Conquer Club

Well, hold on, let me get the honey out so it will be sticky!

isaiah40 wrote:Well, hold on, let me get the honey out so it will be sticky!

You're sticky enough, honey.


Looks good, I say let's move on.

A quick update to show the new capital bonus structure.

[bigimg]http://img694.imageshack.us/img694/978/fracturedchinav1n.png[/bigimg]

nice to see another map with this theme progressing well.

can i suggest reducing mongolia from 8 regions to 4? such a difficult bonus in the middle of the map will make it rather unfair for anyone who has a concentration of regions there in a multi-player game while his opponents are picking off the easy bonuses elsewhere. conceptual justifications for the reduction include the population being only a poverty-stricken 3 million that is largely dependent on herding sheep, with chinese trade being responsible for so much of the rest of mongolia's economy that the title fracture will hit mongolia much harder than the coastal areas, which can obviously trade relatively unimpeded by conflict, via the sea.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-p ... 592189.stm

if u do this, then there are 54 starting regions, so one more will need to disappear for the map to reach “golden number” status. i suggest that nepal and bhutan are merged to become nepal-bhutan.

jilin, not liaoning, is the part of china that has a significant korean-speaking minority, so it makes sense for korea to invade jilin, where at least some people might welcome their troops. recommendation: jilin to join korea.

http://www.china.org.cn/english/travel/53647.htm

liaoning belongs more to manchuria. u can change the name to mukden, a historic name for shenyang, the largest city in the area. the old manchu imperial palace is in shenyang (mukden, as it was then), which served as the original manchu capital before the manchus invaded china to defeat the ming empire. recommendation: liaoning to be renamed mukden and join manchuria as its capital.

http://www.roughguides.co.uk/travel/asi ... nyang.aspx

haipan ought to be hainan.

http://en.hainan.gov.cn/

ian.

iancanton wrote:nice to see another map with this theme progressing well.

First of all let me say thank you!

can i suggest reducing mongolia from 8 regions to 4? such a difficult bonus in the middle of the map will make it rather unfair for anyone who has a concentration of regions there in a multi-player game while his opponents are picking off the easy bonuses elsewhere. conceptual justifications for the reduction include the population being only a poverty-stricken 3 million that is largely dependent on herding sheep, with chinese trade being responsible for so much of the rest of mongolia's economy that the title fracture will hit mongolia much harder than the coastal areas, which can obviously trade relatively unimpeded by conflict, via the sea.

if u do this, then there are 54 starting regions, so one more will need to disappear for the map to reach “golden number” status. i suggest that nepal and bhutan are merged to become nepal-bhutan.

Yes mongolia can be reduced to 4. So what would be a good bonus for it +4 or +3?

jilin, not liaoning, is the part of china that has a significant korean-speaking minority, so it makes sense for korea to invade jilin, where at least some people might welcome their troops. recommendation: jilin to join korea.

liaoning belongs more to manchuria. u can change the name to mukden, a historic name for shenyang, the largest city in the area. the old manchu imperial palace is in shenyang (mukden, as it was then), which served as the original manchu capital before the manchus invaded china to defeat the ming empire. recommendation: liaoning to be renamed mukden and join manchuria as its capital.

At first when I started to read this it was "But that is going to reduce Manchuria to 3 territories", and then I finished reading and then . But yes I can make the changes as those bonuses won't change one bit.

haipan ought to be hainan.

Yea I can make this minor spelling mistake.

New update with readjustments as per ian along with putting the 888's on both large and small maps.

Large
[bigimg]http://img600.imageshack.us/img600/5357/fracturedchinav1o.png[/bigimg]

Small

I wonder if this map will make China block CC with their firewalls...

Hope not!

After looking at the original Fractured America map, I feel like some territories on this map could be divided into smaller chunks.

Joodoo wrote:After looking at the original Fractured America map, I feel like some territories on this map could be divided into smaller chunks.

I think there are enough regions---any more and there'd be too many and and give off the cluttered feeling that WWII Europe sometimes has.


--Andy

AndyDufresne wrote:

Joodoo wrote:After looking at the original Fractured America map, I feel like some territories on this map could be divided into smaller chunks.

