Recommend
8 
 Thumb up
 Hide
18 Posts

Railways of the World» Forums » Variants

Subject: Input on Transcontinental Map rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Bradley Janssen
United States
Tremonton
Utah
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I create maps for my work, and ever since I purchased this game in 2012 I have wanted to create a better (meaning more accurate) map for a transcontinental game. This is what I have produced so far.



I'm not fully finished with the graphic design yet, but I wanted to hear some input on a couple things I've run into. The main thing is where two cities end up right next to each other on my map. For the New York area I took out New Haven and Providence and replaced them with Hartford, then added in Portland Maine.



Around Baltimore I removed Washington DC and put in Harrisburg Pennsylvania. I'm trying to figure out what to do with Wheeling and Pittsburgh. They are both colored cities (the other cities I have removed/replaced have been gray) and are both important in the game as connections to the east coast through the Appalachians. My thought right now is to either move Pittsburgh northeast or Wheeling southwest. What thoughts do you have on those options? I've also thought about leaving them adjacent. Still counts as a link delivering between the two, but no track needs to be built. Anyone connected in to either city is considered to be connected to the other city as well.



I added in the cities from both the North America and Mexico maps that fall into the range. What color would you suggest I use for Vancouver? It is red on the North America map but I don't think I want two red cities (Tacoma) that close to each other.



The other cities I have added in are Hermosillo, MX; Austin, TX; Houston, TX; Midland, TX; Medicine Hat, AB; Great Falls, MT; Green Bay, WI; Sault St. Marie, MI; Sudbury, Ontario; Springfield, IL; Charlotte, NC; Orlando, FL; and Tampa, FL. I don't think I'll keep all of those. The ones I'm thinking of removing are Midland, Orlando, and maybe either Medicine Hat or Great Falls.

I'd love any suggestions! I want to make this the ultimate transcontinental version. The size is 36 inches by 60 inches total for the whole map, or two 30x36 inch maps. So two maps the size of the Eastern US map.
7 
 Thumb up
1.00
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mark Biggar
United States
Mountain View
California
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
The publisher is selling a neoprene mat version of this map. See te add-on list for the recent Kickstarter for the Portugal map.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Alex Drazen
United States
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
For Wheeling/Pittsburgh, you could use a black line like 2 of the cities on the Britain/England map. No adjacency, and you'd have to build track another way to access them. They're a lot of cube to get access to via a single link if it's a double city.

Alternately, you could make Wheeling/Pittsburgh one space and use a Rotor City from Western USA.

The weirdness of the Eastern USA map geography came up in my ROTW game this weekend so this seems like a nifty project!
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Bradley Janssen
United States
Tremonton
Utah
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
mark_biggar wrote:
The publisher is selling a neoprene mat version of this map. See te add-on list for the recent Kickstarter for the Portugal map.


I just looked it up, for anyone else wanting to look at it, it isn't under the add-on section, it's under update 9.

It looks to me like they just took the existing maps and made them a single map. So it has the same issues with towns being in the wrong place (Duluth!) as well as the other inaccuracies that bother me. I'm probably in the minority, but those things bother me enough that I want my own, more accurate, map made. Building through the Grand Canyon as the cost of a river space? Definitely need some ridgelines through there IMO.

Hopefully that doesn't come off as combative. I'm mainly looking for advice on what people would like if they could have an 'ideal' transcontinental map.

My plan is to print it as one piece, but have the option to have it split in two for people who would just want to play one half.
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Nicholas
United Kingdom
High Wycombe
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Looks fantastic! Great job.
Would be extra amazing if it had a score track going round the outside, did you already plan on doing that?
I wonder how with the extra cities it affects cubes and tile track pieces needed... would we need to buy extra pieces?

Look forward to seeing how it goes
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Nicholas
United Kingdom
High Wycombe
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
alexdrazen wrote:
For Wheeling/Pittsburgh, you could use a black line like 2 of the cities on the Britain/England map. No adjacency, and you'd have to build track another way to access them. They're a lot of cube to get access to via a single link if it's a double city.

Alternately, you could make Wheeling/Pittsburgh one space and use a Rotor City from Western USA.

The weirdness of the Eastern USA map geography came up in my ROTW game this weekend so this seems like a nifty project!



The black line in railways of Great Britain between (is it Hull and Grimsby?) represents the Humber river, which is wide with lots of clay so not really possible to build across ... until modern times when they built the at one point world’s longest suspension bridge for an inordinate sum!!

The other thing they did in railways of gb was to combine Leeds and York into the one hex (not sure if that’s been done anywhere else? Not off the top of my head). It’s strange to combine two big cities and then have the almost unheard of Goole next door with it’s own hex, which seems wrong, but I suppose it’s a possibility.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Alex Drazen
United States
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
I see. I'd probably recommend the rotor city or moving Wheeling southeast or southwest by 1 hex, then.

Having 2 connected cities next to each other with 7 cubes accessible to any connection just feels... weird. I don't think any ROTW city has an initial cube number higher than 5.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Christopher M
United States
Flowood
MS
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Have you considered using the dot system to indicate terrain clearly?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Bradley Janssen
United States
Tremonton
Utah
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
nickjhay wrote:
Looks fantastic! Great job.
Would be extra amazing if it had a score track going round the outside, did you already plan on doing that?
I wonder how with the extra cities it affects cubes and tile track pieces needed... would we need to buy extra pieces?

