Page 2 of 2

### Re: Reassessing optimal number of map territories

Posted: Mon Nov 16, 2009 8:03 pm
MrBenn wrote:
benjikat wrote:35 and less (the most you can start with is 11)
42,43,44 - It's no surprise that the many maps with these "classic" numbers of territories are so popular.
52,53 - the best sizes for slightly larger than standard maps
70,71 - the best sizes for large maps
80 - 5 & 6 player games require 2 conquers
88,89 - 4 player games require 2 conquers and 7 players only 1
104 - a great number (what a saddo I am ) - only 8 player games require less than 3 conquers - but still 2 - the best size for a very large map
141,142,143 - 5 player games require only 2 conquers
160 - 4 & 7 player games require only 2 conquers
190,191 - 6 player games require 2 conquers and 7 only 1

I have done some further analysis - the following territory values are optimal for at least 2/3/4/6/8 player games - ensuring that nobody starts with a multiple of 3 on the first turn (therefore requiring a single-territory capture to knock down their opponents deployment). Figures in bold are completely optimal (for ALL games). This list varies slightly from benjikat's original list, as I've used fractionally different criteria to define "optimal" :
35 and less
42,43,44
66,67,68,69
70, 71, 80
88,89
104, 114, 115, 116
138,139
140,141,142,143,160,161
176,177,178,179
186,187,188

215
224
232,233
248,249,250,251
259
260, 283, 284
285,286,287,296,304
305

Nice work guys.
Mr Benn. perhaps this could be included somehow in map gameplay instructions for starters so that we could all beneift from it.
I'll certainly take note, it might cut down ian's work....

### Re: Reassessing optimal number of map territories

Posted: Tue Nov 17, 2009 12:14 pm
cairnswk wrote:Mr Benn. perhaps this could be included somehow in map gameplay instructions for starters so that we could all beneift from it.
I'll certainly take note, it might cut down ian's work....

One step ahead of you there - the analysis was done as part of a gameplay guide we're working on behind the scenes

### Re: Reassessing optimal number of map territories

Posted: Thu Nov 19, 2009 6:29 am
Hmmm

Revised list here - I'd forgotten to take account of the fact that you don;t need to worry about 8 player games until you reach 96 territories - so there are more optimal numbers on the list: [bold - completely optimal; standard - optimal for 2/3/4/6/8 players]

24-35,42,43,44
52,53,57,58,59
66,67,68,69
70,71
,78,79,80, 88,89
104, 114, 115, 116
138,139,140,141,142,143
160,161,176,177,178,179
186,187,188

215,224,232,233
248,249,250,251,259,260
283, 284
,285,286,287
296,304,305
320,321,322,323,330,331,332
354,355,356

### Re: Reassessing optimal number of map territories

Posted: Thu Nov 19, 2009 12:03 pm
Ah, that's much better. The previous one was looking kind of thin.

### Re: Reassessing optimal number of map territories

Posted: Fri Nov 20, 2009 8:11 am
MrBenn wrote:
cairnswk wrote:Mr Benn. perhaps this could be included somehow in map gameplay instructions for starters so that we could all beneift from it.
I'll certainly take note, it might cut down ian's work....

One step ahead of you there - the analysis was done as part of a gameplay guide we're working on behind the scenes

Might I suggest that your behind-the-scenes discussions that go into the guide be preserved and released for public viewing (a locked topic, perhaps) along with the guide? Undoubtedly there will be commentary on the guide and the suggestions and conclusions it contains, and it is often helpful to see the thought processes that led the authors to a certain point. This kind of information can avoid unnecessary rehashing of arguments, and can also provide a jumping off point for new ideas.

### Re: Reassessing optimal number of map territories

Posted: Sat Nov 21, 2009 4:39 am
Most of the bits of the guide have been pulled together from discussion threads such as this one, or from individual posts in map development threads...

### Region distribution

Posted: Sat Nov 21, 2009 6:17 am
This is a spreadsheet I made that might help you to decide the best number of regions to use when creating a map.

Insert the number of regions you want your map to have and get:

-Regions per player
-Starting neutral regions
-Number of starting troops per player

http://kabanellas.webs.com/Kabanellas_Region_Distributor.xls

Have fun and good map making!

K

### Safe numbers of territories

Posted: Thu Feb 18, 2010 7:14 am
I know I've seen them somewhere but I can't seem to find them now, can anyone direct me to the thread or post them here?

### Re: Safe numbers of territories

Posted: Thu Feb 18, 2010 7:21 am
viewtopic.php?f=241&t=105183

24-35, 42, 43, 44, 52, 53, 57, 58, 59, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, (78), (79), 80, (88), (89), 104, 114, 115, 116, (138), (139), 140, 141, 142, 143, 160, 161, 176, 177, 178, 179, 186, 187, 188

### Re: Safe numbers of territories

Posted: Thu Feb 18, 2010 7:26 am
Thanks

### Re: Reassessing optimal number of map territories

Posted: Thu Feb 18, 2010 12:34 pm
[merged]

### Re: Region distribution

Posted: Wed Mar 03, 2010 1:49 pm
Kabanellas wrote:This is a spreadsheet I made that might help you to decide the best number of regions to use when creating a map.

Insert the number of regions you want your map to have and get:

-Regions per player
-Starting neutral regions
-Number of starting troops per player

http://kabanellas.webs.com/Kabanellas_Region_Distributor.xls

Have fun and good map making!

K

This could totally be the wrong place to post this, but i have a question. I started a 2p game on Holy Roman Empire, and thought that we would each get 14 terits, with 14 starting neutral. However, we each got 15 with 12 starting neutral. I came here to confirm against kabanellas' spreadsheet, which also says that we should have gotten 14 each. Game 6562911. I also see the same thing in Austerlitz, Game 6562910 - we each started with 11 terits and as I'm reading it, it should have been 10 terits. I also started a Poison Rome game at the same time and it gave me 14 terits as expected. Any insights?

thanks,
Jake

### Re: Region distribution

Posted: Wed Mar 03, 2010 2:12 pm
jakewilliams wrote:This could totally be the wrong place to post this, but i have a question. I started a 2p game on Holy Roman Empire, and thought that we would each get 14 terits, with 14 starting neutral.

Hello Jake!
"Joe" has an answer for you
Both maps have starting positions, so for example on the HRE map in a 1vs1:
1player => 1 starting positions (5 territories) and 10 "normal" territories = 15
2 player =>1 starting positions (5 territories) and 10 "normal" territories = 15
neutral = 12

(Note:Starting positions are equally splitted and there's no neutral player)

Nobodies - "Joe"

### Re: Region distribution

Posted: Thu Mar 04, 2010 9:46 am
thenobodies80 wrote:
jakewilliams wrote:This could totally be the wrong place to post this, but i have a question. I started a 2p game on Holy Roman Empire, and thought that we would each get 14 terits, with 14 starting neutral.

Hello Jake!
"Joe" has an answer for you
Both maps have starting positions, so for example on the HRE map in a 1vs1:
1player => 1 starting positions (5 territories) and 10 "normal" territories = 15
2 player =>1 starting positions (5 territories) and 10 "normal" territories = 15
neutral = 12

(Note:Starting positions are equally splitted and there's no neutral player)