Three Kingdoms of Korea [Quenched]

Care to peruse completed maps? Take a stroll through the Atlas.

Moderators: Global Moderators, Cartographers

Forum rules
Please read the Community Guidelines before posting.

Re: Three Kingdoms of Korea [4 Jul 2011]

Postby Kabanellas on Tue Aug 02, 2011 4:52 am

natty_dread wrote:No. Just, no. It goes against all principles of this map. It's like saying that europe should be able to bombard australia in classic. I'd rather take the map down and rehaul the whole gameplay than do that.


could you find some way of making that Wa region usable... The problem is that anyone that owns those terrs will be stuck in a dead end, you just can't afford to destroy another player bonus by taking their capital.
User avatar
Colonel Kabanellas
Cartography Assistant
Cartography Assistant
 
Posts: 1475
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 12:21 pm
Location: "Don’t ever wrestle with a pig. You’ll both get dirty, but the pig will enjoy it."
Medals: 66
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (3) Quadruples Achievement (3) Terminator Achievement (2)
Manual Troops Achievement (2) Freestyle Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (2) Fog of War Achievement (4) Trench Warfare Achievement (2)
Teammate Achievement (2) Random Map Achievement (2) Cross-Map Achievement (3) Ratings Achievement (3) Tournament Achievement (7)
General Achievement (2) Clan Achievement (15) Map Contribution (7) General Contribution (1)

Re: Three Kingdoms of Korea [4 Jul 2011]

Postby natty dread on Tue Aug 02, 2011 5:05 am

On the other hand, consider that by taking another's capital and a few territories you can easily get a bonus that more than offsets the -4...

But ok, maybe we should change the Wa bonus.

How about making it so that Wa only gives a +3 bonus if you don't hold any capitals, if you hold a capital it gives no bonus and no penalty?
Image
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class natty dread
 
Posts: 13318
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2008 8:58 pm
Location: fucked off
Medals: 49
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (1) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (2)
Manual Troops Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (3)
Ratings Achievement (3) General Achievement (12) Map Contribution (12) General Contribution (7)

Re: Three Kingdoms of Korea [4 Jul 2011]

Postby natty dread on Tue Aug 02, 2011 5:42 am

Ok, here's the new images - I'll get working on the new XML.

I decided to keep Silla as 1/1 - making it 1/2 would not be good since that would make it too weak in comparison, it should be the strongest bonus. It will still have the most neutrals on the capital so that should offset it somewhat.

Click image to enlarge.
image


Click image to enlarge.
image
Image
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class natty dread
 
Posts: 13318
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2008 8:58 pm
Location: fucked off
Medals: 49
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (1) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (2)
Manual Troops Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (3)
Ratings Achievement (3) General Achievement (12) Map Contribution (12) General Contribution (7)

Re: Three Kingdoms of Korea [4 Jul 2011]

Postby DiM on Tue Aug 02, 2011 9:17 am

natty_dread wrote:No. Just, no. It goes against all principles of this map. It's like saying that europe should be able to bombard australia in classic. I'd rather take the map down and rehaul the whole gameplay than do that.


natty_dread wrote:I decided to keep Silla as 1/1 - making it 1/2 would not be good since that would make it too weak in comparison, it should be the strongest bonus.


i understand that you want historical accuracy. but sometimes that makes for a terrible gameplay. it's like saying china on the classic map should give a +20 just because it represents a huge power (economical and military). image how would classic map play if china had a +20 bonus.
or giving europe +100 and africa 1 simply because there's a huge economical and military difference between them.

map making guide wrote:Function trumps form - The style of the graphics should not detract from ease of play: borders should be clear, titles and numbers easy to read, colors easy to distinguish, etc...

