Conquer Club

danfrank wrote:

I would have to agree. This could easily lead to those bad game chat threads that you mods all love.

Don't worry, by the time this map gets quenched the revolt will have been 1-2 years old.

Does someone think this is a bad idea or something?

Industrial Helix wrote:Does someone think this is a bad idea or something?

Benn & Nobodies are really busy lately. Patience...

-Bump-

I might be a little late, but this this is awesome idea. Love the look, the idea and the size. Will be back with a suggestion or two once I can look over map/thread more and think on it. Greatjob IH

Hello, I am new to the foundry (posting on a new map) but from what I have seen I like the map and the idea behind it, can't wait to see where this map goes

Come. On.

Oh dear... if only there was someone who could spend his time sorting out the threads in drafting room

natty_dread wrote:Oh dear... if only there was someone who could spend his time sorting out the threads in drafting room

Just for the record, I'm costantly keeping an eye on this thread.
The reason because it is still here is another and I do NOT have voice in that.

It's not so funny for me to read your post after that I've spent half of my Sunday on this subforum and moreover you well know I don't let a day goes by without giving at least a look at the Drafting Room.

Anyway, Helix be patient, I'll move this one asap.

Nobodies

Well, in the meantime, I don't see why we should wait for a stamp to continue discussing the map. Give nobodies and MrBenn a break, I'm sure they've got a lot on their hands.

1. The Egyptian Army seems hardly worth going for - it's broken up and has seven territories! I think at least a +5 is warranted here.
2. Anti-Government doesn't seem much different from Pro-Government in structure - I say either raise them both to +3 or down to +2.
3. I originally had my doubts about the Government Building bonus, but I think it's good. It helps to avoid dropped bonuses and it plays a more minor role (which it should).

-Sully

Well, I dont want the bonuses to be even. The anti-gov people won, their bonus should lead to swifter victory. That's why they're uneven.

Industrial Helix wrote:Well, I dont want the bonuses to be even. The anti-gov people won, their bonus should lead to swifter victory. That's why they're uneven.

But the army...? Mubarak didn't use them to their full potential, I think they could have wiped out a lot of people...

Thanks!

Yeah, i guess you're right about the army... I can be happy with 5.

Any other gameplay concerns?

I'll look at this one tomorrow. Sorry for the delays everyone has been experiencing.

I have to say that I like the graphics and general layout. A small map makes this a desperate, short battle, so good choice there too.

Unfortunately I've also got a few bones to pick here:

(1) OK, you'll probably hate me Helix for saying this but... your concept here is in direct conflict with what I percieve as balanced gameplay. The idea that the side that 'won' (for however long that may or may not last) should be the best bonus to both have and be the easiest to hold and be the easiest to take is well... let's just say that using "Australia" in the Classic map as a precedent is not a convincing argument for me. Australia in Classic is not so much famous as it is notorious. And it's rare to see arguments that state that it actually enhances the gameplay of the map (most often I see it defended as being a non-detriment).

Really, it's okay for a bonus to payoff better than others, but then that could be balanced by having it harder to hold. Or, it could be harder to take (like starting with neutrals for instance). But the trifecta of rich, defensible and easy is anaethema. Add to this that the map also has its version of "Asia" in the Army bonus, and It will be dubbed the "Pray-You-Drop-in-the-Rebel-Bonus Map".

(2) The dead-ends are ubiquitous for such a small map. A small number of regions does not have to translate to a small number of strategic options, unless you have a lot of dead ends. I'd pity the player who dropped the State Television HQ and Lower Kornish regions in the upper part of the map, as they would have only one option: to attack the Security Forces Base, which is a relatively useless region in a nearly impossible bonus. A similarly one-dimensional (albeit more attractive) attack route would exist for a player who dropped in the lower half. These kinds of drops are much more likely too, since you've only got 20 regions. Which brings me to my last concern...

(3) The number of regions may not mesh well with the layout of map for larger numbers of players. Dropping just 2 regions in a map filled with dead ends and unevenly balanced bonuses makes this even more of a slot machine experience than other maps of similar size. Might I suggest that dropping 3 regions would make a huge difference?

-- Marshal Ney

1 and 2) I see what you're saying. the Rebels are easy to hold, pay off bigger and are easily defensible. Being one or maybe two of those is desirable, but I'm going overkill here. So what I've done is removed some of the barricades and altered some of the borders... I've noticed maybe two dead ends, State tv and the Parliament Building.

3) I'd be hard pressed to fit 6 more regions in there without making stuff up... i've already made too much up, imo. Yes, the map is going to be a little difficult on 7 and 8 player settings, but with 6, a player will get 3 regions and 2-5 players should be a really fun map to play. I argue that the map would be no worse off that Doodle or Lux. when it comes to 7-8 players.

