Thanks for the comments, see responses below:
cowshrptrn wrote:
I liek what you've done with the map. I'd jsut suggest connecting New Caledonia to Papua New Guinea
Done, will be in the next revision.
happysadfun wrote:
...You should add nz to australia, making it Anglo Oceania
I'm trying to keep real countries where I can. I don't think it makes a significant strategic difference but I could be persauded. Let me know your rationale for adding it...
Add Papua and Brunei to Indonesia, making it Greater Indonesia
As with NZ above I'd prefer authenticity where possible but persaude me.
Hindustan, minus Pakistan,+China+Korea+Mongolia+Japland+Indochina+Taiwan+Thailand+Myanmar+Malaysia+Nepal=Orient SubBonus
Stans+Kazakh+Iran+Pakistan+Afghanistan+Iran+Turkey=North Islamics SubBonus
I considered having a single territory present in multiple sub-bonus regions (mainly thinking about Egypt as part of the political though not geographic middle east) and felt that the map was already sufficiently busy and complex.
Egypt+Sudan+Libya+Tunisia+Algeria+Morocco+Mauritania=African Arab World
I'm still not sure whether we should add a third sub-region to Africa. If the consensus is that we should I think this is the logical grouping.
Ghana=Cote di Ivoire
Do you want me to re-create Cote D'Ivoire or just rename the amalgm I've called Ghana to Cote D'Ivoire. If the latter I'm cool with it.
Own African Arab World, North Islamics, and MidEast and receive an extra bonus of 5, plus the three subbonuses for the individual subcontinents
Make Somalia an overlap of Mideast and Africa, but not a part of asia (That didn't make sense.)
As with the other multi-bonus consitituants I think this might be strategically interesting but given the maps existing size and complexity I think it might be too much. Let's see what others think and revisit based on the responses?
If you must keep Hindustan, add Afghan and Nepal and Burma (Myanmar) to it and call it Indian SubContinent.
I'm okay to add Nepal and go with the Indian Subcontinent label if people prefer that to the Hindustan title which I suppose might be offensive/controversial to Sikhs and Muslims within the territory (I didn't intend any offence). Afghanistan and Burma/Myanmar are not part of the subcontinent as far as I know.
Moskva should be an overlap of Russia and Euro but not in Asia.
You're better off separating Yugoslavia from Poland.
Turkey is where the word Asia comes from. So it's Asian.
On Moskav I've already said my piece on multi-bonus territories. On Poland, I'd like to have more of the eastern european states in their but had to sacrifice them due to space. Picked "Poland" as the name as it's the largest population in the region.
On Turkey, I agree that only about 3% of Turkey's land mass is in Europe (and I compound this but not really highlighting Anatolian Turkey on the map). However I think geo-politically and strategically Turkey is more Europe than Asian, though I think it could be argued either way given it's Ottoman past and the like. I think the map is more 'interesting' with Turkey in Europe but I think this one is open to debate. Shall we let others way in and then reaccess?
*out of breath*
Me too.
![Wink :wink:](./images/smilies/icon_wink.gif)
Thanks for all your suggestions and insights so far.
Cheers,
Zim