WWII Pearl Harbor - [Quenched]

Care to peruse completed maps? Take a stroll through the Atlas.

Moderators: Global Moderators, Cartographers

Forum rules
Please read the Community Guidelines before posting.

Re: WWII Pearl Harbor - [Quenched]

Postby Thezzaruz on Mon Sep 07, 2009 3:52 am

I never really saw the need for a change (must have been getting all good drops ;)).Just thought the planes where a sub set of the map that needed to be strategically tended to.


But if there should be a change then I'd say this is the way to go.
cairnswk wrote:To
* Until Group taken, within any Group
+ 3 any 4 aircraft + 4 any 5 aircraft
User avatar
Lieutenant Thezzaruz
 
Posts: 1112
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2008 2:10 pm
Location: OTF most of the time.
Medals: 8
Standard Achievement (2) Terminator Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (1)
Ratings Achievement (2)

Re: WWII Pearl Harbor - [Quenched]

Postby a.sub on Mon Sep 07, 2009 6:21 pm

cairnswk wrote:I'm quite calm. Thanks. ;)
Unfortunately i can't red any intonations from your face or other expressions you might use because you failed to indicate that you were joking....Sorry. :roll:

was my post that vindictive that you couldnt even realize it? brilliant

cairnswk wrote:To the thoughts from people of dropping the number of planes that start....
It will not happen. Period.
This is a map met to revolve around the initial attack by the planes.
I am not interested in changing that., so please do not ask further on this line.
Yes thats great, making the initial attack from the planes is nice and all but do you honestly believe that removing ONE plane per set would be that detrimental to your map?

We can ensure that seomone doesn't get an immediate bonus on the drop by making the drop aspect harder for all games, but i tend also to agree with Knight2254, that the map is reasonably well balanced apart from the drop, and this is the aspect that has been most troublesome over the last year or more for most players.

If someone wants to play the AA batteries then good that is there option...but I am not in favour of making it easier to get plane bonuses, like +1 for 2, +2 for 3 etc.

I am happy to reconfirm the changed bonuses for the planes and agree with Ian canton....
iancanton wrote:this is worth doing properly. bonuses for 4 and 5 planes! no half-hearted measures!
ian. :)


cairnswk wrote:From

* Until Group taken, within any Group
+ 3 any 2 aircraft + 4 any 4 aircraft


To


* Until Group taken, within any Group
+ 3 any 4 aircraft + 4 any 5 aircraft
User avatar
Cadet a.sub
 
Posts: 1834
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2007 2:07 am
Medals: 26
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (1) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (1)
Assassin Achievement (2) Manual Troops Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (2) Fog of War Achievement (1) Speed Achievement (2)
Cross-Map Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (3) General Achievement (1) Tournament Contribution (6)

Re: WWII Pearl Harbor - [Quenched]

Postby cairnswk on Mon Sep 07, 2009 8:07 pm

a.sub wrote:Yes thats great, making the initial attack from the planes is nice and all but do you honestly believe that removing ONE plane per set would be that detrimental to your map?


Yes, it takes away the flavour of what Pearl Harbour was. :)
User avatar
Private cairnswk
 
Posts: 11492
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2007 8:32 pm
Medals: 51
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (1) Speed Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (1)
Cross-Map Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (3) General Achievement (2) Map Contribution (36) General Contribution (3)

Re: WWII Pearl Harbor - [Quenched]

Postby shidarin on Mon Sep 07, 2009 9:52 pm

cairnswk wrote:
a.sub wrote:Yes thats great, making the initial attack from the planes is nice and all but do you honestly believe that removing ONE plane per set would be that detrimental to your map?


Yes, it takes away the flavour of what Pearl Harbour was. :)


Not all the planes attacked at the exact same time.

I understand that you want there to be an attack from the planes thing going on; but it's never really felt like that to me. Just feels like a normal map for the most part.

