


Ah, but hitting neutrals is a no-no for 1v1 and team, which are the only viewpoints I am presenting. Even if it's just one neutral, on a map of this size, it's not worth it.natty_dread wrote:What about the rail bonuses? There are several small rail bonuses... italy and france, both 2 territories/borders. Ottoman rail bonus. Also, servia, romania & switzerland are all 2 or 1 territories.
I don't know about team games, but in standard games I've seen people hold all of the bonuses...
natty_dread wrote:Anyway, I'm sorry to say but adding bonus areas isn't that simple. For one thing, where would they be added? The only solution that's at least in theory feasible would be dividing existing bonuses into smaller parts. But which ones? This would have to be done in a way that makes sense considering the time period.
That's not going to help my issue, but I guess AoN would be happy with it.natty_dread wrote:So here's my suggestions: for the Ottoman, how about I lower the rail bonus to 2? I could also consider increasing Low Countries land bonus to 3.



bonuses neutralsarmy of nobunaga wrote:I definitely would not be afraid to lower those rail bonuses to 2.

What if only SOME of the stations were droppable? obviously not the auto deploys, but maybe one in every country might make the map more interesting. Just a thought. looking forward to playing the updatenatty_dread wrote:So guys, can you give me some feasible solutions to your perceived problems?
About neutrals: they are sort of necessary, since I don't see any other way to guarantee fairness of drops with the rail bonuses. If the stations started regular, then what if you drop with both stations of italy for example... As for lowering the neutrals, this is something that could be considered, but again, there are fairness issues... it's already lucky for someone to drop next to the italy stations, since there's only 4 neutrals to take and it gives you a good bonus. And I don't particularly like the idea of "1 neutral territories" since they give a huge advantage in any multiplayer games with cards to whoever drops next to them.
How about lowering the Ottoman bonus? Increasing some of the others?
Don't you think this would give a significant advantage to whoever drops the stations?Hopscotcher wrote:
What if only SOME of the stations were droppable? obviously not the auto deploys, but maybe one in every country might make the map more interesting. Just a thought. looking forward to playing the update

natty_dread wrote:Don't you think this would give a significant advantage to whoever drops the stations?Hopscotcher wrote:
What if only SOME of the stations were droppable? obviously not the auto deploys, but maybe one in every country might make the map more interesting. Just a thought. looking forward to playing the update
Nah. Not if you only made SOME of them droppable.natty_dread wrote:Don't you think this would give a significant advantage to whoever drops the stations?Hopscotcher wrote:
What if only SOME of the stations were droppable? obviously not the auto deploys, but maybe one in every country might make the map more interesting. Just a thought. looking forward to playing the update
Although I did win one game by holding the objective, it was more due to fog of war and poor vigilance on the part of my opponents. The objective is a mite too difficult to pursue I think to be meaningful, a bit like Lunar War. It's not completely insane (AOR maps come to mind) but it's certainly going to be a very low-percentage win strategy.army of nobunaga wrote:natty_dread wrote:Don't you think this would give a significant advantage to whoever drops the stations?Hopscotcher wrote:
What if only SOME of the stations were droppable? obviously not the auto deploys, but maybe one in every country might make the map more interesting. Just a thought. looking forward to playing the update
not if a significant number were drop-able making it even odds on getting one on the drops.
Might be an Idea to think about.

Just the xml?MrBenn wrote:The updated xml has been forwarded to lackattack - I don;t think anything has changed yet, but let's wait and see...

Nope; image files toonatty_dread wrote:Just the xml?MrBenn wrote:The updated xml has been forwarded to lackattack - I don;t think anything has changed yet, but let's wait and see...
