AGEOD Forums

One thing that keeps me plunging head-on in this game is the awkward map orientation, which is tilted compared to the "north is up" orientation on most maps. I love maps and comparisons of my progress vis-a-vis historical outcomes and I don't like WW1's orientation at all.

So, while I realize that continued bug fixing is priority No. 1, is there any chance that WW1 will get a normal orientation and if so when?

Since the map works fine as is, probably not.

Disclaimer wrote:One thing that keeps me plunging head-on in this game is the awkward map orientation, which is tilted compared to the "north is up" orientation on most maps. I love maps and comparisons of my progress vis-a-vis historical outcomes and I don't like WW1's orientation at all.

So, while I realize that continued bug fixing is priority No. 1, is there any chance that WW1 will get a normal orientation and if so when?

Why was the map set up this way?

Hi all,

A) The map orientation.

The reason for the Dev team choice is the following one:

1: Look at the map and try to mentaly flip it it: "Hey! it does not fit in the squared frame anymore!" (the European battlefield is longer than large)
2: This means you'll need a bigger frame to display your new "horizontal" map.
3: Hey, this bigger map needs much more graphic ressources!!!

Conclusion: Horizontal map means less players able to run the game for no added gameplay value.
This was the main reason for this design choice. Actually you begin to play you fit in the map fairly easily, just like you do when you play War in the Pacific for example.

http://www.wargamer.com/forums/tm.aspx?&m=307400&mpage=2

Of course, the answer/s are on this forum as well.

Thanks for the explanation! But I'm not sure that I understand it. Yes, the European battlefield is longer W-E than N-S, but how does that mean any difference to what is being shown on the screen? Actually there should just be different provinces be shown at any one time, not less. And the total amount of provinces is identical, no matter how you show them.

But assuming that I'm stupid and that there are indeed less provinces to display with the W-E direction, there are still 2 disadvantages:

- Obviously that would precisely be a gameplay advantage: If more provinces are shown N-S, then the player gets more information and a better overview. Which is all that better, because we are mentally conditioned to understand N-S maps, not W-E ones.
- In any case, no buyer would be lost with a N-S map, because everybody excepts that. But with a W-E map you are running the danger that some people don't put in enough time to get used to the W-E direction and then don't buy the game.

We are going over old ground here I am afraid....but I have to agree with all the statements "against" contained in the recent re-running of the debate....it seems like madness to insist on this orientation...and the various excuses deployed to defend the position do not carry much weight.....I guess the bottom line is that the "too difficult light" has illuminated and nobody wants to go over the old ground to change the orientation....it remains a bad design decision in my view....this game has so much potential...and I do like it very much...but it could have been a dream....instead of falling short in so many areas (albeit that they are slowly being fixed...three cheers for Calvinus!)

didnt some cultures use south north orientation. now that would be seriously wierd. oke:

honestly it seemed funny at first, but after a couple of days it seemed perfectly normal to me.

maybe because im an old school board wargamer and im used to often sitting in a postion where the board wasnt north up to me.

patrat wrote:
maybe because im an old school board wargamer and im used to often sitting in a postion where the board wasnt north up to me.

Exactly.

I believe it has been said that this issue may be re-visited by the developers in the future. But I also would rather that North was at the top. JMHO

Nial