COMMUNITY - FORUMS - LUNA GENERAL
Which Map to Vote For

These opinions are based on my bias towards kingdom 3


G - a lot of potential for waterway play.

H - The most unique of the maps with an inland ocean that could also beneficial to waterway play.

M - The more "rare" races have larger landmass and therefore would not feel as limited in other maps.

S - Seems like an advantageous map from a military aspect with a slight chokehold connecting the two landmasses.


I would like to hear which map members of Luna like and why?

Edit: A user requested this link provided by zimmah in the comments be added to the OP as they found it very useful and so would others, its basically an excel sheet with a break down of the different maps and kingdoms

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/e/2PACX-1vRoZo5nS1gRzqCSBXSTDaOO3SBRIi-dgyL8eadmsT4bqq-3JxIW6aCDoj2W8Qoq0HAAFYTQ4pAxkILB/pubhtml?lsrp=1#


10/23/2018 2:49:41 AM #1

H is looking to be a crowd favorite so far and T just spiked up as well. M looks like it could be fun but others currently don't seem to be in support of that idea as of current. personally, I like H, T, and I


10/23/2018 3:10:29 AM #2

Map I.

One inner sea shared by 4 biomes and 3 kingdoms and a innerish sea shared 6 biomes and 4 kingdoms.


10/23/2018 3:20:28 AM #3

Has no one noticed that map A is shaped like a chicken?!??!


Astronomer. Sailor. Desert Admirer. And the only Waerd supporter in CoE?

10/23/2018 3:21:59 AM #4

F looks interesting to me, with the northern kingdoms being significantly smaller land area than the south. It could create an interesting political landscape, where the southern kingdoms have more landmass and potentially greater access to resources compared to the northern kingdoms. The three northern kingdoms can be closely allied, with kingdom three being a good candidate for a strong military to protect the border between the north and south. Also who ever controls kingdom 4 would have a large say in the trading of goods between north and south. Also kingdom 4 could align itself with the northern kingdoms to create a more massively powerful alliance with the north to conquer the two southern kingdoms.


10/23/2018 3:25:12 AM #5

G is really bad for the janoa and kypiq.

Plus it has soo much marsh, meaning lots of mud.


10/23/2018 3:28:50 AM #6

Looking at the Map Legend I can see that there is a difference in the number of biomes given to each race.

-Races with 4 biomes: Neran

-Races with 3 biomes: To'resk

-Races with 2 biomes: Waerd, Hrothi, Dras (have 3 listed, but only 2 appear on any given map)

-Races with 1 biome: Brudvir, Kypiq, and Janoa

What I looked at before voting was for balanced landmass sizes between the 3 races with 1 biome each and those with multiple. That left me with very few options as there seemed to be very few maps that didn't favor one or another of the 1 biome races. I then narrowed it down even further by looking to see if there weren't any landlocked biomes on the continent. I did this not just as a secondary exclusion method but because I felt that it was also imperative not to exclude any biome from potential ocean-travel. This pretty much gave me my answer...

The aesthetically pleasing, lake in the middle, biome balanced, no landlocked biomes Map H.


10/23/2018 3:32:16 AM #7

I see now that map H has a big inner lake.

If it was shared by more than two kingdoms I`d go for that one.


10/23/2018 4:15:37 AM #8

Also in case nobody else noticed this... There are 17 biomes listed on the Map Legend, but each map only has 16/17 biomes.

Maps A-J and M-T have Dras Salt Marsh biome but no Dras Bog biome. Maps K and L have Dras Bog biome but no Dras Salt Marsh biome.


10/23/2018 4:29:38 AM #9

So far I like H, R, E ,G and O


10/23/2018 5:46:12 AM #10

I would suggest choosing a map that doesn't "layer" kingdoms one on top of another. Instead, one where kingdoms are a little more "mixed," bordering 2 other kingdoms would be more ideal. It would create more interesting political player.

Having some bays and seas would be cool, too.

I really recommend looking at B, L, S or N.


10/23/2018 5:56:55 AM #11

Posted By Eadward at 8:32 PM - Mon Oct 22 2018

I see now that map H has a big inner lake.

If it was shared by more than two kingdoms I`d go for that one.

That's the problem I have with H--the inner lake is awesome, but the political boundaries around it are somewhat uninteresting.


10/23/2018 6:02:47 AM #12

Posted By Beauvais at 10:46 PM - Mon Oct 22 2018

I would suggest choosing a map that doesn't "layer" kingdoms one on top of another. Instead, one where kingdoms are a little more "mixed," bordering 2 other kingdoms would be more ideal. It would create more interesting political player.

Having some bays and seas would be cool, too.

I really recommend looking at B, L, S or N.

Don't forget that awesome three-kingdom match-up on the northern part of map M! Or the 4-kingdom shared border on K!


10/23/2018 7:06:32 AM #13

M has far too little Brudvir and Hrothi land to satisfy the large player bases for these tribes. Several other maps have the same problem. People do not seem to be cognizant that less land means less food, which means less pick-able tribal members. So we are very much picking relative tribal population ratios when we pick different sized biomes.

I like A, C, I, N and Q for their good mountains and coastlines in the north as I'm going to be Hrothi.


Seneschal for the Hrothi County of Iskar, Recruiter for the Duchy of Aritaur

https://discord.gg/qRQ3Zj6

10/23/2018 9:31:23 AM #14

I advise voting against "pancake kingdoms." What I mean by this is maps that have each kingdom "layered" on top of each other so that most only border 1 or 2 other kingdoms. The leading maps of H and T are examples of pancakes.

I think the pancake model encourages more war, as who your allies and enemies are is much more obvious. Whoever is blocking your path to the center is your enemy. While whoever is "behind" you to the north or south is a threat.

However, if kingdom borders are much more mixed, its much more ambiguous who is your enemy or friend. Why? I think that maps were kingdoms border 2 or 3 other kingdoms will be a lot more dynamic for geopolitical gameplay, diplomacy, and politics. It will make the outcomes of declaring war a lot less certain, greater choice in practical marriage alliances, and encourage monarchs to engage in balance of power type politicking. An ambitious kingdom's directions for expansion are more numerous. Alliances could shift, friends could become enemies, etc.

Anyways, just my two cents.


10/23/2018 1:56:45 PM #15

Posted By Eadward at 10:32 PM - Mon Oct 22 2018

I see now that map H has a big inner lake.

If it was shared by more than two kingdoms I`d go for that one.

Yeah that’s my main problem with the lake, there’s only 1 map with a lake, but it only connects 2 kingdoms and 4 biomes.

What makes it even worse is that they’re all To’resk and weard biomes, To’resk love trading, but weard hates the To’resk and according to lore usually doesn’t trade with To’resk. Even if they do trade, the lake doesn’t make a significant difference in the trading options on that map, it would have nearly identical traderoutes if you ignore the lake.

What is even more interesting about map H is that the neran grassland biome is in an awkward trading spot for land trade, forcing those neran to compete with the To’resk in naval trading, or stick with agriculture and horsebreeding (mostly) and trade almost exclusively with the To’resk. Their cavalry would be almost useless in any of their own battles so they’ll be almost forced to join forces with the To’resk or overthrow them somehow (they’ll need outside help for that). It’s a very interesting position for the grassland neran.


Count LizenÇace VeLeîjres of Mydra's Crossing, VII of the order of the IX.

Order of IX