[Vacation valid till Nov. 2013] -Alamo map

[generalhead]

added officer insiginias
changed legends
fixed ladder shadows

Click image to enlarge.

need to move hold 5 officers to win
need to move chapel, hospital and convent yard in legend
Are the targets good to show what region the cannons shoot at or should it be something different?
forgot to move highlights in legend to the name; chapel, hospital and convent yard.

[koontz1973]

GH, going to get you pissed at me, but I think these will help you towards the GP stamp later on.

You have too many ranks now. Generals can stay at four stars, troops 3,2,1 stars, but turn all of the other troops that have different ranks into 1 or 2 stars only. This is for clarity.
Remove all targets for the cannons. You do not need them now. Use the coloured glow you have going round the cannons inside the complete region it can attack. You have a lot of symbols and on a map like this one, they are not needed.
I think the ladders need to be two way now. With the new conditions of getting in and out of the Alamo, some new ways need to be added so you do not get bottlenecks.
Cannons are very powerful, raise them to ten neutrals I would think.

Santa Anna looks very nice now.

[cairnswk]

GH, going to get you pissed at me, but I think these will help you towards the GP stamp later on.

You have too many ranks now. Generals can stay at four stars, troops 3,2,1 stars, but turn all of the other troops that have different ranks into 1 or 2 stars only. This is for clarity.
Remove all targets for the cannons. You do not need them now. Use the coloured glow you have going round the cannons inside the complete region it can attack. You have a lot of symbols and on a map like this one, they are not needed.
I think the ladders need to be two way now. With the new conditions of getting in and out of the Alamo, some new ways need to be added so you do not get bottlenecks.
Cannons are very powerful, raise them to ten neutrals I would think.

Santa Anna looks very nice now.

GH...i have ben watching this deveopment, and knew it was popular...i had started something in 3D towards it, but glad someone else got to do it as i wanted to concentrate on my current MaP.
i agree with koontz about there being too many stars, but
i don't agree about removing the targets...keeping target symbols are almost standard indication for cannon-fodder....perhaps they would look better made smaller however.
I also disagree about colour glow for the target areas...they are unnecessary if you keep the target symbols.
Also consider as you draw...if this is the large version (as i haven't read thru previous pages) about keeping the detail of the humans on the small - space is required to make them decent.
Yes ladders need some direction indicators as do the "bridges" i think they are (i.e. Bell to Prez)
i like the style and sure you'll do well with this.

[koontz1973]

cairns is right, shrink the targets.

[generalhead]

GH, going to get you pissed at me, but I think these will help you towards the GP stamp later on.

I would never get pissed at you because every time you tell me something my map gets better.

You have too many ranks now. Generals can stay at four stars, troops 3,2,1 stars, but turn all of the other troops that have different ranks into 1 or 2 stars only. This is for clarity.

I agree 100%. I was wondering this myself. Especially in the legend it looks a little cluttered with all the different insignia

I think the ladders need to be two way now. With the new conditions of getting in and out of the Alamo, some new ways need to be added so you do not get bottlenecks.

Yes sir

Cannons are very powerful, raise them to ten neutrals I would think.

Yes sir

Santa Anna looks very nice now.

Thank you

[generalhead]

GH...i have ben watching this deveopment, and knew it was popular...i had started something in 3D towards it, but glad someone else got to do it as i wanted to concentrate on my current MaP.

Thank you for watching and commenting on this. I was wondering with all of your exp. how this would fair with you.

i agree with koontz about there being too many stars,

yes sir

i don't agree about removing the targets...keeping target symbols are almost standard indication for cannon-fodder....perhaps they would look better made smaller however.

note taken

I also disagree about colour glow for the target areas...they are unnecessary if you keep the target symbols.

note taken

Also consider as you draw...if this is the large version (as i haven't read thru previous pages) about keeping the detail of the humans on the small - space is required to make them decent.

This is the large version. I found that out with trying to shrink some of the other versions of officers that I had. They looked ok big but shrunk down they looked bad. I haven't tried a small version yet to see what they would look like.

ladders need some direction indicators as do the "bridges" i think they are (i.e. Bell to Prez)
i like the style and sure you'll do well with this.

You mean directional arrows on the map. If they are attack both ways I should still install them?

[cairnswk]

... If they are attack both ways I should still install them?

no of course, only for one -way

[generalhead]

... If they are attack both ways I should still install them?

no of course, only for one -way

Thank you sir.

[tkr4lf]

I definitely disagree about the ladders being two way....they should stay as one way attacks into the Alamo. When an army is attacking a fort, and puts up ladders against the wall, do the defenders start coming down the ladder to attack the attackers? No, the attackers come over the ladder into the fort. They give the Mexican Army an advantage over the Alamo defenders, which they should have, given how superior the Mexican force was compared to the Texian force.

I personally do not agree with making the cannons such a high neutral. Making them that high will make it pretty late in the game before they are even in use, while they should be an integral part of the attacking/defending force. I also think you should add the targets back onto the ladder territories, it makes a nice counterweight to the advantage that the ladders give to the Mexicans. It makes an easyish way to stop them coming over the walls.

Graphics...well, there are plenty of people commenting on that, and I don't really have much to add, so I'll stay silent on that issue.

I do have to ask how the bonuses work now. The bottom legend is a bit confusing, to me at least, as to how the bonuses work. Could you explain it to me?

Still looking good, gh. I'm glad to see you continuing to work on it, it will be a blast to get to play on this one day!

[generalhead]

I definitely disagree about the ladders being two way....they should stay as one way attacks into the Alamo. When an army is attacking a fort, and puts up ladders against the wall, do the defenders start coming down the ladder to attack the attackers? No, the attackers come over the ladder into the fort. They give the Mexican Army an advantage over the Alamo defenders, which they should have, given how superior the Mexican force was compared to the Texian force.

