Well, the human error here is mine, because I forgot to include
Isère in the list, if you can add that last accent please... I'll check also region names in the carto-panel. Also keep an eye at
Haute-Marne territory tag, it looks like the last letter got partially erased.
From a game tests point of view the regions don't seem to be hard to defend, and the games are approching the mid-game in a pretty standard way. This map has 13 non-bordering territories (out of 91), World Expanded has 15 (out of 91), not a great difference. The game-play is resulting beeing very good, at least from my personal view. In any case, counting the non-bordering territories is not a very significant parameter for defining the defensibility of a map regions: in the first "French map-dabbling" by Hoodlum for example there were 23 non-bordering territories out of 90, but the regions were harder to defend, not easier. We must consider all the architecture of the map as a whole for doing a good evaluation. I agree to invite the skeptics in some game tests so that they can get a more accurate idea.
I would possibly give priority to this map rather than "Zealandia 20200" or "North Atlantic" (Vikings) because in those cases we really have to think more about game-play, but in this case we don't need much. I think it is nice to have a map of France for 2 reasons:
- it is where the game "La Conquête du Monde" (the conquest of the world) was born, later re-named as "Risk" in the United States;
- it is fair with the French users, because in ALL DominatingTwelve maps Corsica seems to be part of Italy, while actually belong to France.
EDIT:
The map has changed during my commenting. Of course the super-regions should be kept into account when we speak about defensibility. Hoodlum probably you are going too far now with rivers and mountains, this is not open game-play anymore. I will comment better the new version later, or we will talk by Pm. Not much time right now, sorry.
Well, the human error here is mine, because I forgot to include [i]Isère[/i] in the list, if you can add that last accent please... I'll check also region names in the carto-panel. Also keep an eye at [i]Haute-Marne[/i] territory tag, it looks like the last letter got partially erased.
From a game tests point of view the regions don't seem to be hard to defend, and the games are approching the mid-game in a pretty standard way. This map has 13 non-bordering territories (out of 91), World Expanded has 15 (out of 91), not a great difference. The game-play is resulting beeing very good, at least from my personal view. In any case, counting the non-bordering territories is not a very significant parameter for defining the defensibility of a map regions: in the first "French map-dabbling" by Hoodlum for example there were 23 non-bordering territories out of 90, but the regions were harder to defend, not easier. We must consider all the architecture of the map as a whole for doing a good evaluation. I agree to invite the skeptics in some game tests so that they can get a more accurate idea.
I would possibly give priority to this map rather than "Zealandia 20200" or "North Atlantic" (Vikings) because in those cases we really have to think more about game-play, but in this case we don't need much. I think it is nice to have a map of France for 2 reasons:
[list type=decimal]
[li]it is where the game [i]"La Conquête du Monde"[/i] (the conquest of the world) was born, later re-named as "Risk" in the United States;[/li]
[li]it is fair with the French users, because in ALL DominatingTwelve maps Corsica seems to be part of Italy, while actually belong to France.[/li]
[/list]
EDIT: [u]The map has changed during my commenting.[/u] Of course the super-regions should be kept into account when we speak about defensibility. Hoodlum probably you are going too far now with rivers and mountains, this is not open game-play anymore. I will comment better the new version later, or we will talk by Pm. Not much time right now, sorry.
«God doesn't play dice with the World» ~ Albert Einstein