SFR Yugoslavia [Quenched]

[natty dread]

Yes, or you can go through Herzegovina, or halfway around the map. The point is, now there's a direct connection.

[isaiah40]

BTW where's my red dot?

You don't get a red dot! It's against Section 4, paragraph 3.1 of the Game Play Rules and Guidelines

No dots shall be given to anyone whose name is natty.

[natty dread]

Oh, you're moving me straight to graphics then?

[isaiah40]

Well Section 3.2 says the same thing but for graphics, Section 3.3 is for Final Forge. Now Section 3.4 says that

No person with the name of natty shall have any map quenched, unless he/she counts to 3. That is 3, not 2, not 4, but 3 shall thou count to. Then shall he/she gets his/her map quenched!

[natty dread]

I have a gameplay issue that needs solving.

Currently, the way the map is designed, there's 8 capitals - each player starts with 1 capital (4 troops in each), the leftover capitals start neutral, and the other 36 territories start with a random drop.

This should make for a good gameplay. The only problem is Kosovo - having only 2 territories, it's likely to get it on the drop. Actually, the odds of getting it in a 2 or 3 player game are 1 in 24. With more players it's even lower... so the question is, is a 1 in 24 chance of dropping a +1 bonus an issue?

The only way to prevent anyone from dropping with the Kosovo bonus is to make South Kosovo neutral. But this would mess up the drops, since there would now be 35 territories starting with a random drop - so in a 2 or 3 player game, each player would get 1 capital and 11 other territories - meaning everyone would start with 12. To counter this, there's only two options: add one territory somewhere (I can't think of where) or, make 4 territories neutral (maybe 1 in each of the 2-3 territory bonuses?)

So... adding 4 neutrals, or a 1/24 chance (in 2-3 player games) of dropping a +1 bonus?

I don't really like the idea of adding that many neutrals, since they tend to make bonuses less attractive in 1v1 and team games. I would prefer just having the map start as it is, but is that 1 in 24 chance too high? Of course, unless the player who drops the bonus also starts first, the other player(s) would still have a good chance to break it, so it's more like a 1/48 chance in a 2-player game to get a really good 1st round advantage.

But then again, 1v1 is a really drop-dependent gametype anyway, and as long as most games are fair on it, I don't see that small chance as a huge issue.

So, feedback about this would be welcome.

[natty dread]

I could add in Albania as a territory and connect it with Titograd & Polog...

[Victor Sullivan]

My first thought was to edit the starting positions, but that wouldn't really solve the issue, unless you had the max at 1... I think adding in Albania would be a good solution. You could include it as an Adriatic port and 0 bonus, since it's not part of Yugoslavia.

-Sully

[isaiah40]

My first thought was to code the 2 and 3 territory bonuses with one territory starting as neutral. Then when I reread your idea of adding in Albania as a non-bonus territory, and coding the one territory in the 2 territory bonus, I thought that this would be the best way to go. It would make easier for everyone I think.

[natty dread]

Alright, albania it is.

[natty dread]

I'm not really sure about this after all... not sure if it fits the map:

Click image to enlarge.

[Victor Sullivan]

I see what you mean... Though gameplay-wise I like it.

Is there a way we could split a territory or something?

-Sully

[natty dread]

Well, the only place I can think of is Vojvodina, where I could split Banat in two. But I'm not sure if I want to make it a 4-territory bonus...

[Victor Sullivan]

Well, the only place I can think of is Vojvodina, where I could split Banat in two. But I'm not sure if I want to make it a 4-territory bonus...

Seems perfectly reasonable to me, especially compared to Slovenia and Macedonia.

-Sully

[natty dread]

Ok how's this

Click image to enlarge.

[Victor Sullivan]

Looks fine to me.

-Sully

[isaiah40]

Either way is fine with me, though I may lean towards the splitting of Banat.

[natty dread]

Ok, so then, I will have a Banatna split, and South Kosovo starts with neutral 2.

Any other gameplay conserns?

[isaiah40]

Looking at the hold all ports and Adriatic Sea for only +2, it seems a little low IMO. It's not worth enough for anyone to go after. I think I would like to see it at either +4 or +5 for the 6 territories. I'm leaning towards +4, as I feel that it just enough for someone to want to take and hold it, and yet not so high that it could make the game lopsided.

[natty dread]

The +2 ports bonus is not meant to be a stand-alone bonus. I don't want to make it too strong, as it's a side dish, not the main course.

Picture this: you hold Slovenia & Primorje-Gorski, you get +2 troops for an area with 2 borders. With territory bonus, that's 5 troops a turn for defending 2 territories. So far so good. Then you take the rest of the ports + the Sea, and you now get +6 - as Titograd is a capital and you now have 2 capitals. Counting territory bonus, you now get 9 troops for defending 5 borders.

Well, I could increase it to +3. I think that's high enough for it, with Slovenia it would be 10 troops for 5 borders - that's 2 per territory, or 1 per territory and 5 to spare - which is quite adequate in my opinion.

[isaiah40]

The +2 ports bonus is not meant to be a stand-alone bonus. I don't want to make it too strong, as it's a side dish, not the main course.

Picture this: you hold Slovenia & Primorje-Gorski, you get +2 troops for an area with 2 borders. With territory bonus, that's 5 troops a turn for defending 2 territories. So far so good. Then you take the rest of the ports + the Sea, and you now get +6 - as Titograd is a capital and you now have 2 capitals. Counting territory bonus, you now get 9 troops for defending 5 borders.

Well, I could increase it to +3. I think that's high enough for it, with Slovenia it would be 10 troops for 5 borders - that's 2 per territory, or 1 per territory and 5 to spare - which is quite adequate in my opinion.

Fair enough. Go with +3 and we'll see how it works out in beta.

[natty dread]

Click image to enlarge.

[natty dread]

Maybe I should cut off the mountain between Pristina / Pljevlja? Macedonia is still a bit hard to reach, and if you manage to hold Serbia + Kosovo + Macedonia, you get +10 for only 3 borders - that's a bit too much, seeing as on the west side, all you have is Slovenia + Ports + Montenegro - which is 6 borders at least for that same +10.

So removing the impassable between Pristina/Pljevlja means you need to defend 4 borders on the east side...

[natty dread]

Ok I decided to do this instead

Click image to enlarge.

[natty dread]

Maybe I should remove the bridge from Dubrovnik after all...

[natty dread]

Bridge removed.

Are there any gameplay concerns that I should address?

Click image to enlarge.