Haiti [Quenched]

[edbeard]

see I like the Iberia map. we've just got different opinions obviously.

I'm not saying, "Oh. I'm totally done with everything and it's perfect." Just because it's simple doesn't mean things can be improved and details added.

I don't see what's wrong with 'random playable geography' either. These are the maps I like the most. They definitely provide unique gameplay.

I've also made a relatively small territory map of which CC doesn't have many.

[Riazor]

I chose it because I thought it would make for a good game of risk. The main reason for maps is to play risk on them, obviously.

This is very true and i cannot do anything else than agree with it. Of course, the nicer it looks, the more fun it is to play on. But if i want to play a simple map, on a different risk board, this might just be exactly what i want.

My personal preferences are maps around the size of classic with no real gimmicks. That actually means classic in any other shape

Keep up the good work

[CatfishJohnson]

150% agree with the lizard up dare

[graulenst]

I really like this map. The one thing that bothers me as i look at it is how flat the ocean is. The land having texture and the ocean not having any bothers me.

Great idea and i look forward to seeing this map develop.

[gimil]

For the ocean issues, could you make the sea darker at bit to represent differnt depth. Might give it that extra umph that it needs.

[CatfishJohnson]

nice idea gimil

[gimil]

nice idea gimil

huh?

[Kaplowitz]

For the ocean issues, could you make the sea darker at bit to represent differnt depth. Might give it that extra umph that it needs.

hes talking about that ^^^

[gimil]

Oh im loosing my mind

[Kaplowitz]

Its okay gimil, it was on the last page- use that as your excuse

[CatfishJohnson]

lol yea thats what i was talking about

[Kaplowitz]

In Global, we are learning about Exploration and Columbus so i might be able to get you a real textbook map (scanned of course) of Haiti if you are still working on that style.

[edbeard]

that'd be cool to see at the very least.

don't go to too much trouble though. I've been a bit busy. hopefully I can get to it later this week.

[kerntheconkerer]

I like the idea, I am supportive of most smaller maps since the big ones are too complicated

[edbeard]

v3
v2
v1

What you need to know:

1. 28 territories
2. 6 continents

Changes in this update
1. ocean depth added
2. switched places of sud and sud-est in the legend

To Do:

1. Gameplay / Bonus Discussion

[gimil]

Edbeard once I see some more discussion on the map ill be happy to move this. 3 pages jsut isnt enought.

[CatfishJohnson]

DISCUSS people lol

[t-o-m]

DISCUSS people lol

lol

you're using basic colours, im not sure if thats one of the parts of the map that you're keeping on purpose or...?
otherwise i think it looks good, the colours are maybe a bit too strong for me, i dont know what anyone else thinks.

[edbeard]

one thing about the gameplay I'm wondering about is the four territory four border continents I have.

there's one of those on great lakes and honestly it's kinda a bitch to hold. here I'm giving a smaller bonus for them.


On another note, you can hold each half with two territories (I think that's fine), but the southern portion only gives +8 and the northern portion gives you +9

does this matter? each half has 14 territories by the way.


I could almost give Ouest a bonus of 4 since it touches the most other continents. this evens out the numbers for each half a bit. Each half would have a 2, 3, and 4 bonus continent.

lets pretend I do that, then my only concern then is the four territory four border continents. I'm not quite sure what to do with them.

a. leave it? those continents might be weak points.

b. reduce them by a border? tough to do without creative border alterations

c. increase their bonus? seems like it'd be too high and I don't want two 2 bonus continents and four 4 bonus continents (or do I ?)


bonus discussion! lets go!

[t-o-m]

have you tried using WM's bonus maker?
that could solve your problems with the bonuses, i would take a look but my screen res. cant see it, and im in the middle of something at the moment so i cant change it for the mo.

[t-o-m]

ok i did take a look, well just have, and i think that the Nord bonus is a little unfair.
i would either increase the bonus, reduce the number of ajacent terits by altering the terits, or change the acctual continent.
i dont know if you've based the continents on acctual regions, you probably have, so in my opinion i think its best to alter the terits - reduce the number of ajacent terits, and/or increase the bonus for it.

^sorry if theres errors in that - i cant acctaully read what ive written -screen res. altered!^

[edbeard]

First of all, the bonus calculators out there are only really useful as starting points (and we already have that). From there, you have to use logic and discussion. The calculator can't see everything. They can be used to justify telling someone that a bonus is off though. So I'll take a look.


I'm confused by you saying nord's bonus is too high. maybe you have a different calculator.

territories x 1.5
border territories x 4
neighbor territories x .5
neighbor regions x 1

divide by 6 and subtract 1

6x1.5 + 3x4 + 4x.5 + 2 = 9 + 12 + 2 + 2 = 25 / 6 = 4.16 - 1 = 3.16

If anything this says nord's bonus is too high.

The rest are as follows

Artibonite 3.5
Centre 2.17
Ouest 3.41
Sud 2.17
Sud-Est 3.25

[t-o-m]

I'm confused by you saying nord's bonus is too high. maybe you have a different calculator.

oh, sorry if i said that, i had the screen res. high so couldnt really read what i wrote.
i didnt work anything out on the calculator about your map, i was just suggesting that you take a look.
i ment to say something like the Nord bonus is too low for the amount of boardering terits and continents.

[edbeard]

I don't understand how you said the exact opposite of what you meant on all accounts because of the screen resolution.

here's the image so we know what we're talking about




an important question for people to answer is, do you think the difference between borders 3 vs 2 continents and having 4 vs 3 territories that can attack your continent is worth an additional army?

What I'm talking about is the difference between Artibonite and Sud-Est. Those are the difference between those continents.

I suppose it does make sense, and reduce nord to a 3 bonus wouldn't be horrible.

That would leave us with the same number of bonuses but just switching nord and artibonite.

Ouest could arguably be made into a 4 bonus continent. This would leave the bonus structure even for each half and looking like this.

Nord - 3
Artiboninte - 4
Central - 2
Ouest - 4
Sud - 2
Sud-Est 3


Thoughts?


My other thought is to just make everything a bonus of 3 except the two that are obviously worth 2

[t-o-m]

I don't understand how you said the exact opposite of what you meant on all accounts because of the screen resolution.

lol sorry - i think its best to forget everything i said coz i musta been chatting shit
i just thought that the nord bonus of:

Nord - 3
Artiboninte - 4
Central - 2
Ouest - 4
Sud - 2
Sud-Est 3

3 was fair because it ver open and there are a lot of terits for that continent.
i might be chatting **** again i dont know

--tom