California [Quenched]

[phantomzero]

Sorry, I don't get the Antelope Valley thing.

Beverly Hills is nowhere near the ocean. You should just call that territ Santa Monica or Malibu.
The territ to the South of that should be called San Pedro or Long Beach.
Orange Is a county south of LA.
Burbank is in the San Fernando Valley.
Hollywood is not in the center of LA.
I will fill the LA territs that you have with more accurate names tomorrow.

Names aside, the biggest beef that I have is the Sierra Nevada Mountain range. If ever there was an "Impasse" this mountain range would certainly qualify. It runs through Tahoe to the south and curls to the west just north of LA. Everything to the east of it should not connect to the Napa valley. Or "Central Valley".

I agree with porkenbeans. The names and areas should be kept as geographically accurate as possible. As far as Antelope Valley. That is the name for that area. The main cities there are Palmdale and Lancaster. Your map features some a mix of some city and county names already. I'd just go with Antelope Valley.

[The Bison King]

Names aside, the biggest beef that I have is the Sierra Nevada Mountain range. If ever there was an "Impasse" this mountain range would certainly qualify. It runs through Tahoe to the south and curls to the west just north of LA. Everything to the east of it should not connect to the Napa valley. Or "Central Valley".

I have the Sierra Nevada's in there as an impassable, but understand that I have to leave open spots so that half the map isn't blocked off. I even extended it north to Tahoe in the last version.

[porkenbeans]

Names aside, the biggest beef that I have is the Sierra Nevada Mountain range. If ever there was an "Impasse" this mountain range would certainly qualify. It runs through Tahoe to the south and curls to the west just north of LA. Everything to the east of it should not connect to the Napa valley. Or "Central Valley".

I have the Sierra Nevada's in there as an impassable, but understand that I have to leave open spots so that half the map isn't blocked off. I even extended it north to Tahoe in the last version.

Lake Tahoe is a mountain lake, that while large as lakes go, is tiny in comparison to other places. you have it in the wrong place, and you have made it as large as LA.

I do not see why you just do not use the real counties as territs, instead of taking small towns and haphazardly using them to represent large swatches of land. If you look at a county map of California you would certainly have enough territs to fill your map. However If you want to use something besides counties, there are many different ways to go here.

California is NOT just another state. It's size and climatological diversity alone sets it apart from all other states. You would do better to think of it as a Country. It ranks high along with the worlds largest countries in terms of economy, and its rich history has so much breadth, that all you need do is pick a topic and you will find enough on that subject to fill the map. For example, did you know that the National Park system was started there by John Mieur. There are enough National and State Parks in California to make 10 maps.

There are just so many different things that you could make this map about. I really liked the idea that you had about the 19th century, and California's birth as a State. What ever happened to that idea ?

[The Bison King]

Names aside, the biggest beef that I have is the Sierra Nevada Mountain range. If ever there was an "Impasse" this mountain range would certainly qualify. It runs through Tahoe to the south and curls to the west just north of LA. Everything to the east of it should not connect to the Napa valley. Or "Central Valley".

I have the Sierra Nevada's in there as an impassable, but understand that I have to leave open spots so that half the map isn't blocked off. I even extended it north to Tahoe in the last version.

Lake Tahoe is a mountain lake, that while large as lakes go, is tiny in comparison to other places. you have it in the wrong place, and you have made it as large as LA.

I do not see why you just do not use the real counties as territs, instead of taking small towns and haphazardly using them to represent large swatches of land. If you look at a county map of California you would certainly have enough territs to fill your map. However If you want to use something besides counties, there are many different ways to go here.

California is NOT just another state. It's size and climatological diversity alone sets it apart from all other states. You would do better to think of it as a Country. It ranks high along with the worlds largest countries in terms of economy, and its rich history has so much breadth, that all you need do is pick a topic and you will find enough on that subject to fill the map. For example, did you know that the National Park system was started there by John Mieur. There are enough National and State Parks in California to make 10 maps.

There are just so many different things that you could make this map about. I really liked the idea that you had about the 19th century, and California's birth as a State. What ever happened to that idea ?

I do not see why you just do not use the real counties as territs, instead of taking small towns and haphazardly using them to represent large swatches of land

Because counties are boring and when they divided the state into counties, (believe it or not) they really weren't thinking about what would make a good conquerclub map

Lake Tahoe is a mountain lake, that while large as lakes go, is tiny in comparison to other places. you have it in the wrong place, and you have made it as large as LA.