Form must follow function - So important it's on the list twice! Expect to show some flexibility and be prepared to move away from complete geographical accuracy or historical authenticity: the look and theme of the map must be utterly subservient to gameplay and legibility.


so keeping silla at +1 for each terit is still a bad idea. somebody that gets dongye maecho ye yanju gyaongju and geumgwan will have to defend just 2 borders and get a total bonus of +10 (6 from silla bonus, 1 for fortress, 3 for total number of terits)
if you make it +1 for each 2 terits, then that person will get +7 which is still pretty darn big in my opinion.

natty_dread wrote:On the other hand, consider that by taking another's capital and a few territories you can easily get a bonus that more than offsets the -4...


not really that easy. and in a 1v1 game he who goes for WA loses. while he struggles to cope with the -4 the opponent simply gets another capital and then another and so on and he'll always have the edge.
on games with more players you might accomplish something if the others are ignoring you.

natty_dread wrote:How about making it so that Wa only gives a +3 bonus if you don't hold any capitals, if you hold a capital it gives no bonus and no penalty?


this might work. it makes the strategy for Wa a bit odd but it definitely could work. one would have to start taking terits before taking a capital so that his bonus doesn't suffer from one turn to another but it would be ok.

but strictly from a gameplay point of view i think kabanellas' suggestion with the bombardment would fit perfectly. yeah it would be historically inaccurate and absurd but the gameplay would be so much better.
“In the beginning God said, the four-dimensional divergence of an antisymmetric, second rank tensor equals zero, and there was light, and it was good. And on the seventh day he rested.”- Michio Kaku
Image
User avatar
Major DiM
 
Posts: 10554
Joined: Wed Feb 14, 2007 6:20 pm
Location: making maps for scooby snacks
Medals: 45
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (2) Assassin Achievement (2)
Freestyle Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (2) Speed Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (1)
Cross-Map Achievement (2) Ratings Achievement (3) Tournament Achievement (4) General Achievement (4) Map Contribution (10)
Tournament Contribution (4) General Contribution (3)

Re: Three Kingdoms of Korea [4 Jul 2011]

Postby pamoa on Tue Aug 02, 2011 10:05 am

pamoa wrote:you need to reorder both of your legends to help players to find bonus area
please follow the left-right top-bottom order

goguryeo
tang
baekje
silla
gaya
wa
de gueules à la tour d'argent ouverte, crénelée de trois pièces et donjonnée d'un donjon ajouré, crénelé de deux pièces
Image
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class pamoa
 
Posts: 1207
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 3:18 am
Location: Confederatio Helvetica
Medals: 58
Standard Achievement (4) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (2) Terminator Achievement (2)
Assassin Achievement (2) Manual Troops Achievement (3) Freestyle Achievement (2) Polymorphic Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (2)
Fog of War Achievement (4) Trench Warfare Achievement (2) Speed Achievement (4) Teammate Achievement (2) Random Map Achievement (2)
Cross-Map Achievement (4) Beta Map Achievement (2) Ratings Achievement (4) Tournament Achievement (1) Clan Achievement (8)
Map Contribution (3)

Re: Three Kingdoms of Korea [4 Jul 2011]

Postby Kabanellas on Tue Aug 02, 2011 10:12 am

Silla at 1 per 1 is too much I'm afraid... :-s

Natty, without wanting to go against your strong beliefs for this map, which I do respect a lot. I'd just like to add that being an history lover (and a fan of historical maps) I do juggle a bit with historical accuracy to benefit the game-play. The Third Crusade is a good example of that. There was no Kingdom of Jerusalem on the Third Crusade (1192), as it was overrun by Saladin's forces in 1187 remaining only a couple of cities and fortified posts. Nevertheless I wanted it to appear on the map turning history into fiction: what if the Kingdom of Jerusalem was rebuilt in the Third Crusade. Also, France's borders weren't exactly as such as they appear but far more scattered, England owned Aquitaine but for a matter of gameplay those possessions were limited to Normandy...

