I'd like to see more maps designed like [this one](http://warlight.net/SinglePlayer.aspx?PreviewMap=7578):

To have mounatains, forests, lakes/rivers, bridges/mountain passes, etc. as boundaries makes the maps more realistic.

For instance, in the modern age Savoy controlled the mountain passes between France and Italy. This made Savoy a strategic state: control Savoy or have Savoy as an ally or client state and your access to Italy and ability to threaten France is ensured. Another example: Louis XIV's expansionist reunion policy (ie, feudal legal claims to German cities used as a casus belli) were in part made bc those cities were ports into the Holy Roman Empire (and, vice versa, entry points from the HRE into France!).

Geography influences war. More geographic boundaries in future maps would be nice.

that is the main reason I like one of the Lotr maps so much..
I agree geography in maps is highly important.. I would go further and say that size of territories should be based more on hardship of the lands then on man made borders..

i agree, but i hate the lotr one. i think its the way the bonuses are set up or something. i much prefer east confines and i like the look of that new one.

Slightly OT, but if you haven't read them already, a great pair of books by Jared Diamond delves into these very issues:

1. "Guns, Germs & Steel" and 2. "Collapse"

Both describe how nations / cultures were heavily influenced by their geography, natural resources, choices they made, etc. Excellent books!

Have you ever played the "Seattle Neighbourhoods" map? It does something similar, only allowing you to cross bodies of water and the Interstate (same mechanics as a mountain ridge) through designated tunnels / bridges. Territories which border each other, but without a bridge between them are not connected.
(Also, the Ferry and Yacht territories are beautiful and look great in-game. ;) )

ps. How do you post a link to a specific map? I can't seem to determine the map ID to use...?

ive never even seen that map, is it new?

The San Francisco Bay Area map does the same thing. The hills are only crossed where there are major highways and tunnels, and of course there is the natural water boundaries. He even added a link between Livermore and San Francisco because there are airports in both (OK, that stretches it a bit, but it certainly makes the map more playable).

Another map that is geographically accurate is Troll's Texas map. And that is because Texas has no geography.

Jarrod Diamond did raise some good points in his books - I especially thought it was insightful how he showed that latitude played a huge role in the distribution of crops - A crop that would do good in Europe would also do good in China and South Africa, but it would be unlikely to actually get to South Africa because it would have to pass through the tropics where the crops would fail. This was part of the explanation for the dominance of Eurasia in world history, that the advances in various parts of the continent worked synergistically with each other, while other parts of the world were too isolated by geography and climate to take advantage of advances in Eurasia.

Anyways, long ago I came up with an idea to spice up the effects of geography in Warlight by adding "attrition lines", basically meaning that you could set a percentage on any border between 2 territories, and any army that attempted to cross that border whether on the offense or simply a transfer would lose that percentage of its total strength. So for instance you could have an attrition line representing a mountain and set it to kill off 10% of any army that passes. Probably would be pretty complex to code though...

devilnis, that would easily solve the problems of the difficulty that antartica should possess, which it currently doesn't

crafty's New York map also has geography included.. but there isn't that much to be there so..

2 maps that I've played that utilize geography in neat ways:

Borderless world map
http://warlight.net/SinglePlayer.aspx?PreviewMap=6152

A map of fire and ice
http://warlight.net/SinglePlayer.aspx?PreviewMap=6177

Maybe I should put the idea up on uservoice, you guys think it's good enough? Usually I'm all talk and no walk when it comes to my bright ideas ("I'LL BE RICH!!! RIIIICH!!!!") but I really liked this one when I first thought of it, might be worth pursuing..

This thread inspired me to make a custom scenario tourney. http://warlight.net/MultiPlayer.aspx?TournamentID=1674

I've tried to employ many of the concepts talked about here.

Off topic:
Pity the custom scenario viewer doesn't include the updated bonuses values... :(

Nice flavour text (is that the word??) in the description. It does make it sound like much more of the world is in ruins than actually appears to be the case though.

Here's a game that was played with the custom scenario so you can see what the starting positions look like.
http://warlight.net/MultiPlayer.aspx?GameID=1827128