Look forward to seeing how it goes


I've thought about doing the score track, it would be great to fit it on there to be able to eliminate another board from the table.

I have a couple thoughts on how to do the extra cities. One idea is a variant of the Glenn Drover version.

Glenn Drover wrote:
The variant that we use for two player games is:

No player may build west of the Appalachians unitil a player has scored 30 points.

This ensures that the game is played historically as well as competitively. If you want a blood bath, play this variant with more than 2 players!


My idea would be once you get to 30 points (probably less for the transcontinental version), then you put goods cubes on the cities west of the Appalachian mountains and east of Omaha. Then when someone builds the western link you would add cubes to the rest of the map. That way you should have enough cubes delivered to be able to easily fill all the cities.

My other thought is after the first round, new tracks need to be built from an already connected city (connected to by anyone). That way you can't just connect two cities in the middle of nowhere, someone has to build to them first. Once the western link gets built, then you would be able to start building from the west coast cities (San Francisco, L.A., Tacoma).

As for needing extra track, I don't know. I've never come close to running out, and I have the Nippon expansion if I need more tiles. Then again, I usually play 2 or 3 player games. Have people playing the transcontinental version with 6 almost run out?

1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Bradley Janssen
United States
Tremonton
Utah
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
alexdrazen wrote:
I see. I'd probably recommend the rotor city or moving Wheeling southeast or southwest by 1 hex, then.

Having 2 connected cities next to each other with 7 cubes accessible to any connection just feels... weird. I don't think any ROTW city has an initial cube number higher than 5.


Yeah, that's why I'm struggling with it. Wheeling is such an important connection, it's where the B&O railroad connected the Atlantic Ocean to the Ohio River, so I want to keep it the correct distance from Baltimore, but moving Pittsburgh puts it too close to Harrisburg. They were both very important cities for railroads, so it's hard for me to move either of them.

Deaddogdays wrote:
Have you considered using the dot system to indicate terrain clearly?


I am planning to for the mountains. I personally think that the big water drops are distracting, I just play that if there is water in the hex, you pay the water price.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Bryann Turner
United States
Portland
Oregon
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I would be interested in seeing how this comes out. My caution is that I assume the original maps were playtested extensively with the cities in the hexes they are in, so I'm sure the maps will play differently.

Of course, only one way to find out. :-)
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Alex Drazen
United States
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Quote:
Have people playing the transcontinental version with 6 almost run out?


We ran out of track with five players!

Granted, we did not get any of the North America track out at the time.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Bradley Janssen
United States
Tremonton
Utah
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
alexdrazen wrote:
Quote:
Have people playing the transcontinental version with 6 almost run out?


We ran out of track with five players!

Granted, we did not get any of the North America track out at the time.


What did you do when you ran out? Just use pieces from existing lines?

One thing that might help reduce that happening is that the map I am making is a constant scale. I was surprised when I first started putting this map together to see how stretched out the Western U.S. map is in the East/West direction compared to the Eastern U.S.

For example, when you put the two boards together Dallas is 6 spaces away from Abilene. On my map there are three spaces between Dallas and Abilene. Almost all cities that were 4 spaces apart East/West are now 3 spaces apart. So by matching the scale of the Eastern map it has decreased the space between cities in the West.

That's one of the main reasons I want to make this map. The East map and West map match play well on their own, but put together they don't match up that well. So I'm trying to make a map that is made with the transcontinental game in mind, rather than putting two separate maps together.

btizo wrote:
I would be interested in seeing how this comes out. My caution is that I assume the original maps were playtested extensively with the cities in the hexes they are in, so I'm sure the maps will play differently.

Of course, only one way to find out. :-)


I agree, my question is how much they were playtested together. That's why I'm trying to create this version with the transcontinental game in mind, which I'm hoping will make it a good experience. I'm willing to send this to anyone who wants to playtest it!
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Matt Robertson
Canada
Regina
Saskatchewan
flag msg tools
Life is Short; Play Games!
badge
The BixCON Series of gaming events: A combination of Great Friends, Great Games, Great Food, & Great Drink!
Avatar
mbmb
Great project. I wish you luck and I will be following this closely. A few items for consideration:

(1) Eliminate the state lines and international borders from the map. They are not needed for play and will cause less confusion interfering with the hex lines.

(2) I like your idea of additional cities. I think it will offer a slightly different play experience from the EGG map for people looking to play a transcontinental game.

(3) Please do not add the score track. The transcontinental games run long and the risk of people bumping scoring markers is high. The benefit of having a separate board is that it can be set off to the side or on a TV table to isolate it from the risk of bumping and moving the scoring markers.

(4) Our group has played combined East/West USA games a lot and have a well tested rule set you may be interested in using. Have a look:
https://boardgamegeek.com/filepage/132600/rules-playing-comb...

