Moderator: Cartographers
Iancanton, if we going to create proper map of Balkan,with all proper provinces,then Zeak can abandoned these map,maybe you ask why,because its not possible to put all provinces of all balkan countries.If you want to continue with that,then ok,i can give you a list of over 100 oblast or provinces of Grecce,Romania,Bulgaria,Serbia,Albania,and belive me Zeak will be have hard job to implement all these to be proper.it'll be nice if u manage to put in bucovina, the only one that is missing; if u do this, then kyustendil is a prime candidate for removal, since that was part of sofia province when bulgaria was divided into 9 oblasts - this will make bulgaria a slightly easier hold for someone who's stuck in the east, where the only small bonus is turkey.
nothing is perfect in balkan,and you can not create map with all regions to be 100% perfect.These are the 8 development regions in Romania, which (with the exception of Bucureşti-Ilfov) are named by their geographical position in the country:
Macroregiunea 1:
Nord-Vest (6 counties)
Centru (6 counties)
Macroregiunea 2:
Nord-Est (6 counties)
Sud-Est (6 counties)
Macroregiunea 3:
Sud-Muntenia (7 counties)
Bucureşti-Ilfov (1 county and Bucharest)
Macroregiunea 4:
Sud-Vest Oltenia (5 counties)
Vest (4 counties)
since 1999, it has consisted of twenty-eight. All take their names from their respective capital cities:
Blagoevgrad
Burgas
Dobrich
Gabrovo
Haskovo
Kardzhali
Kyustendil
Lovech
Montana
Pazardzhik
Pernik
Pleven
Plovdiv
Razgrad
Rousse
Shumen
Silistra
Sliven
Smolyan
Sofia City
Sofia Province
Stara Zagora
Targovishte
Varna
Veliko Tarnovo
Vidin
Vratsa
Yambol
qwert wrote:Iancanton, if we going to create proper map of Balkan,with all proper provinces,then Zeak can abandoned these map,maybe you ask why,because its not possible to put all provinces of all balkan countries.it'll be nice if u manage to put in bucovina, the only one that is missing; if u do this, then kyustendil is a prime candidate for removal, since that was part of sofia province when bulgaria was divided into 9 oblasts - this will make bulgaria a slightly easier hold for someone who's stuck in the east, where the only small bonus is turkey.
we all agree that we cannot make a fully-correct map of the balkans that is playable. however, no-one is trying to do this. bucovina is the only historical region that is missing from romania, so it makes sense to include it. i support zeak's use of traditional regions because the modern development regions have the most boring names that u can imagine.qwert wrote:nothing is perfect in balkan,and you can not create map with all regions to be 100% perfect.
the 9-oblast pre-1999 map of bulgaria is closer to our 6-region bonus zone than the modern 28-oblast map.qwert wrote:Ofcourse Bulgaria is even harder to be 100% correct provinces.
the name of our kyustendil region was actually sofia province. if we merge sofia province with sofia city, then the only logical name is sofia. in this case, the name of the capital city is actually the name of the whole region, so there is no confusion.ZeakCytho wrote:Would it be better to rename the newly merged Kyustendil-Sofia as Sofia or Kyustendil?
Bukovina is area who go in Ukraine to,actualy alost half of bukovina is in ukraine.the name of our kyustendil region was actually sofia province. if we merge sofia province with sofia city, then the only logical name is sofia. in this case, the name of the capital city is actually the name of the whole region, so there is no confusion.
Iancanton,if you dont notice these need to be map with present countries,not some historical map of Balkan area before 100 or more years. And you have many historical regions who is much importan then bukovina,and its not on map.bucovina is the only historical region that is missing from romania
all of the regions in romania have historical names at the moment, so it's logical for the extra romanian region to be historical, not modern.qwert wrote:Iancanton,if you dont notice these need to be map with present countries,not some historical map of Balkan area before 100 or more years. And you have many historical regions who is much importan then bukovina,and its not on map.bucovina is the only historical region that is missing from romania



given the course of the sava river, it's possible to extend the course of the river to separate slavonija from republika srpska, if zeak is so minded. there have been several unsuccessful attempts at trying to split up bosnia & herzegovina (b & h) in a meaningful way. montenegro always starts neutral, while b & h is coded so that each player in 1v1 games starts with either fbih or republika srpska, so attacking ur opponent in b & h is a more natural first move than trying to eliminate montenegrin neutrals and therefore needs little incentive.Peter Gibbons wrote:Bosnia & Herzegovnia. It's only a +1 bonus right now. It is 2 territories only, so I understand the reluctance to make it worth more. But it can be attacked from 5 different territories. It seems infinitely harder to hold than Slovenia, which is a +2 but can only be attacked from one territory. The other stand-alone +1 is Montenegro, and than can only be attacked from three adjacent regions.

slovenia was initially 2 regions, but we had to increase it to 3 because having too many small bonus zones means putting in more fixed starting neutrals, which players and mapmakers alike generally hate. the croatia player can actually attack slovenia more easily than vice versa because only 1 croatian region borders slovenia, while the slovenia player must spread his defence over 2 bordering regions.Peter Gibbons wrote:Slovenia has 2 territories that touch outward and only touch 1 adjacent territory. Eastern Turkey has 2 territories that touch outward and touch 2 total adjacent territories (but the borders overlap so there are actually 3 ways to attack in). As such Eastern Turkey seems far more difficult to hold.
I'm no expert on Slovenia geography but is there a way to make it only two territories and downgrade it to +1?
without a big bonus, it was feared that romania and greece would become dead areas, with the most of the play taking place purely in the west. they are worth their bonuses, being a bit more difficult than classic north america. i've already given the following recommendations to make serbia and bulgaria easier to hold.Peter Gibbons wrote:I would bump Serbia and Bulgaria to +5 OR downgrade Romania and Greece to +5. I just don't see justification for Romania and Greece to be worth 50% more than Serbia and Bulgaria.
iancanton wrote:kyustendil was given this name on our map when a bonus for holding capital cities was being considered and we split sofia province into 2 regions. now we know that there will be no capital bonuses, i consider that the map will be fairer for the eastern player if we merge these 2 regions back to the original sofia province, so that there is a bonus zone similar to classic africa in the east, with an extra region in romania.
ian.iancanton wrote:maybe the sar planina (sar mountains) can be added between pelagonia and kosovo to make the serbian bonus easier?
geographically, sar planina is placed between Pelagonija and Shkoder, not between Kosovo and Pelagonija.iancanton wrote:maybe the sar planina (sar mountains) can be added between pelagonia and kosovo to make the serbian bonus easier?

hatchman wrote:First time seeing this map and can't wait to play it! Gorgeous. Nice geographic features.

Silvanus wrote:perch is a North Korean agent to infiltrate south Korean girls