Heck, if you want the attack from the planes feeling, you should embrace the unevenness of the first drop.
Lieutenant shidarin
 
Posts: 15
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2009 1:23 pm
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Medals: 8
Standard Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (1) Quadruples Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (2) Cross-Map Achievement (1)
Ratings Achievement (1)

Re: WWII Pearl Harbor - [Quenched]

Postby cairnswk on Mon Sep 07, 2009 10:33 pm

shidarin wrote:...
Not all the planes attacked at the exact same time.

I understand that you want there to be an attack from the planes thing going on; but it's never really felt like that to me. Just feels like a normal map for the most part.

Heck, if you want the attack from the planes feeling, you should embrace the unevenness of the first drop.


I did shidarin, but so many people complained....
So i am prepared to give this adjustment to see if it helps appoase most...but i know it will probably mean others will never be happy. ;)
User avatar
Private cairnswk
 
Posts: 11492
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2007 8:32 pm
Medals: 51
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (1) Speed Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (1)
Cross-Map Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (3) General Achievement (2) Map Contribution (36) General Contribution (3)

Re: WWII Pearl Harbor - [Quenched]

Postby a.sub on Mon Sep 07, 2009 11:47 pm

you know what?
i typed up a full 3 paragraphs on what you could change to get the "planes are attacking" feel and at the same time keep people quiet
but i realized something, this is retarded
can we honestly say more than 10% of CC actually dislike the way the map is?
i say we put up a vote to see if this is really worth doing, because as a map maker i think the last thing you need is to deal with the handful of ppl that are never satisfied
User avatar
Cadet a.sub
 
Posts: 1834
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2007 2:07 am
Medals: 26
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (1) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (1)
Assassin Achievement (2) Manual Troops Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (2) Fog of War Achievement (1) Speed Achievement (2)
Cross-Map Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (3) General Achievement (1) Tournament Contribution (6)

Re: WWII Pearl Harbor - [Quenched]

Postby cairnswk on Tue Sep 08, 2009 5:15 am

a.sub wrote:you know what?
i typed up a full 3 paragraphs on what you could change to get the "planes are attacking" feel and at the same time keep people quiet
but i realized something, this is retarded
can we honestly say more than 10% of CC actually dislike the way the map is?
i say we put up a vote to see if this is really worth doing, because as a map maker i think the last thing you need is to deal with the handful of ppl that are never satisfied


a.sub, if you want to create another Pearl Harbour maps that works along different lines, drops or whatever, you are welcome to create your own. :)
For the last time, i am interested in only giving the proposed changes.
User avatar
Private cairnswk
 
Posts: 11492
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2007 8:32 pm
Medals: 51
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (1) Speed Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (1)
Cross-Map Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (3) General Achievement (2) Map Contribution (36) General Contribution (3)

Re: WWII Pearl Harbor - [Quenched]

Postby MrBenn on Tue Sep 08, 2009 5:25 am

Let's all take a chill pill, and wait for the updated files to be uploaded ;-)
Image
PB: 2661 | He's blue... If he were green he would die | No mod would be stupid enough to do that
User avatar
Lieutenant MrBenn
Retired Team Member
 
Posts: 7049
Joined: Wed Nov 21, 2007 9:32 am
Location: Off Duty
Medals: 67
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (3) Terminator Achievement (2)
Assassin Achievement (2) Manual Troops Achievement (3) Freestyle Achievement (2) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (2) Fog of War Achievement (3)
Speed Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (2) Cross-Map Achievement (3) Ratings Achievement (3) Tournament Achievement (2)
General Achievement (6) Clan Achievement (1) Map Contribution (7) Tournament Contribution (2) General Contribution (15)

Re: WWII Pearl Harbor - [Quenched]

Postby cairnswk on Tue Sep 08, 2009 6:28 am

MrBenn wrote:Let's all take a chill pill, and wait for the updated files to be uploaded ;-)


I agree. :)
User avatar
Private cairnswk
 
Posts: 11492
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2007 8:32 pm
Medals: 51
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (1) Speed Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (1)
Cross-Map Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (3) General Achievement (2) Map Contribution (36) General Contribution (3)

Re: WWII Pearl Harbor - [Quenched]

