Conquer Club

To be honest i prefer to see this map binned right now than adding more regions. I can move cities, change neutral values but i will not transform this map in an another medium size boring map.
What i could do is to re-work the gameplay, making all region capitals neutrals at the start, rising the count of starting neutral to 8 (Limassol, Larnaca, Kyrenia, Paphos, Famagusta, Nicosia and the British Military Bases) ; everything else comes in the pot.
The starting regions will be 20 , with 2 regions for 8 players etc etc.
Quick eliminations can be prevented working on neutrals, even if i think that the possibility of being eliminated at the beginning is not greater than when you play on Luxemburg.
If it's better for you i can start to work on this different gameplay schema

Ok this is just my opinion, but I never quite understood why did you suddenly decide to make this into a conquest map... personally I think the map was doing fine with random drop.

There's just so much mixing of concepts here: you have a small sized conquest map (starting positions) with the bonus system of a standard map (bonus regions) which is going to make the gameplay extremely difficult to balance. It seems to me that the smaller the map, the more important it is to balance the starting assets of all players.

If you really want to pursue this concept, the only feasible solution I can think of right now is minimizing the differences between bonus areas, so that each starting point has approximately equal chances of both taking and holding a bonus.

Ok this is just my opinion, but I never quite understood why did you suddenly decide to make this into a conquest map... personally I think the map was doing fine with random drop.

I think there are aspects about what you have done that are solid and others that are uneeded. I'm not entirely sure what "conquest map" specifically refers too but I'm asumeing that it has to do with starting locations and everything else be neutral. If so I agree with Natty. You could keep the victory condition, and lose that start locations in favor of random placment. I think that would make it a little more focused and would iron out the problem of unfair placement.

Ok, i'll post an update with a random drop asap
What values do you think are good for the 8 neutrals? (Limassol, Larnaca, Kyrenia, Paphos, Famagusta, Nicosia and the British Military Bases)

I thought about 2 for the BMB, 4 for regions capitals (Limassol, Larnaca, Kyrenia, Paphos, Famagusta) and 5 for Nicosia. Everything else start random with 3 troops.
Sounds good?

ps. Maybe Famagusta with 3 instead of 4 because, like evil dimwit said, it's harder to take?

Yes, I suppose making this map not be conquer style is another solution.

Famagusta is harder to start with than Limassol or Paphos or Kyrenia, because it's not part of a small bonus region. So I suppose it would make sense if Famagusta and Lanarca both started with slightly fewer neutrals.

Changes:

• No conquest
• District Capitals start neutral, Kyrenia, Paphos and Limassol start with 4, Larnaca and Famagusta start with 3, Nicosia start with 5
• Factions Bonus, greek bonus requires 6 cities and turkish bonus requires 5 cities
• District Bonuses, Famagusta 4 and Nicosia 7

I don't get it - where are the cities?

now map looks very clear. maybe you could accentuate the capitals? (with small flags or any icon or another colour of font)...

Yeah... where are the cities?

All small details (like cities) will be added in the graphics workshop, for now graphics (and an open mind) are good enough to understand how the map will work imo.
Please try to focus on gameplay for now

I don't understand how the map works then. Are each territory supposed to have a city on it and is that how the bonus works?

I'm not trying to be nit picky about the graphics, I just don't honestly understand were the cities are to get the bonus.

So I guess it'll be less confusing to call the "cities" territories. This is, I believe, the standard usage and rightfully so, since by using another term you're impyling there is another sort of object (roghly, a special or "decorated" subset of territories), while there isn't.

Keep up the good work!

thenobodies80 wrote:All small details (like cities) will be added in the graphics workshop, for now graphics (and an open mind) are good enough to understand how the map will work imo.
Please try to focus on gameplay for now

Ah, so the territories ARE the cities... I gotcha.

I've replaced the word "cities" with "territories"

thenobodies80 wrote:I've replaced the word "cities" with "territories"

Click image to enlarge.

sorry, you did not...

CTRL+F5, refresh your cache

I have it . but why so complicated?

Oh i've accidentally uploaded the image with the same name used with the previous version and i'm so lazy with this sultriness

thenobodies80 wrote:Oh i've accidentally uploaded the image with the same name used with the previous version and i'm so lazy with this sultriness

Any other comments on gameplay?

I looked hard at the bonuses and they seem spot on. No revisions there I think.

The Game Objective seems silly to me. Essentially you're asking a player to hold all but three territories to win the game. It seems pointless to me to even have a Game Objective.

Why not make the game objective something daring, something almost easy to obtain so that a player must have the game objective firmly in mind every time he takes a turn. Something crazy like "Hold any two Turkish or two Greek districts to achieve victory." Then players have to move fast and always think of whether a player can achieve that. Most victory conditions, it appears to me, are worthless as byt the time a player has gained them the game mights as well be over.

Or just make it standard gameplay, which would work wonderfully.

Industrial Helix wrote:Most victory conditions, it appears to me, are worthless as byt the time a player has gained them the game mights as well be over.

AoR2: Not really
Europe 1914: No
Feudal War, Epic: Yes
Holy Roman Empire: Yes
Oasis: Hell no
Peloponnesian War: Yes
Route 66: Yes
Third Crusade: No
Das Schloss: Yes
Monsters: Probably yes.
Unification Germany/Italy: You'd know better than me.
Gazala, Austerlitz, City Mogul: Haven't played/only played Assassin

Well, you've got a point. And I agree that there's really no need to include a victory condition this demanding in Cyprus.


Also, Famagusta District's bonus should be at most 3. Possibly 2; it does include 5 territories on the Turkish side.
Nicosia District likewise includes 6 territories on the Greek side but it's so large and central that no one's likely to hold it anyway unless they're very much winning.

Industrial Helix wrote:The Game Objective seems silly to me. Essentially you're asking a player to hold all but three territories to win the game. It seems pointless to me to even have a Game Objective.

Evil DIMwit wrote:Well, you've got a point. And I agree that there's really no need to include a victory condition this demanding in Cyprus.

True. i'll remove the objectives.

Evil DIMwit wrote:Famagusta District's bonus should be at most 3. Possibly 2; it does include 5 territories on the Turkish side.
Nicosia District likewise includes 6 territories on the Greek side but it's so large and central that no one's likely to hold it anyway unless they're very much winning.

I'll change Famagusta to +2 (+3 with the turkish bonus)
About nicosia district i don't see problems leaving it as it is now and moreover, like you said, it's not an easy target.
I'll post an uupdate asap.

Nobodies

Changes:

• Famagusta reduced to +2
• Objectives removed

Nicosia is no more a key region, i want to leave it neutral but 5 neutral troops seem a bit too much now. Maybe decreasing to 3 or 4? It could help also to make more accessible the nicosia district bonus, i think...

Perhaps neutral 2 like the British bonuses? If not, then I'd favor 3.