That is a good point. I will post the ladders as attacking both ways this time and give the game play people a chance to look at it and then see about changing it back in the next version.

I personally do not agree with making the cannons such a high neutral. Making them that high will make it pretty late in the game before they are even in use, while they should be an integral part of the attacking/defending force. I also think you should add the targets back onto the ladder territories, it makes a nice counterweight to the advantage that the ladders give to the Mexicans. It makes an easyish way to stop them coming over the walls.

that is a good point. Maybe I will try five and see where that goes. The canons will be pretty powerful now since they can attack a whole region, but they are killer neutral. I will need some more opinions on where to set this at.

Graphics...well, there are plenty of people commenting on that, and I don't really have much to add, so I'll stay silent on that issue.

If you see something I know you will let me know

I do have to ask how the bonuses work now. The bottom legend is a bit confusing, to me at least, as to how the bonuses work. Could you explain it to me?

The next version will be a lot easier to understand

Still looking good, gh. I'm glad to see you continuing to work on it, it will be a blast to get to play on this one day!

We will play on it together my friend

[generalhead]

Lessened the insignia
Moved legend items around
made the targets smaller
realigned some of the insignia

Click image to enlarge.

Please comment on whether the ladders should be one way attacks into the Alamo or two way attacks.
please comment on neutral amounts for the cannons.
please comment on whether the targets should be even smaller.
Should I make Santa Anna have gray/ white hair so he looks older?
I might have to move some of the items in the territories to fit the numbers.
Is the game play in the legend understandable?
some of my targets look different sizes.
How do the generals look as far as graphics?

[koontz1973]

Please comment on whether the ladders should be one way attacks into the Alamo or two way attacks.

As per my previous request, without the two way, the Alamo is going to become a bottle next. The left/top Mexican army has only two ways in and out of the Alamo.

please comment on neutral amounts for the cannons.

As before, they are now very powerful so need to be high.
With the ladders and the neutrals, I would agree to a smaller neutral (5) if they could not attack the generals. You still have the ability to destroy every bonus and eliminate a player with them but the attacking of the generals seems to much if you lower the neutrals.

please comment on whether the targets should be even smaller.

targets are good. now leave.

Should I make Santa Anna have gray/ white hair so he looks older?

leave alone.

Is the game play in the legend understandable?

Yes, but you need to explain the other stars now. Why have 3,2,1 stars if you are not going to explain them.

some of my targets look different sizes.

When ever you redo an element like them, work of one only. You need to delete all of hte others and then redo glows. This will mean each is the same.

[tkr4lf]

Please comment on whether the ladders should be one way attacks into the Alamo or two way attacks.

As per my previous request, without the two way, the Alamo is going to become a bottle next. The left/top Mexican army has only two ways in and out of the Alamo.

In my opinion, it should be a bottleneck. It's a fort. Forts are meant to only have a couple/few ways in and out, that's what makes them so easy to defend, and that is their purpose. I understand gameplay trumps reality, but bottlenecks are not necessarily a bad thing in gameplay. If you look at the map, the northern Mexican army has 2 ways into the Alamo, the Eastern part has 2 ways in, and the South/SouthEast part has 2 ways in. That seems fair to me.

Yes, it will make it harder to get out of the alamo as the Texians, but it should be that way. The Mexican army should have some sort of advantage over the Texian army, otherwise it destroys the theme of this map. If they are both even in forces, then it may make for slightly better gameplay, but it will completely distort the reality of the situation.

In my opinion, we can have our cake and eat it too. Gameplay will still be good I think the way it is, with the ladders being one way attacks and only having a few ways out of the Alamo, and it will still be realistic.

My 2 cents.

please comment on neutral amounts for the cannons.

As before, they are now very powerful so need to be high.
With the ladders and the neutrals, I would agree to a smaller neutral (5) if they could not attack the generals. You still have the ability to destroy every bonus and eliminate a player with them but the attacking of the generals seems to much if you lower the neutrals.

This seems like a reasonable compromise if the cannons are now bombarding the whole region that there target is in. I was under the impression that they still only bombed the territ that the target was in, not the entire region. If they do bomb the entire region, then a higher neutral is necessary, but 10 is still too high I think. If they can bomb the entire region except the commander, then maybe a 5 would work.

If gh goes back to having just 1 or 2 terits that each cannon can bombard with a target denoting the bombable terit (which in my opinion is the preferable solution), then I would think a neutral 2 would work just fine.





On a separate note, has it been discussed what the generals will start out as? I know they start neutral, but what number? Two, five? Somewhere in between?

[koontz1973]

The generals IMO should be 4 or 5 neutrals at least. Low enough for someone to grab early in a game but not so low as they can be taken round 1 and held. This was a problem with RD. First person in a 1v1 game that got one, won the game. You will have the same problem with this map.

About the Alamo ladders, I understand tks thoughts on the theme and that it should in a sense be an advantage to the Mexicans but the problem is random drops. If someone drops most troops in the Mexican army, they have the advantage to win the game. This must be eliminated.
But I will leave the final word on this to nole or ian.

[tkr4lf]

Perhaps something could be done to minimize the chance of that happening?

Or perhaps random drops could be eliminated altogether? I don't think this was the plan, and I don't know how it would work out, but there are 8 commanders...what if everybody was randomly assigned one of the commanders and that was it? Balancing would have to be done, otherwise there would be a massive disadvantage to starting in the Alamo, but maybe it could be cool? I dunno. I'm not advocating this, just throwing the idea out there.

Surely something can be done to prevent people from gaining an unfair advantage gameplay wise while still maintaining the theme.