XML Suggestions and Modifications II

[Mr_Adams]

Suggestion Idea: Deployment Zone

Description: This would allow a mapmaker to create a continent and set it as a deployment zone. A deployment zone would be the only territories that you could deploy forces to.

Why It Should Be Considered: This would allow mapmakers to limit where bonuses could be deployed but still allow the players a choice. For instance if you has a tech tree you could limit it so no forces except autodeployed ones could be deployed there.

Lack Label (Mod Use):

Sounds alot like a suggestion I saw once, and liked alot, where armies could only be deployed on territories of a related bonus. ie. Ociania bonus armies can't be deployed in Asia, but can be forted in. I like your concept here though. similar, but different enough to be appreciated independently.

Pretty good ideas for a cook *poke

[Mr_Adams]

Perhaps bonuses which change throughout the game by a random.com link. eg. hypothetical monopoly based map, "chance card gives bonus of -3 - +5" or something like that.

[yeti_c]

Suggestion Idea: Elimination Zone

Description: This would allow a mapmaker to create a continent and set it as an elimination zone. An elimination zone would be the only territories that count towards eliminating a player. When they were eliminated from this zone the game would be over for them, all of their forces outside of the zone would become an equal number of neutral armies.

Why It Should Be Considered: This would allow maps such as Research & Conquer to create two separate army zones independent of one another. You could create a tech tree that granted bonuses but could not be accessed by military forces.

Lack Label (Mod Use):

Suggestion Idea: Deployment Zone

Description: This would allow a mapmaker to create a continent and set it as a deployment zone. A deployment zone would be the only territories that you could deploy forces to.

Why It Should Be Considered: This would allow mapmakers to limit where bonuses could be deployed but still allow the players a choice. For instance if you has a tech tree you could limit it so no forces except autodeployed ones could be deployed there.

Lack Label (Mod Use):

Love both of these suggestions.

C.

[Evil DIMwit]

Suggestion Idea: Minimum Neutrals

Description: Let a single XML tag for the map specify that at least N territories in the map start neutral. May be extended so that more specific groups of territories can be listed, each with its own minimum neutral value.

Why It Should Be Considered: Means that mapmakers no longer have to set specific territories to start as neutrals in order to get a fair number of initial territories. Suppose you have 48 starting territories; you might set the minimum neutral value to be 4. That way, players are divided at total of 44 territories (a proper number), but the neutral territories are different each time.
The extended version, if implemented, can be used to limit the possibility of a player starting with an entire continent or bonus collection.

[yeti_c]

Also like this.

C.

[Evil DIMwit]

Calculate Killer Neutrals After Objectives and Bonuses

The order that things are apparently implemented now, with killer neutrals applied before objectives and bonuses at the start of a turn, is pretty useless. If you move killer neutrals down the execution list after bonuses, mapmakers gain a couple of gameplay options: killer objectives that need to be held simultaneously and one-time bonuses that have to be recaptured. I'm not saying this would open up a whole new world of experience, but it's better than the present state of affairs and I'm guessing it wouldn't take long to implement.

[ender516]

That's a very good idea.

[trapyoung]

Suggestion Idea: Assign Random Neutral Army Value


Currently for maps that create random drops like Classic or Alexander's Empire, for example, the number of neutral territories are affected by the number of players occupying the number of regions on the map but are assigned an army value of 3. Other maps like Age of Realms, for example, have differing neutral values but they are assigned to specific territories. Allowing XML coding that would allow the mapmaker to create the value of neutral armies that are randomly assigned would allow for whole new features to be implemented into maps. Imagine a map where three randoms will be dropped into a normal territory map but the values of the random armies are more than 3, if the value was, for example, 99 it would effectively preclude movement through that region and could act as a territory block. Certain maps could use these effects to simulate nuclear weapons being detonated or if the map was a Metro/Rail map it could simulate a random accident along the railways that would prevent users from moving on that designated path. Each drop then effectively would be altered not just by how individuals are dropped on the map, but by how the map operates itself causing the amount of strategy and thinking to see which territories and directions users should plan to head for to change. It would virtually create a moving map.

Also, if the zombie neutrals idea is ever implemented, instead of allowing a neutral deploy on a turn, it could be designated that the neutrals, for example let's assume these are nomadic warriors on a map like Peloponessian War, that could attack but because they are limited groups with limited supplies, would not receive reinforcements and allow them to attack themselves down from an original value assigned by the mapmaker.

