Moderator: Cartographers
yeti_c wrote:Mountains much better.
Gameplay - I gave you an idea on how to fix this for 2 player games - would that solve Ed's problem? - Would 3 player games need fixing too? - We can do that too (without impacting too much on the 2 player)
C.
edbeard wrote:doesn't your idea involve a different XML for 2 player games? No way in hell lack is doing that.
yeti_c wrote:Note: 2 player games wouldn't start the same for 2 reasons.
a) of the 3 position tags - 2 would get chosen randomly.
b) The 3rd position tag wouldn't be used... the territories defined in this would be assigned randomly (With a 1/3 going to neutral).
> Note of course - that 32 divides into 2 but not 3 easily.
This would mean that the 3 player game would be totally balanced...
oaktown wrote:yeti_c wrote:Note: 2 player games wouldn't start the same for 2 reasons.
a) of the 3 position tags - 2 would get chosen randomly.
b) The 3rd position tag wouldn't be used... the territories defined in this would be assigned randomly (With a 1/3 going to neutral).
> Note of course - that 32 divides into 2 but not 3 easily.
This would mean that the 3 player game would be totally balanced...
Agh! I thought I finally understood the subtle complexities of the Positions tags, but clearly I do not.
In (a) above, you say 2 of the three tags would be chosen randomly... I thought that two of the three tags positions would be NOT random, in that the territories within that position tag aren't scrambled. Which position tag you get, however, WILL be random.
oaktown wrote:In (b) I assumed that the third, unassigned position tag would go neutral, no? In Das Schlos, which has eight positions, if you're playing a two or three player game are the last two positions that aren't handed out split up among the players? Because that would lead to one player having an paratrooper, which is exactly what we are trying to avoid by setting up the positions in the first place.
yeti_c wrote:> Note of course - that 32 divides into 2 but not 3 easily.
yeti_c wrote:yeti_c wrote:> Note of course - that 32 divides into 2 but not 3 easily.
In this instance - I would give each <position> 10 territories - the extra 2 will be neutral - I would suggest choosing something right in the middle for those 2...
So - with 3 positions of 10 each... then 2 player games would get 10 pre assigned - and 6 other territories each.
oaktown wrote:I think you're saying two different things here, yeti. Three tags of ten leaves 2 territories, which should just be left alone - not tagged neutral. In a two player game they will made neutral automatically since there aren't three to split up among the two players and the 1v1 neutral. So each player in a 2 player game would start with the 10 pre-assigned, plus 5 territories from the unclaimed third tag (not 6).
In games of four or more I assume the position tags would be disregarded completely, and all 32 of the territories thrown into the mix together.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users