Anyway your suggestion for the Wa bonus is better than what we have now for sure.
User avatar
Colonel Kabanellas
Cartography Assistant
Cartography Assistant
 
Posts: 1475
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 12:21 pm
Location: "Don’t ever wrestle with a pig. You’ll both get dirty, but the pig will enjoy it."
Medals: 66
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (3) Quadruples Achievement (3) Terminator Achievement (2)
Manual Troops Achievement (2) Freestyle Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (2) Fog of War Achievement (4) Trench Warfare Achievement (2)
Teammate Achievement (2) Random Map Achievement (2) Cross-Map Achievement (3) Ratings Achievement (3) Tournament Achievement (7)
General Achievement (2) Clan Achievement (15) Map Contribution (7) General Contribution (1)

Re: Three Kingdoms of Korea [4 Jul 2011]

Postby natty dread on Tue Aug 02, 2011 1:24 pm

DiM wrote:so keeping silla at +1 for each terit is still a bad idea. somebody that gets dongye maecho ye yanju gyaongju and geumgwan will have to defend just 2 borders and get a total bonus of +10 (6 from silla bonus, 1 for fortress, 3 for total number of terits)
if you make it +1 for each 2 terits, then that person will get +7 which is still pretty darn big in my opinion.


Let's just see how it works. Remember that we're having increased neutrals on the capitals, which will make Silla harder to take. If it's still too powerful, so that it unbalances the map, we'll think of something.

DiM wrote:strictly from a gameplay point of view i think kabanellas' suggestion with the bombardment would fit perfectly. yeah it would be historically inaccurate and absurd but the gameplay would be so much better.


I disagree. Gameplay isn't just about making things fair and even, or making the map work as a game - I believe the gameplay should also suppport the theme of the map: if a gameplay mechanic works, but makes no sense thematically, then it is not good gameplay. Ideally, a good gameplay does both: works to provide a fun experience to players, and also integrates the map thematically.

pamoa wrote:you need to reorder both of your legends to help players to find bonus area
please follow the left-right top-bottom order


I considered this, but decided against - the names of the bonus areas are written on the map, so no one should have any problems finding them. For the lower legend, it's easier to word and more intuitive by having Wa first, but I did reorder the rest to follow the order you mentioned. As for the upper legend, I suppose I could put it in the same order as the lower one. Although the current order looks better aesthetically, as the chinese text forms a neat horizontal pyramid.

Kabanellas wrote:Natty, without wanting to go against your strong beliefs for this map, which I do respect a lot.


I don't really have strong beliefs as such... IH designed the gameplay, I gave him pretty much free hands while only offering a few suggestions here and there. IH seems to be gone, and the map needs to be fixed, so I'm working on it for now... I just don't want to go too much against the ideas & designs IH had for the map.

Look, if the 1 for 1 for silla doesn't work, we can change it in the next update. No big deal.
Image
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class natty dread
 
Posts: 13318
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2008 8:58 pm
Location: fucked off
Medals: 49
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (1) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (2)
Manual Troops Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (3)
Ratings Achievement (3) General Achievement (12) Map Contribution (12) General Contribution (7)

Re: Three Kingdoms of Korea [4 Jul 2011]

Postby DiM on Tue Aug 02, 2011 3:51 pm

natty_dread wrote:
DiM wrote:so keeping silla at +1 for each terit is still a bad idea. somebody that gets dongye maecho ye yanju gyaongju and geumgwan will have to defend just 2 borders and get a total bonus of +10 (6 from silla bonus, 1 for fortress, 3 for total number of terits)
if you make it +1 for each 2 terits, then that person will get +7 which is still pretty darn big in my opinion.


Let's just see how it works. Remember that we're having increased neutrals on the capitals, which will make Silla harder to take. If it's still too powerful, so that it unbalances the map, we'll think of something.


increasing neutrals on capitals won't work. the bonus is much too big and increasing the neutrals only makes a person get the bonus a bit later in the game. probably just by 1 round or 2. so instead of getting a +7 from round 1 he'll get it in round 2. then expand and get the +10 in round 3.

natty_dread wrote:
DiM wrote:strictly from a gameplay point of view i think kabanellas' suggestion with the bombardment would fit perfectly. yeah it would be historically inaccurate and absurd but the gameplay would be so much better.


I disagree. Gameplay isn't just about making things fair and even, or making the map work as a game - I believe the gameplay should also suppport the theme of the map: if a gameplay mechanic works, but makes no sense thematically, then it is not good gameplay. Ideally, a good gameplay does both: works to provide a fun experience to players, and also integrates the map thematically.


disagree all you want but the map making guide is very clear on this matter:
Function trumps form - The style of the graphics should not detract from ease of play: borders should be clear, titles and numbers easy to read, colors easy to distinguish, etc...

