To regular team players, some maps are well-known. Deviating maps are hardly ever played. This may be ashame, for some of these less-often played maps may be quite balanced.

First, let me summarize the most often played maps:
Ulster - Saxony/Hanover - Muscovy/Lithuania
vs.
Grenada/Castile - Corsica/Rome - Nicaea

Here, Castile will normally only be played if north has Saxony. Another possibility is Ukraine instead of Musc/Lith, to balance.

I'd like this topic to mention some alternative maps, and player's experience with it. Let me start the first example...

The first example:

Regular north versus south maps, with Natolia/Syria/Cyprus/Palestine instead of Nicaea.

Recently, I've played Rome, with epidemic in Cyprus, a game eventually won by south. About a year ago, I played Cyprus, with Master in Rome, and again this game was won. Paars once apparently once played Palestine, and also won that game. So it would seem that it is not so bad to be a bit further from the front.

However, I have also played games with Adriano in Syria, and with Xuul in Natolia. In both cases I played Muscovy, and I set myself the goal of not letting them develop Byzantium or Macedonia. In both cases, this aim was, quite easily, achieved. Xuul and Adriano are strong players. So I think we have to conclude that, under normal circumstances, maps with lands behind Nicaea are impossible to play. Nevertheless, a good challenge if you think you are stronger than the other players in the game.

And related, maps with Greece instead of Nicaea. On the face of it, Greece seems to be an advantage, because it is closer to the front.

I think I played Greece two or three times, and I didn't notice any particular advantage. I saw Kenjii play Greece once, and he was soon overrun by ibg, from Muscovy.

Being closer to the Balcans should really be an advantage, but I think the trouble is that the African backlands are further away, and moreover, they are more vulnerable to a cutoff. Not that you'd lose many armies there, but when Nicaea is lost, rebellions in those backlands will increase.

Not being experienced in playing Greece may also be a factor.

So far, it seems to me that Greece is an excellent variant on the regular maps.

My favorite variant is Leon or Tangiers in place of Grenada. I believe Leon still has a slight advantage over Ulster, and Tangiers is only slightly disadvantaged to Ulster (less so than Ulster is to Grenada).

---------------------------
I've seen Wales - Denmark - Lithuania a few times. I think the strength of Wales makes up for the disadvantage in Denmark.

---------------------------
I really enjoy playing from Syria or Cyprus. I think that disadvantage for south makes up for the general southern advantage. Although many players discount Syria/Cyprus and make me find another map.

Some variants that we know are good:

Leon or Tangiers instead of Grenada: more balanced with Ulster.
Also, Northumberland or Wales vs Grenada should be pretty balanced.

I think Denmark vs Sardinia should be pretty balanced, although I once got a serious beating with me in Denmark and Master in Sardinia. But I also got beaten by Adriano once, him in Denmark, me in Roma (with a bad start, though).

Variants are good, the same game again and again gets boring.

And let's not forget the E/W maps:
Ulster - France - Grenada
vs
Musc/Lith - Wala - Nicaea

Denmark + wales is still a huge disadvantage for N.
Wales won't get any of the countries in Skandinavia and it can't afford to be attacked by corsica/Roma.

tangiers imo still has a slight advantage over ulster but it seems way more balanced as grenada, unfortunately good maps with tangiers in them do rarely popup.

Maps with tunis can be fun; in N-S but
also e-w; either vs spain or vs Nic

On the whole, many people are too picky with 3v3 maps. If it's slightly imbalanced, then just balance it by choosing the teams well.

And more evw maps!

Yeah agree.

The old "Look at me being knowledgeable about the game so
I know your map sucks"-routine...

Squeegie Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> My favorite variant is Leon or Tangiers in place
> of Grenada. I believe Leon still has a slight
> advantage over Ulster, and Tangiers is only
> slightly disadvantaged to Ulster (less so than
> Ulster is to Grenada).
>

Good player in Ulster will be quick to get England.. Therefore its a 2v1 vs Italy, that normally is under pressure from the start. Thats why Tangiers is too bad.

Ulster Sax Tangiers Corsica may offer too much possibility for early 2v1 kill, but say Ulster Hanover Tangiers Roma doesn't seem like it should be so bad, and gives a good balance in the long-run.

Yes, Roma and Corsica are stronger than Hanover, in my opinion, and weaker than Saxony. But Roma-Hanover feels like the most balanced to me.

What is players opinion about maps with Flanders and Norway, versus Aragon and Tunis/Sicilia?

I've played a couple, and overall, the balance seems quite good.

I recall:
*An early victory for Flanders (emp) vs Aragon (LNO), before Tunis (deBoer) could get into play. Luck was a big factor there
*A victory for south, as Flanders (ibg) was dealt with UK lands producing armies. Sicilia was in the game, I think
*I think there were one more north and one more south victory, of which I forgot the details - they might be in the 3 vs 3 post.

No flanders.. And no norway.. I remember that F***ing game.. :(

Generally speaking, I like maps where oposing capitals are far from eachother. They make for long games and luck becomes a smaller factor.

I particularly like maps with Tangiers or Portugal; Denmark or Sweden; Tunis or Sardinia; Natolia, Syria or Cyprus. Of course the oposing capital should not be too strong, unless it's balanced with players. I remember once beating Podolia from Syria (or Cyprus), but Master was in Italy, and that certainly helped :)

It is true that luck is a larger factor when the caps are close together. But good moves also become a larger factor, and I like that aspect. I don't like long games per se (rather not!), but they should be long enough for team mates to help each other out, so that everyone can make his contribution to the final outcome.

The longer the better! :p

acro Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The longer the better! :p

That's what she said.