Conquer Club

Viking Invasion-Map II: The Other Resurrection

Have an idea for a map? Discuss ideas and concepts here.

Moderator: Cartographers

Forum rules
Please read the Community Guidelines before posting.

Re: Viking Invasion-Map II: The Other Resurrection

Postby natty dread on Sun Jun 27, 2010 8:23 am

shocked439 wrote:
natty_dread wrote:
Sorry, this is a little hard to follow: you like the decay being cancelled by holding Norway and Denmark or don't? It seems to be somewhat essential in terms of gameplay at the moment anyway.


This is impossible. A decay is a negative autodeploy, and autodeploys cannot be conditional, currently. So you cannot cancel a decay by holding other territories.

What if it's not cancelled but neutralized by an additional bonus, like conquer man. +2 if you hold a ship and port city -1 fir each ship as two seperate bonuses having the effect of a conditional auto deploy.


Not a good idea IMO. Decay doesn't currently decay below 1, so players could "cheat" the system by just leaving 1:s on the decay territories so they wouldn't lose any troops but would still gain the troops given by the bonus.
Image
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class natty dread
 
Posts: 12877
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2008 8:58 pm
Location: just plain fucked

Re: Viking Invasion-Map II: The Other Resurrection

Postby TaCktiX on Mon Jun 28, 2010 9:21 pm

Industrial Helix wrote:Well, why don't you see about making this map a 6 player map then? I believe Tacktix got approval for Research and Conquer to be 6 players.


For the record, OliverFA and t-o-m secured that approval, not myself. I came onto the scene with that already in place. Ironically, I'm the only one still developing the map (though development will be delayed until the middle of July. Blame my PCS.

Anyways, the map at hand. I certainly see where you're coming from Balsiefen, but I disagree with the assessment that "we don't know whether or not a small conquest map will work." One of the major reasons the present conquest maps are fine and not just a diceluck dinner is that there are numerous options to pursue, with a good buffer between you and your nearest enemy (unless you got Aoria in AoR 1; sucks to be you). Thus, strategy tends to play up higher than luck. With a much smaller neutral buffer and fewer "places to go" before running into other players, balancing it so it isn't "ZOMG I LOST NONE AGAINST THAT NEUTRAL 5!" most of the time for victory will be very hard. Referencing back to Helix's idea, you could lobby for 6 players, keep your general conquest theme, and add that lovely buffer to make things more do-able.
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class TaCktiX
 
Posts: 2392
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2007 8:24 pm
Location: Rapid City, SD

Re: Viking Invasion-Map II: The Other Resurrection

Postby Evil DIMwit on Mon Jun 28, 2010 10:07 pm

We certainly have small conquest maps. WWII Poland, Poker Club, now Woodboro. The problem isn't just size; all the kings in Britain are very close together. This might be slightly improved by adding some impassables: Off the top of my head, Hwicce-Tamworth, Tamworth-Mercia, Wincastre-Wessex, Wreocan Saete-Deira, Scone-Strathclyde. I don't know if this is quite a replacement for just adding a bunch more territories between everything, though.
ImageImage
User avatar
Captain Evil DIMwit
 
Posts: 1616
Joined: Thu Mar 22, 2007 1:47 pm
Location: Philadelphia, NJ

Previous

Return to Melting Pot: Map Ideas

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users