Conquer Club

Dako wrote:As usual, I can help with proper Russian namings .

Thank you, much appreciated. I'll try to remember to call you when I can start working on this again...

this is where I am now



impassables haven't yet been placed, title and station names missing, i'll try to finish it tomorrow.

I'm not sure how I feel about white as the background color. I do know how I feel about using squares for stations... that is to say I don't like them.

I kind of have a thought for how you might be able to do the background color in the playable area's. What if it resembled the actual geography? That is to say a slow gradient from white in the north to various greens and browns in the south. Just a thought, it could be cool.

This is not meant to represent the final graphical form of the map. I'd like to get the gameplay in shape first.

Ha! Good one.

Glad to see this map back in action!

Think you can break Korea up into at least 2 spaces plus a RR station?

And I kind of feel like there should be some unison between the Russian Territories compared with the other states. Even making them all shades of the same color.

Thanks IH. About Korea, we'll have to see if there's enough room. I think I'll have to cut down the territories a bit, there's some places I'm not sure if they work on the small map...

About the colours, I just picked some colours at random, I think they can be tweaked properly in graphics.

this is v4

Wouldn't it be better just to have "Age of Steam: Trans-Siberian Rail" and drop the "TRANSSIB"?

"Hold both termini and any 6 Transsib stations for one round to win"
Why not just hold all of them? It's only one more. Wouldn't that be more consistent with the Orient?

count again

Yeah, I noticed.

As for your question, I don't want the objective to be too hard. I want the objective to be a viable way to win the game, not something that only gets used rarely.

However, once OE has been in beta for a while we'll see how the objective works in practice, so we'll know if there should be less or more stations in the objective.

Cool beans. I can't wait to play OE! I hope it moves swiftly into beta mode.

Ok... so I've been wondering: should I pursue historical accuracy at the cost of good gameplay, or the other way around?

Because the BAM (Baikal-amur mainline) which in this map goes from Krasnoyarsk to Sovgavan wasn't built until soviet times. Also, as was pointed out earlier in the thread, the trans-mongolian rail wasn't built until the 60:s or so.

So does it bother anyone that railways that didn't exist yet at the time are on the map?

It kind of bothers me... but not really. I guess you could take the approach of the history of the transiberian RR. You could do something like a planned railway scheme.

Well it kind of bothers me too... on a historical map there shouldn't be that big inaccuracies.

So I'm thinking of maybe transforming the gameplay to something a bit different... I have some ideas...

Here alternate gameplay plan is

Didn't the original Transsiberian RR go straight through Manchuria, as opposed to around it? So the Transsiberian Station should be at Harbin, not tynda and birobijan

Well, it may be, but both routes were operational at approximately in the same time frame... and this way there are more transsib stations.

I don't know, I guess there will be time to work on that in GP...

I'll probably have to scrap the verny-novosibirsk line too, it seems it wasn't built until 1930:s...

I believe I wish to further deviate from the gameplay of OE with this map, and I believe I will do it thus:

"Industrial Centers"? That seems cool. Do you have a reason for their placement?

yes.

Sigh... I meant are there industrial centers where you placed them on the map or are they placed strategically for gameplay reasons?