Conquer Club

chipv wrote:

Brutal Assassin wrote:Just something of note - With Archers/Catapults only being able to assault like tiles, I ended up stuck in a scenario where I had around 30 troops which were stranded with no way of winning. All I could do was attack around the map in a circle. Being an honorable player, I opted to not suicide on someone, but really that is the only option I have that would impact the game. Otherwise I'm just stuck making men waiting for someone to kill me since there is no way to expand outward.

Game: http://www.conquerclub.com/game.php?game=8271553

This is part of the strategy of the map. Obviously avoid getting into this scenario whilst trying to get your opponent into it for example.

Just making sure it was intentional. Accidentally reinforced an archer unit without realizing that it was a loop and essentially stranded my entire army -_-

Does this mean we are close to getting this out of Beta?

It's ready to go, up to MrB now

8 castles for 2 players... well that screw the map big time, congrats to the incompetent players that wanted that change to be returned.

P.S. Can someone tell me how can second player win one vs one game?

chipv wrote:LIVE CHANGE

Reverted to old starting positions - 1 on the Noble, 2 on the Castle. Unassigned is 3 on Noble, 8 on Castle as before

I agree with this chip.

GoranZ wrote:8 castles for 2 players... well that screw the map big time, congrats to the incompetent players that wanted that change to be returned.

P.S. Can someone tell me how can second player win one vs one game?

It is possible, having played this a number of times there are ways to win playing second, although if you're playing the top 3 on this map
it would be difficult.

chipv wrote:

GoranZ wrote:8 castles for 2 players... well that screw the map big time, congrats to the incompetent players that wanted that change to be returned.

P.S. Can someone tell me how can second player win one vs one game?

It is possible, having played this a number of times there are ways to win playing second, although if you're playing the top 3 on this map
it would be difficult.

it is only possible and difficult if I play agents noob or if the other player decides to make deliberate mistake. where is the fun in that?

I played a game now and one of my castles was over run in round 3(that give we whole 2 rounds to expand and defend).

what I want to say is... I CANT WIN IF A PLAYER WITH SIMILAR SKILLS AS ME PLAYS FIRST, AND IF I'M FIRST TOP 3 CAN ONLY WATCH AS I TAKE THEIR POINTS AND THAT WONT BE BECAUSE THEY ARE WEAK

P.S. plz don't destroy such a beautify designed map. ty in front

GoranZ wrote:

chipv wrote:

GoranZ wrote:8 castles for 2 players... well that screw the map big time, congrats to the incompetent players that wanted that change to be returned.

P.S. Can someone tell me how can second player win one vs one game?

It is possible, having played this a number of times there are ways to win playing second, although if you're playing the top 3 on this map
it would be difficult.

it is only possible and difficult if I play agents noob or if the other player decides to make deliberate mistake. where is the fun in that?

I played a game now and one of my castles was over run in round 3(that give we whole 2 rounds to expand and defend).

what I want to say is... I CANT WIN IF A PLAYER WITH SIMILAR SKILLS AS ME PLAYS FIRST, AND IF I'M FIRST TOP 3 CAN ONLY WATCH AS I TAKE THEIR POINTS AND THAT WONT BE BECAUSE THEY ARE WEAK

he's right

I'm investigating a change at the moment, I'm not willing to release this from BETA until this investigation is complete.

Basically I want to see if we can get a mechanism to force 1 castle per player for all settings.

GoranZ wrote:8 castles for 2 players... well that screw the map big time, congrats to the incompetent players that wanted that change to be returned.

P.S. Can someone tell me how can second player win one vs one game?

Then I must be one of those incompetent players

....the thing is that though it worked better for 1v1, the last settings worked definitly worst for all the others settings. We just wouldn't want that.

If chip manages to do what is intending to, and limits the starting positions to 1 Castle (and Noble) per player the issue with 1v1 will be solved .... And we a
will all be a lot happier

Kabanellas wrote:

GoranZ wrote:8 castles for 2 players... well that screw the map big time, congrats to the incompetent players that wanted that change to be returned.

P.S. Can someone tell me how can second player win one vs one game?

