SFR Yugoslavia [Quenched]

[natty dread]

Why do you think so?

[Vlasov]

I just played my first turn on this map. I was the first player to take a turn (#9746524), a 4-player game with Fog, but I could still see three other owned Capitals besides one that I own.

NOWHERE on the map does it state that each Capital "autodeploys" +1 army per turn -- but it happened on my turn -- for ALL the players, not just me!

What gives?

[natty dread]

They don't autodeploy. They start with 4.

[Vlasov]

Okay. I see. But shouldn't it say that on the map?

[natty dread]

No. 

[isaiah40]

Problem:

I don't think this is right.

[natty dread]

You probably connect through some other route there. The territories are not connected in the XML.


One problem that needs to be corrected though: it seems 1v1 starts with 12 territories. I don't know how I managed to f*ck that up again... damn fucking 1v1 games, I swear they're giving me grey pubic hairs or something.

Ok so 43 territories... 9 neutrals, 43-9 = 34... so that's 11 + 1 capital... argh. What to do, add 2 more neutrals? I don't see any other choice, with the starting positions already being used for the capitals... but where to put them...

[natty dread]

On second though, this map doesn't play all that well for 1v1 in the first place... sooo maybe I should just chalk this one up as "not a good 1v1 map"... I mean if the map isn't that great for 1v1 in the first place, why f*ck up the gameplay of the other game types just to make it into a mediocre 1v1 map instead of a bad one?

Thoughts anyone?

[isaiah40]

No I didn't. It is connected. Green still has Livino and Split-Dalmatia, and red still has Sarajevo. We are in round two now. Game 9751636, read the game log. Also I suggest placing a starting neutral in Montenegro as it gets dropped by a player right from the get go.

[Victor Sullivan]

Sorry, isaiah, but I just tested the border in a speed game (with the help of chuckbp2 - thanks!) and there is no connection between the Adriatic Sea and Herzegovina.

-Sully

[thenobodies80]

No I didn't. It is connected. Green still has Livino and Split-Dalmatia, and red still has Sarajevo. We are in round two now. Game 9751636, read the game log. Also I suggest placing a starting neutral in Montenegro as it gets dropped by a player right from the get go.

Titograd?
The xml is ok for what i can see....

[dowian2]

On second though, this map doesn't play all that well for 1v1 in the first place... sooo maybe I should just chalk this one up as "not a good 1v1 map"... I mean if the map isn't that great for 1v1 in the first place, why f*ck up the gameplay of the other game types just to make it into a mediocre 1v1 map instead of a bad one?

Thoughts anyone?

Because it comes up on random. Right now, for a 1v1 game, you start with 12 regions. A smart player who goes first uses his 4 deploy to take your capital, and they're deploying 6 and you're deploying 3 before you even start. I don't think you're going to be able to turn this into a good 1v1 map without seriously changing gameplay to the point where you're hurting the other game types, but this would be a terrible deciding game in a 1v1 random tourney or something of the like.

I'm not a mapmaker, but is there any way to code the XML in such a way that it's done differently for 2-player games? I assume there's some sort of switch on Woodboro preventing people from starting with the Pirate Stations in 2-6 player games, but those are starting spots for 7-8 player games... could something similar be done here?

[isaiah40]

My bad, for some reason, that anchor was actually submerged! LOL

[Bruceswar]

On second though, this map doesn't play all that well for 1v1 in the first place... sooo maybe I should just chalk this one up as "not a good 1v1 map"... I mean if the map isn't that great for 1v1 in the first place, why f*ck up the gameplay of the other game types just to make it into a mediocre 1v1 map instead of a bad one?

Thoughts anyone?

Because it comes up on random. Right now, for a 1v1 game, you start with 12 regions. A smart player who goes first uses his 4 deploy to take your capital, and they're deploying 6 and you're deploying 3 before you even start. I don't think you're going to be able to turn this into a good 1v1 map without seriously changing gameplay to the point where you're hurting the other game types, but this would be a terrible deciding game in a 1v1 random tourney or something of the like.

I'm not a mapmaker, but is there any way to code the XML in such a way that it's done differently for 2-player games? I assume there's some sort of switch on Woodboro preventing people from starting with the Pirate Stations in 2-6 player games, but those are starting spots for 7-8 player games... could something similar be done here?