Form must follow function - So important it's on the list twice! Expect to show some flexibility and be prepared to move away from complete geographical accuracy or historical authenticity: the look and theme of the map must be utterly subservient to gameplay and legibility.


yes ideally the gameplay and the theme go hand in hand and fit perfectly but clearly this is not the situation here. so i honestly don't care that Silla was a powerful kingdom or that Wa can't bombard if that means the map is unplayable. and frankly that's what it is right now. take a look at 1v1 games where players get 20+ bonuses by round 3. that's bad.

you need to drastically reduce the bonuses and create more borders in some areas perhaps by adding junks.
“In the beginning God said, the four-dimensional divergence of an antisymmetric, second rank tensor equals zero, and there was light, and it was good. And on the seventh day he rested.”- Michio Kaku
Image
User avatar
Major DiM
 
Posts: 10554
Joined: Wed Feb 14, 2007 6:20 pm
Location: making maps for scooby snacks
Medals: 45
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (2) Assassin Achievement (2)
Freestyle Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (2) Speed Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (1)
Cross-Map Achievement (2) Ratings Achievement (3) Tournament Achievement (4) General Achievement (4) Map Contribution (10)
Tournament Contribution (4) General Contribution (3)

Re: Three Kingdoms of Korea [4 Jul 2011]

Postby natty dread on Tue Aug 02, 2011 9:45 pm

I am NOT going to add bombardments to the map.

There's absolutely no reason to add bombardments to the map. None.

As for your other complaint,

natty_dread wrote: if the 1 for 1 for silla doesn't work, we can change it in the next update. No big deal.


Now can we get the f*ck on with it.
Image
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class natty dread
 
Posts: 13318
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2008 8:58 pm
Location: fucked off
Medals: 49
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (1) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (2)
Manual Troops Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (3)
Ratings Achievement (3) General Achievement (12) Map Contribution (12) General Contribution (7)

Re: Three Kingdoms of Korea [4 Jul 2011]

Postby AndyDufresne on Wed Aug 03, 2011 10:03 am

natty_dread wrote:I am NOT going to add bombardments to the map.

There's absolutely no reason to add bombardments to the map. None.

I'd agree that I don't think bombardments would be very fun with this map.


--Andy
User avatar
Corporal AndyDufresne
Retired Administrator
 
Posts: 25356
Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2006 8:22 pm
Location: A Banana Palm in Zihuatanejo
Medals: 20
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (1) Triples Achievement (1) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (1)
Freestyle Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (1) Trench Warfare Achievement (1) Speed Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (1)
Cross-Map Achievement (3) General Achievement (4) General Contribution (2)

Re: Three Kingdoms of Korea [4 Jul 2011]

Postby The Bison King on Wed Aug 03, 2011 2:07 pm

AndyDufresne wrote:
natty_dread wrote:I am NOT going to add bombardments to the map.

There's absolutely no reason to add bombardments to the map. None.

I'd agree that I don't think bombardments would be very fun with this map.


--Andy

I third this notion. There is nothing that requires this kind of device, or rather there are alternative better solutions.
Image

Hi, my name is the Bison King, and I am COMPLETELY aware of DaFont!
User avatar
Sergeant The Bison King
 
Posts: 2004
Joined: Thu Aug 27, 2009 5:06 pm
Location: the Mid-Westeros
Medals: 23
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (1) Triples Achievement (1) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (1)
Manual Troops Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (1) Trench Warfare Achievement (1) Speed Achievement (1)
Teammate Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (2) Ratings Achievement (1) General Achievement (1) Map Contribution (4)
General Contribution (3)

Re: Three Kingdoms of Korea [4 Jul 2011]

Postby natty dread on Wed Aug 03, 2011 5:11 pm

Yes, like the one in my latest update.
Image
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class natty dread
 
Posts: 13318
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2008 8:58 pm
Location: fucked off
Medals: 49
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (1) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (2)
Manual Troops Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (3)
Ratings Achievement (3) General Achievement (12) Map Contribution (12) General Contribution (7)

Re: Three Kingdoms of Korea [4 Jul 2011]

Postby Coleman on Wed Aug 03, 2011 6:01 pm

I have absolutely no problems with your large version of the map.

