Fragmentation of CSFR - change ot the neutrals? pg 39

[Oneyed]

Everyone is likely to ignore the capitals in small games anyway and in the larger ones, they will be hard to hold till further in the game and players have the kraj needed for it.

sounds logic. ok, this is another version of conditional border. this looks better, I think. 4 town will be not so hard to hold and if player could has bonus for towns he needs capital.

Click image to enlarge.

Oneyed

[koontz1973]

Looked in the first post but could not see it, the amount of starting positions for all games, so this is just an assumption on the amount of starting territs you have (34).

2/3 player games - 10 territs each
4 player games - 7 territs each
5 player games - 6 territs each

As you can see, with this amount of starting territs, the condition is already held (or a good chance of it) by one or all players. This sort of negates it as it is. And considering with the size of map, this is going to be the sort of games most played on it, why have it.

6 player games - 5 territs each
7 player games - 4 territs each
8 payer games - 3 territs each

Here is where it would work best as the chance of anyone getting 4 territs in SR or CR are very small. But again, I refer to my previous post about the larger games on this map...

and in the larger ones, they will be hard to hold till further in the game and players have the kraj needed for it.

Ask yourself this question - How does this benefit the map? Honestly, from my point of view as a player and not the map maker, it does not add anything to it. It is wasted space for small games and ignored in the large.

But if you do keep it in, the wording needs to be changed as right now, it implies that I can attack any capital from any territ as long as it is on the same side.

Add this to Hellenic wars though would add another level of GP to an already good map.

[Oneyed]

Looked in the first post but could not see it, the amount of starting positions for all games, so this is just an assumption on the amount of starting territs you have (34).

now they are in . there are 35 territories.

2/3 player games - 10 territs each
4 player games - 7 territs each
5 player games - 6 territs each

As you can see, with this amount of starting territs, the condition is already held (or a good chance of it) by one or all players. This sort of negates it as it is. And considering with the size of map, this is going to be the sort of games most played on it, why have it.

the conditional border is out. and I also change bonus for towns from +1 for 3 to +1 for 4.

Add this to Hellenic wars though would add another level of GP to an already good map.

not bad idea

thanks koontz.

Oneyed

[Oneyed]

big map

Click image to enlarge.

small map

Click image to enlarge.

list of neutrals and starting positions:

there are 35 territories. 2 capitals (Praha and Bratislava) will start allways as neutral. and Brno will also start allways as neutral.

there will be 8 starting positions (territories which could directly attack capitals). I think they could work as in the Third Crusade map - so some of them will start as neutral if number of players will be less as 8.

these territories are:
StČK (Středočeský kraj)
Beroun
Kladno
Tábor
ZSK (Západoslovenský kraj)
Komárno
Trenčín
Nitra

the rest of territories will be randomly deployment.

8 players game:
4 territories for each player (include 1 starting position for each), 3 neutrals (Praha, Bratislava, Brno).
7 playes game:
4 territories for each player (include 1 starting position for each), 7 neutrals (Praha, Bratislava, Brno, 1 starting position (StČK°) and 3 random).
6 playes game:
5 territories for each player (include 1 starting position for each), 5 neutrals (Praha, Bratislava, Brno, 2 starting positions (StČK, ZSK°)).
5 playes game:
5 territories for each player (include 1 starting position for each), 10 neutrals (Praha, Bratislava, Brno, 3 starting positions (StČK, ZSK, 1 random°) and 4 random).
4 playes game:
8 territories for each player (include 2 starting positions for each), 3 neutrals (Praha, Bratislava, Brno).
3 playes game:
9 territories for each player (include 2 starting positions for each), 8 neutrals (Praha, Bratislava, Brno, 2 starting positions (StČK, ZSK°) and 3 random).
2 playes game:
10 territories for each player (include 3 starting position for each), 15 neutrals (Praha, Bratislava, Brno, 2 starting positions (StČK, ZSK°) and 10 random).

° if it is possible to code exactly which starting position will start as neutral if number of players is less as 8.

Oneyed

[nolefan5311]

Do you really want those 8 regions to be starting positions in every game? Not sure I understand the logic behind it, takes out the randomness of the deployment and in fog games it "makes things easier", so to speak. With 32 starting territories, deployment will looks like this for each player game:

2 - 10 per player with 12 neutral
3 - 10 per player with 2 neutral
4 - 8 per player with 0 deployed neutrals (other than the 3 starting positions)
5 - 6 per player with 2 neutrals
6 - 5 per player with 2 neutrals
7 - 4 per player with 4 neutrals
8 - 4 per player with 0 neutrals

I'm not sure where you got the 16 deployed in 2 player games...2 and 3 player games will always be the same.

Personally, I would avoid the starting positions. I don't think it makes anything more fair nor do I think it adds anything to the GP. Also, I would follow ian's suggestions and have Brno as n2 or n3 and the two capitals as n4.

