Conquer Club

RjBeals wrote:Hmm... I was wondering if it would be more fair to start all the dustbowl territ's as a neutral +1. I know during map creation this was discussed about starting neutrals and unlucky drops, but I've played some games where due to a bad starting drop, players have had absolutely no chance of winning. Is this worth revisiting, or letting it stay as luck of the drop?

Let it stay - shit happens.

C.

I just had a 1v1 where I dropped with 6 of my 12 territories in the dust. Then I lost all 4 from my deployment on bad dice. There's no chance I can win.

Night Strike wrote:I just had a 1v1 where I dropped with 6 of my 12 territories in the dust. Then I lost all 4 from my deployment on bad dice. There's no chance I can win.

I had about the same. Dropped 7 in the dust which i lost. I won the game.. but still.

I knew this would happen.

Yes Shit Happens - but it may be bad enough where 1 game with an unlucky drop, and the player will not play the map again for fear it will happen again. My vote is to leave it be also I guess, simply because I'm done with the map, and focused on my next project - but if this keeps rising to the top, and the staff agrees, then I'll have no choice but to re-open the map.

I just had a thought; could all the dustbowl territories start with 4, so on the first turn they decay to 3 rather than 2?
I'm not sure what I think of that, but it might be a way to mitigate against the drop?

MrBenn wrote:I just had a thought; could all the dustbowl territories start with 4, so on the first turn they decay to 3 rather than 2?
I'm not sure what I think of that, but it might be a way to mitigate against the drop?

Yeti, is this possible?

MrBenn wrote:I just had a thought; could all the dustbowl territories start with 4, so on the first turn they decay to 3 rather than 2?
I'm not sure what I think of that, but it might be a way to mitigate against the drop?

Yes - with a lot of coding... every single territory would need to be a "<position>" - and you could then set them to 4...

This would have a sideeffect of eliminating the 3rd Neutral player in 1v1 games though.

C.

That sounds like a bit too much effort...

Thinking about it, you'd get complaints about people starting with more armies... (ie if you went 1st, all the dust would have 4s on them)

An excellent map and nice game. I just finished listening to the audio version of the Timothy Egan book, The Worst Hard Time. Very striking story and reflective of the fact that we as humans CAN have a nearly immediate, measurable affect on the environment.

Thanks for your great work here!

exclaim wrote:An excellent map and nice game. I just finished listening to the audio version of the Timothy Egan book, The Worst Hard Time. Very striking story and reflective of the fact that we as humans CAN have a nearly immediate, measurable affect on the environment.

Thanks for your great work here!

.
Your Welcome. Inspiration from reading that book is why I created this map. Glad you like it!

RjBeals wrote:Hmm... I was wondering if it would be more fair to start all the dustbowl territ's as a neutral +1. I know during map creation this was discussed about starting neutrals and unlucky drops, but I've played some games where due to a bad starting drop, players have had absolutely no chance of winning. Is this worth revisiting, or letting it stay as luck of the drop?

I personally like it as is, and hadn't ever considered the thought of it being an improvement by adding neutrals.

6266823 - Killed red in this game, cashed, got two bonus troops to Boise City. When I started deploying, I had 2 troops on Boise City. I.e. it appears that the initial -1 effect in the the Dust Bowl kicked in mid-turn. Bug?

alstergren wrote:Game 6266823 - Killed red in this game, cashed, got two bonus troops to Boise City. When I started deploying, I had 2 troops on Boise City. I.e. it appears that the initial -1 effect in the the Dust Bowl kicked in mid-turn. Bug?

There's nothing in the gamelog to indicate any lost troops

alstergren wrote:6266823 - Killed red in this game, cashed, got two bonus troops to Boise City. When I started deploying, I had 2 troops on Boise City. I.e. it appears that the initial -1 effect in the the Dust Bowl kicked in mid-turn. Bug?

Agree with MrBenn, reading the log, when you cashed you got 2 bonus troops to Oklahoma City, not to Boise city....

2010-01-21 20:14:20 - alstergren eliminated Dirtis Khan from the game
2010-01-21 20:14:29 - alstergren cashed in a group of Oklahoma City, Sterling, and Topeka worth 10 troops
2010-01-21 20:14:29 - alstergren got bonus of 2 troops added to Oklahoma City
2010-01-21 20:14:36 - alstergren deployed 6 troops on Boise City

thenobodies80 wrote:

alstergren wrote:6266823 - Killed red in this game, cashed, got two bonus troops to Boise City. When I started deploying, I had 2 troops on Boise City. I.e. it appears that the initial -1 effect in the the Dust Bowl kicked in mid-turn. Bug?

Agree with MrBenn, reading the log, when you cashed you got 2 bonus troops to Oklahoma City, not to Boise city....

2010-01-21 20:14:20 - alstergren eliminated Dirtis Khan from the game
2010-01-21 20:14:29 - alstergren cashed in a group of Oklahoma City, Sterling, and Topeka worth 10 troops
2010-01-21 20:14:29 - alstergren got bonus of 2 troops added to Oklahoma City
2010-01-21 20:14:36 - alstergren deployed 6 troops on Boise City

Oh. I did. Well, in that case, the Boise didn't decrease as I thought. My bad...

Can the XML be changed on this to have equal amounts of starting territories in the decaying zone?

It just makes sense. It would make games more fair and probably get more people to play the map.

chapcrap wrote:Can the XML be changed on this to have equal amounts of starting territories in the decaying zone?

It just makes sense. It would make games more fair and probably get more people to play the map.

Was this a stupid question?

You'd have to ask RjBeals about that.

I'm not changing it, but I don't care if someone else wants to.

chapcrap wrote:Can the XML be changed on this to have equal amounts of starting territories in the decaying zone?

It just makes sense. It would make games more fair and probably get more people to play the map.

That would be great.

Decreasing the number of starting regions in 1 v 1 games would make the games even more balanced, in my opinion. Currently both players get 12 regions.

RjBeals wrote:I'm not changing it, but I don't care if someone else wants to.

Thanks Rj! Let's get the XML out and start editing!

Now that Rj said he doesn't mind changes, can I just work with the XML myself? Does someone else need to?

you can do it if you know how.

Well, the lastest version of the xml in this thread that I can find is about 6 pages ago. There is nothing in the first post for the XML. Can one of the Foundry mods take a look at this? Give me the XML and I will work on a proposed change to make the map even. Everyone can see that the starting positions need to be changed.

here you go. this is the current version