ZeakCytho wrote:I think it's a great first draft.
ZeakCytho wrote:I'm a bit hesitant to support rail-lines and city bonuses. For geographical maps like this, I think classic gameplay really works best. The whole thing might be less confusing if the rail lines looked like rail lines instead of just plain lines. Right now it's a bit hard to tell them apart from the territory borders. I think you also need to define "connect by rail" - do you mean "hold X cities and the territories between them that the rail goes over" (which I think you mean), or just "hold X cities"?
oaktown wrote:• Split the giant Bengal Presidency into two regions, but now how one might expect; added the Central Provinces as a 5 territory, four border +4, and reconfigured those territories. I'm quite pleased with the huge central region because it features the railroad sub-bonus.
oaktown wrote: Total regions not including Nepal and Bhotan = 42... doesn't get more classic.
• Total regions if we include Nepal and Bhotan = 44... I'm thinking perhaps we start them neutral, 2 armies each, and if somebody wants to hit them for a card that's their choice. Otherwise they won't see any action, which is fine because they aren't a part of British India.
oaktown wrote:Re-drew the Bombay Presidency to better reflect true geography. It is now five territories with three borders - a nice +3, and equal to the northern region.
• Split the giant Bengal Presidency
oaktown wrote:re. the "Big Region," aka Bengal Presidency: some of you are saying to split it up, but nobody is saying why.
Juan_Bottom wrote:Right now, It's dead space on the map. The movement there will be stagnent. I don't like dead space.oaktown wrote:re. the "Big Region," aka Bengal Presidency: some of you are saying to split it up, but nobody is saying why.
asl80 wrote:good start oaktown, the feel of the graphics are good ... but at the same time i wonder if this is not the text based version
i.e. it's all words at the moment
Users browsing this forum: noxiO_o