GIANT Risk

[Blueneutron]

Anyone like the idea of a larger map with more territories meant to take longer and have more neutrals? Say, twice as large as the Realms map, but like normal gameplay?

It could be a land-mass type game, rather than something surreal-based. Also, a longer lasting game, but balanced by high armies each turn. 6 players could be battling at a time with as much as 150 armies each.

[kagetora]

isnt that basically what World2.0 is?

[whitestazn88]

wasnt pixel world developed to be like that?

[Blueneutron]

World 2.0 is sort of like that, but

1) It's an older map and sort of boring after the 20th time

2) There aren't a lot of neutrals

3) There's no megabattles, i.e. 100 armies for each player


I'm thinking more along the lines of epic

[kagetora]

1. I only play maps of those size for team games
2. I don't like fighting neutrals, they're a waste of time
3. OK

I mean, if you get it going, I'll play it

[mibi]

There is a map, soon to start development, that when finished will be in the 400-600 territory range.

[lord voldemort]

there is also world 3.0 which is on hold til map sizes get changed

[kagetora]

isnt 300 excessive? i mean, i think w2.0 has too much

400-600, wow. that is just overly eccentric

[gimil]

isnt 300 excessive? i mean, i think w2.0 has too much

400-600, wow. that is just overly eccentric

not a chance . . .

the more the merrier

[Liam5129]

sweet go hamsters!-L5129 little bro of W123

[mibi]

I also have another map in development that will be around 1000 territories on one map.

[hecter]

I also have another map in development that will be around 1000 territories on one map.

I don't envy the guy that does that xml...

[Coleman]

I also have another map in development that will be around 1000 territories on one map.

I don't envy the guy that does that xml...

I don't envy me either.