion, and i will have to run the numbers through the calculator again.

Altered Bonuses as below



[bigimg]http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s282/cairnswk/OTTOMAN%20EMPIRE/WW1_Ottoman_V14L.jpg[/bigimg]

VErsion 14 above:
1. Signature added
2. Sand texture given to neutral areas

Maps have now been split in to small and large.

So - GP discussion

Ottoman
Armenia - T5 B5 BC4 : Bonus 5 -> Suggest 4
Anatolia - T7 B6 BC4 : Bonus 6 -> Suggest 5
Syria - T5 B4 BC5 : Bonus 5 -> Suggest 4
Europe - T2 B2 BC2 : Bonus 2
Mespotamia - T4 B4 BC3 : Bonus 4 -> Suggest 3

Entente
British - T8 B5 BC5 : Bonus 7 -> Suggest 6
Russian - T7 B3 BC2 : Bonus 4 -> Suggest 3
Italian - T1 B1 BC2 : Bonus 1
French - T1 B1 BC2 : Bonus 1
Mecca - T3 B2 BC2 : Bonus 2

Added some suggestions - If you add up the Ottoman to the Entente - the Ottoman empire far outweighs the Entente - Coupled with the fact that if you hold Ottoman you probably hold Russia - I think they needed lowering a bit.

I've suggested 6 for British but 7 would be fine - because it's nigh on impossible to hold... But it does have a 1 way into Ottoman - and also if you hold British you will hold French and Italian - and also probably Mecca - as it has prime expansion properties - getting it in the first place will be a nightmare though because almost all territories border each other due to the ports - So either 6 or 7 is fine.

Another thing I would suggest is reordering the Legend...

Swap British and Russian - and put Mecca before Italian...
i.e.
Russian
British
Mecca
Italian
French

As this is the order of the continents on the map.

Ottoman...

Europe
Anatolia
Armenica
Syria
Meso

C.

yeti_c wrote:So - GP discussion
....
C.

C...Thanks for that analysis, I've taken note of what you say.
I had considered also the Ottoman outweighing the Entente as far as bonus totals go and the fact that the British section was dispersed widely.
To that point i would like to keep:
1. the Entente as is
2. reduce Ottoman to your sugestions.
I think this would better balance the map.

The legend re-ordering will be done also.

Let's see if anyone else has any considerations on this.

Seems fair - Glad you're reordering the legend - I think that will help understandability a lot more (it took me a little while to work out the regions from the colours - so you may want to bear that in mind)

I usually don't care about stuff like that too much - cos I just use BOB to tell me what is what!!

C.

Good of Yeti to check in with gameplay comments - I've been a bit out of touch this past week, but I'll try to hit a couple of threads each day.

I see italian and french colony are starting neutral... has there been any talk of also starting one of the European territories neutral as well? It wouldn't be rare to see somebody start with both, and forcing somebody to hit a neutral for that bonus might be a nice balance with the two southern neutrals. It makes for a rather awkward 39 territories, which hurts 4, 5, and 8 player games a bit.

I would fully endorse lowering British a bit - when you couple (triple?) it with the two little guys, it's a +9. The little guys don't add borders... of course, the British region doesn't need any more!

Does anybody else not like the use of British and Russian "Empire?" It's not as if you're holding the entire empire - maybe use "British Possessions" instead? Not that it matters really.

oaktown wrote:Good of Yeti to check in with gameplay comments - I've been a bit out of touch this past week, but I'll try to hit a couple of threads each day.

I see italian and french colony are starting neutral... has there been any talk of also starting one of the European territories neutral as well? It wouldn't be rare to see somebody start with both, and forcing somebody to hit a neutral for that bonus might be a nice balance with the two southern neutrals. It makes for a rather awkward 39 territories, which hurts 4, 5, and 8 player games a bit.

I would fully endorse lowering British a bit - when you couple (triple?) it with the two little guys, it's a +9. The little guys don't add borders... of course, the British region doesn't need any more!

Does anybody else not like the use of British and Russian "Empire?" It's not as if you're holding the entire empire - maybe use "British Possessions" instead? Not that it matters really.

