|> Thanks Rvw, but thats in the 1800's, my map is meant to be up to date. If I changed it, it would look too like Europe AD 1900, by Ottoman, and then I'd really be in a mess!
Pity we can't have maps which evolve over time (= game turns). Like you start with Europe AD 1600, then every turn is 10 years, so in turn 40 (if the game isn't finished yet) you'd be in Europe AD 2000 (and stay there; no way to predict the future).
Obviously there's a few "minor" practical issues and I'd be shocked if Fizzer spent the ridiculous amount of time needed to implement this, but still, it's a cool concept! :p
Nice idea RvW, and you could have it that as time progresses, more of the world unveils.. So after a certain time has passed, connections to America and Asia become visible!
Doing much more work for the slight possibility that this "time progress" animation concept will appear is a long shot, and not one i'm wiling to take :)
Also, I believe maps past 350ish or so territories are bad to play on, unless the map is extremely good in a minority of cases.
Back on topic: You could divide the territories via natural boundaries rather than political ones. They´ll line up somewhat but it may differentiate it
I would like to be able to try this map out!
Skimmed through the topic from page till now and your project seems to have divided a lot of opinions.
I can see how Troll may have some issues with a similar version of Europe come out. But, many great works in the past have inspired other masterpieces, each complimenting each other.
If map making was a form of revenue generation then I could understand there having to be many points of difference and other issues with map making. But, I am under the impression that it is a labour of love and for the benefit of the community in general to have more options.
Good luck Major Risk and I hope to be dishing out some pain on the map of Europe (whatever name it will end up with)
Took your advice and added bit more in turkey. Spoken to Troll to see if it is ready, waiting for reply.
If it isn't I have nothing else to change really ;/
Also, all of the provinces in europe are still pretty much the same as Troll´s. That is what he is opposed to, so you could merge or split some of them or reshape them.
i like what you did with russia, turkey and the levant.
are the gray areas in russia kazakhstan? if so, making the territories neutrals with names showing they are part of kazakhstan might be useful? it could be a bit confusing otherwise.
would adding 2-3 territories for iraq and iran (worth 1) be bad?
Now, that map is starting to look sexy! Please don't add those superbonuses (0 is ok for me). That may be a map for balanced strategic 4vs4 or even 5vs5 play!
I can't spot any important imbalances (since the map is big and designed for larger team games small imbalances are not important). At the moment I'd suggest to go into testing phase and players will comment while playing. France and Italy are kinda useless at the moment, but that's how it was before, they'll serve primarily as attack routes. Scotland, eastern spain and new eastern europe will bring major changes in the gameplay. I definitely like that map much more than europe 1600 which was the first attempt of resizing europe.
