Conquer Man [Quenched]

[Coleman]

What do others think about having more than one cake?

The cake is a lie.

[Night Strike]

I haven't payed too close attention, but using double (and triple) letters for territories will get really confusing (not to mention really hard on the eyes). If people want no continents, couldn't you leave in the colors to differentiate territories but not code them as a bonus?

[yamahafazer]

I haven't payed too close attention, but using double (and triple) letters for territories will get really confusing (not to mention really hard on the eyes). If people want no continents, couldn't you leave in the colors to differentiate territories but not code them as a bonus?

I think that this is a good idea as it could get very hard to read.

[yamahafazer]

If people are set on only having one cake don't you think that it's a bit too cloce to the "conquer man"? If their so close one person might easaly be able to get them bouth and hold them.

[WidowMakers]

If people are set on only having one cake don't you think that it's a bit too cloce to the "conquer man"? If their so close one person might easaly be able to get them both and hold them.

Conquer-Man, The cupcake, the Diamonds and Aliens will all start out with neutral territories on them.

[yamahafazer]

hummm ok

[Skittles!]

I haven't payed too close attention, but using double (and triple) letters for territories will get really confusing (not to mention really hard on the eyes). If people want no continents, couldn't you leave in the colors to differentiate territories but not code them as a bonus?

I agree with Night Strike, and the colours are easier on the eyes rather than the stand-out white.

[oaktown]

I haven't payed too close attention, but using double (and triple) letters for territories will get really confusing (not to mention really hard on the eyes). If people want no continents, couldn't you leave in the colors to differentiate territories but not code them as a bonus?

I agree with Night Strike, and the colours are easier on the eyes rather than the stand-out white.

I'm in both camps - I prefer the no pellet groups, but perhaps the pellets can be turned down a few degrees to make them easier on the eyes.

you should work with Lack and see if you can't add some "wacka wacka" every time the map opens.

[WidowMakers]

I think I am also leaning towards the no bonus territory idea.

OK here is an idea for the naming. If we use a grid system then the names do not need to be in the way and there is no need to use colors to shorten the name.
1) One color - Grid naming: A1, A2, ..... Q14, Q15
2) Color Naming (See last image) Red A, Red B ..... Blue Q, Blue R
This is confusing because I think people will think the different colors mean something. There will be tons of posts "Why don't i get a bonus for holding all of RED?

3) One color - pellet naming: A, B, C, D.....AA, AB, AC, AD,......EA, EB, EC, ED

I like #1.



But we still need to decide if we want to lower the bonus as the numbers get higher (read lower right of legend)

WM

[oaktown]

how about a two letter grid system so you can print the numbers on the pellets but you don't have to mess with a third digit...
first row is AA - AO
second row is BA - BO
third row is CA - CO

When there's a barrier I'd skip over a letter to make sure the, "J"s or "O"s line up vertically. This will make for more clear attack patterns.

I'd vote no bonus regions, but i like that you're trying to be creative with the army distribution. Can you be more clear about the decreasing bonuses? Are we talking regressive in that if you hold ten terits you get the base 3, but if you hold 12 you get a -1 penalty and remain at +3? Or do you keep getting bonuses but the steps aren't so big?

[unriggable]

Label each pelet A1, A2, etc.

[WidowMakers]

how about a two letter grid system...
first row is AA - AO
second row is BA - BO
third row is CA - CO

When there's a barrier I'd skip over a letter to make sure the, "J"s or "O"s line up vertically. This will make for more clear attack patterns.

Are you saying to put the letters on the pellets?

I'd vote no bonus regions, but i like that you're trying to be creative with the army distribution. Can you be more clear about the decreasing bonuses? Are we talking regressive in that if you hold ten terits you get the base 3, but if you hold 12 you get a -1 penalty and remain at +3? Or do you keep getting bonuses but the steps aren't so big?

I had a graph done but I must have lost it. I will try to make up one later but in the mean time here is what I meant.

Basically the blue line is the standard increase by 1 army for every three territories. An the magenta line is the decreaseing value of bonus. There is teh equation where X is the number of pellets

The problem is I don't know how to do this in XML and how to explain it.

