Moderator: Community Team
No...they did it so Jimmy Carter could give it away!Pedronicus wrote:Those blokes didn't dig the canal for a laugh.

It should be pointed out that - like the alaska/kamchatka route that you mention in classic - there is a cross-map junction in the south.Pedronicus wrote:That map missed out on a massive connection. If the panama canal was open and you could go between Caribbean and pacific - then it would be much more playable, CARTOGRAPHERS - Classic is really good because of alaska / kam, you missed out on making one of the few maps that could of added a cross map junction that made sense to include through an actual human achievement. Those blokes didn't dig the canal for a laugh.
Lighten up, Francis. It just made for a good joke.Pedronicus wrote:are Americans still pissed that they don't own the rights to a waterway that flows through another country?
then get some engineers to make a canal through America and undercut those damn pesky Panamanians

So Australia ends up connected to Antartica, yet there is no Northwest Passage? Are we going for half realistic and half 16th century belief? This map is too stuck in the middle for me to enjoy.... Everytime I see it, I just get to critical.oaktown wrote:Also note the theme of the map - 16th Century.
yep... kinda like this old map...Juan_Bottom wrote:So Australia ends up connected to Antartica, yet there is no Northwest Passage?

I always do!!!!!!!oaktown wrote:Anyway, we don't always get everything perfect in the Foundry, but we do the best we can... others are always welcome to come and help!
I actually bumbed into that map, when I did a search for a good map to prove my point about the passage.... But by the time I got there, the map was pretty much done. I'm too new.oaktown wrote:yep... kinda like this old map...
yup, it's too small for 1v1 and people only play feudal and classic for multiplayers...hulmey wrote:Game play is really bad on this map..with alot of bottle necks! But hey if you dont like it, then dont play it. For those that do like it, they have an extra map to fall in love with![]()
Francis? Are we talking Drake here?dividedbyzero wrote:Lighten up, Francis. It just made for a good joke.Pedronicus wrote:are Americans still pissed that they don't own the rights to a waterway that flows through another country?
then get some engineers to make a canal through America and undercut those damn pesky Panamanians
I like a map to have a hard to hold continent. It gives a player a place to hold out and quietly build some armies, instead of always being in a part of the map that someone wants to grab as another bonus.oaktown wrote: When the play of a seas map was first being worked out months ago a second connection was considered, either as an arctic passage or as the Panama Canal. There was concern that by creating additional routes you add borders and make the regions even harder to hold - the North Atlantic would have one more border to defend with either connection, and I think it's hard enough to hold as is. The reason it takes four months to make a map is because we discuss all of these things.
There is no mention that this is a 16th century map on the join game page, It's just called the High Seas. Just because the map maker decided to make it look like an old discoloured pirate treasure map, makes it aesthetically pleasing, but detracts from playability.oaktown wrote:Also note the theme of the map - 16th Century. There was no Panama Canal then, no Suez Canal, and no Northwest Passage. Plus the mapmakers of the day thought that Alaska was a part of the Antarctic, and that California was an island. We played with making this a 19th century map and connecting the Med with the Red Sea, but the 16th century inaccuracies made this map play better.
I was thinking more of Stripes, but I think I like your answer more.Pedronicus wrote: Francis? Are we talking Drake here?![]()
Anyways, my response was tongue in cheek.![]()

1v1's fill extremely fast.theanubis wrote:nobody joins my high seas games, unless they're 1vs1. does nobody like the map?