This is the **newest** [map](http://warlight.net/SinglePlayer.aspx?PreviewMap=13020) that I have been working on,(It may look a little bit familiar :D)
I am going to add Africa, more of Russia and Saudi Arabia in a different [map](http://WarLight.net/SinglePlayer.aspx?PreviewMap=12972) (More on that later in the year)

So whilst Europe is done I thought I would bring it out as a different map and add any improvements that Troll's map may be lacking. So if you've ever wanted to change the Europe Map here's your chance!

I have already changed a few **Connections, Territories and Bonus Values**.
It would be great if anyone could point out any missing connections ect... or give any other suggestions. :o)
Thanks - Major Risk

I'm guessing cyprus is like hawii on Grundie's earth.
i like it (the europe map is a sold part of the game now).
I don't have time to examine it properly but it looks alright at a glance.

Why exactly do we need a facsimile of Troll's Europe map?

That´s nice.. I think it´d benefit greatly if you included North Africa and the Levant though, like on Ottoman´s version of Europe.

And perhaps change it to look less like Troll´s, so people will notice a clearer difference. The bonus colours are one example of doing this, if you don´t want to edit actual boundaries and bonuses.

This is very much a draft as the borders will need to be gone round properly.
@Richard - I think you can answer that yourself :D

Other easy ways to differentiate it from Troll´s map would be adjusting the bonuses. Make the big bonuses smaller, and the small bonuses bigger.

Quick Examples:

Split France into 3 bonuses.
Split Scotland from the Great Britain Bonus,
Combine Denmark and Norway..

Well, you can get the idea from there.

Evia - Aegean (Greece and Turkey) connection missing.

And whatever you name the new Europe map, PLEASE don't name it anything like "better" or "improved" Europe. Those titles are not actually representing any changes you made from the original map, but just subjective nonsense.

Nice ideas {rp} Clavicus Franco IV, France splitting up into smaller bonuses I like especially.
And Africa and Levant will appear in a similar map of mine later this year. :)

And why would Scotland need to split from Great Britain? The name is not anything political, just the name of the island, so there's no reason for being offended (I assume you're a Scot because it's just a silly idea splitting a regular bonus into one small one and one tiny consisting of 2 territories. And at the same time you're combining Denmark and Norway into a bonus even bigger than Britain...)

Thanks Moros, I was actually just thinking of naming it EUROPE in capitals.

And Major, I wonder why you edited Moldova and Cyprus. I see no strategic reason to make Moldova a separate single-territory bonus than political correctness, and with the same reason Kalingrad should be separated from the Baltics.

The only answer I have is that we don't. It's a highly rated map that is incredibly similar to your version. Why have a second, slightly altered version of a 'classic'?

I get having this map and expanding to cover more of Asia, Middle East and Africa. Then this would possibly bring something new to the table but as of now it's a simple regurgitation of what has already been produced.

Why are Denmark and Sweden touching?

Also, like Richard says, what's the point? Two different connections?? Wouldn't it be easier to whip up a UserVoice to allow custom connections or something...?

Moldova meant that 1) Romania had 1 less territory and was now easier to defend and 2) Moldova can easily break Romania and Ukraine (If anyone decides to pick there.) 3)Political Correctness as you said - I didn't change Kalingrad because it would make Baltic States a unattractive bonus and we wouldn't want that again :)
I think the balkans will be a much more favourable starting place now - with the changes made.

@ Richard - the Europe map By Troll has some flaws (I believe) and I would like to fix them and make a different version. Just because it looks the same doesn't mean it is - it has very subtle changes that make a big difference to gameplay.

RVW- Denmark and Sweden touch on Trolls map which is a mistake. I will change it later thanks.
Also Uservoice is a slow process and I don't think enough people would vote. Fizzer's time is precious and It wasn't just connections that I changed if you look at the map.

The public seriously disagrees with you based on the ratings.

There are already some 7-8 European maps with various tweaks to them... do we really need to add a 9th with such minimal variation? At least the most recent Europe map was a completely new approach with the focus on languages.

"And why would Scotland need to split from Great Britain? The name is not anything political, just the name of the island, so there's no reason for being offended (I assume you're a Scot because it's just a silly idea splitting a regular bonus into one small one and one tiny consisting of 2 territories. And at the same time you're combining Denmark and Norway into a bonus even bigger than Britain...)"

@Moros,

No, quite the opposite, i´m an Englishman. I suggested ways to alter the map so it doesn´t appear like Troll´s version.

Turning Norway, Denmark, and lets also say Iceland into one bonus will remove the typical ´islands´ starting spots, and make the gameplay different.

I don´t particularly care if Scotland is part of the bonus or not, merely wished to suggest ways to make the map´s gameplay significantly different from the classic version.

@Richard,
He´s making the map, he´s completed alot of it, there´s no reason for you to argue with him.

Don´t play the map if you don´t like it, stop endlessly critisizing and insulting the very idea of it. I don´t see a reason to.

Richard you cannot speak for "the public".
They don't disagree with me - the ratings simply suggest that they like troll's map. You are drawing conclusions from no evidence, if you really want to keep trolling the forums be my guest but do it in another thread - there is nothing more to be said on the matter. Hint: If you don't like the map, don't play on it!

I didn't speak for the public... I led the 500+ ratings of Troll's map speak for the public.

All I am saying is that I don't see the point in producing such a straight-up facsimile. Dropping ten territories and adding 2 null-bonuses to a map of this scope is nothing. As others said, an adjustment to make your map stand out would be advisable lest it be ignored as just another rip-off of existing maps.

Simply adding in Northern Africa or linking to colonial holdings or expanding westward would add another layer to your map and make it stand out on its own merits. As it now stands I see it simply being ignored for a more well-known and extremely well-liked map. If anything, I could see there being criticisms/complaints from players when they join a game on this map mistaking it for the original.