alexandrois wrote:I love the railway idea
I think that that north west won't have much action in it as the edges do
so could you put a railway running up the west coast into the north west?
Certainly I could, but there are two problems with this. The first is that the north west is already made up of small, controllable regions. Both Bombay Presidency and Northern Frontier are fives territory, three border +3 regions. And both are going to be ideal start positions due to their locations on the edges of the map. Running a rail line up the west would be redundant.
The second reason I wouldn't want a rail line there is because it didn't exist. The current lines are historically accurate and based on the rail system of India in the 1860s-1870s.
cairnswk wrote:I notice there is an attack loop between Calcultta, Bombay and Madras, but nothing similar in the west.
Won't that create an in-balance in the gameplay?
Perhaps a... coastal shipping route from Bombay to Karachi.
Well, I kinda liked the linear nature of that region. An attack route from Bombay to Karachi (Sindh) wouldn't be a bad thing, but I'm not sure it contributes much to gameplay. The fact that there is a sea route in the east isn't a good enough reason to justify a sea route in the west, but if there is further justification for adding a western sea route I'm willing to consider it.
Also. i know this is late in the piece and you can reject all of this if you want, but I've recently become acquainted with some British-Indian history through the magic the ABC TV here in Oz. Isn't the Taj more of a symbol of the Mogul Empire of India. While I realise it is probably the most recognised building in the world (so they say) i would have thought that some building from the British construction and architecture of New Delhi would be more defining of the British Period for India.
I hear where you're coming from on this one... the Taj wasn't held in as high regard in 1870 as it is today. This is kind of like the Queen v. Empress question - Empress might be correct, but Queen is what CC users will relate to. Using an English building might be more true to the historical flavor of the map, but the average user might wonder what it is.
cairnswk wrote:For the train bonuses, do you mean that you have to hold all territories that the rail-line traverses to get that bonus. That is kind of unclear that way it is written in the legend.
(sighs) I've probably changed the language of this a dozen times over the life of this thread, and every time I change the language somebody suggests language that somebody else has already rejected. I don't really give a damn what it says, so if you have a better idea I'd love to hear it.
cairnswk wrote:Oaktown, IMO i've gotta say that i'm not a big fan of the Presidency names on the map in the background. They overlap and collide with the territory names in many places and this causes my eyes to be lead away from the actual territory names to try to read the Presidency names.
As a colorblind user I would rather err on the side of too much information. There are already too many maps out there that I can't play.
cairnswk wrote:I voted for Queen Victoria. She was known as the Empress of India. So Queen Victoria would fit in more with what you have in the title style. I must say that I'm surprised the 4th option made it into the poll.
I'll probably stick with "Queen" - though had it been close I was comfortable just saying "Her Majesty's." And whenever I post a poll around here I like to include one option for those that share my general opinion of Foundry polls, which is that they are meaningless.
cairnswk wrote:So apart from that, if none of those things are considered issues by the rest of the foundry, after seeing the Small version with some armies on it for placement, i'd be happy to say FF.
Page 12 of this thread has a small map with three digit counts.
a.sub wrote:one day in the middle of the night im going to be at ur house with a knife
and eat ur brain
and hope it gives me at least some of ur talent
Now that's just weird.