Version 11.6 FRANCE 2.1

[Nola_Lifer]

Is Dordogne suppose to connect to Charente-Maritime? It looks that way drawn on the map but it doesn't.

[Mishalex]

No, they are not connected...

[Gilligan]

No, they are not connected...

The graphics do show they are connected, so I guess a change is in order.

[Mishalex]

OK... We are waiting for Koontz to sent us the XML and we'll do the change...

[Vinyl-Taliban]

Currently playing a game of this, I held all the objective points for 1 round, but didn't win. What gives?

Game: 14134653 (but it's foggy).

Round 9: Completed holding all objective terts.
Round 10: Didn't win...

In summary, ended round 9 holding all the terts for objective win. Didn't win on start of turn round 10.

In contrast to Christmas, where I took my 5th star end of my turn in round n, and won on turn start of round n + 1 (Game 13805887)

Apologies if this isn't the right place for such a question and appreciate being directed as appropriate.

[Vinyl-Taliban]

This is the log of the turn where I expected to win:

2014-03-20 18:13:17 - Vinyl-Taliban got bonus of 1 troops added to Wallonie
2014-03-20 18:13:17 - Vinyl-Taliban received 6 troops for holding IDF
2014-03-20 18:13:17 - Vinyl-Taliban received 2 troops for holding Suburbs

I also hold Seine-Maritime for the regional claim.

That's all objectives met, but no win.

[Gilligan]

This is the log of the turn where I expected to win:

2014-03-20 18:13:17 - Vinyl-Taliban got bonus of 1 troops added to Wallonie
2014-03-20 18:13:17 - Vinyl-Taliban received 6 troops for holding IDF
2014-03-20 18:13:17 - Vinyl-Taliban received 2 troops for holding Suburbs

I also hold Seine-Maritime for the regional claim.

That's all objectives met, but no win.

do you hold all of that red shield for the regional claim, or just Siene Maritime?

[Vinyl-Taliban]

Thanks for the reply.

Just Siene Maritime.

I see where you're going with this. I presume all of a particular claim must be held?

If true, I don't feel it's particularly clear in the instructions on the map. However, I won't moan about it. Lesson learnt.

What's your take on how understandable the instructions are? (poorly worded question considering the cirumstances, I concede...alas, I could do no better!)

[jghost7]

1) Foreign claims can be attacked from adjacent territory
example : Alpes-Maritimes can attack Monaco

I would leave this as it is. It works in all the games I have played with the map and honestly, this part needs no tweaking.
...

1000% disagree with koontz here. It may have worked in the games you played thus far, but I doubt the objective has come into play as yet. As you promoted the lessening of neutrals in Paris, then access to the foreign claims will become more important. It truly never made sense to me that they were ever only accessible from paris, which also happens to be where the rest of the objective is as well.

Thanks,

J

[Leehar]

I liked the addition of another Large map to complement USA 2.1, Hive & World 2.1 with differing dynamics in all

I didn't like how Paris & the foreign claims didn't seem to be highly relevant in most of my games, has any thought been considered on having the foreign claims as starting positions?

I remember looking at this thread a year ago, and I'd just like to complement the foundry on making the graphical amendments & I trust they did a great job throughout the process in bringing such a stellar product to us. Although I will admit I have had some difficulty in identifying territory connections sometimes :/

[Dukasaur]

I like the look of the map. I like the depth of geographical detail, and the fact that visually it's very clear and easy to understand. I think graphically this is a big hit.

What I really don't like is the fact that Paris has been rendered almost irrelevant. I really can't see anyone investing the time and effort to go for an objective victory. I understand that there is a proposal afoot to tweak this problem by reducing the number of neutrals and adding a bonus for the foreign claims. Personally, I think that's not the right solution either.

I would completely throw out the objective victory. I would make the foreign claims accessible through their nearby territories, just as they are in reality. In order to make them interesting, I would give them autodeploys, but no relevance to the central objective.

Paris should be the central objective. More than any other major nation on earth, France is centred on its capitol. Every war and revolution has been extremely focused on the centrality of taking and holding Paris. Still, I think an objective victory there would oversimplify things. Rather, I would treat Paris like the forts on the South Africa 1885 maps -- a multiplier that magnifies other bonuses. That would ensure that it would be heavily contested, while preventing anyone from sneaking a surprise victory there.

[iAmCaffeine]

I'm really enjoying the map, but I have to echo concerns about the winning condition; it's never used. I've played 1v1, multiplayer games, team games and polymorphic games.

[Mishalex]

We're working on it... thanks guys for the notice

[Donelladan]

I'm really enjoying the map, but I have to echo concerns about the winning condition; it's never used. I've played 1v1, multiplayer games, team games and polymorphic games.

First, it is used some times. I have won a game by taking the victory condition ( 6 player double games with fog) already.
And I think it is quite normal that the victory condition is almost never used.
Who is winning a King's Court II game by taking the objective for example?
And except if trench or freestyle do you ever consider taking the objective in the city mogul map?
Same also works for Das Schloss game, you win by taking the objective only when the game is already over, or if freestyle.

