Battle For Iraq! [Quenched]

Care to peruse completed maps? Take a stroll through the Atlas.

Moderators: Cartographers, Global Moderators

Forum rules
Please read the Community Guidelines before posting.

Postby mibi on Mon Oct 22, 2007 8:58 am

jasnostj wrote:I like the idea.

I say you add more parties to it. It's not only Americans, Baath and Al Qaeda linked insurgents fighting - the latter two rooted in the Sunni community - but several Shia and Kurd factions as well. Like this the conflict is represented too simplisticly, and from an educational point-of-view (my idea of a good map is that you can learn something from it as well) that's not helping people to understand it.

Also, what to do with the (vast) mixed areas?

Image


yes I would like to add more combatants, like the Mahdi army, can you suggest others? Also as i mentioned earlier the mixed areas will be territories like Ninawa which will be required for both the Kurd and Sunni bonus, meaning both bonus can't be had. So there will be lots of fighting over the mixed areas.

and yes I agree this map could be very educational to the uninformed masses.
User avatar
Captain mibi
 
Posts: 3360
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 8:19 pm
Location: The Great State of Vermont
Medals: 13
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (1) Map Contribution (5)
General Contribution (3)

Postby Coleman on Mon Oct 22, 2007 9:00 am

I'm not understanding how this is controversial. It isn't any secret what all is going on over in Iraq. This is a true to present geography/war map with involved sides represented. There is no bias I see except for that the US isn't the sole combatant that is not a part of the other two groups.

I'd recommend the use of Coalition, although I personally don't have a problem with USA.
Warning: You may be reading a really old topic.
User avatar
Sergeant Coleman
 
Posts: 5402
Joined: Tue Jan 02, 2007 10:36 pm
Location: Midwest
Medals: 25
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (1) Triples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (1) Assassin Achievement (1)
Freestyle Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (1) Speed Achievement (2) Cross-Map Achievement (2) Ratings Achievement (2)
Training Achievement (1) Map Contribution (6) Tournament Contribution (2) General Contribution (2)

Postby mibi on Mon Oct 22, 2007 10:00 am

Coleman wrote:I'm not understanding how this is controversial. It isn't any secret what all is going on over in Iraq. This is a true to present geography/war map with involved sides represented. There is no bias I see except for that the US isn't the sole combatant that is not a part of the other two groups.

I'd recommend the use of Coalition, although I personally don't have a problem with USA.


just wait until i add the bonuses. +10 for the Americans and -2 for being non-white. Aww yeah we gunna kickass all over dis map yo!
User avatar
Captain mibi
 
Posts: 3360
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 8:19 pm
Location: The Great State of Vermont
Medals: 13
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (1) Map Contribution (5)
General Contribution (3)

Postby mibi on Mon Oct 22, 2007 5:19 pm

Changes:

1. Ta'am and Muthana are mixed ethnic territories so you will need them to hold either bonus.
2. Netruals are in the ally boxes. With US being hardest to take but with the potential biggest bonus.
3. City bonus have been updated to reflect the geopolitics, sort of.

Image
User avatar
Captain mibi
 
Posts: 3360
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 8:19 pm
Location: The Great State of Vermont
Medals: 13
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (1) Map Contribution (5)
General Contribution (3)

Postby ps2civxr20 on Mon Oct 22, 2007 5:43 pm

1. also make nafja and salahaddan mixed
2. maybe make a small bonus for having all the non mixed teritories for one ethnic group and another for all of the terretories
3. Make it so that if you hold bagdad and eather the sunni or shia contenent that you get a bonus
4. possibly make the rivers kind of like a railroad in that tere are stations (ports) that you can attack along the river. Some ports could be cities
Private ps2civxr20
 
