Greetings all!

I'm pretty much done with my Seven Years' War Map (only need to add some more fluff), so now is a great time to ask for any and all feedback that you might have.
https://www.warzone.com/SinglePlayer?PreviewMap=64986

All comments are welcome: connections, historical accuracy, gameplay, balance, aesthetics, whatever you can come up with. If anyone wants to do some test runs that would be great too.

To note:
- I went with 1750 as the year to base the map on.
- Territory and bonus names can only use characters that I have on my keyboard. I'm sure this has messed names up in India and Eastern Europe, but alas.
- Bonus values should all be (number of territories)*2 -1. This might be a tad unbalanced, but I hope that disbalance means the port territories are more valuable.

I have a few specific questions that I'm wondering myself:
- I was planning to do another link between West Africa (Bornu) and Tripoli or Benghazi, also with five negative territories inbetween. It's the place of a historical Saharan trade route, but I'm not sure it would ass *anything* in terms of gameplay, since the other crossing is quite close. Thoughts?
- Bonus colours. Especially the yellows of Spain and China seem to blend in with the background too much. Anyone else who feels that way?
- I have grouped together a lot of native american tribe in (a bit a-historic) territories, to give those tribes that played a role in this war more gumption. Otherwise, there would be a lot more single territories with a bonus of only 1. Thoughts on that?
- Is the way sea travel works clear enough, or should there be more information on it?

Alright, thanks in advance for any comments!

amazing map. There's so much detail put into it! I did my best effort to find improvements and this is what I came up with:


suggested name changes (Belgium & Northern France)

Boulonois -> Calais
French Flanders-> Lille (this is because the territory doesn't ressemble actual French flanders)
Antwerp -> Flanders ( says Antwerp , but doesn't include actual Antwerp, which is located in Brabant)


for Angola

Cuando Cubango -> Menongue ( Cuando Cubango is merely the name of the modern Angolan province )
Luanda Island -> Luanda ( trust me it's not an island )
Montalegre-> Caála (there exists no such name as Montalegre in Angola)
Bemba -> Mumena (actual Bemba is located somewhere else)
Katanga -> Kikanda (Katanga is too broad)

for Algeria

Oran -> Orán (Spanish name)

for Mossi Kingdoms

Ouagadougou -> Wage sabre soba koumbem tenga (Ouagadougou is the francophone spelling of the name ;) but we have to be consistent)

one missing connection between Antanarovio and Betsileo in madgascar. And another between London and Kent.
and the flag of the netherlands and the dutch west indies are historically inaccurate. Remember de prinsjesvlag!

Awesome, I can work with that! Thanks a lot.

I'll implement the name changes.
I had a territory in front of Luanda in a first sketch, being the fort where the Portuguese first landed (called an Island, even though it isn't) - the name stuck even after the territory was removed. My bad!

(As for the flags, I was under the impression the red-white-blue started being used somewhere in the late 17th century instead of the orange-white-blue, so some fifty years before this time. I'll go check again though)

Edited 4/13/2018 19:14:46

The Bonus labels on the bottom cant be read because it goes off screen. Otherwise, stellar map.

you're welcome. Besides I've did some research about the flag and turns out it's not me that is right but you. I tended to be overly orangist when I made the remark, but de statenvlag was more used during this era. A personal mistake. I feel like a complete snob to know better than a dutchman on his own country. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_the_Netherlands#/media/File:Statenvlag.svg but to my liking I'd suggest to make the blue appear just a little bit brighter just to get the sweet historical feeling. Even if this can't sound snobbier than it can get.


Anyways your maps are always of high quality and I always do enjoy them.
Some personal thoughts

negative territories inbetween the desert - nah even if it's like -1 or -5 armies a turn it'll not have a huge effect if you already have a huge income. It more or less prevents smaller players to cross the wasteland which I think is not really favored by diplomacy makers. Putting a lot of territories inbetween however, so it takes more turns in order to get there, is a more realistic approach and balancing one.
bonus colours blending in with the map - I see no problem with this and genuinely don't feel that the colors blend with each other
sea travel - I like this innovating feature so much ! and I'm so anticipated to see it finally being put in action. It suits best for what it's made for: diplomacy gameplay. If you have space left you can maybe put the sea travel information in the upper right corner
grouped american tribes - I approve. It's better for diplomacy as well

Broken territory connections

Europe
Kajana -> Lodeynoye Pole (Österbotten)
Vasa -> Uleáborg (Österbotten)
Åland -> Turku (Åland)
Gästrikland -> Uppsala (Uppland)
Karlstad -> Skaraborg (Värmland) (this may just be an issue with how your lake was cut out, same with Östergotland)
Vestfold -> Oslo (Telemark)
Danish Atlantic Fleet -> Faroe Islands (Faroe Islands)
Dagestan -> Kakheti (Kingdom of Kakheti)
Kabilya -> Kuku (Regency of Algiers)
Kabilya -> Kef (Regency of Algiers)
Lisbon -> Beja (Alajento)
Beja -> Sevilla (Alajento)
Toledo -> Cáceres (New Castile)
Cáceres -/> Madrid (New Castile)
Paris -> Alençon (Isle de France)
Modea -> Genoa (Duchy of Modena)
Modea -> Milan (Duchy of Modena)
Bari -> Molise (Otranto)
Travnik -> Venetian Dalmatia (Venetian Dalmatia)
Bosnia -> Littoral (Bosnia)
Schaumburg-Lippen -> Münster (Münster)
Lucerne -> St. Galle (Thirteen Cantons)
London -> Kent (Essex)


