@Feline

Ofc, Israel is really weak on this configuration. Could be easily overun by Jordan or Syria lol.


General Amoora, I'd really love to see some bonus giving extra income for strategic positions controled (ex dardanelles straight, suez channel,...). They could give 0 income as default, but it'd be great to have them as options to add.

Feline, I am aware that Israel is severely underrepresented and its something that I very much dislike as well, however the most I can do is try to divide Israel as much as I can which is what I'm going to be trying to do. However I don't want to make a city like tel aviv, worth as much as Cairo for example, it just wouldn't be balanced and my solution is to have 0 default country bonuses, it's the best thing that I can think of to do to solve this issue. Which brings me on to my next point

Teamguns, i will have bonuses at default 0 for strategic control, for example a kurdish state region and as you say, the suez canal and other things. It's just I'll be making them once I've finished the whole map territory wise.

EDIT: also just one question, would you all prefer ISIS to be an ai or player controlled in the testing phase? As they won't follow rules of any diplomacy if its properly done. As for other groups such as the Kurdish controlled regions, they will have to be players as the Kurdish state can indeed become very important in the Middle East in real life.
And just one more question, would you like to see things like default 0 culture bonuses. These sort of things would make uniting a culture very desirable and make things very realistic, the best example would probably be Kurdish people, they span a large region of the central Middle East and a bonus for culture would make the country look much more realistic and give reason for it to declare war on other nations for legitimate reasons, rather than the state looking rather odd and not controlling fully kurdish lands. As well as that what about Religious bonuses that would be default 0, they would be extremely important to entities such as the houthi rebels in yemen to make control of Shiite lands much more desirable than sunni lands for the bonus.

Edited 3/25/2016 21:31:24

Israel IS underpowered here, but I don't think there's a solution for that expect overridding territory bonuses, and that'd be unrealistic - so it turns to be a realism vs balance conflict, and I'd personally go for the latter since this is a game. It's best to leave it to game creators.

on tests, I'd prefer ISIS to be human player since 1. even ISIS knows they won't survive without a bit "diplomacy" and 2. AI is simply too dumb to fight against human players, let alone 1 player; We'd need them to be a challenge. If there's lack of players thought, go for AI.

I'd prefer all extra bonuses to be 0 on default or maybe 1 to simply see them drawn, no need for complications.

Feel free to ask me for culture/strategic extra bonuses in PM or here as I can give some off my head.

And no problem, just making my contribution as a WLer from that region :P

The issue with boosting Israel bonuses is that the land becomes increasingly desirable die to the high tpt count increasing chances of mass coalitions such as syria, Egypt, Jordan, Palestine all up against Israel. Now in real life we know that Israel might actually be able to handle that but in Warlight, the chances of a player being able to handle that situation is very slim. Very slim, now i do understand what you mean but I'll leave them as they are for now and leave it up to gamemakers to change them If they'd like to boost Israel's bonuses.

EDIT: I just wanted to give an example of how Israels bonuses being overloaded could actually be very bad for it. In terms of diplomacy, Israel will already be in a tough position and if being realistic no one will ally with israel at the start of the game at least. Now lets imagine that I'm playing syria and struggling to crush ISIS, nobody wants to help with ISIS because lets imagine for a moment that ISIS has made a deal not to attack others so long as they leave ISIS to eat me up. I as syria, need troops and looking to my western borders, if Israel has bonuses of around 10 per province, that'll be very appealing, Ill call up Egypt and Jordan and offer them a slice of Israel if they help me and shortly Israel would be crushed. Thats why I don't want to overpower Israels territories. I mean even If i really overpower them, they wouldnt be able to hold up against the armies of Jordan and Egypt an Syria at the same time from all corners.

Edited 3/25/2016 22:01:02

Yeah ISIS will be a human player if I can muster up enough testers.

For overlaping/extra bonuses, I'd say:
- Country bonuses are by default at 1, it's interesting to see them at any game.
- Rebel groups bonuses are at 0.
- Religion bonuses are very interesting, could be put as 1 by default.
- Strategic positions such as channels, straights and holy cities at 0 would be cool.
- Natural ressources options would be good too: oil and gas fields, refineries and pipelines positions.

Links for the ressources maps:
http://www.slidego.com/res/palooza/world/MiddleEast-geography/2A2900AA.png
http://321energy.com/editorials/nigelmaund/nigelmaund102010A.jpg
http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2014/images/06/11/infographic.ime.oil.gas.jpg


A sanction/foreign help system could also exist, but it'd need to have the US/USSR on the game to have any sense. To boost a bit israel's strengh, split the extrem south Syrian province in 2, the golan mountains are De Jure syrian, but Israel controls it.

Edited 3/25/2016 22:14:34

Feline, as much as Israel is powerful, it isn't that powerful for a '300' bonus, that'd make it beyond unbalanced for such a small region. As well as that one cannot only take into account military but population and other factors, israel isn't very highly populated. Now as for externals like the USA, Russia and China, as much as it is realistic to have them, especially the USA as they do actually get ivolved in the middle east as history has shown, I feel like the presence of them is rather unbalanced, a country that gets their support would have no issues smooth sailing through the game.

No need to have them as OP as that. Just put them as 0 income default. People change that if they want. But they really need connections to the mainland, or some1 could troll by sitting there. US could have connections to Israel, Egypt and Turkey (maybe Yemen and Oman too if you add a fleet there); Russia to Turkey and Iran.

I'd like to have that sanction/help thing that would be pretty interesting to have.

Edited 3/25/2016 23:06:42

We'll try the first testing phase without them and then perhaps we'll see if they are necessary.

Also, I've now done the preliminary divisions for Turkey, what do you think? I'll probably finish them all of tomorrow if everyone likes them as they are.

I like them. ^^

looks good so far, keep up the good work ;)

Once again, I'm really interested in testing this map
Love the work you've done till now

Thank you Zahaan Ali, I've put you on the testers list

Socotra's territory is not named. It's the island off of yemen

Thank you for bringing that up tchaikovsky.
I've got a question, would you think it would be better to put trade points throughout the trade route which would be used in muck the same manner as boat territories or should I not?

Here is how I think it would work.

A trade line would start at Istanbul, then to Alexandria, then through the Suez canal and to Jeddah in Saudi Arabia, it would then continue down the red sea to Taiz in the mandeb straight, from there the line would go to socotra and after that to Muscat in Oman. It would then proceed on to Qeshm(Iran), then Dubai(UAE), then Doha(Qatar), then Bahrain and then split into two, one to Kuwait City and one to Al basrah in Iraq.

Along the course of this line there would be small territories with bonuses of '-1' for each one to represent the cost of trading and controlling the sea and trade lines.

There would then be bonuses for controlling the whole trade line or the Mediterranean part of the trade line, or the Red Sea or the Persian gulf.

So what do you think? Should it be like that or should it be no territories in the trade line?

I think it would be good

I think it'd be good too, for fast travel and sea control.

Is this not dead, right? I'm really looking forward to it.

Don't worry stewie, I am indeed still working on it.

When will it be finished?