As someone who only views the small versions of the map when they play ( :o shocking I know ) I find the small version of this map causes considerable eye strain to read. I don't know if it is how dark the map is or that the text which is perfectly legible on the large map is simply too grainy on the small map.

I realize you've already passed graphics but it would really help me and probably other people if the text on the small map was given a bit more err solidarity? weight? shadow? Something. Especially in the legends.

Some words, such as donghuyeo are fine, but liaodong, hwangasanbeal, and muju give me some problems if that helps you pinpoint what it is about the text I am having trouble with.
User avatar
Sergeant Coleman
 
Posts: 5402
Joined: Tue Jan 02, 2007 10:36 pm
Location: Midwest
Medals: 25
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (1) Triples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (1) Assassin Achievement (1)
Freestyle Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (1) Speed Achievement (2) Cross-Map Achievement (2) Ratings Achievement (2)
Training Achievement (1) Map Contribution (6) Tournament Contribution (2) General Contribution (2)

Re: Three Kingdoms of Korea [4 Jul 2011]

Postby natty dread on Wed Aug 03, 2011 7:44 pm

I'll see what I can do...
Image
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class natty dread
 
Posts: 13318
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2008 8:58 pm
Location: fucked off
Medals: 49
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (1) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (2)
Manual Troops Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (3)
Ratings Achievement (3) General Achievement (12) Map Contribution (12) General Contribution (7)

Re: Three Kingdoms of Korea [4 Jul 2011]

Postby PLAYER57832 on Thu Aug 04, 2011 10:54 am

Yes, I want to reiterate the "hard to read" and "hard to tell colors apart" bit. I cannot remember if I said this earlier, but if you really don't want to make the colors on the junks brighter, how about using some kind of symbols that could match (like flag designations). I know that might not be as historically accurate, but sometimes a compromise is necessary.
Sergeant PLAYER57832
 
Posts: 2394
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2007 9:17 am
Location: Pennsylvania
Medals: 30
Standard Achievement (4) Doubles Achievement (1) Triples Achievement (1) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (2)
Assassin Achievement (1) Manual Troops Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (4)
Speed Achievement (2) Teammate Achievement (1) Random Map Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (4) Ratings Achievement (4)
Training Achievement (1)

Re: Three Kingdoms of Korea [4 Jul 2011]

Postby natty dread on Thu Aug 04, 2011 11:47 am

Ok, I hope they're better now.

New XML is also done.

Click image to enlarge.
image

Click image to enlarge.
image

korea5.xml
new xml
(48.1 KiB) Downloaded 18 times
Image
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class natty dread
 
Posts: 13318
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2008 8:58 pm
Location: fucked off
Medals: 49
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (1) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (2)
Manual Troops Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (3)
Ratings Achievement (3) General Achievement (12) Map Contribution (12) General Contribution (7)

Re: Three Kingdoms of Korea [4 Jul 2011]

Postby pamoa on Thu Aug 04, 2011 12:19 pm

I hate to repeat myself but it seems you don't want to answer this
I was hoping better from you
pamoa wrote:you need to reorder both of your legends to help players to find bonus area
please follow the left-right top-bottom order

goguryeo
tang
baekje
silla
gaya
wa
de gueules à la tour d'argent ouverte, crénelée de trois pièces et donjonnée d'un donjon ajouré, crénelé de deux pièces
Image
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class pamoa
 
Posts: 1207
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 3:18 am
Location: Confederatio Helvetica
Medals: 58
Standard Achievement (4) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (2) Terminator Achievement (2)
Assassin Achievement (2) Manual Troops Achievement (3) Freestyle Achievement (2) Polymorphic Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (2)
Fog of War Achievement (4) Trench Warfare Achievement (2) Speed Achievement (4) Teammate Achievement (2) Random Map Achievement (2)
Cross-Map Achievement (4) Beta Map Achievement (2) Ratings Achievement (4) Tournament Achievement (1) Clan Achievement (8)
Map Contribution (3)

Re: Three Kingdoms of Korea [4 Jul 2011]

Postby natty dread on Thu Aug 04, 2011 12:20 pm

I answered it last page.

