Blakkrose wrote:Can anyone tell me why the map is not yet Live?
tnb said that you were testing bigwham's post above, with lowering the cost of monsters.
No need to test that. I can say now that the neutrals are near enough perfect now. Some settings and size of games will give them more play over others but that was taken into account when we looked at the map.
Lets get this into play please so we can see how it works for all settings and sizes, then we can fiddle with the neutrals if needed.
After playing and discussing a bit with blakkrose, my personal suggestion, that's not a mandatory thing, is to:
- Consider a way to make the map more playable in 2 players game. Actually i think it shows the usual problem that the first player that grab an advantage with gems (because he starts first or because he is just more lucky with dice) can close the game in few turns without any way for the opponent to do something seriously to stop him. If this is not possible, well exclude games that have less than 4 players and are not polymorphic (not sure we can ). - Monsters. even if i understand that neutrals are a way to stop a mass bombardment, i think they are too high. If you see we have about 20 neutrals plus decay just to bombard combined with a 5 neutrals ghul that moreover everyone will have on the list due its key role as condition to bombard. - Again any bonus "Iblis + X monsters = Y" in which X>4 is pretty ridicolous. If you receive it you have already won the game, you don't need those troops. Specially considering how much work is required to have them for Y troops. It's easier to go for gems and obtain exactly the same number of troops but in the meanwhile kill the opponents more frequently than trying to unlock monsters. Maybe it can be a type of bonus that is worth in some extended games, but again, in that case i don't know how much 18 troops can make a difference apart for a really strange combo of game settings.
I would leave ibilis at 10 neutral troops, the 4 colored monsters at the corners changed to 3 or 4 neutrals. Finally ghul can be 3 neutral. alone it gives nothing, everyone need it to access to crystals and it has a 3 decay...it's not a problem if it is easier to take.
That's what i would do if it was my map. Said that it's not that it can't be played as it is now. Nobodies
thenobodies80 wrote:- Consider a way to make the map more playable in 2 players game. Actually i think it shows the usual problem that the first player that grab an advantage with gems (because he starts first or because he is just more lucky with dice) can close the game in few turns without any way for the opponent to do something seriously to stop him. If this is not possible, well exclude games that have less than 4 players and are not polymorphic (not sure we can ).
As you wrote, this is a problem that plagues many maps, so I do not think it is a priority to do something.
thenobodies80 wrote:- Monsters. even if i understand that neutrals are a way to stop a mass bombardment, i think they are too high. If you see we have about 20 neutrals plus decay just to bombard combined with a 5 neutrals ghul that moreover everyone will have on the list due its key role as condition to bombard. - Again any bonus "Iblis + X monsters = Y" in which X>4 is pretty ridicolous. If you receive it you have already won the game, you don't need those troops. Specially considering how much work is required to have them for Y troops. It's easier to go for gems and obtain exactly the same number of troops but in the meanwhile kill the opponents more frequently than trying to unlock monsters. Maybe it can be a type of bonus that is worth in some extended games, but again, in that case i don't know how much 18 troops can make a difference apart for a really strange combo of game settings.
I removed the condition to iblis to take bonuses for monsters. Now for any combo of monsters, from 2 onwards, there's a bonus.
thenobodies80 wrote:I would leave ibilis at 10 neutral troops, the 4 colored monsters at the corners changed to 3 or 4 neutrals. Finally ghul can be 3 neutral. alone it gives nothing, everyone need it to access to crystals and it has a 3 decay...it's not a problem if it is easier to take.
I touched up the troops of the monsters as follows: [list=] [*]Iblis 5 [*]Dai 3 [*]Efreet 3 [*]Marid 3 [*]Djinn 3 [*]Ghul 3 [*]Acolyte 3 [/list]
Here's the new graphics and XML file: Map Image Large version (840x400):
Gentlemen, it is possible that the modifications have not yet been included on the beta server? And when the map will be live? It 'possible that from 19 July 2013, the map is not ready yet? It's been almost seven months!
I have some serious health issues that keeps me away from computers and any stressing activity. Please get in touch with gilligan till I'm fully back....I hope soon.
---The development period has concluded for the Temple of Jinn. All objections have had their time. The Foundry and I hereby brand this map with the Foundry Beta Brand. Let it be known that this map is now ready for BETA Play. After an extended period of time in BETA and once all quirks and issues have been resolved, the map will be put into Full Play(barring any Admins or Foundry Foreman vetoes).
Conquer Club, enjoy!
While the map is in BETA Play, there are a couple of administrative tasks that are required of the mapmaker(s) in addition to the initial gameplay testing:
1. Please ensure that the first post of the thread contains all the necessary information to help future visitors to the development thread; it's particularly important to ensure the most recent images are there, along with any helpful guides (such as gameplay quirks/nuances or the location/size of any starting neutrals etc.) 2. It is the responsibility of the mapmaker(s) to ensure that they respond to further feedback in a timely and constructive manner. 3. Write a "creative" map description and send it to the Foundry Foreman via PM. You're encouraged to post it into the first post of the thread as well; the description will be used to populate the maps database.
patrick1234321 wrote:What is the point of the gem areas if they just decay and give no bonus? I mean like the earth gem and such not the gems on most of the areas
I'm assuming you mean the crystals. They give you a bonus if you take Ghul.
patrick1234321 wrote:What is the point of the gem areas if they just decay and give no bonus? I mean like the earth gem and such not the gems on most of the areas
I'm assuming you mean the crystals. They give you a bonus if you take Ghul.
The decay to the crystals used to balance the advantage of being able to bombard all the gems of the same color
).