Would you prefer if I called it "Lake Tahoe Region"?????????

You're the one whose boasting about how many climate regions, and land marks, and national parks are in California, and that's exactly what I'm trying to show of in a map like this. That's why Lake Tahoe's a region, that's why Kings Canyon is a region, that's why Death valley is a region. But you also would prefer me to divide it by county????????
MAKE UP YOUR MIND.

There are just so many different things that you could make this map about. I really liked the idea that you had about the 19th century, and California's birth as a State. What ever happened to that idea ?

This is that idea, but please forgive me if I don't add in an old timey prospector with a pick axe on the side of the map.

[porkenbeans]

Names aside, the biggest beef that I have is the Sierra Nevada Mountain range. If ever there was an "Impasse" this mountain range would certainly qualify. It runs through Tahoe to the south and curls to the west just north of LA. Everything to the east of it should not connect to the Napa valley. Or "Central Valley".

I have the Sierra Nevada's in there as an impassable, but understand that I have to leave open spots so that half the map isn't blocked off. I even extended it north to Tahoe in the last version.

Lake Tahoe is a mountain lake, that while large as lakes go, is tiny in comparison to other places. you have it in the wrong place, and you have made it as large as LA.

I do not see why you just do not use the real counties as territs, instead of taking small towns and haphazardly using them to represent large swatches of land. If you look at a county map of California you would certainly have enough territs to fill your map. However If you want to use something besides counties, there are many different ways to go here.

California is NOT just another state. It's size and climatological diversity alone sets it apart from all other states. You would do better to think of it as a Country. It ranks high along with the worlds largest countries in terms of economy, and its rich history has so much breadth, that all you need do is pick a topic and you will find enough on that subject to fill the map. For example, did you know that the National Park system was started there by John Mieur. There are enough National and State Parks in California to make 10 maps.

There are just so many different things that you could make this map about. I really liked the idea that you had about the 19th century, and California's birth as a State. What ever happened to that idea ?

I do not see why you just do not use the real counties as territs, instead of taking small towns and haphazardly using them to represent large swatches of land

Because counties are boring and when they divided the state into counties, (believe it or not) they really weren't thinking about what would make a good conquerclub map

Lake Tahoe is a mountain lake, that while large as lakes go, is tiny in comparison to other places. you have it in the wrong place, and you have made it as large as LA.

Would you prefer if I called it "Lake Tahoe Region"?????????

You're the one whose boasting about how many climate regions, and land marks, and national parks are in California, and that's exactly what I'm trying to show of in a map like this. That's why Lake Tahoe's a region, that's why Kings Canyon is a region, that's why Death valley is a region. But you also would prefer me to divide it by county????????
MAKE UP YOUR MIND.

There are just so many different things that you could make this map about. I really liked the idea that you had about the 19th century, and California's birth as a State. What ever happened to that idea ?

This is that idea, but please forgive me if I don't add in an old timey prospector with a pick axe on the side of the map.

King,
the names that are on this map are not of the period. While a pick axe may seem cliche, it does reflect the period. I do not see anything that reflects the 1800's. If you were to make Tahoe "The Ponderosa" then you would be headed in the right direction.

The reason that I mentioned "Counties" is that it would be an easy thing to do, and it would be correct. As it is now, I can not see a theme. It is all somewhat fantasy, in that you have used real names, but not accurately. Fantasy is cool, maybe you could include Disneyland and the "Magic Kingdom". That would fit in with the theme.

I am happy with whatever theme that you decide on. Once I understand just what that is, I will be of better assistance to you on this project. I have lived in just about every region at one time or another, so, once I understand your vision, I know that I can be of value to you.

I like the miss-shaped outline, it gives the feel of an old hand drawn map. But that alone does not say 1860.

[The Bison King]

The reason that I mentioned "Counties" is that it would be an easy thing to do, and it would be correct.

I'll be clear on this so we can move past this point, I am NOT doing counties. If you want to play on counties get out a road map, and play on that.

As it is now, I can not see a theme. It is all somewhat fantasy, in that you have used real names, but not accurately.

Ok bear with me... what if the the of this map was fantasy? Not like magical kingdom fantasy but more like the perfect Ideal California that people want to believe in. The California Steinbeck wrote about, the California which thousands of gold miners and cowboys flocked to in search of a better life, the California which gave birth to Hollywood and the 60's hippy movement. The California which is filled with ghost towns and broken dreams, as well as palatial mansions and spanish Villa's. Does that make sense or is that too far out there?

