Conquer Club

original image:



Click here for small version of the map.

51 territories, 6 bonus 'continents' (colors). If you played Chinese Checkers as a kid, you'll remember that each player started in a colored triangle and moved across the neutral area of the board to take over the triangle across from the you. (note: original suggestion was to start all white territories as neutral) To reflect that, I'm toying with the idea of giving a significant bonus if you can run a contiguous string of territories through the center of the map, connecting two opposing colors.

Let me know what you think about playability, graphics, how easy it is to read, etc. I'm thinking the triangles should be worth more than three - three armies is nothing on a board with so many territories to begin with.

The board is my own creation. The images I pulled from http://www.orientgallery.org - I'd still like to come up with my own graphics, so if these aren't public domain I'll replace them.

Decent. Maybe add a bonus to white, since it seems so important

Really interesting idea. I agree that white should have a bonus as well. I think this would make a great map. Very different from the other maps which is a good thing.

I like it.. I don't see a point to white having a bonus, as happysadfun suggested.. I can't see anyone capturing and holding all of it, unless there was maybe one enemy left in only one of the triangles..

You could name them like G-1 G-2 G-3, P-1 P-2 P-3. O-1 O-2 O-3, etc.
I could continue the A, B, C, D sort of thing too.. Like G-A, G-B.. you know what i'm getting at..
and the neutral or white area could go with N-A, W-A, N-1, W-1, or just A as it seems to already be going..

no i think the white should stay neutral so that it encourages keeping your own continents. Love this map it is brilliant.

i guess since white is so big it would be too hard to hold. You would have to give it a massive bonus. I guess its ok to leave it neutral. It does make more sense.

sweet, I like it and I''d play on it

Hate to burst your bubble, its a cool idea and all, but last i checked Lack hasn't added a means of forcing neutral territories, so they will start with player's armies on them

no, not neutral persay, but there just isnt a bonus for the area if im understanding it correctly. That would work. I dont understand how it couldnt.

cowshrptrn wrote:Hate to burst your bubble, its a cool idea and all, but last i checked Lack hasn't added a means of forcing neutral territories, so they will start with player's armies on them

Right... ideally I would like to see the center of the board start all neutral, as per the board game. This is my first stab at this, so I don't know what limits I'm working under. Thanks for the warning.

if you can make the white area neutral in the beginning, you could give the seven territories in the middle of the white area a rather large bonus for holding it, this'll give players encouragement to break into the neutrel area.

Neutral areas can't be predetermined unfortunately.


--Andy

glee wrote:if you can make the white area neutral in the beginning, you could give the seven territories in the middle of the white area a rather large bonus for holding it, this'll give players encouragement to break into the neutrel area.

How's this glee: you receive a bonus for having a contiguous path through the center connecting two color triangles. This approximates the idea of chinese checkers in which the idea is to make a path across the board, and gives incentive for driving into the center of the board. This should be easy enough to code.

I really like this map. My only concern is the names. I think it would be very easy to deploy or fortify on the wrong territory. I don't have a solution to this problem though, so it may just have to stay as is.

I like your map, I think it would be a unique board to play. Although I think the color names is suitable - maybe you can use part of the chinese zodiac for continents names.
~icettee

icettee wrote:I like your map, I think it would be a unique board to play. Although I think the color names is suitable - maybe you can use part of the chinese zodiac for continents names.
~icettee

I'm thinking that there will be enough room for error using colors - giving each triangle an arbitrary name might lead to futher confusion.

I love, however, the zodiac idea - I can imagine an entire zodiac map, in which you fight from star to star to control a zodiac constellation. The map draws itself... in fact, here it is:

oaktown wrote:How's this glee: you receive a bonus for having a contiguous path through the center connecting two color triangles. This approximates the idea of chinese checkers in which the idea is to make a path across the board, and gives incentive for driving into the center of the board. This should be easy enough to code.

If you only consider paths through the center you already have 16 possibilities for each of the 3 opposing colours. So you already need 44 things to code for (3x 16 - 4 diagonals which are paths for 2 crossings) (which could off course be done). But is will be more difficult if you only want 1 times a bonus for each crossing over. If you have 1 possibility (so 5 countries), you can get a 2nd possibility by only conquering 1 other country. If you code all posibilities seperate you get twice a bonus. And I don't think you mean to have this.
I should be possible to avoid this somehow, but I think the coding will get very complicated.
Maybe a good idea to just make 1 or 2 paths for each crossing which give a bonus (for example S-F-A-B-I and R-E-A-C-J for orange-blue and the same pattern for the other 2 crossings).

You wrote:Input needed

And now you know how I feel.

The map is good, but the black background may be a bad idea.

Forza AZ wrote:If you have 1 possibility (so 5 countries), you can get a 2nd possibility by only conquering 1 other country. If you code all posibilities seperate you get twice a bonus. And I don't think you mean to have this.
I should be possible to avoid this somehow, but I think the coding will get very complicated.
Maybe a good idea to just make 1 or 2 paths for each crossing which give a bonus (for example S-F-A-B-I and R-E-A-C-J for orange-blue and the same pattern for the other 2 crossings).

Agreed - I could solve the problem the way it was solved in the US Apocalypse map, by giving bonuses then taking away, but this will be confusing during game play. I'll think on it.

happysadfun wrote:The map is good, but the black background may be a bad idea.

Thanks - this is easy enough to fix. I'll come up with some alternatives and post them this weekend.

Changes to this map based on feedback... let me know if I'm going in the right direction.

1. Black background gone... not sold on this background, but it does make the entire board feel lighter.

2. Moved circles B, D, C, E, F, G to create attack routes from the center of the traingles... corner spaces looked too important. This may also make center attack routes more viable during game play.

3. Increased territory bonus to four... three seems like nothing on a map with over 50 territories.

4. Added a +4 bonus for controlling opposite triangles (eg. Red and Green)... this encourages center attacks and controlling fortification route through center, and may relieve the need to giving a bonus for the center spaces.

I quite like the new background, it does brighten the map up significantly. I'm not sure about +4 for holding opposite triangles though, that seems a bit high to me.

Sorry if this has been brought up before, but since all triangles are the sam bonus, instead of putting the what each one is worth, consider putting "+4 per triangle." Also, the background seems a bit off to me, could you try to put some sort of radial gradiant, so that it is a bit lighter around the actual map area. The colour is good though.
I also agree with keyogi that +4 for opposite triangles is a bit high. Maybe 2?

looking good but one bit of advice. There will probably be loads of suggestions but i just think you should keep it simple. Listen to what everyone says but do not have everything people suggest on one map otherwise it will all look bad.

boberz wrote:Listen to what everyone says but do not have everything people suggest on one map otherwise it will all look bad.

thanx - the map has actually gotten cleaner as more people weigh in. I've chucked the ideas of areas starting neutral, bonuses for white, bad colors, etc. More than anything I want the map to be clean and clear, or else it isn't playable. I'm losing a game in africa right now because I didn't pick up a border between two countries - crap like that turns me off from a map.

+4 too high for opposing color bonus: check.
triangle bonus key is redundant: check.
radial gradiant: I'll play with it.

thanks to everybody who takes the time to post feedback.

the "glow" from the armie shades annoy me u mind making them solid?