Do you think it would be better to have more borders, instead of less??
Maybe. But what about adding a strip of north African territories (Lybia and Egypt) to allow a flanking manoeuvre?
The bridge between Germany and Scandinavia is very short, and I really don't see how a removal could be justified. As for the Den-UK, its removal would be sensible, as Norway is actually closer to the British mainland and the islands have no bridge to Germany.
AoW is not anywhere close to a simulation anyway. The purpose is to make the map more balanced: in most of the games I am in, the winner is whoever gets Gibraltar.
That is the same argument we see on youplay about blue max and WS&IM... It is some sort of simulation, otherwise we could just use graph maps where territories are replaced by nodes and borders by links.
1) Why is there a bridge between Siberia and Canada?
To de-emphasise the continents and allow for more varied enclosing possibilities.
What about a bridge between russia and Greenland? Of course, it would make greenland a wonderful base to launch attacks on europe and asia, but it would also be an awful salient to defend.
We were thinking to add a "Polynesia" or "Hawaii" territory a few years ago, but Marcuza came up with the current map. I think it could be a nice idea though.
That would make an extra connection between north america and asia, not necessarily bad. But with the USA in this condition it would render N.A. even more useless as it is now (by itself, of course...)
3) Europe is divided into plenty of small territories, the same could be done with the USA... Or at least it could be split into West Coast and East Coast, or even East, South, North West and South West. The same could be done with Canada. This way wars in America could be as interesting as wars in Europe.
We tried to keep the current "main" (whatever that means) states intact. We had to break up Alaska, Siberia and Kamchatka to make the map look better and more playable.
I thought that, apart from some exceptions, every territory had a comparable amount of manpower/industrial capacity (yeah, my views are influenced by the Hearts of Iron series
). I hardly see Madagascar or New Guinea to put up a unit production comparable to that of USA or any European country.
Your opinions are appreciated. I think what we need most is an "average" map, though. Something with about 25-30 territories.
For that, either you build a map of the eastern united states, going west until you fill your 30 states requirements
, or you split the european nations on the 14 territories map in smaller geographical units. A map of Asia in medieval times could be another option.
Sorry for the long reply.