Then I must be one of those incompetent players

....the thing is that though it worked better for 1v1, the last settings worked definitly worst for all the others settings. We just wouldn't want that.

If chip manages to do what is intending to, and limits the starting positions to 1 Castle (and Noble) per player the issue with 1v1 will be solved .... And we a
will all be a lot happier

The thing is, that with 4 castles per player the opponent already knows where the other player is, he should only attack when the time comes(round 3), no strategy involved. For 1v1 the best setting is 2 castles per player, since now we have 8 neutrals per castle. For other settings 1 castle per player should be perfect solution.

OK lets analyze Kabanellas games 1vs1(sorry I took you as example)
6/10 ended with win of the first player
3/10 ended with win of the second player but first player attacked prematurely(round 2) or attacked council member(not too ordinary strategy)
1/10 ended with win of the second player, could be considered as clean win but luck could had good influence in this game

1. Kabanellas second, wins but other player attacks Lord Chamberlain in round 1(smart move lol)... Game ends in Round 6
http://www.conquerclub.com/game.php?game=8067164

2. Kabanellas second, eliminated in Round 5
http://www.conquerclub.com/game.php?game=8067929

3. Kabanellas first, wins in Round 6
http://www.conquerclub.com/game.php?game=8077452

4. Kabanellas second, eliminated in Round 8
http://www.conquerclub.com/game.php?game=8091887

5. Kabanellas second, wins, the other player in round 2 reaches to your castle but fails to take it, catapults have bigger range. game ends in Round 15
http://www.conquerclub.com/game.php?game=8092822

6. Kabanellas first, wins, game ends in Round 11
http://www.conquerclub.com/game.php?game=8093444

7. Kabanellas second, wins, from round 2 the other player attacks council member(not too common), game ends in Round 11
http://www.conquerclub.com/game.php?game=8098588

8. Kabanellas first, eliminated, first player doesnt attack in round 3(first player drop is 6, second is 13)
http://www.conquerclub.com/game.php?game=8119045

9. Kabanellas second, eliminated in Round 7
http://www.conquerclub.com/game.php?game=8119047

10. Kabanellas first, wins in Round 7
http://www.conquerclub.com/game.php?game=8176553

P.S. Plz make another calculation on the wins and loses for 1v1, its needed.
ty in front

Other then this, the map should become them most popular very soon

There is no way to force different limits for castles per player per game type at this time.
I have asked for a general limit on castles per player, that would be easiest to implement.

The problem then is whether or not to use 1 or 2 castles as a maximum.

1 does not work for 1v1, 2 does.
1 does work for doubles, 2 does not.

I am tempted to bite the bullet and use 2 as I think 1 would destroy 1v1 in a more spectacular way.

I'd definitely prefer 2 castles per player on 1v1

Hello,

I began several games on this map and I read the last two pages of this topic.

Maybe put 2 or 3 neutral on regions which are close from catsle would enable people who are not in top 3 to get two rounds more to defend.

I think there is a problem of equity with Knight K3. On the second round, the castle B is able to conquer it AND to attack catsle C. It's impossible from C to B, I think it's not fair... Maybe put it on N11. What do you think about that ?

Thanks for reading



See you in another game


PS : I love this map !

Thank you Lalloq.

Actually both Castle's Knights (B2 Knight and C5 Knight) distant 4 hexes from K3 (and K3 is at range of 3 from both Castles) - so they are equal in this case

Kabanellas wrote:I'd definitely prefer 2 castles per player on 1v1

It seems its the best solution. With 2 players it wont matter much who is first or second, with doubles it will be up to the strategy and maybe to the turn order.

btw field bordering B5, B6, N07, S2, N08 should be rock I think(IDK if k3 can attack N07 now, but I will test it soon )

Kabanellas wrote:Thank you Lalloq.

