Conquer Club

P.S. Just realized i'm 15 pixels too wide. Shouldn't be a problem to make it small enough without applying for supersize unless I get carried away with rivers, valleys and bridges all around the zig...
PPS I'm leaving a little extra room on top and left for now until I can draw in the camps.

One concept to explain one-way attacks from camps to the ziggurat is hanging bridges or even small wooden ones that can be easily destroyed if attacked. The Incas actually used these a lot (even at Machu Picchu). Might be tough to draw though. Here's an idea:


I also forgot to mention I've been playing with shadows. Not sure if it's worth the work, but you can see them at the bottom of the ziggurat.


OR is shading the bottom side of everything a little darker sufficient - as on the rest of the map?

And one more thing... I think I'll get rid of the white stroke around the region numbers (some have it some don't) - it doesn't seem necessary.

Loving the update. Early morning here so let me get a good look later.
These two are a must have. River and bridges look really nice, but the shading will need to go on.

Great work jonofperu, coming along nicely.

Here are some images that inspired the design of the map:

show: Show images

do you have to hold your camp to survive, like middle ages and antarctic map?

It might be worth implementing that, nicarus. It might speed up endgame a little, but like Antarctica, if you lose your bases/camps it's probably over already. Not necessarily on this map though with all the autodeploy and potential bonuses (have yet to post some of those ideas).

Lose a camp, your out, good idea. The camps can only be attacked though once you reach the summit and not before. Change it from Antarctica to not have the summit bombard the camps.

Still working on the update. Have been traveling and swamped with work. Got a few more sections of stonework done on the plane before my battery ran down. Laying stones is very time consuming work. :-p

Looking forward...

[Moved]

Moved to ideas as an update has not been made in a month. If the map maker wishes to continue with this, he can by making an update and contacting one of the cartographers.

koontz

Update - Draft v06


1. Finished stonework on the ground of each level. (whew! I don't even want to try to count how many stones I drew )
2. Got rid of all the army circles as they were. Now I'm just using a glow - although it's more of a circle at the camps for lack of other images/design for those.
3. Used a smaller font and shrunk the text in the legend. Included the examples within the legend and made the whole map a bit smaller due to saved space.

TO DO:
1. Add shadows
Only the shadow along the bottom edge has been created so far, but it gives an idea of what it will look like.
2. Draw camps
Not sure what to do here yet. It would probably take me months to draw a river canyon all around the ziggurat with hanging bridges across it from the camps to the entry points, but yeah - it would be cool.
Should probably at least do something more interesting with the camps.
3. Randomize the stone walls - make each unique.
4. Maybe add examples of bombardment from the camps against the ziggurat and from the pinnacle against the camps?

Must say, very nice. Will have a proper look a little later for you.

I'm looking at the map and I have a small question.
I see camps have colors on them, so I think that it's the way you will match together the camps into a 8 players game, right?. How it will work with less players? Are these camps starting positions or they are given out randomly (like in feudal war) ? If they are SP, there's a max position limit?
I have understood how the map will work and it seems interesting, but I want to understand 100% the starting drop.

Thanks in advance for your answer
Nobodies

Yes, the colors on the camps represent starting spots.
Thus far my concept was simply that players would randomly be assigned to camps (however many players there are).
I'm not sure what options are available when coding, but if - as your comment implies - you can code a max number of starting spots, that might be a good thing to balance first turn advantage. On the other hand, with all the neutrals and protected starting spots it may be better to spread players across all starting spots (8 each 1v1, 5 each 3 player, 4 each 2v2, 2 each 3v3 or 4v4, etc). Strategy comes in when you have to decide whether to hit the neutral first turn since it will expose you to a counter attack by your opponent. You get to go first, but you weaken yourself attacking neutrals and your opponent gets to attack/bombard you directly. Remember the camps bombard their side of the ziggurat.

You will want to look for spots where you (and your team if it's teams) can capture and hold positions in spite of potential counterattacks or bombardment from camps. Randomized starting spots might give one player/team a pyramid side entirely to themselves. This is perhaps the most dangerous unbalanced drop. If each team has it's own side that's fine, but if one side gets a side to itself they could run away with the game. You can attack around the corners, but I'm thinking of the bombardment advantage from the auto-deploy starting points. Perhaps I could code a max number of starting spots per side? I that possible? Particularly for teams - can you limit a team to maximum 3 starting spots per side? (Although, as mentioned below, the auto-deploy on the ziggurat can overcome the auto-deploy on the camps. The issue is imbalance at the start.)

Probably you will want to conquer a neutral where your teammate(s) (or your other starting spots) can reinforce you in order to withstand the bombardment attacks the enemy will make against you before your next turn. If you manage to hold a spot, then you will have auto-deploy on it and can bombard the next spot you want to take to soften it up. As you take more spaces on a side of the ziggurat auto-deploy will soon protect you from bombardments. The enemy's starting spot gets +3, but once you hold three territs with +1 and two territs with +2 you will leave him in the dust. HOWEVER the way to counter this is to focus bombardment on the font line territ. Unless it's unlimited reinforcements it will take people a long time to get autodeploy troops up to the front. If you are expanding on another side of the ziggurat you may at least be able to keep your enemy contained on the side he's focusing on by bombing his front line. Of course the counter to this counter is to use autodeploy on the spots you have to expand in multiple directions. The more front lines you have the less vulnerable you are to bombardment.

