1. I feel they over-value the number of neighboring territories and regions, without considering the size of the neighbors. For instance, in classic Australia has only one neighboring territory and region, which makes it an attractive take, right? Certainly... but since that one neighbor is huge, there's nowhere to go. Image if that neighboring region was only four territories - then it would really be attractive, because you get one bonus and jump to the next. It would make for a powerful start.
2. I feel they don't take into account just how much easier it is to grab and hold a small region early vs. a larger region. With the rising number of two and three territory regions, I think we need to be very careful about how we assign them bonuses. Each territory in a three terit bonus won't be nearly as hard to take as each terit in a 6 terit region, because in the smaller region you don't have to defend as much as you go.
So I've come with the following, which is still very much in the idea stage and I welcome you all to tear into it. It looks confusing on paper, but everything is easier in a spreadsheet.
(#terits - 2) x 5
plus
(# defending terits) x 3
plus
(# attacking terits) x 1
plus
(# neighboring regions) x .5
plus
(size of smallest neighbor region - 2) x .5
and divide the whole thing by 10.
For classic this formula gives you (not rounded):
Australia: +2.0
S. Amer.: +2.0
N. Amer.: +4.9
Asia: _7.35
Europe: +4.85
Africa: +3.5
Africa is the only bonus that doesn't round to what it should, but check it out: 3.5. I've always felt that Africa is a borderline +3/+4 anyway, because you rarely win by making Africa your base.
and I already look at how the continent lies in respect to the rest, meh