I think there are enough regions---any more and there'd be too many and and give off the cluttered feeling that WWII Europe sometimes has.


--Andy

True. Now that I reduced the number of territories in Mongolia, the map is looking less cluttered. Although now I'm thinking about the possibility of combining Bahar with either Uttar Pradesh or Jharkland.

Just saw something. Wasn't this stickied already?? And now it's not?

it must be ur imagination, isaiah. it looks stickied to me!

isaiah40 wrote:Yes mongolia can be reduced to 4. So what would be a good bonus for it +4 or +3?

although either are possible, i prefer +3, so that this smaller bonus doesn't become too attractive.

isaiah40 wrote:Also watch out for those Burmese, although they will give you clear passage, any army you leave behind they will eliminate all of them and leave 3 neutral armies standing!!

it looks as if myanmar no longer has killer neutrals. time to amend the back story in the opening post?

rather than lai chau, which is the most sparsely-populated province of vietnam, hanoi (or ha noi) is the logical name for the capital.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lai_Châu_Province
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanoi

indo-china can be renamed as nam viet, a kingdom in the area whose name reappeared from time to time in history as rulers tried to revive past glories.

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/top ... 0/Nam-Viet
http://www.historyfiles.co.uk/KingLists ... ietNam.htm

to correspond more with provincial boundaries, i suggest that nanning is renamed guangxi (nanning is the provincial capital of guangxi) and the current guangxi is extended eastward to border both jiangxi and hong kong, then renamed guangdong.

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Gover ... /guangdong

isaiah40 wrote:

AndyDufresne wrote:

Joodoo wrote:After looking at the original Fractured America map, I feel like some territories on this map could be divided into smaller chunks.

I think there are enough regions---any more and there'd be too many and and give off the cluttered feeling that WWII Europe sometimes has.

--Andy

True. Now that I reduced the number of territories in Mongolia, the map is looking less cluttered. Although now I'm thinking about the possibility of combining Bahar with either Uttar Pradesh or Jharkland.

bihar is fine as is, even on the small map. the india-myanmar border does look very awkward. u might do something there. on the other hand, it’s possible to increase the number of land regions by 2, if u let the sea routes be killer neutrals, so that the total number of starting regions is the nice 52 that i believe u’re wanting. let’s see if we can come up with a scheme that makes some gameplay, religious, racial and linguistic sense, such as putting qinghai (amdo) into tibet. this leaves 2 zones of 3 regions, which can each be increased to 4 (but this is only an example and u might have other ideas).

http://www.tibetanpost.com/tpost.php?op ... tion&id=19
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amdo

the city autodeploy of +2 adds a nice touch to the map. perhaps call them free cities?

do the capitals each start with 1, 2 or 3 neutrals?

ian.

suggestion for map

sea route across indian ocean

24Keyser wrote:suggestion for map

sea route across indian ocean

uh, actually that is the bay of Bengal

The Bison King wrote:

24Keyser wrote:suggestion for map

sea route across indian ocean

uh, actually that is the bay of Bengal

I was thinking of the same thing...from Jharkand to Nay Pyi Taw I guess?

The Bison King wrote:

24Keyser wrote:suggestion for map

sea route across indian ocean

uh, actually that is the bay of Bengal

My mistake xD

Okay what would be the good reason as to put a sea attack route there?

looking nice. just star in Nay Pyi Taw is a little bad visible.
the sea lines are also fine, maybe do them "more nice"?
[bigimg]http://img573.imageshack.us/img573/8973/fracturedchinav1osmall.png[/bigimg]

Joodoo wrote:

The Bison King wrote:

24Keyser wrote:suggestion for map

sea route across indian ocean

uh, actually that is the bay of Bengal

I was thinking of the same thing...from Jharkand to Nay Pyi Taw I guess?

isaiah40 wrote:Okay what would be the good reason as to put a sea attack route there?

the sea route connects two zones that are already adjacent to each other, so doesn't do very much.

