Pearl Harbor: Twist or Stick?

[nippersean]

I preferred the compromise suggestion for the plane bonuses that were suggested in the original thread, and mentioned again here. Something like +1 for 2, +2 for 3.

I've not played either that much but I think it's nearly great.
The first one did get very lopsided drops.
The second one is...well...not as exciting to play. The planes are virtually worthless and the AA's are the way to go from what I've seen.

The bonus for the planes went from +3 for 2, to nothing until you hold 4 (then +3). Which seems a massive tweak.

I'm surprised a compromise can't still be tried. I guess it depends on whether you're a singles player or a trips / quads player to have a strong opinion. I guess the first one had a more fun element and in a sense "realism" in that the planes are a very strong and important element of the map.
So after careful consideration, I've abstained and added to the "viewed not voted" stats.

[briggs1209]

I never played the original version but have played the new one. I found playing the map on fog made it a bit quick to end both times round. Like the concept and the style , planes being able to attack different groups would shake things up a bit

[MrBenn]

It looks like it's still broadly a 60:40 split in favour of reverting to the original map version

[alstergren]

It looks like it's still broadly a 60:40 split in favour of reverting to the original map version

It's easy to click in a poll. I'd review the comments where people bother to put down their thoughts when making up my mind.

[olkok]

I prefer the old map. Much more fun.

[ltiyank]

I prefer the original but only because I did quite well on it.

[Knight2254]

Go back to the old map.

Right now the AA guns WAY too valuable. It's difficult to get a bonus aside from the AA guns so whoever gets those simply reinforce those every turn and are able to shoot down enough planes to eliminate the plane bonuses.

If we do anything I think we should go back to the previous map or perhaps reduce the bonuses -- Something like +1 for 2, +2 for 3, +3 for 3. This would allow you, if you did not get the AA bonuses (then you're probably loaded with planes), to have a fighting chance.

[Pantheon]

Go back to the original please.
It was much more fun and interesting. The current map lacks any authenticity or excitement; I don't even play it anymore.

[mrbang]

I vote for the original version
So what if it's not a great 1v1 map? there are any number of maps that can be awful as 1v1 but great for 4 or more.
Please, a great exciting map has been gutted.

Give us back our sneak attack!!!


mrbang

[Keredrex]

If we do anything I think we should go back to the previous map or perhaps reduce the bonuses -- Something like +1 for 2, +2 for 3, +3 for 3. This would allow you, if you did not get the AA bonuses (then you're probably loaded with planes), to have a fighting chance.

It seems there are msany who would like the old map back.. or even better the compromise as metnioned above... I also stopped playing this map until the decision is finalized.

[Robinette]

It looks like it's still broadly a 60:40 split in favour of reverting to the original map version

and nearly 1600 others who visited without voting

[Uncle Death]

I had more fun in the original and like it. I don't like it anymore.

[PLAYER57832]

I just started playing the new version in 1 vs 1. Honestly, I cannot see all that much difference. Just put it back the way it was.

[Timminz]

Old map please.

[AtreidesHouse]

I just started playing the new version in 1 vs 1. Honestly, I cannot see all that much difference. Just put it back the way it was.

Being as I have played this map (both versions) almost 1000 times, I agree that there wasn't that big of a difference between the versions, although I like the revamp a little better as it is a little more challenging, albeit not in 1v1 because the drop determines that almost 80% of the time. To suggest a little tweak, open up one more access to Ford Island because I find that is pretty easy to hold and fortify (depends on fortifications and cards of course) and say making it accesible from California or Swan would factor in a lot of different variables.