This is Vexer's formula, I know it well and it's easy to do by mind when you get used.
Bonus = (t/3) + (b/2.5) rounded to integer
t = territories
b = borders to defendIt proved over the years to be working pretty well, even if it tends to reward too much small regions and not enough large regions in my opinion. For example it doesn't apply to World Classic, where NA is evaluated 4,20 and Asia only 6,00. Even so it's still a good way, because too high bonuses for large regions could be dangerous, too low bonuses instead never break the game-play.
I consider respecting the formula as not mandatory, not strictly at least, and it is not even very accurate because the matter of establishing the bonuses could be more complex than just counting the territories, however it's a good starting point. Vexer himself was used to made arrangements, I can remember him saying something like: "If a region is in the center, attacked from many sides, then round up, otherwise round down. If the terts are 4 and the borders are 3 [it equals to 2.5333] then almost always round down".
I'd rather say: "Round down regions with 4 or less terts, round up with 5 to 8 terts, add one for 9 or more terts", debatable okay.
Another one is what I call the 'minus one' formula (it doesn't give any negatives):
Bonus = -1 + (t+b)/2 rounded to integer
Looks to me a good measurement of how hard a region really is, with the same lack of accuracy than Vexer's, sure.
Plus the flaw that it doesn't help much the mapmaker to decide the bonuses when lot of them are point-five results: better to round up or down?
As max value of a 'super-region' I'd suggest the 'minus two' formula:
Max bonus compound = integer( -2 + (t/3) + b ).
So if the sum of the bonuses of a super-region overpass the max then some of the bonuses need to be reduced accordingly (to be applied to super-regions not exceeding 4/9 of the map size).
Just my 2 cents
This is Vexer's formula, I know it well and it's easy to do by mind when you get used.
Bonus = (t/3) + (b/2.5) rounded to integer
[i]t = territories
b = borders to defend[/i]
It proved over the years to be working pretty well, even if it tends to reward too much small regions and not enough large regions in my opinion. For example it doesn't apply to World Classic, where NA is evaluated 4,20 and Asia only 6,00. Even so it's still a good way, because too high bonuses for large regions could be dangerous, too low bonuses instead never break the game-play.
I consider respecting the formula as not mandatory, not strictly at least, and it is not even very accurate because the matter of establishing the bonuses could be more complex than just counting the territories, however it's a good starting point. Vexer himself was used to made arrangements, I can remember him saying something like: "If a region is in the center, attacked from many sides, then round up, otherwise round down. If the terts are 4 and the borders are 3 [it equals to 2.5333] then almost always round down".
I'd rather say: "Round down regions with 4 or less terts, round up with 5 to 8 terts, add one for 9 or more terts", debatable okay.
Another one is what I call the 'minus one' formula (it doesn't give any negatives):
Bonus = -1 + (t+b)/2 rounded to integer
Looks to me a good measurement of how hard a region really is, with the same lack of accuracy than Vexer's, sure.
Plus the flaw that it doesn't help much the mapmaker to decide the bonuses when lot of them are point-five results: better to round up or down?
As max value of a 'super-region' I'd suggest the 'minus two' formula:
Max bonus compound = integer( -2 + (t/3) + b ).
So if the sum of the bonuses of a super-region overpass the max then some of the bonuses need to be reduced accordingly (to be applied to super-regions not exceeding 4/9 of the map size).
Just my 2 cents ;)