Posts: 49
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2007 5:21 pm

Postby ps2civxr20 on Mon Oct 22, 2007 5:52 pm

also minor spelling problem "new bahgdad"
Private ps2civxr20
 
Posts: 49
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2007 5:21 pm

Postby mibi on Mon Oct 22, 2007 7:29 pm

ps2civxr20 wrote:1. also make nafja and salahaddan mixed
2. maybe make a small bonus for having all the non mixed teritories for one ethnic group and another for all of the terretories
3. Make it so that if you hold bagdad and eather the sunni or shia contenent that you get a bonus
4. possibly make the rivers kind of like a railroad in that tere are stations (ports) that you can attack along the river. Some ports could be cities


I like the first two suggestions, but i think the last two would add some unnecessary complication. There is already a road which follows the river mostly.
User avatar
Captain mibi
 
Posts: 3360
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 8:19 pm
Location: The Great State of Vermont
Medals: 13
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (1) Map Contribution (5)
General Contribution (3)

Postby mibi on Tue Oct 23, 2007 5:27 pm

Changes:

1. Added another mix territory
2. Added seperate bonuses for mixed and non-mixed terrirotes

Image
User avatar
Captain mibi
 
Posts: 3360
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 8:19 pm
Location: The Great State of Vermont
Medals: 13
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (1) Map Contribution (5)
General Contribution (3)

Postby suggs on Tue Oct 23, 2007 5:39 pm

Hopefully the Yanks will be out soon. They've never been keen on extending thier empire "extra-Monroe" as it were.
So take the Yanks out of it.
And put in a load of bonuses for oil, as thats why its been fought over for the last 100 years. (Dont see the US invading Zimbabwe, do we....)

But cool idea. Nice and contraversial, which in itself is a good thing. Its only through the dialectical exhange of thoughts that we get anywhere at all.
Good work.
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class suggs
 
Posts: 4016
Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2007 4:16 pm
Location: At the end of the beginning...
Medals: 7
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (1)

Postby ps2civxr20 on Tue Oct 23, 2007 6:42 pm

mibi wrote:
ps2civxr20 wrote:1. also make nafja and salahaddan mixed
2. maybe make a small bonus for having all the non mixed teritories for one ethnic group and another for all of the terretories
3. Make it so that if you hold bagdad and eather the sunni or shia contenent that you get a bonus
4. possibly make the rivers kind of like a railroad in that tere are stations (ports) that you can attack along the river. Some ports could be cities


I like the first two suggestions, but i think the last two would add some unnecessary complication. There is already a road which follows the river mostly.

more suggestions yaa :D

1. Since the baathists were never too strong in kurdistan or shia areas because they oppressed them so i think you should take it out of kurd and shia dominated areas same with al-qaeda in shia area. you should replace the baathists in kurd area with some group for kurdish independence. Also replace the baaths and al-qaeda with some shia groups. Maybe the iraqi government in all places.

2. Still think you should mix nafja and salahaddan

3. Also maybe add other countries as one or two territory places because this isnt happening in a vacuum. Maybe give a bonus if you control southern iraq and iran or bonus if you have the kurdish parts of iran, sirya, and turkey along with kurdish iraq. Also if you implement this make it so that they all are neutral with a 10 garrison

4. Maybe have a small bonus if you control shia or sunni parts of bagdad

5. add arbil as a city

6. Not to get political but if this seems unnecessarily complicated it because the whole thing is unnecessarily complicated.
Private ps2civxr20
 
Posts: 49
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2007 5:21 pm

Postby mibi on Tue Oct 23, 2007 7:48 pm


1. Since the baathists were never too strong in kurdistan or shia areas because they oppressed them so i think you should take it out of kurd and shia dominated areas same with al-qaeda in shia area. you should replace the baathists in kurd area with some group for kurdish independence. Also replace the baaths and al-qaeda with some shia groups. Maybe the iraqi government in all places.


