New Zealand [Quenched]

[Armandolas]

Congratz for the map.
My eye usually is not a big fan of your maps design, but this one looks really nice. Nice combination of colours and sober enough.So this time my eye got you
Didnt try to play it yet but it looks really fun so i will do it soon.
Keep up the good work

Thank-you Armandolas for your feedback, I hope you enjoy this map.
As a matter of other feedback...why my other maps not catch you eye? Just interested to know

I think my eye has a problem with the colours that you like. You seem to like a lot of pink and "washed" colours ...sometimes i have the feeling that im still playing some 80s videogame
Maybe they are just too colourfull for me and dont let me concentrate...haha
Also the little details like mountains and these kinds of stuff, now are much more modern
Maybe i cant just explain my feelings...but this is not a criticism , is just a matter of my visual taste no being equal to yours, because i know a lot of people like your maps

[cairnswk]

...
I think my eye has a problem with the colours that you like. You seem to like a lot of pink and "washed" colours ...sometimes i have the feeling that im still playing some 80s videogame
Maybe they are just too colourfull for me and dont let me concentrate...haha
Also the little details like mountains and these kinds of stuff, now are much more modern
Maybe i cant just explain my feelings...but this is not a criticism , is just a matter of my visual taste no being equal to yours, because i know a lot of people like your maps

Thanks Armandolas. appreciate your time.

[cairnswk]

Just found an error in the xml....Kaikoura should start 3 neutral (Tiki), but doesn't....so have fixed attached below for upload please
I've checked again all neutral tikis, and these should now be fine.

[Seamus76]

Congrats on another beautiful map.

[cairnswk]

Congrats on another beautiful map.

thank-you Seamus.

[thenobodies80]

Just found an error in the xml....Kaikoura should start 3 neutral (Tiki), but doesn't....so have fixed attached below for upload please
I've checked again all neutral tikis, and these should now be fine.

Sent. It shouldn't take too long.

Nobodies

[rdsrds2120]

Uploaded! Thanks!

BMO

[cairnswk]

Uploaded! Thanks!

BMO

Thank-you rdsrds2120

[thenobodies80]

I agree with iancanton about what you discussed in Game 12192356.
Specify on the map that tiki are autodeploy is a very good idea.
Said that, you can wait a bit before to update, maybe something else will come up, so you won't have to produce an update just for that.

Nobodies

[cairnswk]

I agree with iancanton about what you discussed in Game 12192356.
Specify on the map that tiki are autodeploy is a very good idea.
Said that, you can wait a bit before to update, maybe something else will come up, so you won't have to produce an update just for that.

Nobodies

OKies

[Bruceswar]

First time playing this map. I will say this. Looks to be a very interesting map. I am fan of 1 vs 1 games and 18 spots to start gives a pretty big advantage to those who go first. Example.. Yes I had killer dice, but the point of 6 vs 5 or 4 to drop stands. Maybe 1 more neutral would fix this?

Game 12204881

After me playing 1 turn..

Bruceswar 4.9 1 24 59 8
shaneback 4.8 0 12 36 4

I am 23 men up and 8 deployments up.

[nolefan5311]

First time playing this map. I will say this. Looks to be a very interesting map. I am fan of 1 vs 1 games and 18 spots to start gives a pretty big advantage to those who go first. Example.. Yes I had killer dice, but the point of 6 vs 5 or 4 to drop stands. Maybe 1 more neutral would fix this?

Game 12204881

After me playing 1 turn..

Bruceswar 4.9 1 24 59 8
shaneback 4.8 0 12 36 4

I am 23 men up and 8 deployments up.

This appears to be a result of the changed XML posted on the 9th, in which one of the Tiki's was coded neutral. This will have to be addressed cairns. Are any other regions other than the Tiki's coded as neutrals? I haven't counted the regions myself, but based on the first post, there are 73 starting regions and 16 neutrals, leaving 57 regions to be distributed, which would give each player 19 regions in 1v1. Ideally, you put it down to 53 starting regions so 1v1 will start with 17 and 4 player games will start with 13, but 57 is a decent enough number (though not perfect, since dropping 6 will make it easier to take 3 or more regions from your opponent on the first turn).

[cairnswk]

First time playing this map. I will say this. Looks to be a very interesting map. I am fan of 1 vs 1 games and 18 spots to start gives a pretty big advantage to those who go first. Example.. Yes I had killer dice, but the point of 6 vs 5 or 4 to drop stands. Maybe 1 more neutral would fix this?

Game 12204881

After me playing 1 turn..

Bruceswar 4.9 1 24 59 8
shaneback 4.8 0 12 36 4

I am 23 men up and 8 deployments up.

This appears to be a result of the changed XML posted on the 9th, in which one of the Tiki's was coded neutral. This will have to be addressed cairns. Are any other regions other than the Tiki's coded as neutrals?

no, there are only 16 neutrals on tikis.

