South america + africa option

So new player here.
and would like to see a south america and africa option.
we can have some naval battles and land wars also could see a team africa vs team south america.
maybe at a north america vs europe to?

Wot

Kirjoittanut pizzalord123, 29.05.2017 at 14:38

So new player here.
and would like to see a south america and africa option.
we can have some naval battles and land wars also could see a team africa vs team south america.
maybe at a north america vs europe to?

I think you're talking about presets of the world map. There's a lot of them, and you're bound to find one you're describing. If by any chance you do not find one, make one (or ask someone else to make one).

Yes presets and there is not africa+america

How about a suggestion that you can form your own map (within the default map) in, like clicking on a continent in the map, so for example Africa and South America only, or Africa and South America and Australia only. Would be a better way instead of making presets all the time.

North America vs Europe good.

But... South America vs Africa? lol man, the hunger games, South America would always win because of income.

Kirjoittanut Alexis, 31.05.2017 at 19:46

North America vs Europe good.

But... South America vs Africa? lol man, the hunger games, South America would always win because of income.

Both have almost the same amount of income

Kirjoittanut 4nic, 31.05.2017 at 22:49

Kirjoittanut Alexis, 31.05.2017 at 19:46

North America vs Europe good.

But... South America vs Africa? lol man, the hunger games, South America would always win because of income.

Both have almost the same amount of income

I mean income in certain number of turns, to take whole Africa you need like 6 turns more than South America, and also the units maintenance is higher for Africa than for SA.

Kirjoittanut Alexis, 01.06.2017 at 09:42

Kirjoittanut 4nic, 31.05.2017 at 22:49

Kirjoittanut Alexis, 31.05.2017 at 19:46

North America vs Europe good.

But... South America vs Africa? lol man, the hunger games, South America would always win because of income.

Both have almost the same amount of income

I mean income in certain number of turns, to take whole Africa you need like 6 turns more than South America, and also the units maintenance is higher for Africa than for SA.

This doesn't really make any sense ;p

Kirjoittanut Wheelo, 01.06.2017 at 14:29

This doesn't really make any sense ;p

He means that you won't be having the total income from africa unless you get it all, which will take far more turns than conquering all SA, therefor SA would have a time advantage

Kirjoittanut RaulPB, 01.06.2017 at 17:07

Kirjoittanut Wheelo, 01.06.2017 at 14:29

This doesn't really make any sense ;p

He means that you won't be having the total income from africa unless you get it all, which will take far more turns than conquering all SA, therefor SA would have a time advantage

Still doesn't make much sense, we're not going to be seeing a t3 rush from zimbabwe to ecuador now are we...

Kirjoittanut Wheelo, 01.06.2017 at 17:14

Still doesn't make much sense, we're not going to be seeing a t3 rush from zimbabwe to ecuador now are we...

No but you would rather see a rush from SA towards Africa before than the other way round. Now that would make sense, wouldn't it? Simply because SA is faster to conquer

Kirjoittanut RaulPB, 01.06.2017 at 17:19

Kirjoittanut Wheelo, 01.06.2017 at 17:14

Still doesn't make much sense, we're not going to be seeing a t3 rush from zimbabwe to ecuador now are we...

No but you would rather see a rush from SA towards Africa before than the other way round. Now that would make sense, wouldn't it? Simply because SA is faster to conquer

After how many turns? 7? Not much of a rush then.

Kirjoittanut Wheelo, 01.06.2017 at 18:13

After how many turns? 7? Not much of a rush then.

Still gathers SA faster and invades africa sooner than the other way round.... right or not? Just a simple Yes or No question.... Stop trying to argue uselessly pls

Kirjoittanut RaulPB, 01.06.2017 at 19:54

Kirjoittanut Wheelo, 01.06.2017 at 18:13

After how many turns? 7? Not much of a rush then.

Still gathers SA faster and invades africa sooner than the other way round.... right or not? Just a simple Yes or No question.... Stop trying to argue uselessly pls

You quoted me first, if anything you're the one arguing buddy. 99% sure an africa vs sa duel would be down to lategame, rendering the "time advantage" meaningless.

Kirjoittanut Wheelo, 02.06.2017 at 06:37

You quoted me first, if anything you're the one arguing buddy. 99% sure an africa vs sa duel would be down to lategame, rendering the "time advantage" meaningless.

..... I tried to explain to you what you didn't understand.... w/e, screw you next time

Kirjoittanut RaulPB, 02.06.2017 at 06:59

Kirjoittanut Wheelo, 02.06.2017 at 06:37

You quoted me first, if anything you're the one arguing buddy. 99% sure an africa vs sa duel would be down to lategame, rendering the "time advantage" meaningless.

..... I tried to explain to you what you didn't understand.... w/e, screw you next time

I understood it bro, I just said it doesn't make sense seeing as the game is going to lategame anyway...

Kirjoittanut Wheelo, 01.06.2017 at 18:13

Kirjoittanut RaulPB, 01.06.2017 at 17:19

Kirjoittanut Wheelo, 01.06.2017 at 17:14

Still doesn't make much sense, we're not going to be seeing a t3 rush from zimbabwe to ecuador now are we...

No but you would rather see a rush from SA towards Africa before than the other way round. Now that would make sense, wouldn't it? Simply because SA is faster to conquer

After how many turns? 7? Not much of a rush then.

It take 3/4 turns to get from North brasil to southern west africa. And this is with submarines. Played africa yesterday in a WG and it took me only 3/4 turns.