User blog comment:ProfessorMcG/Reworking of the Map Games/@comment-461469-20100704050955

I have an idea (sorry for joining this late), but when the Axis, Allies and Communism Map Game was reaching implausible and impossible territory, it was decided to hold a realism meeting, where the people who disagreed with someone else's idea (sorry to do this, Cathrine, but your idea of the US getting a 500,000 strong army in two weeks, without training, etc., for example), and it was pointed out what was implausible, and what can be done to fix it, while the person who originally made the idea could defend it, and it would be eventually altered to make it more real.

I think having two people control a nation, while a good idea to control implausibility, may eventually get to unwieldy, as they both would have to agree, and could possibly destroy the map game.

Instead, why not have a person control each nation, while someone else gets to control technology, another disasters and events (both natural and man-made), etc.? That could add complete surprise the Map Gamers and force them to think on their feet, which could help control plausibility, as they would have to think of plausible answers to the problems. If it isn't plausible (according to a Realism Meeting, or something) then it can be edited.

And, last idea, why not have some people in charge of doing the maps, so they know what is going on, and the next turn can't start until after the map is posted, so everyone knows what is going on?

(I know most of these ideas are big, and possibly implausible to enforce or do, but it is my idea. Don't hate me for it.)