Yup!Gilligan wrote:So is this going to be "WWII: Australia" in Start a game, join, etc.?
Moderator: Cartographers
Thanks peteeson for your suggestion.peteeson10 wrote:its a good map. it has alot of potential. idont think there should be so many area bonuses.

Lackattack...no worries....posted below!lackattack wrote:Hey cairnswk,
I took too long to install this map and now the XML file is gone. Sorry! Could you re-upload it or send to info@conquerclub.com?
Thanks

lol I didnt get lucky I was on the bad end of someone with bismarcks hehe. Great map though looks good.. Thanks for your hard workcairnswk wrote:yes Nc_Hunt3r...you got lucky this round....a fix has been sent to lackattack. Thanks for your post.Nc_Hunt3r wrote:The Bismarks says 4 but gives 6 is this a bug?
Oh I'm sorryNc_Hunt3r wrote:lol I didnt get lucky I was on the bad end of someone with bismarcks hehe. Great map though looks good.. Thanks for your hard workcairnswk wrote:yes Nc_Hunt3r...you got lucky this round....a fix has been sent to lackattack. Thanks for your post.Nc_Hunt3r wrote:The Bismarks says 4 but gives 6 is this a bug?

Thanks Night Strike for your comments...those neutrals in the middle are deliberate...this whole concept is meant to represent the attack from the north by the Japanese and the holding of the south by the Allies...the neutrals in the middle are territories that were conquered by both side in order to destroy the Japanese advance on Australia. Regardless of this fact, if you play the map like a normal map, there are definite chalenges in there to overcome, and eveyone can still enjoy it.Night Strike wrote:I like the map, but having all the neutrals in the middle could give someone a distinct advantage. Was it a fluke that our game has neutrals in just the middle band of territories? (548042) If there's going to be neutrals, they should be mixed up.



