World 2.0 Map

D.IsleRealBrown · Post by **D.IsleRealBrown** » Tue Dec 05, 2006 9:45 pm

Don't do it.

Just don't.

s.xkitten · Post by **s.xkitten** » Tue Dec 05, 2006 9:51 pm

try it once...it can be good, it can be bad...all depends what kind of game you like...give it a chance

just thought i would balance this post

D.IsleRealBrown · Post by **D.IsleRealBrown** » Tue Dec 05, 2006 9:57 pm

I didn't even say anything bad....

AAFitz · Post by **AAFitz** » Tue Dec 05, 2006 10:19 pm

i hear ya d....you can definitely use the hour up deploying and fortifying...

but i like it....probably wont play it with no cards though...400 rounds seems like too many to me

zarvinny · Post by **zarvinny** » Tue Dec 05, 2006 11:02 pm

i don't think no cards will really take that long. With the all the bonuses, once someone gets control, they'll probably keep control and the game will end rather quickly.

gavin_sidhu · Post by **gavin_sidhu** » Wed Dec 06, 2006 12:42 am

Flat rate is a waste of time too, 10 men doesnt push the balance over too much.

DING · Post by **DING** » Wed Dec 06, 2006 12:50 am

gavin_sidhu wrote:Flat rate is a waste of time too, 10 men doesnt push the balance over too much.

if you wanna play cards... poker is the game for you

howie · Post by **howie** » Wed Dec 06, 2006 4:36 am

Am loving this map, its unique and is good fun, you also dont need to heavily fortify boundries becaues the map so big

Pedronicus · Post by **Pedronicus** » Wed Dec 06, 2006 8:52 pm

I've been aware of this map from it's early creation stages (I still go to the map forum - but have given up telling everyone to stop making new maps)

When I mentioned to General Mayhem about the New World Map that was being made - he knew nothing about it. . . . A lot of people never look around this site much. (when I first saw the Greasemonkey post - way back in the day - it was a useful addition to own early on) - so it pays to look around all forums.

I've been interested in watching this map be suggested, formed and tweaked into something we now see.
I watched, and said nothing - and now it's out I'm watching people play on it.
I've not played it yet - & I doubt that I will.
All of the Hulabaloo that surrounded the map lead to it being hurriedly issued with a lot of problems.
It's not suprising as it must of been a massive headache to enter all the codes of what area borders what etc.
As these new maps get made it amuses me to watch everyone holler and whoop about how cool it looks.
Everyone seems to be more interested in the look of a map - down to what sea shading style to use, instead of it's real playability.
When This map was first issued with no country names - I thought "hmmm - very stylised edges etc." - but to look at it now with text and army bubbles and great big thick lines denominating sub continents - its just too hard to read all the connecting territories.
The key to a good game of risk is understanding your way around a board.
I've played a game of escalating cards on the North America Map with a bunch of decent players, and that went all the way to round 20 where people were handing in card sets for 115 armies.
This map, if played correctly, should go to about 50 rounds (even in escalating) - but it won't be played correctly - because it's just too big to understand all of the routes / key choke points etc.
I'd imagine that the drop down menu of territories is hard to find what your looking for because - you'll be looking for somewhere, without the map in front of you, because you've had to scroll down the screen to get to the drop down menu.

I admire Zim's efforts in making this map, and all of his further posts answering and sorting out bugs - but its just too big!

Americans always think that big is best, but the best motorbike in the world is a Ducati - not a Harley. the same can be said for this map - big isn't always best

KoolBak · Post by **KoolBak** » Wed Dec 06, 2006 8:57 pm

LOL!! I'll put my V-Max agaist yer Ducati any day my friend......(I concur that it is a great bike but yours is a sweeping generalization and involves a considerable amount of subjective assessment).

What kind of car should I drive Pedrovski?

hendy · Post by **hendy** » Wed Dec 06, 2006 9:01 pm

well I like it

http://www.conquerclub.com/game.php?game=124843

Pedronicus · Post by **Pedronicus** » Wed Dec 06, 2006 9:06 pm

KoolBak wrote:What kind of car should I drive Pedrovski?

something that doesn't have a huge engine to compensate for something

Robinette · Post by **Robinette** » Thu Dec 07, 2006 2:21 am

Pedronicus wrote:
KoolBak wrote:What kind of car should I drive Pedrovski?
something that doesn't have a huge engine to compensate for something

Ohh.. but horsepower is one of my favorite things... (and the only thing I'm compensating for is boredom)

I have a little sports car from the 60's with a small engine, and sure, it's loads of fun to drive... $\:D/$
but ohhh my, when I pull 300 horses of 60's muscle car out of the garage...

hee

hee... well there really is nothing else quite like it.

