Moderator: Cartographers
Gillipig wrote:Haha like the idea. Reminds me of Circus Maximum in some way, just more complicated. We often see maps with complicated bonuses but awkward attack routes isn't as common. But no bonuses? Maybe I'm wrong but I think you should reconsider that.
If let's say you have a bunch of territs out there that if taken together results in a bonus players have to figure out how to attack to take down as few neutrals as possible and get the bonus as fast as possible.
but doesn't no bonuses mean dice luck matters more?
koontz1973 wrote:The only bonus I considered in the drafting stage was to have a whole column or row for a bonus in a sliding scale. Column A would be 1 and column D & E 4 back to column H being a 1. Rejected that as it means a player with all of a column would win. Can put it back if demand for it is lots.
tokle wrote:koontz1973 wrote:The only bonus I considered in the drafting stage was to have a whole column or row for a bonus in a sliding scale. Column A would be 1 and column D & E 4 back to column H being a 1. Rejected that as it means a player with all of a column would win. Can put it back if demand for it is lots.
I think you should keep it as plain and simple as you can.
koontz1973 wrote:the higher the number, the luck of the dice becomes less important.
Gillipig wrote:koontz1973 wrote:the higher the number, the luck of the dice becomes less important.
True but remember that all maps with high numbered neutrals have bonuses on them. You might end up making it very unbalanced if you have high neutrals but no bonuses. Why? The benefit of attacking won't be greater than just sitting there and waiting for the other one to bust up some high numbered neutrals. In fact that is a problem I can already imagine as it is now. If this map is played without spoils players will just wait each other out, it will be like Feudal war without bonuses which I think most of us can imagine would not make for very fun games. Spoils will force players to think a little but no spoils also unfortunately means no attacking as it is now. I don't think your innovative attack route system is being exploited to it's full potential. Players will just stack and when someone feel they have enough troops they'll try to go for the opponents "mother territ". 3 player games would be a torture with everyone just waiting each other out. I think you need bonuses to make it a balanced map.
koontz1973 wrote:Gillipig wrote:koontz1973 wrote:the higher the number, the luck of the dice becomes less important.
True but remember that all maps with high numbered neutrals have bonuses on them. You might end up making it very unbalanced if you have high neutrals but no bonuses. Why? The benefit of attacking won't be greater than just sitting there and waiting for the other one to bust up some high numbered neutrals. In fact that is a problem I can already imagine as it is now. If this map is played without spoils players will just wait each other out, it will be like Feudal war without bonuses which I think most of us can imagine would not make for very fun games. Spoils will force players to think a little but no spoils also unfortunately means no attacking as it is now. I don't think your innovative attack route system is being exploited to it's full potential. Players will just stack and when someone feel they have enough troops they'll try to go for the opponents "mother territ". 3 player games would be a torture with everyone just waiting each other out. I think you need bonuses to make it a balanced map.
Even in a no spoils game, the choice of stacking is a strategy, not an advantage. There are only 3 neutrals between the 2 players so if you stack your 5 onto one territ, you would have 18. If I take those 3 neutral territs with no lose, I will attack your 18 with 15. Many times with those odds, the attacking player has won. But then you get your 5 and take all of the territory lost and more. This map will come down to how you play it. You say in a 3+ player game, players will stack, they do that now in City Mogul already and Circus Maximus and lots of other maps. That is not new as a strategy. The map with lots of neutrals have bonuses, I agree with that, and a map with lots of high neutrals (City Mogul only) has high amounts of deployable troops, but we are dealing with neutral 1s only. One other map without bonuses or continents on is Circus Maximus, and it is played fairly regularly. It is not Classic numbers or AOR but it has a following. With the neutrals only being one, you would need to have extremely bad dice to lose a lot. With both players getting exactly the same throughout, the player that decides to mass attack will lose. This is not for your quick / speed games. It will need to be played slowly with a lot of thought as a player that mass attacks will lose quickly. The player that moves slowly and with great care over where to place his troops will get a much bigger advantage than. Gillipig, you may think the bonuses would balance the map, but with all respects, I disagree. Bonuses will not go onto the map unless there is serious problems when it comes to Beta, when I say serious problems, I mean the first few games get to round 50+ with no end in site. Only at that point will they go on.
thehippo8 wrote:With respect, I agree on the no bonuses - certainly for now. From a chess perspective, if you DID change your mind (which I doubt) then bonuses could be available for the central squares (ie the four very centre squares and then the 12 squares around them as two distinct regions. I can't see how to do that, though, without making the map look really ugly!
Gillipig wrote:koontz to be honest I only like the knight attack routes, I don't think you're making the most of the possibilities that your innovative attack system offers. It will end up being a very easy map if you only know how knights move in chess and have some patience. "A minute to learn, a lifetime to master" is a great slogan but I don't see how it fits this map. If I were you I would move away from the chessboard and try the knight attack system in some other environment. A chessboard is too small and limited for my taste.
koontz1973 wrote:Gillipig, you have made you feelings known towards this map, loud and clear.
isaiah40 wrote:I think the dot idea is the way to go. Instead of dots you could outline each square with the colors - stay away from the yellow as it is hard to see in the legend.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users