Good luck with the project!!!
Matt
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Nicholas
United Kingdom
High Wycombe
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Bixby wrote:
Great project. I wish you luck and I will be following this closely. A few items for consideration:

(1) Eliminate the state lines and international borders from the map. They are not needed for play and will cause less confusion interfering with the hex lines.

(2) I like your idea of additional cities. I think it will offer a slightly different play experience from the EGG map for people looking to play a transcontinental game.

(3) Please do not add the score track. The transcontinental games run long and the risk of people bumping scoring markers is high. The benefit of having a separate board is that it can be set off to the side or on a TV table to isolate it from the risk of bumping and moving the scoring markers.

(4) Our group has played combined East/West USA games a lot and have a well tested rule set you may be interested in using. Have a look:
https://boardgamegeek.com/filepage/132600/rules-playing-comb...

Good luck with the project!!!
Matt


Disagree with points 1 and 3, but I suppose it comes down to your personal preference!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Bradley Janssen
United States
Tremonton
Utah
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
nickjhay wrote:
Bixby wrote:
Great project. I wish you luck and I will be following this closely. A few items for consideration:

(1) Eliminate the state lines and international borders from the map. They are not needed for play and will cause less confusion interfering with the hex lines.

(2) I like your idea of additional cities. I think it will offer a slightly different play experience from the EGG map for people looking to play a transcontinental game.

(3) Please do not add the score track. The transcontinental games run long and the risk of people bumping scoring markers is high. The benefit of having a separate board is that it can be set off to the side or on a TV table to isolate it from the risk of bumping and moving the scoring markers.

(4) Our group has played combined East/West USA games a lot and have a well tested rule set you may be interested in using. Have a look:
https://boardgamegeek.com/filepage/132600/rules-playing-comb...

Good luck with the project!!!
Matt


Disagree with points 1 and 3, but I suppose it comes down to your personal preference!


I have everything as separate layers, so if someone is interested in a copy it will be easy to take those off if they don't want them. I personally really like having the state lines. I put them as a different color to reduce confusion.

I read through those rules for the transcontinental variant, I like it. I'll have to try it out sometime.
2 
 Thumb up
5.00
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Bradley Janssen
United States
Tremonton
Utah
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I'm finished with the first draft! My hope was to have a version done for the 150th anniversary of the Transcontinental Railroad this Friday (I live about a half hour from Promontory).



Here’s a list of adjustments as compared to the two-board transcontinental version.

Edit to add link to EGG's transcontinental version. https://ksr-ugc.imgix.net/assets/024/243/268/29a68dd3e676dba...

Projection: The original boards weren’t at the same scale/projection. The east US is rotated counter-clockwise while the west isn’t, and the cities don’t line up well between the two boards. For example, both Fargo and Bismarck are shown as being south of Minneapolis, even though there is plenty of empty space above them on the western board. Also, the western board is in landscape format, which compared to the east map stretches out the distance between cities. Having the whole map made as a single piece makes the distances across the whole map consistent.

Towns: Some of the crowded areas ended up losing cities, as there wasn’t enough space to fit them all in. The towns that aren’t on this map from the original maps are: New Haven, Providence, Dover, Washington DC, Fort Worth, Ogden, and Virginia City. I tried to replace them with cities in the general area to keep the overall gameplay the same.

For the eastern US I added in Augusta, Portland, Hartford, Lynchburg, Charlotte, Tampa, Houston, Springfield, Green Bay, and Sault St. Marie.

For the western US I added in Watertown SD, Midland TX, El Paso TX, Austin TX, Flagstaff AZ, Clifton AZ, Candelaria NV, Frisco UT, Baker City OR, Challis ID, Missoula MT, and Great Falls MT. As I looked into the railroad maps for the states in the western US, most had a railroad spur to a mining town, which I tried to add in.

I also added in towns from the Mexico and North America maps. The North America map is much smaller than the transcontinental map, so I added in some additional towns to make the distances between towns not as big.

Geography: A gripe I had with the western US map was the incorrect geography. The rivers connecting through between Butte and Idaho falls and the Grand Canyon and Hell’s Canyon being the least expensive routes to connect through are just two. I added the true topography to the map to show me what areas needed to be mountains and need to have ridgelines. Building through the Rocky Mountains is more expensive than building through the Appalachians. It’s also very clear why the original builders chose the route they did for the transcontinental route.

What's Next?

I'm going to be playing this map to see how it goes. I'm definitely not a very experienced ROTW player, and I can only play so many games. If anyone would be interested in it I will upload a file of it. It prints and 36"x60".

I did think about the idea of making the game board wider and zooming in a little more, which would remove the extra Canada and Mexico cities.

I ended up not putting on the score track. There would be enough reaching over it and bumping that I personally want it separate.

Let me know what you think! Unless you hate it. Then just let it fester in you.
6 
 Thumb up
5.00
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Bradley Janssen
United States
Tremonton
Utah
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Some pictures I took of the map next to the originals. Unfortunately I don't have the fixed boards that line up. I printed it at the local Alphagraphics on Tyvek paper. It cost about $30. Tyvek is waterproof and tear proof, although I haven't attempted to tear it. It's what we have used when printing maps of lakes for people to take on their boats.





8 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.