And let me tell you, it passes EVERYTHING on the road... um, except gas stations.

KoolBak · Post by **KoolBak** » Thu Dec 07, 2006 2:35 am

LMAO!!! Well Pedro....dont know what I'm compensating for (I'll have to ask my satisfied bride of 19 years) but my shitty old chevy dually crewcab pickup has a brand new 502 crate motor pushing 475 horses......my pristine VMax, one of the first in Western USA in 85, has only 12000 miles on her and 150 horsies at the tire....I LIKE power......probly why I collect big guns too.....I am sure I can rely on your British wisdom to set me straight!

Oh yeah,,,I forgot to mention my 78 short wide chevy 4x4 PU lifted 8 inches with a hand built 350.....damn, I have a problem.......Is it a concern that I collect and rebuild chainsaws too? LOL!!!!!

reverend_kyle · Post by **reverend_kyle** » Thu Dec 07, 2006 3:39 am

I've only played a few 6 player games on this map.. none are done so far, but its ok.

D.IsleRealBrown · Post by **D.IsleRealBrown** » Thu Dec 07, 2006 8:34 am

I've now warmed up to this map a bit. The first round is definitely a little aggravating however. Especially when you have 4 of them in a row.

Fireside Poet · Post by **Fireside Poet** » Thu Dec 07, 2006 9:26 am

gavin_sidhu wrote:Flat rate is a waste of time too, 10 men doesnt push the balance over too much.

http://www.conquerclub.com/game.php?game=126584

Flat rate worked out just fine ...

qeee1 · Post by **qeee1** » Thu Dec 07, 2006 9:33 am

That's a team game, where you can't have a standoff, so it doesn't really count.

Marvaddin · Post by **Marvaddin** » Fri Dec 08, 2006 11:38 am

Fireside Poet wrote:http://www.conquerclub.com/game.php?game=126584

I warned zim, but he didnt believe me. Where is the importance of the full continents?

Pedronicus · Post by **Pedronicus** » Fri Dec 08, 2006 12:41 pm

D.IsleRealBrown wrote:I've now warmed up to this map a bit. The first round is definitely a little aggravating however. Especially when you have 4 of them in a row.

Everytime I read one of your quotes to myself - I do the Ian McShane voice in my head

Fireside Poet · Post by **Fireside Poet** » Fri Dec 08, 2006 12:51 pm

Marvaddin wrote:
Fireside Poet wrote:http://www.conquerclub.com/game.php?game=126584
I warned zim, but he didnt believe me. Where is the importance of the full continents?

There really isn't any .. it's the subtlety of owning a couple of subcontinents and because of the vastness of the map that seems to do the trick. Attack, Attack, Attack is the m.o. because being defensive will leave you in the dust quick because of the army bonuses. It is a nice change of pace, but not for the weak of heart in my book.

sully800 · Post by **sully800** » Sat Dec 09, 2006 1:20 am

Marvaddin wrote:
Fireside Poet wrote:http://www.conquerclub.com/game.php?game=126584
I warned zim, but he didnt believe me. Where is the importance of the full continents?

It depends on the continents and your positioning in the game, but the full continents can become very important, because they are much easier to hold than a bunch of seperate sub continents. Then again, a few subcontinents might make you look less powerful, but that all really depends on where your troops start out.

I've seen people holding all of SA on a few boards, Australia on a few, some rounds of NA, etc. The full continents are definitely an important part IMO though the subcontinents control the large portion of the game.

I have yet to see any good middle of the game stabs at holding Africa, Europe or Asia though. Those are all too large and difficult I think, at least in a game with 6 players.

DesalationReborn · Post by **DesalationReborn** » Sat Dec 09, 2006 1:49 am

It's not for 6 players, I'll tell you that.

http://www.conquerclub.com/game.php?game=126773

I'm personally happy about my rising Asian Empire, though.

for dummies · Post by **for dummies** » Sat Dec 09, 2006 8:27 am

i am playing it with 6 players just fine. i love this new map. i have allready won 1 game on it and am on my way (hopefully/probably) to winning this one

http://www.conquerclub.com/game.php?game=125112

qeee1 · Post by **qeee1** » Sat Dec 09, 2006 4:18 pm

It forces me to rethink strategy, I like it. I mean it's interesting at least. And from what I've seen so far it's fairly balanced.