[Coleman]

I still favor continents so no help from me on the xml issue with your idea. At least, not right now.

[Incandenza]

I like the no-continent concept. With so many territories, armies won't be hard to come by.

A few things, tho:
1. You might want to think about having the grid coordinates along the side and bottom AND having the pellet # on the actual pellets. I know it's redundant, but I just think you'll have fewer misdrops that way.
2. One thing to consider is that, when it comes to territory-count bonuses, we're not just talking about pellets. The bonus-type territories are territories as well that will add to the count.
3. I may be alone on this, but I think the cupcake bonus is a touch high.

Potential copy for the territory-bonus concept:
There are no continents in Conquer-Man! (alt: Conquer-Man sneers at continent bonuses!)
Territory bonuses are sliding:
(and then you'd have some sort of box, like so:)
territories----# territories per army
1-21 ------------------ 3
22-x ------------------ 4
x+1-y ---------------- 5
y+1-z ---------------- 6

well, you get the idea.

[oaktown]

It would be ideal to have the territory names attached to the pellets somehow, but I understand that it may get messy on teh board... one of those moments where you have to weigh practicality vs. look.

Could you keep the bonus structure more simple and just say that in ConquerMan your per turn allotment is one army for every four territories, instead of three? This would be easy to accomplish with the given XML - you create a bonus called "Conquerman recalculation" that has every terit, you only need 12 terits to hold it, and it's a -1. Thus if you have 12, 13, or 14 terits you get 4-1=3. Then another bonus with the same name that gives a -1 at 15, and another with the same name that gives a +1 at 16, and so on... -1 every 3, +1 every four.

A typical turn would look like this:
05:56:21 - oaktown receives -2 armies for holding Conquerman Recalculation
05:56:21 - oaktown receives 7 armies for 22 territories

(22÷4=5 armies; 7-2=5 armies)

You could just as easily do the same thing with the XML but stagger the progression, it would just be harder to explain.

This would be a fun idea for a small map going the other way: +1 army every 2 teritories.

[Coleman]

The xml to do this wouldn't be hard. I would just use a series of collections containing all the pellets with overrides myself.

[bloknayrb]

I think that keeping the grid labels on the sides would make it too much of a pain to play, but the idea of bonuses coming only from territories held and not continents is an interesting one.

[yeti_c]

The xml to do this wouldn't be hard. I would just use a series of collections containing all the pellets with overrides myself.

Concur...

For naming - I like the grid... but I don't like the RED pellets... Can you make them a colour that's not in the 6 player colours?

C.

[WidowMakers]

So for naming we have Three camps:

1) Grid
2) Pellets
3) Grid and Pellets

I will try to get pictures of these up and once the poll is reset we can vote.

[I GOT SERVED]

So far, this map is really coming along, and I love it. Keep up the excellent work!

That being said, I'm not a big fan of the grid, namely because for me personally, this would make mis-deploying sooooo much easier to do. This is why I favor the color/pellet combo (Red A, etc.) You don't have to have continent bonuses per say, but just some differentiation would be great.

[WidowMakers]

So far, this map is really coming along, and I love it. Keep up the excellent work!

That being said, I'm not a big fan of the grid, namely because for me personally, this would make mis-deploying sooooo much easier to do. This is why I favor the color/pellet combo (Red A, etc.) You don't have to have continent bonuses per say, but just some differentiation would be great.

I understand what you are saying but:
1) Pac-man only has one color of pellets
2) It will confuse players. They get confused when there is text on a map explaining stuff. Imagine how confused they will get when they think they are supposed to get a bonus for a color and don't
==================================
OK here are the three styles.

The first one looks the best. But the 2nd will probably be the best for reading the map and not making mistakes. IMHO

Grid

Pellet

Grid and Pellet

[unriggable]

Don't think diamonds should be able to attack each other. Bonus is enough.

[Aerial Attack]

I vote for version C (Grid and Pellet). That's the most clear

[unriggable]

What's the point of the grid if there are already pellets?

[WidowMakers]

What's the point of the grid if there are already pellets?

I agree. It only makes the map wider and seems to confuse me.

I only put that one as an option because someone asked.

WM