Conquer Club

e_i_pi wrote:

oaktown wrote:

e_i_pi wrote:How would you feel about having some sort of bonus for holding x amount of territories that lie between the Tigris and the Euphrates? Like the Zeroes/Kates/Vals on Pearl harbour. That would bring more attention to the centre of the map early on, which I think would create a more widespread dynamic for the map.

I totally agree - this is the cradle of civilization after all, so the territories with the Tigris/Euphrates valleys should be the focal point of the map. And I always love giving players incentive to start in regions that would traditionally be an unwise start (see India, berlin, eastern hemisphere).

Any suggestions on how this could best work? Perhaps a ziggurat symbol noting the major civilization centers within the rivers, and give +1 for holding any three, +2 for any four, etc. Or is this too Route 66?

Hmm. Two ways you can go with this:

The Territory Bonus
Something like Berlin would be good, but Berlin uses x/2+1 territories as the cutoff for bonus, meaning only one player can have the bonus at a time. I would think allowing more than one player to achieve bonus would be good, given the sheer number of territories. 1 for 3, 2 for 5, 3 for 7 maybe, but I don't know. edbeard would be the one to grill about the bonus structure. Also, a problem with doing it this way is you'd potentially fall into the same trap experienced with USA Map Pack and Wales - ie, the problem with a player dropping 'the lot'.

The Key Point Bonus
Use just the major cities, so I dunno what they are, I guess:
Susa, Ur, Nineveh, Babylon
I've never studied Ancient History, but those 4 would be in there, I'm guessing another 2 or 3 would be good then have a structure like you described above.

I would prefer to see something like the first option, but that is somewhat unmanageable, and the second option is a good balance between allowing open play and ensuring certain game types aren't farcical.

What he said. The first option would be best, but the second may be what we have to go with to prevent an imbalanced drop.

i think I'm reading the two suggestions correctly, and I think that a hybrid of the two ideas might work best. I think we could identify eight major cities in the T/E river basin, mark them on the map, and give an escalating bonus for holding them. As e_i_pi said; hold 3 for +1, hold 5 for +3, hold 7 for +5. This would be in addition to the bonuses you already receive for holding those regions, so if we put four in each of the central regions it would give each region another +1 army on top of the regular bonus, reflecting the importance of the region. Hell, we could just put three in each territory and put two elsewhere to make things interesting - Susa and Mari would be the obvious choices.

I like Uruk (Gilgamesh's home city) Babylon, and Ur in Sumer; Assur, Nineveh, and something farther north in Subartu; Mari and Susa to mix things up. ??

The reason I'm suggesting eight is that we could code them as starting positions, so no one player would start with three of them, with the exception of two and three players games in which each player would at start with a minimum of two cities, and the last two would - if I am remembering the rule correctly - would be assigned randomly. You can't make every map perfect for every game type.

I'll comment on this some other time, but I just wanted to say right now that the combination of the idea with these incredibly befitting graphics has me giddy with excitement.

Didn't put too much into the graphics, but this is the basic idea. Forgot to tweak the bonuses as suggested above, but there's all kinds of time for that.

oaktown wrote:The reason I'm suggesting eight is that we could code them as starting positions, so no one player would start with three of them, with the exception of two and three players games in which each player would at start with a minimum of two cities, and the last two would - if I am remembering the rule correctly - would be assigned randomly. You can't make every map perfect for every game type.

If you were to code the cities as neutrals, then the remaining cities wouldn't be allocated to anybody.

I still think the red/brown regions are quite isolated, and easier to hold than anywhere else

the white territory lines seem a little off. Can't say I am digging the stone too much either.

MrBenn wrote:If you were to code the cities as neutrals, then the remaining cities wouldn't be allocated to anybody.

Hmm, so you can code a terit as neutral, AND as a starting position, and the starting position overrides the neutral start unless it is not assigned? (Did we have this exact same conversation last month?)

MrBenn wrote:I still think the red/brown regions are quite isolated, and easier to hold than anywhere else

Right now both can be held from four territories, or three if you expand out to Mashu, Assuer, and Nineveh. Perhaps when the red region is dropped to just +5 it will be better? Or do we need another entry?

mibi wrote:the white territory lines seem a little off.