Sorry, I am not quite sure I understand this suggestion. Are talking about adding more combattants or more bonus rules? or something else


2. Still think you should mix nafja and salahaddan


While I wanted to make te ethnic mix totally acurate I had to keep an eye out for playabilty. If Najaf and Salahaddan were mixed it would leave the Suni area with just 2 territories, which is real small for a bonus espeically since its more than half of the map. Currently its 4 territories with an extra 3 mixed so I think its a good comprimise between playability and accuracy.

3. Also maybe add other countries as one or two territory places because this isnt happening in a vacuum. Maybe give a bonus if you control southern iraq and iran or bonus if you have the kurdish parts of iran, sirya, and turkey along with kurdish iraq. Also if you implement this make it so that they all are neutral with a 10 garrison


I was also considering this, but I am afraid there really isnt much room, as you can see. The country of Iraq already poses difficult because many of the privinces are all squashed and Anbar is just huge no to mention the long names so the map cant get much small in the space, nor can i fit surrounding countries.

4. Maybe have a small bonus if you control shia or sunni parts of bagdad


which parts are those?

5. add arbil as a city


Arbil wasn't really a scene of any major fighting. why should i add it?

6. Not to get political but if this seems unnecessarily complicated it because the whole thing is unnecessarily complicated.


I agree... but while the map should convey the complexities it must also have a balance with playability.
User avatar
Captain mibi
 
Posts: 3360
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 8:19 pm
Location: The Great State of Vermont
Medals: 13
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (1) Map Contribution (5)
General Contribution (3)

Postby ps2civxr20 on Tue Oct 23, 2007 8:04 pm

1. i meant get rid of some groups in areas where they were never srong or liked and replace them with new ones though if you want to cange the bonus it is up to you.

2. you could make it so that to hold a ethnic group you haveto have a presence in the provences cities

3. Understandable, though it would be nice if they changed the map size limit

4. not exactly sure which parts are which but there is probably a map of it somewhere

5. it is still a major city but you dont realy have to add it

6. no you shouldn't make it playable at all, you should make it so everyone can do anything and it is confusing what you can do.
Private ps2civxr20
 
Posts: 49
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2007 5:21 pm

Postby Coleman on Tue Oct 23, 2007 9:33 pm

ps2civxr20 wrote:6. no you shouldn't make it playable at all, you should make it so everyone can do anything and it is confusing what you can do.
I found this statement more confusing then the map by far.

Explain please?
Warning: You may be reading a really old topic.
User avatar
Sergeant Coleman
 
Posts: 5402
Joined: Tue Jan 02, 2007 10:36 pm
Location: Midwest
Medals: 25
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (1) Triples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (1) Assassin Achievement (1)
Freestyle Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (1) Speed Achievement (2) Cross-Map Achievement (2) Ratings Achievement (2)
Training Achievement (1) Map Contribution (6) Tournament Contribution (2) General Contribution (2)

Postby Elijah S on Wed Oct 24, 2007 1:57 am

...
Last edited by Elijah S on Wed Oct 24, 2007 10:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Captain Elijah S
 
Posts: 665
Joined: Wed May 09, 2007 6:24 pm
Location: South Park, Colorado
Medals: 21
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (1) Quadruples Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (2)
Speed Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (2) Tournament Achievement (1)
Map Contribution (1) Tournament Contribution (4)

Postby Rictus on Wed Oct 24, 2007 6:53 am

Question - are the city bonuses 'stackable'? If I control two cities and have captured both the Sunni and American neutral areas, do I get both bonuses? I really like the idea of allied cities, but I’m unsure how this is gonna work in a practical sense… Also, I assume these territories are one way? Because otherwise, my opponent takes the city, then I come piling out of the ‘neutral’ flag area to take the city back, which seems at odds with what these areas are meant to represent… or am I missing something? I really really like the idea of aligning the cities, which is why all the questions about the mechanism. Good luck with this one, I hope it goes somewere.
Corporal Rictus
 
Posts: 205
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 7:13 am
Medals: 6
Standard Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (1)

PreviousNext

Return to The Atlas

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

Login