i really like it.rocksolid wrote:I'm not sure the Missississippippi was recognized as a joke. I think the fact that it can't fit on the map properly is part of what makes it funny, even though it doesn't quite fit in with the futuristic theme.
Banana Stomper wrote:Perhaps put a nuclear thing in nevada.
AndyDufresne wrote:---One thing I notice right away is the lack of being able to limit your borders to less than what gives you the continent bonus, with the minor exception of Texas.
---Lastly, what do you have in mind for the ocean?
qeee1 wrote:I'm not sure, what if you start with two of them... you're basically crippled the first few turns.
Just to check my stats the bonuses would be:
Number owned / Bonus
1 / -1
2 / -2
3 / -2
4 / 0
5 / 5
6 / 14
Jota wrote:The idea of CC now having too many borders is interesting to me. I say that because the player who owns CC can still choose to take Sanders in addition to it, reducing his/her borders back down to almost exactly what they were before... can removing the obligation to own an additional country really make a continent more difficult to hold?
I had kinda been imagining that having the strategic choice of either A) taking Sanders and having more countries to defend or B) not taking it and having more borders to defend was a nice element. Hmm.
I think the rocket is lame, i thought the skull was much better. I like the quick and dirty bridges, though i think sanders needs one less. I agree on the rivers thing sanders is in it's place.Jota wrote:Finally, an update!
(Click for larger version.)[/url]
The rivers, they tell me to do things. I try to talk back, but who am I to refuse a river? The rivers insisted that Sanders be a part of the Voodoo Bayou. And in the long run, I think they were right. This means that those of you who are good at looking at bonuses should probably look at them again -- although I think there's a chance they might not actually have to change, since the effects sorta even out a bit.
I think that, unless people hate this ocean, I'm going to keep that as it is. But on the subject of aesthetic flourishes, is the rocket any clearer? How about in the large version? I'm considering reverting to the skull in the small map while keeping the rocket in the large one. Oh, and how about them quick-and-dirty bridges? I have this suspicion that they will be universally loathed. But if you don't loathe them, please, let me know!
(And of course, any other constructive comments are welcome.)
Users browsing this forum: w1nner