Moderator: Cartographers
Banana Stomper wrote:One thought i just had was about cyprus. What if the attack route was taken out from accross the mediterranean. I think it sorta makes sense that you would need to control the mediterranean to get that island. I also don't think it would really change the game play all that much, it wouldn't increase borders or anything, the only difference would be another players ability to thwart your attempts to take antigonus by heavily fortifying the mediterranean. I guess that just makes sense to me as a way to block off the region in real life. Its just a thought i had that might make the game play a lil more interesting.
Mr. K wrote:Banana Stomper wrote:One thought i just had was about cyprus. What if the attack route was taken out from accross the mediterranean. I think it sorta makes sense that you would need to control the mediterranean to get that island. I also don't think it would really change the game play all that much, it wouldn't increase borders or anything, the only difference would be another players ability to thwart your attempts to take antigonus by heavily fortifying the mediterranean. I guess that just makes sense to me as a way to block off the region in real life. Its just a thought i had that might make the game play a lil more interesting.
I thought about that but decided against it. Antigonus is already hard enough to hold. Also in real life, even if that entire sea is controlled, it wouldn't be that hard to travel from the island to those coasts. Imagine this:
You own an island off the coast of another country you own. Another empire holds the larger body of water around it. If they're hold over those waters is strong enough that they're able to stop you from sailing from the coast to your island, then they're probably strong enough to take your island (through a siege or otherwise).
This game would work much the same. If the owner of the mediterranean is strong enough, he can simply just conquer Cyprus or one of the Cappadocia's. If they're not strong enough to do that, than hypothetically they're not strong enough to keep the sea-ports that well guarded.
So yea, I almost didn't put them in for a little bit cause I was afraid they might not make sense, but that was how I justified their existance. Really it could go either way, but I prefer having them.
Banana Stomper wrote:Perhaps the title could could get some ancient pizzazz? It'd definitely add to the feel of the map.
AndyDufresne wrote:---Are you going to use the Army shadows?
---Have you considered doing anything with the legend. I'm not sure if it's my eyes or my computer, but sometimes kassander is a little hard to read. Perhaps a simple marble slate? If you do go the route of more decorative items, I'd do the same for the little description on the right of the map. I think some decorative aspect to this map would be nice, and even better if it was something perhaps historically linked, for a background in the legend or something similar.
---Have you experimented with thre mountains and their sizes? It'd be nice not to see a repeated pattern. Also currently, they remind me of delicious cookies.
---I see your reasoning for not having certain border territories touch the land off the battlefield, but really the Med. just looks silly. Places in Kassander touch it, so why can't it and the caspian sea?
---And by your logic for Antigonus, Kassander should be a 4 due to how hard the seas are to hold and same with Ptolomy. The bonus distribution is intresting, no real middle continent of 5-6...
---And maybe look into something elegant for the name, other than simple white text.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users