Agreed - the lines would look better just being the color of the background/unfinished wall.

oaktown wrote:

MrBenn wrote:If you were to code the cities as neutrals, then the remaining cities wouldn't be allocated to anybody.

Hmm, so you can code a terit as neutral, AND as a starting position, and the starting position overrides the neutral start unless it is not assigned? (Did we have this exact same conversation last month?)

Yes and Yes... Déja vu?

oaktown wrote:The reason I'm suggesting eight is that we could code them as starting positions, so no one player would start with three of them, with the exception of two and three players games in which each player would at start with a minimum of two cities, and the last two would - if I am remembering the rule correctly - would be assigned randomly. You can't make every map perfect for every game type.

1v1 = 4 cities - but that's not a problem - as it would still be fair.
1v1v1 = 2 cities (2 neutral) (Assuming the cities are set to neutral - otherwise the remaining 2 would be allocated randomly.)

C.

yeti_c wrote:[1v1 = 4 cities - but that's not a problem - as it would still be fair.
1v1v1 = 2 cities (2 neutral) (Assuming the cities are set to neutral - otherwise the remaining 2 would be allocated randomly.)

OK, so I was right about how those last two would be assigned, and MrBenn was right about how you can assign them neutral. And 8 start positions in a two player game would be split 4-4, which does give an advantage to the starting player who, as the map is now set up, would start with 15 territories (43-8 =35 /3 = 11 territories each + 4 start positions = 15) plus a city bonus. With an initial drop of six armies it would be fairly easy to knock your opponent down to 13 territories and no city bonus, leaving player two with only four armies to start with.

Anyway, we aren't even an advanced draft here... we have time to work this crap out.

Added the Bull of Heaven, as well as a bonus for holding the three beasts - bull, scorpion, humbaba.

I get the feeling that all the action is going on in the bottom left-hand corner.... It feels a little congested and lop-sided, as there are none of the special territories over the Jericho side of the map...

Could you rework the bonuses

MrBenn wrote:I get the feeling that all the action is going on in the bottom left-hand corner.... It feels a little congested and lop-sided, as there are none of the special territories over the Jericho side of the map...

Do you mean the bottom right corner? If so, I have two comments...
1. the top left is, in my opinion, the most attractive early start - four terits, two borders to hold. And the bottom left ain't bad either.
2. part of the problem is that I have crammed a lot of territories into not many pixels. The Dilmun region is spaced out much more nicely, so one of my next projects will be to move the mountains range north and east and devote the river valleys more pixels.

sailorseal wrote:Could you rework the bonuses

It's early - right now we can do anything. Have something specific in mind, sailor?

the map is a bit weird in that you have four continents with two borders. just an observation


the "defeat all three challenges" thing sounds like you have to just take over each territory once and you've got the bonus. just a weird way to put it and I don't see how saying something like "conquer and hold all three challenges" is bad


you've seemingly countered the attractive red area (being able to cut down on your borders and being able to hold brown easily alongside it) with having everyone start in that area. seems fine to me.


maybe put your signature by the title so it's a bit more hidden and subtle? might make for a cooler overall look. make it like you've carved it into the stone so it doesn't stand out but you can see it if you look for it. right now it jumps out at me whenever I look at the lower left territories

Spent some time shifting the southeast territories up to give them more space... did this before reading edbeard's comments, so I will tackle those thoughts next.

I guess at some point I should be looking at other folks' maps, eh? Practice what you preach and all.

Yes, I meant bottom-right

It looks like that area is less congested now - the shifting around you've done has made quite a lot of difference. I'm not completely sold on the 'Bull of Heaven' territory, insofar as it doesn;t sit within any of the regions... you could add another territory between the Bull and Rapiqum, and add them both to the Amorites region (although I'm not too sure how that fits into the Gilgamesh saga)

I like the idea of embossing your signature... but there's plenty of time for little tweaks like that

[Advanced Draft]

42 posts and already an advanced draft?? It is good but I think you need a few more peoples opinions before giving it a stamp. And only 3 updates can hardly be called advanced. There are other maps in here with 10 pages of critisism and they are not even advanced drafts. Just because he is an experieced map maker and a cartographer doesn't mean he can get special treatment.
Don't get me wrong though, I love the map!


