Will we ever see a bigger map?

[Mosby]

I was just wondering if I am the only one wishing for a much bigger map to play on.

It was the screen shots of HoI3 that really got me thinking about it, and how it would (at least in my mind) open up a few more options to both sides when planning attacks.

While I'm not saying that this map is bad, because I don't think that by any means, there have been times when I have wished that I had a bit more elbow room to play around with. (Even more so with BOA2)

I know that making another map for this game would be a huge almost impossible undertaking, but does anyone else ever think about it?

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[Mosby]

Yeah, I really understood that it wasn't going to happen...guess I should've re-worded the subject.

Was just wondering if I was alone or not about wanting one at times.

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[ohms_law]

He did say:

Yeah, I really understood that it wasn't going to happen...

It seems to me that he just wants to talk about it...

Beyond the obvious "of course!" answer, my initial response is more cautious. These games are strategy games first and foremost, and I'd hate to see them moved away from that. This sort of "eye candy" improvement worries me, is all.

[Rafiki]

I'm just wondering which areas you think are missing? I view the off-map boxes as a simplified way of representing relevant areas that didn't see much action (California, Mexico) or where much detail isn't needed (shipping box, blockade boxes). Would you have liked to see those areas represented as regular regions?

I like huge maps myself, but the hugeness needs to add to the gameplay, otherwise it easily becomes wasted pixels and effort

[soloswolf]

Sorry, but in this respect, if wouldn't matter how many wanted the map to be enlarged, it can't be done without redesigning the game itself. It will have to wait for an entirely new game.

That's pretty lame. You spend years patching and perfecting an already great game and all we ask for is a new map and you can't deliver?! Real nice...



@ Raf: Yeah, I can't really see what would/could change. The map has always been a strong point for me, and beyond liking the existing one, I really don't know what could change.

[Colonel Dreux]

The map is very good, but I think having the entire section northern states in the game would be nice. Just a regular map of the United States, southern Canada, and northern Mexico could work.

Battles were fought in New Mexico, and there were Confederates in Arizona. Native Americans in the Rockies and Great Plains 'skirmished' with Federal soldiers as well. The game includes this currently of course, just not with a big map.

Nothing needs to change really, but it'd be interesting to play with a full map.

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[Rafiki]

[color="Blue"]Moved [/color]

I think it's a very interesting discussion; I've been happy with the size of AACW's map, but a larger size might allow for a better portrayal of the less significant areas? However, the biggest potential in such a map would be the opportunities for added scenarios and modding

OTOH, larger map = more resources used (both in-game and in development), so it becomes a question about whether or not the extra cost is justifiable.

[johnnycai]

I think Mosby's reference to HOI3 is that more regions on the map, and therefore turns that are <15days, would lead to more tactical campaigning.
HOI3 is supposed to have more regions than HOI2 and is implying more tactical options.

[Mosby]

I've always wanted a bit more control with my forces, even though I know that's really not the point of the game. To add in more regions everywhere, like in HoI3, would mean more options to move around and battle. It would also probably mean a move towards something closer to a tactical experience, which once again isn't what the game is about. The extra regions in places further west would be fun as well, but once again I certaintly don't dislike the map we have.

Good call on moving the thread as well, I was thinking about posting it there originally, not sure why I didn't.

[ohms_law]

I like huge maps myself, but the hugeness needs to add to the gameplay, otherwise it easily becomes wasted pixels and effort

That's the key point, in my opinion.
I remember at first I was slightly disappointed (for lack of a better term) at the "off map boxes" and slightly limited view of America. With a couple of games worth of experience though it quickly became apparent just how well thought out that design is. Your attention is focused where it should be, on the south-eastern quadrant of North America!

[TheDoctorKing]

I think the area covered by the map is fine. There really shouldn't be much fighting in those off-map boxes if the sides are truly constrained by historical possibilities. The only possibility is maybe more coverage of the southwest, extending the regular map out to the Rio Grande valley in New Mexico. There actually was some fighting out there.

As for a less "grainy" area map a la HOI3, I don't know if that is necessary. This is basically a strategic game. It might be interesting though if it didn't take away too many resources from more important things, like more varied strategic and political choices.

[Big Muddy]

I like the map as it is, the off map boxes work well in my opinion.