[Oneyed]

Do you really want those 8 regions to be starting positions in every game? Not sure I understand the logic behind it, takes out the randomness of the deployment and in fog games it "makes things easier", so to speak.

why to have starting positions? these can directly attack capitals. it is very possible that in 2, 3, 4 players games player XY will hold 4 towns in the same republic, so if these 8 regions will be random deployment it is also possible that player XY will hold 2 of these regions. so player XY can in his first turn take capital and hold bonus for towns...

I'm not sure where you got the 16 deployed in 2 player games...2 and 3 player games will always be the same.

there are 10 for each player in 2 players game...

Personally, I would avoid the starting positions. I don't think it makes anything more fair nor do I think it adds anything to the GP. Also, I would follow ian's suggestions and have Brno as n2 or n3 and the two capitals as n4.

I agreed with Brno. the number of neutrals in capitals depends on starting positions. if they will not be there I recomended to have n5 for capitals. if starting positions will be in n4 for capitals would be fine.

Oneyed

[koontz1973]

Oneyed, some final touch ups from me.

All around the board, the lines you have are going over the colours. but the colours are showing through in places and in others you have two lines joining and again making a darker colour. This is very distracting as now that I see it, it is all I see. Can we get that cleared up?


You are missing colours all around the board where the kraj touch each other. This needs to be tidied up as well.

[nolefan5311]

Do you really want those 8 regions to be starting positions in every game? Not sure I understand the logic behind it, takes out the randomness of the deployment and in fog games it "makes things easier", so to speak.

why to have starting positions? these can directly attack capitals. it is very possible that in 2, 3, 4 players games player XY will hold 4 towns in the same republic, so if these 8 regions will be random deployment it is also possible that player XY will hold 2 of these regions. so player XY can in his first turn take capital and hold bonus for towns...

There is no such thing as a perfect drop, no matter how you change things up. Even in classic a player drops 3 of the 4 regions in Oceania or SA. Sometimes they drop the whole bonus. It happens. If someone drops 4 towns in one republic, their opponent is likely to hold 4 towns in the other republic, which makes it a wash. Just thinking out loud here, but the map is fine how you have it.

I'm not sure where you got the 16 deployed in 2 player games...2 and 3 player games will always be the same.

there are 10 for each player in 2 players game...

Yes, there are, I wasn't debating that. In a previous post though you mentioned the 16 number, which I don't know how you arrived at.

Personally, I would avoid the starting positions. I don't think it makes anything more fair nor do I think it adds anything to the GP. Also, I would follow ian's suggestions and have Brno as n2 or n3 and the two capitals as n4.

I agreed with Brno. the number of neutrals in capitals depends on starting positions. if they will not be there I recomended to have n5 for capitals. if starting positions will be in n4 for capitals would be fine.

Oneyed

This is for you to determine (whether or not you want starting positions at all), but 5 on the capitals, even without the starting positions, is going to discourage people taking them anyway. With 10 territories to start and only a 3 drop, it's going to take a couple of turns to even begin thinking about taking even a 4. A 5 is not likely to be touched at all. Since they're the capitals I'd figure you'd want them in play. So 4 is probably your best bet.

All of this stuff was looked at prior to the GP stamp being issued so I don't think you have anything to worry about.

[Oneyed]

Oneyed, some final touch ups from me.

All around the board, the lines you have are going over the colours. but the colours are showing through in places and in others you have two lines joining and again making a darker colour. This is very distracting as now that I see it, it is all I see. Can we get that cleared up?

You are missing colours all around the board where the kraj touch each other. This needs to be tidied up as well.

I know about both things. I did them purposedly to have this look. so if this is graphic problem I will edit this.

There is no such thing as a perfect drop, no matter how you change things up.

...but why not to be so close to perfection as is possible?

Sometimes they drop the whole bonus. It happens. If someone drops 4 towns in one republic, their opponent is likely to hold 4 towns in the other republic, which makes it a wash. Just thinking out loud here, but the map is fine how you have it.

the starting positions will helps to have start of game more balanced, so much as is possible. I do not worry about holding any 4 towns in the same republic, I worry about that one player will start with 2 or more regions which could directly attack capital. this will starting positions solve.

This is for you to determine (whether or not you want starting positions at all), but 5 on the capitals, even without the starting positions, is going to discourage people taking them anyway. With 10 territories to start and only a 3 drop, it's going to take a couple of turns to even begin thinking about taking even a 4. A 5 is not likely to be touched at all. Since they're the capitals I'd figure you'd want them in play. So 4 is probably your best bet.

this is on you guys. I am fine also with n4 for capitals.

All of this stuff was looked at prior to the GP stamp being issued so I don't think you have anything to worry about.

I think gameplay is finished. just starting positions are question now.

thanks for help and interest, guys.