Agreed. Note to self stay away! At least on 1 vs 1's

[Gillipig]

On second though, this map doesn't play all that well for 1v1 in the first place... sooo maybe I should just chalk this one up as "not a good 1v1 map"... I mean if the map isn't that great for 1v1 in the first place, why f*ck up the gameplay of the other game types just to make it into a mediocre 1v1 map instead of a bad one?

Thoughts anyone?

It's maybe a bit too unbalanced in 1v1. I think it could be easily fixed by just making us start with 11 territs instead of 12. I don't see how making 1v1 games start with 11 regions will mess up the gameplay of larger games so there's no harm in making that correction!

[Bruceswar]

On second though, this map doesn't play all that well for 1v1 in the first place... sooo maybe I should just chalk this one up as "not a good 1v1 map"... I mean if the map isn't that great for 1v1 in the first place, why f*ck up the gameplay of the other game types just to make it into a mediocre 1v1 map instead of a bad one?

Thoughts anyone?

It's maybe a bit too unbalanced in 1v1. I think it could be easily fixed by just making us start with 11 territs instead of 12. I don't see how making 1v1 games start with 11 regions will mess up the gameplay of larger games so there's no harm in making that correction!

it is not the 12 starting points... it is the +2 that really tosses this map for a loop.

[HighlanderAttack]

On second though, this map doesn't play all that well for 1v1 in the first place... sooo maybe I should just chalk this one up as "not a good 1v1 map"... I mean if the map isn't that great for 1v1 in the first place, why f*ck up the gameplay of the other game types just to make it into a mediocre 1v1 map instead of a bad one?

Thoughts anyone?

Just started a 1v2 game so not too much input but if possible 11 starting points does make a better 1v1 game. I will let you know how it goes

[natty dread]

The thing is, the map has lots of neutrals already... especially in the less-than-8 player games, where a lot of the capitals start neutral... and to get the map to start with 11 territories in a 2-player game, I would have to add 2 additional neutrals on the map. I dislike excessive neutrals since they tend to be ignored by players and often turn into roadblocks...

However... I'm still in the middle of testing the map myself, I don't have much time for CC currently so I can't play a lot of games at once... so I'll see how it goes, if it seems feasible to add those neutrals then I'll consider it...

[Odeuminus]

I really like the map and enjoy playing it.I just have a proposition that since officially both provinces,Vojvodina and Kosovo were part of republic of Serbia how about getting for instance extra point for each province if one holds Serbia?

[Peter Gibbons]

Has the notion of merely a +1 for every two capitals been previously discussed? Seems like it would balance things a little more but perhaps I'm not thinking it through.

[istanbul39]

I like this map but too many easy bonuses. In simple one on one games, it is nothing to have 8 deployment by round 2 by simply taking 1 from opponent and 1 neutral in strategic places across the board. Impossible to come back on this map.

Love the map! Tweek the bonus structure. Nice job.

[initus]

I dislike excessive neutrals since they tend to be ignored by players and often turn into roadblocks...

True, if they are 3 troop neutrals. Have you considered 1 troop neutrals? I think that would solve the problem and make people more likely to grab up the capitals. Though there might even be a mad dash at the beginning of the game to secure as many as one can, I'm not sure if you want that.

[AndyDufresne]

I dislike excessive neutrals since they tend to be ignored by players and often turn into roadblocks...

True, if they are 3 troop neutrals. Have you considered 1 troop neutrals? I think that would solve the problem and make people more likely to grab up the capitals. Though there might even be a mad dash at the beginning of the game to secure as many as one can, I'm not sure if you want that.

2 Neutral troops have worked well in Fractured China for their capitals.


--Andy

[natty dread]

I'm considering the following changes...

Capital bonus: +2 for first 2, +1 for each additional 2

Neutral 2:s to 2 territories: Slovenian littoral & Niksic.

[natty dread]

I'm considering the following changes...

Capital bonus: +2 for first 2, +1 for each additional 2

Neutral 2:s to 2 territories: Slovenian littoral & Niksic.

No opinions, anyone?