North America
Passamquodi -> Kennebec (Passamquodi)
Fort Beauhamois -> Wahpekute (Santee)
Peoria -> Moingwena (Illinois Confederacy)
Mohawk -> Pigwacket (Iroquois Confederacy)
Providence -> Plymouth (Rhode Island)
British Atlantic Fleet Territory is hidden by New York bonus link

Asia
Quetta -> Oandahar (Afghanistan)
Tanot -> Pitthala (Jaisalmer)
Barboda -> Surat (Surat)
Koch Bihar -> Kamatapur (Kingdom of Bhutan)
Savanur -> Sira (Sira)

Africa
Arguin -> Brakna (Brakna)
Cayor -> Jolof (Kingdom of Cayor)
Matamba -> Anziku (Kingdom of Anziku)
Antananarivo -> Betsileo (Merina Kingdoms)

South America
Paita -> Guayaquil (Audiencia of Quito)
Asunción -> São Peter (Southern Brazil)

Wow, I'm both embarrassed and very grateful. Thanks!

Wow, this map is wonderful! I can only imagine how much work it required!

Here just some connections/issues I noted

Pacific Theatre
- Portuguese Pacific Fleet partially hidden by the Macao Bonus Link

Spice Islands Theatre
- Banda Island connect to Timor instead of Flores as drawn

Indian Theatre
- Nakkai <--> Sihak (Northern Rajput States)
- Nander <--> Warangal (Northern Kingdom of Hyderabad)
- Baroda <--> Khandesh (North-Western Maratha Confederacy)

East African Theatre
- Mbwila <--> Kouilou (Kingdom of Anziku)

West African Theatre
- Madeira connect to Nassau, instead of Kaabu as drawn

North American Theatre
- Falmouth <--> Mohawk (Iroquois Confederacy)

European Theatre
- Dresden <--> Liegnitz
- Austrian Silesia <--> Nitra (Upper Hungary)
- Capitalize Voronezh
- Capitalize Brunswick-Wolfenbüttel

And some names changes that I would suggest, to be more consistent with language and historical accuracy

- Lucerne --> Zürich
- Arborea --> Sassari
- Codominions --> Ennetbergische Vogteien
- Seven Zenden of Valais --> Sieben Zenden des Wallis
- Three Leagues of Grisons --> Freistaat der Drei Bünde
- Geneva --> Genève
- Milan --> Milano
- Turin --> Torino
- Venice --> Venezia
- Trent --> Trento
- Lombardy --> Bergamo
- Florence --> Firenze
- Sienna --> Siena
- Rome --> Roma
- Naples --> Napoli
- Lavoro --> Terra di Lavoro
- Principato --> Principato Citra
- Bari --> Terra di Bari
- Otranto --> Terra d'Otranto
- Cosenza --> Basilicata
- Catanzaro --> Calabria
- Demone --> Val Demone
- Noto --> Val di Noto
- Unify Palermo and Mazara --> Val di Mazara
- Sambia --> Samland

About your questions
- Another connection between Europe and Africa could be good imo
- I think the colours are okay
- I'm okay with the american tribes grouped, should work well in diplomacy
- Innovative and interesting way to deal with see connections, interested to play it

Edited 4/15/2018 19:38:26

your Mediterranean battle thing connects to a territory in russia.

I didn't examine in detail, but WOW!

I'm hyped

Any idea what the level requirement will be?

Alright, I've had way too much horrible "responsible" things to do lately, but I think I'm finally caught up.

All missing connections and bad names you found should be fixed.

I still want to add some fluff bonuses, but I need to play some actual scenario games for those first. I can add those after the map goes live as well.

---

Any idea what the level requirement will be?

Eh, not above 10. I dislike level requirements for maps.

---

Does anyone else have problems with how slooooooow the map is? If so, I might need to remove some background (sadly). It could also just be my shitty browser - that's why I'm asking.

Once again thanks for all the help!

Just asking, why do you have the fleet mechanics to work the way they do?

Just asking, why do you have the fleet mechanics to work the way they do?

why you have the fleets so that controlling a fleet in one spot means controlling it everywhere.

Oh boy. I spent a long time thinking about how to do the fleets. I considered making more fleets, or larger fleets (for example, a fleet for every coast, or even a fleet for every port territory). I eventually settled on the current size and number of fleets for several reasons:

Most important:
- Travel times. I wanted someone in the Netherlands to be able to reach Indonesia as fast as possible, to open up the map. More fleets would mean "colonising" in both FFA's and Diplo's would be a huge time investment. If it takes six turns to reach an island, it is probably not worth going there (compare that to the wilderness crossings, which are a chore to take - precisely because I wanted those to be a last resort).
- Historical accuracy. The British ruled the waves during the Seven Years' War, and it's why they won. They fought just a few battles to control the Atlantic, and then spent the entire war invading. They took Havana (the capital of the Spanish Americas), Senegal, Manila, the French sugar islands without so much as a fight, and then harried the French coasts non-stop. It forced Spain into a war of attrition in Portuguese hills, it prevented France from reinforcing India.
I didn't want taking the fleets to be a waste of time or an afterthought: I wanted them to be crucial. Losing your fleet should mean losing the war.

Less important:
- Clarity: more fleets means more territories that are not visibly connected, and that is confusing. If you're familiar with the mechanics it makes sense, but there's always the new player who doesn't understand.
- Space: More fleets require more space wasted on empty oceans, and the map is packed already. I'd rather spend the space on adding periphery nations than on more fleets.

Those are my reasons, for this map. The naval system is flawed in some ways, and I'm sure it's unbalanced. I'm sure it would be mighty fun to have more fleets, or less powerful fleets, and I do want to do so in other maps. But for this one (a large, multi-purpose historical map) I think the current system is best.


If you know of ways to improve, that's always welcome though!

Edited 6/17/2018 16:42:59