Edit: I forgot that this was a competition entry and received some vetting there. That makes me less annoied but I still think it should have been in here a little longer.

Since Gilgamesh isn't one of the more famous historical figures, maybe you could write a short story about him in the legend. Otherwise it looks good.

an idea to provok some thought.

Wht not move the contient legends to the bottom and have them in a horizontal line. On that orange section you can 7 brikes making it prefect to fit your legends there. Move the challenges text to undernearth the title and make the title area a little bigger. That will reduce the busyness of the bottom left that benn was talking about.

gimil wrote:Wht not move the contient legends to the bottom and have them in a horizontal line. On that orange section you can 7 brikes making it prefect to fit your legends there. Move the challenges text to undernearth the title and make the title area a little bigger. That will reduce the busyness of the bottom left that benn was talking about.

I was actually toying with that idea recently.... the reason I didn't do it is that the solid colors along the top and bottom of the map do a lot to help convey the sense that this entire thing is part of a wall, which I think the image needs more - not less - of. I'll think more on this, however, as it would open up the bottom of the map nicely.

The story behind the Bull of Heaven goes something like this... Gilgamesh and Enkidu walk into the great forest to face Humbaba, the protector of the forests. They call Humbaba out and kill him, angering the gods, who then send the Bull of Heaven (believed to be a physical manifestation of drought) to the walls of Uruk. Scores of men are killed by the Bull before Gilgamesh and Enkidu defeat it, but in doing do Enkidu is mortally wounded. Enkidu's death sends Gilgamesh into a existential tailspin, yada yada yada.

So - how does one convey that on a CC map? It seems as if the Bull really isn't a part of a region, and should really only be able to be defeated by Gilgamesh (Ururk), but I guess there's no reason that the Bull can't hit Uruk back. For that matter, I guess the Bull could hit any territory, but perhaps only be attacked BY Uruk.

Ooh, here's a thought - what if the Bull can bombard ANY of the great cities, but only be attacked by Uruk? That would give it significant strategic value.

oaktown wrote:So - how does one convey that on a CC map? It seems as if the Bull really isn't a part of a region, and should really only be able to be defeated by Gilgamesh (Ururk), but I guess there's no reason that the Bull can't hit Uruk back. For that matter, I guess the Bull could hit any territory, but perhaps only be attacked BY Uruk.

Ooh, here's a thought - what if the Bull can bombard ANY of the great cities, but only be attacked by Uruk? That would give it significant strategic value.

It's a nice idea, but I think it would be Uruk far too powerful. If you hold Uruk (and thus bull of heaven) early in the game, you can stop anyone else from getting the city bonus.

So, perhaps start it with 4 or 5 neutrals?

oaktown wrote:The story behind the Bull of Heaven goes something like this... Gilgamesh and Enkidu walk into the great forest to face Humbaba, the protector of the forests. They call Humbaba out and kill him, angering the gods, who then send the Bull of Heaven (believed to be a physical manifestation of drought) to the walls of Uruk. Scores of men are killed by the Bull before Gilgamesh and Enkidu defeat it, but in doing do Enkidu is mortally wounded. Enkidu's death sends Gilgamesh into a existential tailspin, yada yada yada.

So - how does one convey that on a CC map? It seems as if the Bull really isn't a part of a region, and should really only be able to be defeated by Gilgamesh (Ururk), but I guess there's no reason that the Bull can't hit Uruk back. For that matter, I guess the Bull could hit any territory, but perhaps only be attacked BY Uruk.

this sounds like its own map... lol

i like this map, i would definatly play on this map...its not completely complicated and it's not overwhelmingly simple. I don't like the arrows though, i think you could find a different way to show that. And i think it would be better if you made the mountains all the same color, or at least just make them mountain colors, because i dont really like the blue mountains...just something to think about, and i can definatly see this map appearing on conquer club soon

The concerns about making the Bull, and thus Uruk, too powerful did not fall on deaf ears. The Bull is now a standard starting territory with only one attack route - Uruk. This gives uruk some advantage in that it is a city AND it controls access to that challenge, but does not give it unearthly powers across the board.

Moved the legend info around - I think this makes more sense.