I haven't counted the regions myself, but based on the first post, there are 73 starting regions and 16 neutrals, leaving 57 regions to be distributed, which would give each player 19 regions in 1v1. Ideally, you put it down to 53 starting regions so 1v1 will start with 17 and 4 player games will start with 13, but 57 is a decent enough number (though not perfect, since dropping 6 will make it easier to take 3 or more regions from your opponent on the first turn).

There are 72 terts (FP now changed)...my bad
less 16 neutrals = 56 for distribution...not so good....since that means for 2P/3P 18 start positions = 6 armies on the drop, which is what everyone gets at present.

Rather than code another 3 neutrals (which is the number required to make a decent drop number), why not make the divisor 4 (i have new graphics and xml centering to do anyway).

That would make 2P/3P armies 4 on start. This would reduce the ability to take so many terts on 1st go and even up the playing field a bit.

Code: Select all

    <reinforcements>
       <reinforcement>
          <lower>1</lower>
          <upper>72</upper>
          <divisor>4</divisor>
       </reinforcement>
    </reinforcements>

[thehippo8]

That sounds like a clever/good suggestion!

[nolefan5311]

That would solve the problem as well.

[Leehar]

agree with the fix for 2p

[ManBungalow]

Is the Tiki "+1 bonus when held" an autodeploy?

[cairnswk]

Is the Tiki "+1 bonus when held" an autodeploy?

yes MB, there's a fix coming for that shortly.

[cairnswk]

Attached is the xml file with the new divisor of 4 in it.
The new xml file must be uploaded because it has new centering in it.

Small

Click image to enlarge.

Large

Click image to enlarge.

http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s282 ... 1S_xml.png
http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s282 ... 1L_xml.png

XML: http://www.fileden.com/files/2012/12/21/3378809/06_NZ.xml

[Leehar]

It's still somewhat tough to tell which terr. exactly have the planes. Gisborne (and perhaps Auckland) are the best because they're right next to the actual troops (which you click on for clickable maps etc)

Perhaps put mini-airports inside the actual territories, or some other identifier like you have with the tiki's?
Or I see now that the planes are alongside the territory names, so perhaps make that explicitly stated, since sometimes I thought ashburton or mt. taranaki had a plane etc

Also, is there anyway to make mt. cook & twizei seem more seperated? the curving of the river right near the mountain made it seem they were connected.
In that same vein, is it possible to say that the rivers have Bridges?

[cairnswk]

It's still somewhat tough to tell which terr. exactly have the planes. Gisborne (and perhaps Auckland) are the best because they're right next to the actual troops (which you click on for clickable maps etc)

Perhaps put mini-airports inside the actual territories, or some other identifier like you have with the tiki's?
Or I see now that the planes are alongside the territory names, so perhaps make that explicitly stated, since sometimes I thought ashburton or mt. taranaki had a plane etc

Also, is there anyway to make mt. cook & twizei seem more seperated? the curving of the river right near the mountain made it seem they were connected.
In that same vein, is it possible to say that the rivers have Bridges?

"Where are mine eyes".
We'll see if anyone else has these problems.

[Oneyed]

It's still somewhat tough to tell which terr. exactly have the planes. Gisborne (and perhaps Auckland) are the best because they're right next to the actual troops (which you click on for clickable maps etc)

Perhaps put mini-airports inside the actual territories, or some other identifier like you have with the tiki's?
Or I see now that the planes are alongside the territory names, so perhaps make that explicitly stated, since sometimes I thought ashburton or mt. taranaki had a plane etc

Also, is there anyway to make mt. cook & twizei seem more seperated? the curving of the river right near the mountain made it seem they were connected.
In that same vein, is it possible to say that the rivers have Bridges?

"Where are mine eyes".
We'll see if anyone else has these problems.

for me is question about planes clear. maybe because I´ve looked at the map more often...
...but cairn for those who have this problem you could do that frame around names will be longer and planes will be in frame with names...

Oneyed

[thenobodies80]

The updated images and xml have been sent.

Nobodies

[cairnswk]

It's still somewhat tough to tell which terr. exactly have the planes. Gisborne (and perhaps Auckland) are the best because they're right next to the actual troops (which you click on for clickable maps etc)

Perhaps put mini-airports inside the actual territories, or some other identifier like you have with the tiki's?
Or I see now that the planes are alongside the territory names, so perhaps make that explicitly stated, since sometimes I thought ashburton or mt. taranaki had a plane etc

Also, is there anyway to make mt. cook & twizei seem more seperated? the curving of the river right near the mountain made it seem they were connected.
In that same vein, is it possible to say that the rivers have Bridges?

"Where are mine eyes".
We'll see if anyone else has these problems.

for me is question about planes clear. maybe because I´ve looked at the map more often...
...but cairn for those who have this problem you could do that frame around names will be longer and planes will be in frame with names...
Oneyed

Yes i could do that, and planes would have to be smaller ti fit inside the frame of name and to me spoil the look of the map.
I think Oneyed, that if some players simply take the time to examine the map, they will see that most of the planes sit at the end of the name frames, and that had they applied that association to Mt Taranaki or Ashburton they see exactly where the planes were.

[cairnswk]

The updated images and xml have been sent.

Nobodies

thanks tnb80