**

[trapyoung]

No reply? It's been two weeks, I thought it was an interesting suggestion

[theBastard]

very good topic. was any of ideas here used in XML?

sugestion: auto-deploy conditions

descriptions: we have territory with +1 auto-deploy each turn, but if player holds one special territory (capital, holy place) the territory with +1 auto-deploy will has +2 auto-deploy.

why it should be considered: more possibilities for auto-deploy and balance between manual-deploy and auto-deploy (because there are many options how make manual-deploy higher but no one for auto-deploy).

[MrBenn]

You're right, it would be a great thing to have. Conditional Autodeploy has been at/near the top of my wish list for over a year now

[theBastard]

You're right, it would be a great thing to have. Conditional Autodeploy has been at/near the top of my wish list for over a year now

thanks MrBenn. where is problem? mods did not want it?

off notice, but is any chance that we will have bigger maps? (for example 840 x 800 will be playable?)

[TaCktiX]

You're right, it would be a great thing to have. Conditional Autodeploy has been at/near the top of my wish list for over a year now

thanks MrBenn. where is problem? mods did not want it?

off notice, but is any chance that we will have bigger maps? (for example 840 x 800 will be playable?)

We have had I think 2, maybe 3, XML updates in the last 18 months. Lack, until recently the only programmer, hasn't had the time (relative to other priorities) to code any more than that.

[theBastard]

We have had I think 2, maybe 3, XML updates in the last 18 months. Lack, until recently the only programmer, hasn't had the time (relative to other priorities) to code any more than that.

o.k. hope he it will be done soon.

[theBastard]

sugestion: standard bonus only for start of game

descriptions: when game is set up as auto-deploy units at the start of game players could deploy their standard +3 bonus, but during game the standard bonus will be not valid. only continents bonuses and maybe any number of unts for any nimber of territories.

why it should be considered: this could help from start to maps build on auto-deploy and could give more possibilities of strategy at the start.

[pimphawks70]

I personally won't play any map with a dice adjustment. Terrible idea that ruins the integrity of R*sk.

Sorry I'm a bit late to the party here, but I have to agree. The majority of these suggestions IMO seem to stray too far from the original concept of a certain board game. Not sure if I'm alone here, nor am I trying to belittle the suggestions, but I feel like CC should try and stick (somewhat) to its roots.

[Victor Sullivan]

Suggestion Idea: Random Bonus

Description: A different unknown territory would give you a certain bonus each turn. (Using the Classic map, Manila might give you a +1 bonus one game, and in another game, Johannesburg might give you the +1 bonus) The xml might go as follows:

Code: Select all

<territory>
   <name>Manila</name>
   <borders>
      <border>Hong Kong</border>
      <border>Beijing</border>
      <border>Novosibirsk</border>
      <border>Tokyo</border>
   </borders>
   <coordinates>
      <smallx>198</smallx>
      <smally>189</smally>
      <largex>299</largex>
      <largey>278</largey>
   </coordinates>
   <randombonus="1">1</randombonus>
</territory>


The <randombonus="1"> is for if you want other territories to be in a different random set. (Thus, if a territory were in a different random set it might look like <randombonus="2">1</randombonus>)

Why It Should Be Considered: Would add some interesting aspects, such as having random "capitals", like 1 random capital per map or per continent, or "hidden bonuses". It would allow for a more radically different experience each time you play.

-Sully

[Evil DIMwit]

In my experience with gameplay development, mapmakers contend with two annoying arbitrary restrictions: Having to have a certain number of starting territories so that the first player doesn't get an advantage through the territory bonus; and having to put neutrals or starting positions on small continents so the first player doesn't get an advantage from dropping a bonus. The former problem I've addressed in part but I'll modify it here to be more useful, and the second has a simple solution below.

Suggestion Idea: Minimum Neutrals, v2

Description: Let a single XML tag for the map specify that at least N territories in the map start neutral. The tag can be set to apply only with specific numbers of players. For example, with 48 territories, a deployment problem only occurs in a 4-player game. If you can code it that a 4-player game gets 4 random neutral territories, then you can have a 48-territory map on any of the other player settings.