Did you know that feudal epic and feudal war also have winning conditions? I have played feudal war or epic a total of 583 times personnally and I think I won only once by owning the victory conditions.

So, really, I do not understand your concern about the winning condition in respect to what we have for the other maps.
And, to the mapmakers, don't make it too easy to take !

[iAmCaffeine]

I'm really enjoying the map, but I have to echo concerns about the winning condition; it's never used. I've played 1v1, multiplayer games, team games and polymorphic games.

First, it is used some times. I have won a game by taking the victory condition ( 6 player double games with fog) already.
And I think it is quite normal that the victory condition is almost never used.
Who is winning a King's Court II game by taking the objective for example?
And except if trench or freestyle do you ever consider taking the objective in the city mogul map?
Same also works for Das Schloss game, you win by taking the objective only when the game is already over, or if freestyle.

Did you know that feudal epic and feudal war also have winning conditions? I have played feudal war or epic a total of 583 times personnally and I think I won only once by owning the victory conditions.

So, really, I do not understand your concern about the winning condition in respect to what we have for the other maps.
And, to the mapmakers, don't make it too easy to take !

Obviously it is used some times, but I have never seen it even attempted at in any of my games, which is all I was saying. I'm not even saying that's reason to remove the winning condition or change it.

[rrob74]

Thoroughly enjoy France 2.1 map. There are times though where holding Paris, suburbs, foreign claim and domestic claim for one round doesn't always work. See Game 14152927 as example. Is this a glitch or am I overlooking something? Great work otherwise!

Cheers,

Rob

[Gilligan]

Thoroughly enjoy France 2.1 map. There are times though where holding Paris, suburbs, foreign claim and domestic claim for one round doesn't always work. See Game 14152927 as example. Is this a glitch or am I overlooking something? Great work otherwise!

Cheers,

Rob

make sure you hold all territories of the same flag, not just one

[HotShot53]

I really like this map... maybe because I've done well on it so far lol. I like the regional claims, it makes the borders of territories slightly more flexible. I dislike how many neutrals have to be killed to take paris... it basically makes the foreign claims useless unless you're going for a conditions win. If you have enough extra troops to take and hold paris, you're probably going to win normally anyway... so far I've never seen anyone even try to take it.

[rrob74]

Thanks Gilligan for the reply. Please look at Game 1415924. I've had GREEN hold both flags / both territories in HAU for several rounds. Plus I've held all 5 Foreign Claims. Do I also need to hold all of BAS since it has same Regional Flag in HAU? If so then this should be added to the explanation because it is not intuitive. As it stands, I'm unable to win because I can't hold off. Had I known I would have won this game several rounds ago. Please confirm and thanks in advance!

[Donelladan]

The game number you gave us is wrong rrob74.
But yes you need to hold all flag in BAS, and HAU.
It is written on the legend, regional claims, holding all of the same flag +1.
So you don't hold a regional claim unless you have all the flag of this claim.

[rrob74]

See game 14152924. I interpreted as holding all flags = extra troop. But the winning criteria does state "one regional claim" which I thought was just one regional flag.

[rrob74]

Thanks for clarifying. This is very helpful!

[josko.ri]

This is very good map, thanks for putting effort in making it be.

One thing I like about the map: A lot of regions have border with a lot of other adjacent regions. Pretty similar than Hive map, but pretty different than other similar geographic maps. In terms of unlimited fort team/polymorphic game, which is my favorite settings and which I have played so far in this map, many connections among regions increase skill level needed to properly play this map, which I very like.

One thing I dislike about the map: Value of bonuses is not properly balanced. For example, LOR bonus which is worth +3 is overestimated. It is not so hard to take (no neutrals there) and it is dead edge so king of works as Australia bonus on Classic map. Maximum value for that bonus should be +2. If you compare that with BZH bonus which is worth only +2, you get huge discrepancy. Both bonuses has 4 regions, and BZH can be broken from 2 sides while LOR can be broken from only one side (I do not count the way through 3,3 neutrals as smart way to go break any bonus). That is just one example, but there are some similar ones, such as FRA (2), it has also 4 regions like LOR and BZH, but it has neutral which need t be taken, and it can be broken from many adjacent regions.

[facet]

[beta map challenge]

I loved this map, thank you. I love the scale of it, Paris seems a long way away from the south coast!

I didn't like so much how the Paris victory hasn't come up yet in any of the games I have played.

[CMetternich]

I played this map several times now and I really love it, Thank you.

One thing I dislike:

The southern regions are a bit overvalued in my mind, whereas the regions Paris and Central are not so important. As I played this map I found out that nearly everytime the winner got the southwest under his control and then is unstoppable. So one suggestion:

Mid has a bonus of 8 (!), Cen has a bonus of 6, just exchange this bonus.

Historically the Central with the Loire regions and Paris was always of high importance, so there is also a logic behing my suggestion (otherwise for reasons of playability).

And again thank you for your efforts.