Oneyed

[koontz1973]

Oneyed, you seem to want some starting positions. Right now, you have nine territs that can directly attack either of the two capitals. 4 for Brat and 4 for Pra. Lets see if this can be done to make the game any better. Remember, that is what this is about, making the gaming experience better for the players.

I think you are right, n4 for the capitals is high enough to discourage most players going after them in early rounds.

I have not run the odds for any game size, but to me, any percentage of games in which a player could get either all of the 5 or 4 respectively are so small, it may only happen once in ten years. So will starting positions make this game better? Right now, the drop as it is, random, I am only going to get 10 in a 2 player game. Thats 10 for me, 10 for you, and 10 neutrals. The chance of either of us getting a drop good enough to be able to clear out an area in the first round to be able to go for the capitals is remote. It becomes even harder in larger games.

But why go for a capital in the first place. It is a 4 neutral, one more than the others so it is going to be ignored by me as why take a capital when I can attack one of yours. This is going to be the reaction of most players.

The long and the short of it is this, positions, will do nothing for the small or large games at all. It will be a detriment to fog games as I know where you are. It will destroy the large games completely as every player will get one of there 3 near a capital. Team games will be destroyed as in doubles, my team can hit yours and most likely knock you out by the end of round 2.

Let the drop be the drop and sod the positions. It will add nothing to this map at all. It is the same as the conditional border, something to think about but not always wise to add. Hope this makes sense as I had dinner half way through posting this.

[Oneyed]

I have not run the odds for any game size, but to me, any percentage of games in which a player could get either all of the 5 or 4 respectively are so small, it may only happen once in ten years.

the main problem is not holding all regions which attack capitals by one player from the start. the problem is that if one player will hold 4 towns in CR and two regions which attack Praha he has big chance that he take Praha in his first turn and will hold bonus for capital + 4 towns in the CR.

So will starting positions make this game better? Right now, the drop as it is, random, I am only going to get 10 in a 2 player game. Thats 10 for me, 10 for you, and 10 neutrals. The chance of either of us getting a drop good enough to be able to clear out an area in the first round to be able to go for the capitals is remote. It becomes even harder in larger games.

in 4-player games, each player starts with an average of 5 or 6 towns, which is good. in 2-player games, each player starts with an average of 6 to 8 towns plus 2 to 4 regions, which means the usual town bonus is +1, but +2 is also common.

I will post this info just for your review oneyed (this is just 1v1):
Town Bonus +1 for 4 - chances of dropping at least 4 towns is 99.7%. Chances of dropping 8 towns is 31.02%

But why go for a capital in the first place. It is a 4 neutral, one more than the others so it is going to be ignored by me as why take a capital when I can attack one of yours. This is going to be the reaction of most players.

lets look at this situation: I have Beroun, StČK, Pardubice, Tábor, Ostrava, JMK, Nitra, Trenčín, SSK, Košice. in the first round I deploy 3 on Beroun and attack Praha. if I have lucky I take Praha and have bonus +1. so what for attack your region?

It will destroy the large games completely as every player will get one of there 3 near a capital. Team games will be destroyed as in doubles, my team can hit yours and most likely knock you out by the end of round 2.

no. how you can say this? this sounds teleologic. region near capital is only one of more which player will holds. so your team can not knock out my team so early. my team will have other regions over all map...

Hope this makes sense as I had dinner half way through posting this.

good apetite . btw, I preffer dinner and then work

Oneyed

[koontz1973]

the main problem is not holding all regions which attack capitals by one player from the start. the problem is that if one player will hold 4 towns in CR and two regions which attack Praha he has big chance that he take Praha in his first turn and will hold bonus for capital + 4 towns in the CR.

Oneyed

This will never happen. No one in small games is going to waste troops on neutrals. It never happens, and the amount that is wasted on taking them makes you weak.

lets look at this situation: I have Beroun, StČK, Pardubice, Tábor, Ostrava, JMK, Nitra, Trenčín, SSK, Košice.

If you or any one got that drop, and another player was not able to counter it, then this game has been going on for ten or more years. The odds of this drop are so small small.

If you put positions into this game, you will harm the larger games and team games. Your map though.

[Oneyed]

could we do the decision about starting positions? I see that as iancanton, also nolefan prefer map without them. if you guys think that this will not unbalance the game, especially start of game, I am fine with this.

so when there will not be starting positions it would be also fine to follow ians advice about railway:

the disconnected railway network looks really strange. let praha connect to usti n labem?

and then will be able to attack both capitals from 5 territories. just connect Praha to Plzeň.

so there will be just capitals codded as neutrals and everything else will be on lucky

Oneyed

[pamoa]

as for the easiest bonus one need to hold a minimum of 4 territories
I don't see any need to code starting position
we even have maps were mapmaker refused to code 3 territories regions with starting position
and managed to get on-line that way even unfair it is

[Oneyed]

ok, pamoa. and thanks

so map will be without starting positions. there will be just Praha and Bratislava codded as neutrals n4. the rest of territories will be random deployment.

Oneyed