Why It Should Be Considered: Means that mapmakers no longer have to set specific territories to start as neutrals in order to get a fair number of initial territories. Gives mapmakers that much more control over gameplay.


Suggestion Idea: Nobody-Drops-a-Bonus-Zone

Description: Let the XML define sets of territories such that no player will have the entire set at the start of the game. The sets must be mutually exclusive (and probably exclusive from start positions) and must have more than one member. There is a simple algorithm for ensuring this:

• Produce a random ordering for the K players such that each player occurs once.
• Fill up the no-drop zones one at a time from your list.
• If you reach the end of the K-player sequence, generate a new random sequence of players. If the first player of the current sequence is the same as the last player of the previous sequence, move that player to the end of the current sequence, to ensure that no player is positioned twice in a row.
• If you fill up the no-drop zones completely, randomly distribute the rest of the current player sequence before proceeding with regular territory distribution.
• If you reach the maximum number of player territories -- say, if the entire map was made of no-drop zones -- make the rest of the map neutral (the only caveat with this is that it's likely to leave the last couple of continents entirely neutral; this might be overcome by randomly assigning the neutrals first, and then proceeding with the rest of the distribution).

This algorithm should, for the most part, run in linear time.

Why It Should Be Considered: Means that mapmakers no longer have to set specific territories to start as neutrals in order to prevent players from dropping unbalanced bonuses. Gives mapmakers that much more control over gameplay.

[theBastard]

Suggestion Idea: delimit negative region bonus

Description: now we have negative region bonus (autodeploy) where player lost each turn any number of army. my idea is to do that if player fulfil any condition (hold capital...) he will not lose armies here. but his "enemies" will lost armies here.

Why It Should Be Considered: it could be used to represent civil revolts against foreign forces, it could represent guerilla war. it is about loyality to (capital) owner.

[Victor Sullivan]

Suggestion: Killer Neutrals V2

Description: Killer neutrals reset at the end of one's turn, rather than the beginning of his next. For example, on Lunar War, if the Missile Bases had V2 killer neutrals, I attack and conquer all 17 neutrals on the base to take it over, then go on attack as per usual, but when I finish my turn (click "End Reinforcement"), the base resets back to 17 neutrals.

Why it should be considered: Makes it so that Player B can just go thru the one troop Player A left on the Missile Base (in this scenario), but instead has to go thru all 17 neutrals, just as Player A did. Seems more fair IMO.

-Sully

[Mr_Adams]

Concise description:Program XML to deploy specifically deploy teams

Specifics/Details:
XML should be able to specify starting position for team mates, so that maps can be set up with teams set up even and fairly. (i.e. make position a, b, c and d for team a)

How this will benefit the site and/or other comments:

I would like to make a map (Yes, I know I've tried before and not finished, but I'm going geometric this time. should be much easier ) ANYWAY, there are hundreds of people on here who have gotten really good at playing dubs on specific maps, but there's really no dubs specific map yet. This would make it much easier to come up with maps designed to accommodate teams, but still able to be played in standard/terminator/assassins.

[rdsrds2120]

Concise description:Program XML to deploy specifically deploy teams

Specifics/Details:
XML should be able to specify starting position for team mates, so that maps can be set up with teams set up even and fairly. (i.e. make position a, b, c and d for team a)

How this will benefit the site and/or other comments:

I would like to make a map (Yes, I know I've tried before and not finished, but I'm going geometric this time. should be much easier ) ANYWAY, there are hundreds of people on here who have gotten really good at playing dubs on specific maps, but there's really no dubs specific map yet. This would make it much easier to come up with maps designed to accommodate teams, but still able to be played in standard/terminator/assassins.

Maps oriented around the very idea of team gameplay sounds...interesting. That and this idea would rise at about the same time, if it were to be so. I think that'd be neat.

-rd

[Victor Sullivan]

Please post your XML suggestions here: viewtopic.php?f=127&t=103961

If a mod could merge this topic over there, that'd be fantastic

Cheers,
Sully

[Mr_Adams]

AH SHIZ! An XML thread. I don't do this stuff often =P

[blakebowling]

Please post your XML suggestions here: viewtopic.php?f=127&t=103961

If a mod could merge this topic over there, that'd be fantastic

Cheers,
Sully

I can't merge it into that thread, since I don't have privs there. But I will ship it out to the foundry, someone there should find it.