1. no talk about starting one of O Europe as neutral but will do if others think it is a good idea.
2. i'd like to keep the British as 7 as balance for being split up. The Ottoman has 22 terts and that's a big win if you manage to get it all.
3. how does Russian Territories and British Colonies sound?

cairnswk wrote:...
1. no talk about starting one of O Europe as neutral but will do if others think it is a good idea.
2. i'd like to keep the British as 7 as balance for being split up. The Ottoman has 22 terts and that's a big win if you manage to get it all.
3. how does Russian Territories and British Colonies sound?

Version 15 below



[bigimg]http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s282/cairnswk/OTTOMAN%20EMPIRE/WW1_Ottoman_V15L.jpg[/bigimg]

New names and ordering are much better...

Oak - can you tell the region colours apart? and can you match them to the legend?

C.

yeti_c wrote:New names and ordering are much better...

Oak - can you tell the region colours apart? and can you match them to the legend?

C.

i would say he would have difficulty, but then after 15 pages...

EDIT// After checking Oaktown first came into comment on this map around page 9. Nothing about the colours in 6 pages. Can't be a problem.

still thinking that all names must be in english transation-Now you have Ottoman in turkis language(some names),and all other names is english translations(rusian,English,Italian and france its all in English translations), i think that these not make any sence.

qwert wrote:still thinking that all names must be in english transation-Now you have Ottoman in turkis language(some names),and all other names is english translations(rusian,English,Italian and france its all in English translations), i think that these not make any sence.

like names on your Europe map Qwert, It makes sense to me.

All names in mine map is english translation
I dont understand why you insist that some names(well only some Turkis names) must be in turkey language and all other is in english translation,if you want then put Russian in Russian language-Italian Italian language,France in france language,and territory who control England put to be in English language.

qwert wrote:All names in mine map is english translation
I dont understand why you insist that some names(well only some Turkis names) must be in turkey language and all other is in english translation,if you want then put Russian in Russian language-Italian Italian language,France in france language,and territory who control England put to be in English language.

read back through the thread Qwert, you will understand why it has been done like that.

Well i whas present,and if i remember you put some names only because some person request that some territory must be in turkish language. For me these not have any logical sence. In past when you create map-name must be in one tranlation-If you decide to put english then all names is english translation.
Geliboly-Gallipoli
Anadoly-Anatolia

By way Anatolia is complete wrong name for these territory,because these is name for all turkey.

Anatolia (Turkish: Anadolu, Greek: Ανατολία, Anatolía) or Asia minor is a region of the Middle East, comprising most of the modern Republic of Turkey. It is a geographic region bounded by the Black Sea to the north, the Caucasus to the northeast, the Aegean Sea to the west, the Mediterranean Sea to the south, Greater Syria (Upper Mesopotamia) to the southeast and Transcaucasia and the Iranian plateau to the east.

These not make sence.

Correct name will be :Edirne

qwert wrote:....
Correct name will be :Edirne

I guess you got that name from this map
http://www.zum.de/whkmla/histatlas/asmi ... dm1900.gif
so i will change the name on the map from Anadolu to Edirne, thank you.

As for naming in Turkish-English as opposed to full English name, yes this was special request from commenter who is Turkish. I see no harm in that.

Please refresh your browser to see this change in Version 15 below.



[bigimg]http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s282/cairnswk/OTTOMAN%20EMPIRE/WW1_Ottoman_V15L.jpg[/bigimg]

Just a minor graphical question: why is the port icon a white star in a red circle? Shouldn't it be something that's either port-like, like an anchor, or has some British significance, like a naval ensign or something? Or does the star-circle thing have significance and I'm just ignorant?

ZeakCytho wrote:Just a minor graphical question: why is the port icon a white star in a red circle? Shouldn't it be something that's either port-like, like an anchor, or has some British significance, like a naval ensign or something? Or does the star-circle thing have significance and I'm just ignorant?

There is nothing naval about the star.
It is merely a symbol u have chosen to indicate the ports.
An anchor could be used but been done many times before.