http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=541822Bigfalcon65 wrote:just another plain space map to me usinag our solar system only, i wanna get some star trek battles goin on, inter galactic
Moderator: Cartographers
http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=541822Bigfalcon65 wrote:just another plain space map to me usinag our solar system only, i wanna get some star trek battles goin on, inter galactic
Then play Space map, or make your own Star Trek map.Bigfalcon65 wrote:just another plain space map to me usinag our solar system only, i wanna get some star trek battles goin on, inter galactic
Trojan asteroids are clusters that lead and trail Jupiter in its orbit. The ones ahead are the greek camp and the ones behind are the trojan camp (I think i have that right). the asteroids themselves have names from the correct camp example: Hector is in the Trojan camp. All together they are called TrojansNeutrino wrote:P.S. I've heard of the Trojan asteroids, but not the Greek ones. Why are the Trojan ones so much more famous?
I could see needing to sacrifice and make the switch to the overhead view but I want to try some of the obvious stuff first before i ditch this version. I think thinning the lines, reducing the contrast and perhaps dropping the planet size bey 25% or so will go a long way. When that fails I'll do the top down like you suggest.Neutrino wrote:As for this map; the design itself is a little confusing. Maybe a top down view of the Solar System would be a better idea. You wouldn't be able to get in more than 1 region per planet, but it would be much simpler.
Actually, come to think of it, you could probably expand this map to include Alpha Centauri and maybe a few other nearby stars. This will allow you to keep a large number of regions and not be quite as confusing.


all jumpgates should start with a nutral or 1 or 2 to solve this problemDiM wrote: in a 1vs1 game if i start with 1 jump gate and the other player starts with 6. there's a 4 army difference from the beginning. he's sure to lose badly.
Top Score:2403natty_dread wrote:I was wrong
I hear you. It is a bit crowded. I'll experiment with losing the army circles, but I'm concerned with not being able to see the number especially in space and on Jupiter. Also The routes wont have anywhere to neatly terminate. But I'll make a test.gimil wrote:This map in really messy and crapped. can u try and do something without the army circles? jsut to try and savesome space.
According to the statistics, USApocalypse is one of the most unpopular maps. The problem I personally have with it and why I rarely play on it is that if you start owning a nuclear zone or two, you can only deploy 2, and if you don't start with it you get a major advantage. It doesn't seem that big, but if the dice hate you with a 5 on 3 attack in round 1, you're gone.maxdetjens wrote:The bonus is strange. on purpose. The most powerful travel method on the board has an additional strategic consideration. It may not be to your advantage to take an additional gate (or perhaps to your great advantage).
I seem to be getting alot of confused input on these JG bonuses. I know the concept of an alternating bonus is new. But not so new. The USApocalypse map has negative bonuses. And while its a bummer to start with only 2 reinforcements its manageable.
I like the alternating bonus structure because it adds an interesting strategic consideration, especially in team play. In Team play you could in theory be in a situation where one player gets a penalty and the other a loss. It would be good for that team then to swap ownership of that gate every turn to ensure each gets a bonus. Lossing a gate can become an annoyance for you or a total disaster for your opponent (or either or both). The loss of a gate that would hurt your opponent probably needs to be defened less that a gate that would benifit your opponent.
All sorts of interesting angles emerge from this alternating bonus
Excellent! Then you probably also agree that space seems under represented. Especially considering is pretty much everywhere.Bad Speler wrote:Considering i love the topic of space, im going to try to follow this map very closely and give some opinions.
Agreed, but I'm still open any suggestions on how to loose the army circles.Someone suggested not using army shadows, i like that idea but dont think its possible, the dark blue numbers on the black space would be hard to see.
As mentioned numerous times, the map is very crowded, and i dont think shrinking everything would help that much.
I can structurally drop the low orbits and connect the equatorial territories to the moons, gates and high orbits directly. That will indeed save space. I Don't think i can loose the high orbits. They are the only non jump gate way to traverse the outer solar system. I think its important to preserve this longer and more arduous second route as a complement to the expeditious but strategically perilous (in terms of bonus) jump gates. I further can see directly connecting planets or connecting them with routes between moons (I actually tried that in an early draft) The number of route lines needed makes the map even more cluttered. I also cant see providing a free expressway through the solar system.It has 61 territories, and thats a lot, I think you would be able to get rid of some territories. In my opoinion, the high orbits and low orbits arent necessary.
Agreed. Added to the list.Saturns glow looks too bright.
Top Score:2403natty_dread wrote:I was wrong