asl80 wrote:hey cairns - version 3's looking better than the first, but why the explorer helmet inlay(thingy), maybe keep it as an open playing field?
your probably already on the way to this - but giving the map a clear wellington-napoleon oppositional gameplay would be best?
hopefully will have a feel similar to pearl harbour, which is a beautiful map.
(i.e. even if it's within territories, you could have figures with army circles beside - not too sure about the army no.s within the figures like the attempt above)
[EDIT]: P.S. - i voted for B thinking of something different - consider it changed to C, which i left alone picturing something like Gazala which i'm still a little unsure of (lines all over the place) ... pearl harbour has a greater focus on imagery and setting, as opposed to just schemata, though recreates the attack routes, and positions held, likely to have taken place. (Don't take the Gazala points to seriously though - have t go back and have a look at it {and still like it})
The point been, that it is getting the overall setting right that is most important, i.e. out on a field - assuming it was indeed so (or did they fight virtual wars back then too?), as well as making the player feel like they are holding a position, i.e. napolean, and advancing in his shoes with his army - assuming that the gameplay is organised so it is best to try and take sides so this can be recreated.
Would a possible way for making the taking of sides more likely be to have a few small bonuses at each end of the map (prob. northwestish and southeastish in this context), then some larger ones in the middle, followed by some medium ones that either side would ultimately contest for in the end to gain the upper hand in the balancing of power?
Posted: Thu Nov 01, 2007 3:53 am
and not aimed at judgement but rather a contribution.