[porkenbeans]

The reason that I mentioned "Counties" is that it would be an easy thing to do, and it would be correct.

I'll be clear on this so we can move past this point, I am NOT doing counties. If you want to play on counties get out a road map, and play on that.

As it is now, I can not see a theme. It is all somewhat fantasy, in that you have used real names, but not accurately.

Ok bear with me... what if the the of this map was fantasy? Not like magical kingdom fantasy but more like the perfect Ideal California that people want to believe in. The California Steinbeck wrote about, the California which thousands of gold miners and cowboys flocked to in search of a better life, the California which gave birth to Hollywood and the 60's hippy movement. The California which is filled with ghost towns and broken dreams, as well as palatial mansions and spanish Villa's. Does that make sense or is that too far out there?

The 60's in California was the best place on earth. I am full of memories from that time. I would love to see this map go in that direction. If that is really something that you want to do, please tell me. I can fill you in on many places that are prevalent from that time.

The 60's is not really tied in a thematic sense, to the 1800's. So here is where I am confused with your vision. Tell me more about this fantasy California dream that you are talking about. When it comes to "California dreamin", I am there dude.

For example, did you know that the Flower Children retired to Northern California ? Specifically a place called Humbolt County. They brought with them all of the scientific knowledge, that the few drop outs from Berkley, and the rest of the So-Cal colleges produced. With that know-how they started to breed the worlds best marijuana. and is today, Northern California's most profitable industry. And, their pot is second to none in the world.

I can show you where Manson cave is located. A hang out where Charlie indoctrinated his clan. Or all of the best Surf beaches, where the Flower Children called home. Or a place outside of LA called Vasquez Rocks. You have seen it in countless movies from Westerns to Star Trek.

I can go on and on about this era. But, I will stop here for now.

[The Bison King]

For example, did you know that the Flower Children retired to Northern California ? Specifically a place called Humbolt County.

No, but I'm listening...

They brought with them all of the scientific knowledge, that the few drop outs from Berkley, and the rest of the So-Cal colleges produced.

hmm... what scientific knowledge would they produce? I wonder?

With that know-how they started to breed the worlds best marijuana. and is today, Northern California's most profitable industry.

yeah?!

And, their pot is second to none in the world.

Road Trip!!!!

Or huh well I mean...That would be illegal

[The Bison King]

Any way back on topic, I think here in lie's the difference between what I want to do with this map, and what you want me to do with this map. You want me to hone in and pick something really really specific and name everything after marlyn Manson's hideout or whatever cause it's a 1960's theme or whatever. But what I want to do is give just the broadest sense of what the state is. Like a highlight reel. Include all the major cities and the BIG "Well Known" Landmarks like Lake Tahoe, Yosemite, and yadda-yadda-yadda. Obviously there is too much history to fit it all into this map. That's why I'd rather keep it lose.

I'm not really digging a 60's theme right now because the hippy movement was to well founded in love and peace to make a good CONQUER club map. What about just a broad "golden age" feel. Something like from the 1840's to 1930's. I don't really want to theme it after a particular year, I just want to give someone who doesn't know every detail of Californian history a taste of the place.

[porkenbeans]

Any way back on topic, I think here in lie's the difference between what I want to do with this map, and what you want me to do with this map. You want me to hone in and pick something really really specific and name everything after marlyn Manson's hideout or whatever cause it's a 1960's theme or whatever. But what I want to do is give just the broadest sense of what the state is. Like a highlight reel. Include all the major cities and the BIG "Well Known" Landmarks like Lake Tahoe, Yosemite, and yadda-yadda-yadda. Obviously there is too much history to fit it all into this map. That's why I'd rather keep it lose.

I'm not really digging a 60's theme right now because the hippy movement was to well founded in love and peace to make a good CONQUER club map. What about just a broad "golden age" feel. Something like from the 1840's to 1930's. I don't really want to theme it after a particular year, I just want to give someone who doesn't know every detail of Californian history a taste of the place.

So just a mishmash of various claims of fame ? I can dig that. Oh, and it is "Charles" not Marlyn.

[The Bison King]

Oh, and it is "Charles" not Marlyn.

[The Bison King]

Cool, then with that out of the way what I really want to do is pin down is LA, I'll pose 3 questions:

1.)Is +6 for 6 borders too much? (remember there is room for expansion and you can hold it for 4 with the outside territories, for 3 if you also have the desert.)

