Sorry to take so long to give this a review... it's actually a day overdue
Well, let me start with what I like. I call it this section-
WHAT I LIKE
. I like the variety of bonuses and hazards, and the thematic elements as well- terrorism, nationalism and the competition for oil resources.
2) Political Theme
. This map deals with our current reality with a mature political lens.
3) Multiple Avenues
. I like the dual victory objective (although one of them is far easier- see my concerns) and the multiple ways to attack each other, through terrorists or fleets, by land or by sea.
Again I apologize for the delay in the fortnightly critique. However, part of the trouble I had in writing a review was that I'm not getting a good feel of the gameplay flow; I understand all of the parts in the legend individually, but as a whole it doesn't "click". Perhaps it's because there seem to be antagonistic gameplay elements at work here, so I can't get a good sense of what you're trying to accomplish. For instance:
1) A Large Map That Seems Cramped
. It's a rather large conquest map, yet the starting positions are insanely close to each other (I know that you've recently had a discussion about this, but I have reservations about the 'solution'- see point 3 below) and can bombard each other through a killer neutral 3.
2) Oil Is Icky
. The theme is supposed to center around oil, but in fact they are the least attractive bonuses on the map. They produce fewer troops for the number of regions held, in addition to rather significant negatives in taking and holding them- the teleporting terrorists in the case of refineries and the killer neutral seas in the case of tankers.
3) Not Enough Gravy
. You seem to want players to try to go out and construct empires, yet there's not a lot of umph provided at the start when compared with the relatively high average neutral values out there. This could make for frustrating times where the dice play an even more significant role than usual.
4) Terrorists Trump Oil Fields
. The Victory Objective seems to offer two possibilities, yet only one of them looks realistic- the terrorists.
5) Revolts... Yawn
. There are 'civil unrest' regions that are clearly meant to factor into the gameplay, yet they are completely avoidable due to the apparent lack of impassibles or continent bonuses.
The map's clarity is also a bit of an issue when analyzing the gameplay, but I think I understand the elements well enough so that can wait. For now, my biggest concerns lie with the starting points and the large amount of 'inert' or even 'conflicting' gameplay elements.
My advice is to ask yourselves what are the essential gameplay mechanics, and go from there. For instance, does this map absolutely need to be a conquest map? If the answer if 'yes' (and you have a good reason why it's yes), then that's a start. If the answer is 'no, but it'd be really nice', well then you know it's not an essential mechanic. Once I have an idea of what you see as being essential, then I can give further recommendations.