Anyway, yeah, I forgot to do the right legend. So much shit to do. I'll do it in the next update.
Image
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class natty dread
 
Posts: 13318
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2008 8:58 pm
Location: fucked off
Medals: 49
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (1) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (2)
Manual Troops Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (3)
Ratings Achievement (3) General Achievement (12) Map Contribution (12) General Contribution (7)

Re: Three Kingdoms of Korea [4 Jul 2011]

Postby thenobodies80 on Thu Aug 04, 2011 5:00 pm



Sent to lackattack. ;)

Give every man your ear, but few thy voice. Take each man's censure, but reserve thy judgment.
show
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class thenobodies80
 
Posts: 5558
Joined: Wed Sep 05, 2007 4:30 am
Medals: 70
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (1) Quadruples Achievement (2) Terminator Achievement (2)
Assassin Achievement (2) Manual Troops Achievement (2) Freestyle Achievement (2) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (2) Fog of War Achievement (3)
Speed Achievement (2) Teammate Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (3) Bot Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (4)
General Achievement (8) Map Contribution (7) Tournament Contribution (6) General Contribution (17)

Re: Three Kingdoms of Korea [4 Jul 2011]

Postby HighlanderAttack on Thu Aug 04, 2011 9:56 pm

Game 9515412

so I come to this game and see that in a 1v1 game my opponent took one territ and now has 13 armies due--is this right--first time on the map but damn really?
We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, therefore, is not an act but a habit.
User avatar
Lieutenant HighlanderAttack
 
Posts: 10746
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2008 9:01 am
Medals: 138
Standard Achievement (4) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (3) Quadruples Achievement (3) Terminator Achievement (2)
Assassin Achievement (3) Manual Troops Achievement (3) Freestyle Achievement (3) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (3) Fog of War Achievement (4)
Trench Warfare Achievement (1) Speed Achievement (3) Teammate Achievement (2) Random Map Achievement (2) Cross-Map Achievement (4)
Battle Royale Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (3) Tournament Achievement (34) General Achievement (16) Clan Achievement (5)
Tournament Contribution (34) General Contribution (2)

Re: Three Kingdoms of Korea [4 Jul 2011]

Postby Coleman on Thu Aug 04, 2011 11:27 pm

natty_dread wrote:Ok, I hope they're better now.


Awesome thanks. :D I was surprised to see a territory name change so late but I hadn't been following this one that closely.

HighlanderAttack wrote:Game 9515412

so I come to this game and see that in a 1v1 game my opponent took one territ and now has 13 armies due--is this right--first time on the map but damn really?


seems to still be the old image so I had to change to large to read these

daegaya, aragaya, geumgwangaya, and sakju all become worth +2 with the ownership of gyaongju, which itself seems to be worth +2 under the same rule.
3 + (5 x 2) = 13

So the map is working as intended. Your situation isn't as bad as it first appears though, daegaya has to advance through jinhan to take it back if you break it, and teng-chou can attack there as well.

Additionally, if all those other neutrals were a 3rd player green's position would be nowhere near as powerful. 1v1 has always been flawed in my opinion (not that I'm not happy we have it).
User avatar
Sergeant Coleman
 
Posts: 5402
Joined: Tue Jan 02, 2007 10:36 pm
Location: Midwest
Medals: 25
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (1) Triples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (1) Assassin Achievement (1)
Freestyle Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (1) Speed Achievement (2) Cross-Map Achievement (2) Ratings Achievement (2)
Training Achievement (1) Map Contribution (6) Tournament Contribution (2) General Contribution (2)

Re: Three Kingdoms of Korea [4 Jul 2011]

Postby natty dread on Fri Aug 05, 2011 2:10 am

HighlanderAttack wrote:Game 9515412

so I come to this game and see that in a 1v1 game my opponent took one territ and now has 13 armies due--is this right--first time on the map but damn really?