2.)If not should it be raised to +7

3.)The other alternative is to reduce the number of borders altogether, what do we feel about this?

Once this is figured out I'll go about re-naming and Arranging the LA territories to be more appropriate.

[porkenbeans]

Cool, then with that out of the way what I really want to do is pin down is LA, I'll pose 3 questions:

1.)Is +6 for 6 borders too much? (remember there is room for expansion and you can hold it for 4 with the outside territories, for 3 if you also have the desert.)

2.)If not should it be raised to +7

3.)The other alternative is to reduce the number of borders altogether, what do we feel about this?

Once this is figured out I'll go about re-naming and Arranging the LA territories to be more appropriate.

I do not comment on GP issues very often, but I will say this for what it is worth. LA is the Heart of Southern California. I would go as far to say that, LA IS Southern California.

[Victor Sullivan]

As far as the theme is concerned, I think you definitely need to make this as much California as possible. In other words, you should not be able to recreate this map with another state, otherwise, why California? Why not Ohio or Wyoming or Massachusetts? Just something to think about. As for the LA bonus, I think +6 is fair. +7 seems a little steep IMO. As for the reducing of the borders, I say it'd be okay, as long as you're not compromising California's geography. And if NOT reducing the borders compromises California's geography, then definitely reduce the borders. Anyways, hope my comment helps

-Sully

[The Bison King]

As for the reducing of the borders, I say it'd be okay, as long as you're not compromising California's geography. And if NOT reducing the borders compromises California's geography, then definitely reduce the borders.

Well you break it up 100 different ways depending on how you justify it, What I want to know is if from a gameplay prospective 6 borders is too many.

[Victor Sullivan]

As for the reducing of the borders, I say it'd be okay, as long as you're not compromising California's geography. And if NOT reducing the borders compromises California's geography, then definitely reduce the borders.

Well you break it up 100 different ways depending on how you justify it, What I want to know is if from a gameplay prospective 6 borders is too many.

I realize that. I'm saying either way it'd be fine from a gameplay perspective, so choose the most geographically accurate choice.

-Sully

[The Bison King]

Click image to enlarge.

Click image to enlarge.

Ok for now I'm sticking with 6 borders in LA I changed the names around so that hopefully they'll be more appropriately matched, also I can rely on less abbreviations.

[Victor Sullivan]

Believe it or not, I think the minimap is too big. It distracts from the main map IMO, since it's like 1/3 the size.

[The Bison King]

Click image to enlarge.

Click image to enlarge.

Well, I know I'm not in graphics yet but, I couldn't stand looking at that last version any longer. What do you think?

[The Bison King]

Believe it or not, I think the minimap is too big. It distracts from the main map IMO, since it's like 1/3 the size.

Also I did make the mini map smaller.

[Evil DIMwit]

I recommend you start the cities neutral. Right now a 4-player is guaranteed to drop someone with the +1 bonus, and 1 in 5 will drop a +3 bonus. 1 in 7 3-player games will drop a +4 bonus.

Either way, add another territory, because 51 and 41 are both unsafe numbers -- 52 and 42 are fair.

[The Bison King]

I recommend you start the cities neutral. Right now a 4-player is guaranteed to drop someone with the +1 bonus, and 1 in 5 will drop a +3 bonus. 1 in 7 3-player games will drop a +4 bonus.

Either way, add another territory, because 51 and 41 are both unsafe numbers -- 52 and 42 are fair.

Oh Duh! I knew that In fact I just added a territory in Thyseneal for exactly the same reason. yeah that seems reasonable starting the cities neutral as well. how about just 2 neutral troops on each one.

About adding a territory I think what I'll do is add 1 territory to the desert as well as increase it's border by one as well as it's worth.

[Evil DIMwit]

Go for it.

[jefjef]

You could probably get by calling "No Name" tert "Lone Pine".

[The Bison King]

You could probably get by calling "No Name" tert "Lone Pine".

see I'm not sure if you were present for the conversation which established that "No Name" is the name of ghost town that I chose to exemplify the fact that that region is predominantly defined by ghost towns or if you think that it is listed as "No Name" as a place holder since I didn't have a name. Either way I have considered calling it lone Pine, it really comes down to the question; Which is more badass? I know Victor stated that he thought "No Name" is pretty bad ass. I to think it's pretty sweet. Lone Pine is also a pretty badass name, so I could still be persuaded that way.

New draft soon, I swear.