I'd argue that we should learn from the weaknesses of prior maps.

You wouldn't need to make things up, just divide up the larger territories a bit. Tahrir sq. in 2-4 territories, some of the longer roads in 2.

I have a gameplay clarity suggestion:

The government buildings and Egyptian army are both kinda hard to distinguish from the background. All the other areas are coloured, which makes a nice contrast to the black and white background, but those two are also grey so they are hard to see against the background. I suggest changing the colour of those areas to make them more noticeable.

Riskismy - Well, I want to make this a small map. I would hardly call Doodle Earth a mistake as well, so I'm running on the that precedent. Marshal had some good points about too many dead ends... so I've fixed that. I could open it up potentially more though if necessary.

Natty - Well... I'm trying to run along the lines of the Egyptian flag, red, black, white and gold. The army seems to differentiate just fine, imo. Maybe the gov't buildings are a little tough... but then again, they all have that white line and the texture difference is played down quite a bit by the color over it. Not to mention, the territories all have numbers and names on them. There's quite a bit pointing to what the shape of the territory. Overall, i think it is quite clear that they are separate from the non-playable part of the map.

I'm get the idea of following the flag colours, and it would work if those colours wouldn't mix up with the background so easily.

Yes, of course you can tell where territories are by numbers, but having territories that are so hard to see makes the map hard to read overall. I mean, you can't grasp the shape of the map with a glance, you have to spend that extra time finding the army numbers, which makes it sort of unfriendly to the players.

Playing the egypt theme with the flag colours is all well and good, but may I remind you of the most important gameplay guideline: function trumps form...

Now you're saying that the army area differentiates just fine... sorry, but I beg to differ here. It has exactly the same saturation, level of focus and tone as the background. If it weren't for the white borders, it would be indistinguishable from the river. Heck, I just now found the Al Gezara territory - earlier I mistook it as part of the background...

The goverment buildings are only slightly better... they get lost in between the houses/buildings, being of the same tone.

Now, there are some options on how to solve this. Firstly, you could make the background darker and the Egypt army territories lighter, so that there would be a clear light/dark contrast between playable/non-playable areas. Or, you could blur out the non-playable area, to raise the playable area into focus... but this would lose a lot of detail and realistic feel of the map... the third option would be to change the Egypt army & Goverment areas so that they would be different shades of yellow and red. You would still be using flag colours, just not all of them...

Well, that's my 2 cents... you're doing a good job with the map, I'm sure you'll figure out a way to improve playability while maintaining a strong thematic consistency.

Industrial Helix wrote:Riskismy - Well, I want to make this a small map. I would hardly call Doodle Earth a mistake as well, so I'm running on the that precedent. Marshal had some good points about too many dead ends... so I've fixed that. I could open it up potentially more though if necessary.

I didn't say anything about mistake. I said doodle earth had weaknesses, and those are far from the same. I haven't yet seen a map without weaknesses to some extend.

I know lots of people like the constricted, 'tight corners' feel to the map, and it's not without allure to me, but I nearly always feel too cramped. I guess that's just my personal preferences shining through, when I ask you to open it up. It's fine that you disregard that request, there's plenty of room for niche maps (no offence meant!). I hope myself to put some niche maps out there in good time.

Yay, a thousand times better Helix

I'm seeing better attack routes, more options, better balance here.

My only preference (if you can cook something up) would be to also do something about that "Asia" bonus of 6 contiguous regions and a split-off region; when you think about it, that's over a third of the entire map! That might be an unpredcendented proportion of total regions for a bonus continent, but that's just a guess.

Anyway, it's just a wish, so don't tear your hair out over it, but look into it if you can as I think it would improve the map's gameplay. Maybe a build-a-bonus similar to the government buildings (but slower)? Hmmm, the number 7 isn't quite ideal here... if there were 8, it would be nice to maybe say +2 for any 4, that way it would still be +4 for holding the entire set of 8 regions.

As for adding regions, well... I certainly wouldn't stop you if you could add a couple, but by eliminating some of the dead ends and evening the bonuses a bit, it isn't critical.

-- Marshal Ney

I was think a build a bonus system might be better as well. This could go two ways:

1)(my preferred choice) Build a bonus with a common piece of the Security Forces Base. Hold Security forces with the two bridges and Al Gazara for +2, Hold Security forces base with the Courtyard and the two Kornish Al Nil pieces for +2. Total value +4. I would do this with a black and dark gray.

2) Hold any 4 for +2, all 7 for +4.

Thoughts?

Ok, because nobody cares to look at anything but an updated map, here's what I went with for the Army bonus for simplicity's sake.

No need to get your bickers in a twist, dear...

Looks good, though I think Anti-Gov't is equally attainable as Pro-Gov't now, correct? Seems they should have equal bonus.