Evil DIMwit wrote:I still think East Turkestan would make a good bonus.

u can give the uygurstan name to xinjiang, since the latter is the chinese name for this area and therefore unlikely to be kept by a muslim insurgency.

the capital of han ought to be moved to xi'an which, as well as being a former imperial capital, is a bit further away from beijing. also move the capital of chu (i propose naming this bonus wu, one of the three kingdoms, instead of chu) from jiangxi, which is adjacent to hong kong, to jiangsu (where nanjing, another former chinese capital, was located).

in a similar vein, delete the sea routes from hainan to macao and hanoi, then draw in one from hainan to nanning (renamed as guangxi in my previous post). this increases the distance from the taiwan bonus (shouldn't this be taipei, if we're calling them cities?) to macao and hanoi.

i'm conscious of the fact that, in fractured america, the capital cities remain untouched throughout many 1v1 games. if all capitals start neutral, then +3 for holding 3 capitals is unattractive compared with +2 for one city. +3 for holding 2 capitals will encourage more action around the capitals.

also see if u can straighten out that india-myanmar border, even if it means undoing that illogical (and rather unhelpful) merger i suggested of hindu nepal with buddhist bhutan.

ian.

I am currently working on another update and hopefully will have one posted soon.

iancanton wrote:

Joodoo wrote:

The Bison King wrote:

24Keyser wrote:suggestion for map

sea route across indian ocean

uh, actually that is the bay of Bengal

I was thinking of the same thing...from Jharkand to Nay Pyi Taw I guess?

isaiah40 wrote:Okay what would be the good reason as to put a sea attack route there?

the sea route connects two zones that are already adjacent to each other, so doesn't do very much.

Evil DIMwit wrote:I still think East Turkestan would make a good bonus.

u can give the uygurstan name to xinjiang, since the latter is the chinese name for this area and therefore unlikely to be kept by a muslim insurgency.

the capital of han ought to be moved to xi'an which, as well as being a former imperial capital, is a bit further away from beijing. also move the capital of chu (i propose naming this bonus wu, one of the three kingdoms, instead of chu) from jiangxi, which is adjacent to hong kong, to jiangsu (where nanjing, another former chinese capital, was located).

in a similar vein, delete the sea routes from hainan to macao and hanoi, then draw in one from hainan to nanning (renamed as guangxi in my previous post). this increases the distance from the taiwan bonus (shouldn't this be taipei, if we're calling them cities?) to macao and hanoi.

i'm conscious of the fact that, in fractured america, the capital cities remain untouched throughout many 1v1 games. if all capitals start neutral, then +3 for holding 3 capitals is unattractive compared with +2 for one city. +3 for holding 2 capitals will encourage more action around the capitals.

also see if u can straighten out that india-myanmar border, even if it means undoing that illogical (and rather unhelpful) merger i suggested of hindu nepal with buddhist bhutan.

ian.

agreed

PS im looking forward to playing this map

Map is looking nice!

I don't really have any input on the gameplay... it seems pretty solid to me.

I agree with ian about the capital bonus though... I think maybe autodeploys could work there.

I do have lots of graphical suggestions for this map, but I'll hold my tongue since this is still in gameplay... let me know when you hit graphics!

natty_dread wrote:Map is looking nice!

I don't really have any input on the gameplay... it seems pretty solid to me.

I agree with ian about the capital bonus though... I think maybe autodeploys could work there.

I do have lots of graphical suggestions for this map, but I'll hold my tongue since this is still in gameplay... let me know when you hit graphics!

Capitals are autodeploy. Go ahead and hit me with graphics!

Ok, graphics... two things that I would mainly pay attention to at the moment:

The colour scheme of the map seems a bit too bright and... well, I don't know how to put it... merry? Anyway, as the theme of the map is "broken China", I would suggest more broken hues... browns, grays, cold metallic colours... (cyans, dark greens and magentas work well, too, as long as they are desaturated...)

Next, I'm not a huge fan of the texture on the map. It seems too monotone and uniform. I would suggest something a bit more splashy... I've always liked to use a slightly different texture on sea and land, it helps with the contrast to bring the land area more in focus...

If you want, I can cook up some textures for you.