I suggest you wait until this update goes live before starting any more games. The old version is very unbalanced.
Image
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class natty dread
 
Posts: 13318
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2008 8:58 pm
Location: fucked off
Medals: 49
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (1) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (2)
Manual Troops Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (3)
Ratings Achievement (3) General Achievement (12) Map Contribution (12) General Contribution (7)

Re: Three Kingdoms of Korea [4 Jul 2011]

Postby HighlanderAttack on Fri Aug 05, 2011 7:40 am

natty_dread wrote:
HighlanderAttack wrote:Game 9515412

so I come to this game and see that in a 1v1 game my opponent took one territ and now has 13 armies due--is this right--first time on the map but damn really?


I suggest you wait until this update goes live before starting any more games. The old version is very unbalanced.


I do not control tourney games and when they are sent out but that is good to hear
We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, therefore, is not an act but a habit.
User avatar
Lieutenant HighlanderAttack
 
Posts: 10746
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2008 9:01 am
Medals: 138
Standard Achievement (4) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (3) Quadruples Achievement (3) Terminator Achievement (2)
Assassin Achievement (3) Manual Troops Achievement (3) Freestyle Achievement (3) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (3) Fog of War Achievement (4)
Trench Warfare Achievement (1) Speed Achievement (3) Teammate Achievement (2) Random Map Achievement (2) Cross-Map Achievement (4)
Battle Royale Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (3) Tournament Achievement (34) General Achievement (16) Clan Achievement (5)
Tournament Contribution (34) General Contribution (2)

Re: Three Kingdoms of Korea [4 Jul 2011]

Postby HighlanderAttack on Fri Aug 05, 2011 7:41 am

Coleman wrote:
natty_dread wrote:Ok, I hope they're better now.


Awesome thanks. :D I was surprised to see a territory name change so late but I hadn't been following this one that closely.

HighlanderAttack wrote:Game 9515412

so I come to this game and see that in a 1v1 game my opponent took one territ and now has 13 armies due--is this right--first time on the map but damn really?


seems to still be the old image so I had to change to large to read these

daegaya, aragaya, geumgwangaya, and sakju all become worth +2 with the ownership of gyaongju, which itself seems to be worth +2 under the same rule.
3 + (5 x 2) = 13

So the map is working as intended. Your situation isn't as bad as it first appears though, daegaya has to advance through jinhan to take it back if you break it, and teng-chou can attack there as well.

Additionally, if all those other neutrals were a 3rd player green's position would be nowhere near as powerful. 1v1 has always been flawed in my opinion (not that I'm not happy we have it).


Thanks--hope I get good dice :)
We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, therefore, is not an act but a habit.
User avatar
Lieutenant HighlanderAttack
 
Posts: 10746
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2008 9:01 am
Medals: 138
Standard Achievement (4) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (3) Quadruples Achievement (3) Terminator Achievement (2)
Assassin Achievement (3) Manual Troops Achievement (3) Freestyle Achievement (3) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (3) Fog of War Achievement (4)
Trench Warfare Achievement (1) Speed Achievement (3) Teammate Achievement (2) Random Map Achievement (2) Cross-Map Achievement (4)
Battle Royale Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (3) Tournament Achievement (34) General Achievement (16) Clan Achievement (5)
Tournament Contribution (34) General Contribution (2)

Re: Three Kingdoms of Korea [4 Jul 2011]

Postby PLAYER57832 on Sat Aug 06, 2011 9:13 pm

OK, looks like you might already be addressing this. From a 1 vs 1 perspective only (and understanding that not every map needs to play well 1 vs 1 ;) ), I think you need to reduce the bonuses across the board.

Also, you have 2 basic "buildings" that I can see. However, the bonuses vary widely. If you want to vary the bonuses, then try varying the structures somehow. That is, all castles "should" more have the same basic bonus, if you want one more, maybe make it a "palace" or some such. OR, just skip the "castle" label and give each individual names.
Sergeant PLAYER57832
 
Posts: 2394
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2007 9:17 am
Location: Pennsylvania
Medals: 30
Standard Achievement (4) Doubles Achievement (1) Triples Achievement (1) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (2)
Assassin Achievement (1) Manual Troops Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (4)
Speed Achievement (2) Teammate Achievement (1) Random Map Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (4) Ratings Achievement (4)
Training Achievement (1)

PreviousNext

Return to The Atlas

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users

Login