This is another unique feature of the map. I don't recall another map covered in auto-deploys. I guess we'll see how it plays (or how you guys think it will play).

Coding starting positions is an easy thing to do. I would suggest you think about randomly deploying on all starting camps but place a max of 2 or 3. This way, in fog games, you do not know where the opponent is or when you will meet them. Just like Antarctica. jonofperu, lastly, you need to get out their and advertise this map. Without community support, you are not going further. Lets see if players want this map, I know I do.

Id like this map!

Sounds like a great idea, might be worth thinking about only have a three base troops whatever the region count, like FW?

Do you guys mean limit total starting spots to 3 or can you code a limit of 3 per side?
I kind of like the idea of giving players a lot more starting spots in 1v1, it would just be better if no one could get a whole side to themselves.

Bombardment Clarification for Summit vs Camps (don't know if something like this is necessary on the map itself - I doubt there's room):


EDIT: bombardment only up to LEVEL C

Just jumping in, so apologies if the following has been mentioned:


1. Players' starting positions. Have each player having 1 territory facing a 5-man neutral; otherwise, 8-player dubs would leave team 2 and team 3 at a disadvantage.



Other than that, it seems pretty fun.


Q: Is the E-level the only place which can bombard/attack camps?

Thanks for jumping in!
I think what may compensate for first turn advantage is that the camps can bombard their entire side of the ziggurat. So if another team takes a neutral or two you can hit them directly from your camp.

Yes, E01 is the only place that can bombard/attack camps.

jonofperu wrote:Do you guys mean limit total starting spots to 3 or can you code a limit of 3 per side?

No, 3 per player. So in a 1v1 foggy game, you do not know where your opponent is. I would even lower the three to a two. Pot Moresby, Antarctica and a few others that have come before have all tried to have lots more starting positions. Players want less so they do not know where there opponent is.

So wait, are you allowed to bombard now from the camps up as well? I don't really like that :/ I liked just attacking one level at a time, and as you go up you are gaining an advantage to bombard down.

Also I still love the way it looks. for the starting positions are you wanting something artsy? Maybe you could have the starting camps just be a simple campfire or something that looks period?

swimmerdude99 wrote:So wait, are you allowed to bombard now from the camps up as well? I don't really like that :/ I liked just attacking one level at a time, and as you go up you are gaining an advantage to bombard down.

Say what?! It needs to be tried out. It's something new and exciting!

swimmerdude99 wrote:Also I still love the way it looks. for the starting positions are you wanting something artsy? Maybe you could have the starting camps just be a simple campfire or something that looks period?

Newbie here so take it for what it's worth I was thinking the same thing have something artsy for the starting camps or for the altar just to give it a little color. I like the layout of the map and that it is unique.

I would also say maybe only let the camps bombard up to level c?

mcshanester29 wrote:

swimmerdude99 wrote:Also I still love the way it looks. for the starting positions are you wanting something artsy? Maybe you could have the starting camps just be a simple campfire or something that looks period?

Newbie here so take it for what it's worth I was thinking the same thing have something artsy for the starting camps or for the altar just to give it a little color. I like the layout of the map and that it is unique.

I would also say maybe only let the camps bombard up to level c?

I really think they should be VERY limited in their allowance to bombard, I liked that its a race up not that you can bombard from wherever you want, go for the highground! Its strategical and logically sound, I can see why you might be able to bombard up long distance... but not too far. And most certainly shouldn't be able to attack more than one panel I think!!

Thanks for the feedback, guys. I'm glad people like the map!
Still not sure what to do with the camps graphically, but something as simple as campfires might do the trick.
Maybe I could put some blood on the altar for color... lol

The reasoning behind bombardment up the ziggurat from the camps is this:
1. Realistically you can bombard a fortress, although with limited success if your weapons are weaker than the defenses.
2. The main reason though is playability. Allowing bombardment from the camps speeds the map up a lot and reduces the effect of the neutrals. It took me some getting used to, because I think I originally reacted the same as Swimmerdude. It felt like it was sacrificing the original strategy premise. HOWEVER, there were some negative comments about having so many neutrals on the map and I gradually began to see the advantages of eliminating those neutrals more quickly and bringing the players together to clash in the struggle for high ground.

Look at it this way.
If players can basically attack neutrals all the way to the top without encountering their opponents, then it becomes nothing more than a dice competition. If I roll better against neutrals than you I get to the top first and win. And a roll advantage gets compounded exponentially as you gain bonus/auto-deploy. If I'm analyzing this correctly, bombardment brings players into contact with each other sooner and introduces more strategy angles. The basic dilemma is: "Do I take this neutral, because if I do he will be able to bombard me." So if someone jumps ahead conquering a few neutrals, you can neutralize his first turn/roll advantage by bombarding.

Several have suggested limiting starting positions per player to 3. My original concern was that someone could end up with one side of the zig all to themselves and an unfair advantage. Others said it would keep people hidden from each other in fog games.
My concern now with this is what happens in a 2 player game? You could easily end up with someone getting a side to themselves. I'm torn between keeping a fog element by limiting starting spots and creating a complex dynamic all the way around the map as each player attacks from multiple points. Without a limit on starting spots you create a huge melee struggling for the high ground in the middle, but you lose the fog effect if each camp bombards its side. This feature is up in the air for me.

Which is better?
a) FOG and only 3 camps to work with to assault the mountain
b) 8 starting spots each in 2 player, 16 camps all attacking the mountain and struggling to control the high ground