Actually both Castle's Knights (B2 Knight and C5 Knight) distant 4 hexes from K3 (and K3 is at range of 3 from both Castles) - so they are equal in this case

Yes but K3 can be bombarded by B catapult and archer. K3 can also attack both villages of castle B, and by the way easily attack the castle (and without be seen by castle C in fog of war)...
That's not truce with C castle

GoranZ wrote:btw field bordering B5, B6, N07, S2, N08 should be rock I think(IDK if k3 can attack N07 now, but I will test it soon )

K3 can't attack N07 but I still think that the field bordering B5, B6, N07, S2, N08 should be rock and not grass(it might confuse someone)

IDK if K2 can attack N08...

Played map in single, double format 5 - 6 times now.

It is the closest map to a chess game i have encountered. Happen to be a president of a local chess club (said only to qualify comments). I believe this is one of the best, most analitical, stategical, multiple scenario maps i have played in all of conquer club.

Whether or not you believe the dice curse you and your ulitimate plan, this map provides multiple attacking options, and plenty of balanced bonus options that are easily got, and easily broken. At this stage, there is limited stone walling (stack building) choke points, that prevent uneccessary long play, as breach points are via all avenues, knights, catupults, archers and silent round the back stuff.

I like how pieces support pieces espically in the attacking format, ie you have charged a knight in and before a front assualt, a catupult can activate via a trebeche. maximizing the final charge.

No map is perfect. But my compliments to he architect, designers, planners, thinkers and feedbacker whom have all contributed.

This is still not better than chess, you have over 1500 years to prove that, but it definetly tips the balance away from luck, or lucky dice into more of a think, think, think map.

Well done.

Under

I did not read the hole topic so maybe it was already mentioned.

There could be a pat situation if one player controls the archers and the other one(s) do have territs in the council. The archer player is stronger but he can not win cause he can't attack.

Underated wrote:Played map in single, double format 5 - 6 times now.

It is the closest map to a chess game i have encountered. Happen to be a president of a local chess club (said only to qualify comments). I believe this is one of the best, most analitical, stategical, multiple scenario maps i have played in all of conquer club.

Whether or not you believe the dice curse you and your ulitimate plan, this map provides multiple attacking options, and plenty of balanced bonus options that are easily got, and easily broken. At this stage, there is limited stone walling (stack building) choke points, that prevent uneccessary long play, as breach points are via all avenues, knights, catupults, archers and silent round the back stuff.

I like how pieces support pieces espically in the attacking format, ie you have charged a knight in and before a front assualt, a catupult can activate via a trebeche. maximizing the final charge.

No map is perfect. But my compliments to he architect, designers, planners, thinkers and feedbacker whom have all contributed.

This is still not better than chess, you have over 1500 years to prove that, but it definetly tips the balance away from luck, or lucky dice into more of a think, think, think map.

Well done.

Under

Thanks a lot, we appreciate it

(and I do love Chess - been playing it since I was 4 ....I think )

knubbel wrote:I did not read the hole topic so maybe it was already mentioned.

There could be a pat situation if one player controls the archers and the other one(s) do have territs in the council. The archer player is stronger but he can not win cause he can't attack.

yup, that's what you'll get if you're stuck in a no way out path..... Archers can only bombard or assault each other

Ok I have word this change may be a week or so away so I would like to have a discussion with 1v1 players on this map.

One castle or 2 to start with?

I would like to discuss pros and cons of starting with 1 castle in 1v1

I'll start the ball rolling:

Pros

Game last longer, more challenging, more fair to 2nd player

Cons

May encourage use of Court to try for a quick kill - is this likely?

2 more pros would be :
* would become less of a farming map on 1vs 1
* if I understand correct, this would also mean 2 vs 2 would start with 1 castle each, and that would make the map better

chipv wrote:Ok I have word this change may be a week or so away so I would like to have a discussion with 1v1 players on this map.

One castle or 2 to start with?

I would like to discuss pros and cons of starting with 1 castle in 1v1

I'll start the ball rolling:

Pros

Game last longer, more challenging, more fair to 2nd player

Cons

May encourage use of Court to try for a quick kill - is this likely?

Maybe.
I can see a strategy being to attack the castle then the villages, and keep forting everything back to the noble. Assuming you're building faster than your opponent, it would only be a matter of time. However, that wouldn't be wise, so I don't know how many people would do it.

-rd