Postby a.sub on Tue Sep 08, 2009 9:29 pm

cairnswk wrote:
a.sub wrote:you know what?
i typed up a full 3 paragraphs on what you could change to get the "planes are attacking" feel and at the same time keep people quiet
but i realized something, this is retarded
can we honestly say more than 10% of CC actually dislike the way the map is?
i say we put up a vote to see if this is really worth doing, because as a map maker i think the last thing you need is to deal with the handful of ppl that are never satisfied


a.sub, if you want to create another Pearl Harbour maps that works along different lines, drops or whatever, you are welcome to create your own. :)
For the last time, i am interested in only giving the proposed changes.


lol i think my poor communication skills have come in again, it was a crappy way of saying i liked the old map :lol: :oops:
User avatar
Cadet a.sub
 
Posts: 1834
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2007 2:07 am
Medals: 26
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (1) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (1)
Assassin Achievement (2) Manual Troops Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (2) Fog of War Achievement (1) Speed Achievement (2)
Cross-Map Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (3) General Achievement (1) Tournament Contribution (6)

Re: WWII Pearl Harbor - [Quenched]

Postby ahunda on Sat Sep 12, 2009 6:36 pm

Just a thought, guys: This is not a graphics revamp, but a change of bonus structure & game-play. And that should not happen in the middle of games.

If you simply up-date this map, prepare for a shit-storm of complaints of all the people, who are currently in active games on the map, incl. clan challenges & tournaments. Because you will screw all these games, where people hold bonuses and have positioned themselves accordingly.

Alternative: Take the map offline now, so that no new games can be started. Wait for the active games to finish. Then upload the new one.
Field Marshal ahunda
 
Posts: 411
Joined: Fri Apr 13, 2007 9:52 am
Medals: 28
Conqueror Achievement (1) Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (2)
Terminator Achievement (1) Assassin Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (2) Speed Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (1)
Cross-Map Achievement (3) Ratings Achievement (2) General Achievement (1) Clan Achievement (6)

Re: WWII Pearl Harbor - [Quenched]

Postby cairnswk on Sat Sep 12, 2009 7:14 pm

ahunda wrote:Just a thought, guys: This is not a graphics revamp, but a change of bonus structure & game-play. And that should not happen in the middle of games.

If you simply up-date this map, prepare for a shit-storm of complaints of all the people, who are currently in active games on the map, incl. clan challenges & tournaments. Because you will screw all these games, where people hold bonuses and have positioned themselves accordingly.

Alternative: Take the map offline now, so that no new games can be started. Wait for the active games to finish. Then upload the new one.


Forwarded to Foundry Leader as a good suggestion. :)
User avatar
Private cairnswk
 
Posts: 11492
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2007 8:32 pm
Medals: 51
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (1) Speed Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (1)
Cross-Map Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (3) General Achievement (2) Map Contribution (36) General Contribution (3)

Re: WWII Pearl Harbor - [Quenched]

Postby Lubawski on Sun Sep 13, 2009 10:08 am

cairnswk wrote:For the last time, i am interested in only giving the proposed changes.


So the discussion is off the table? That's too bad. This was one of my favorite maps for team games. The proposed change of needing 4 or 5 planes makes it pointless in a trips or quads game. While I agree that in a 1v1, standard 4 player or fewer game, or in a dubs game, it offered unbalanced drops, there is still strategy involved. The same argument can be made for many maps on the site. This is one of the few maps that have a huge following (as evidenced by the social group that play only this map). It's unfortunate if a drastic change (and I would consider going from 2 planes to 4 planes for a bonus drastic) is made. Better options are making three planes required for the +3 bonus or dropping the bonus from a +3 for 2 planes down to a +2 or +1.
Going first always has its advantage. That's why we have random chance determining who goes first. It equals out in the end. Good players overcome drops all the time. A change to 4 planes required for the bonus, in my opinion, would ruin this map. However, as Cairns created it, I think he should also be the one to decide.

lol. I just realized the title now says Quenched...I'll leave my opinions anyway for posterity sake.
Image
User avatar
Colonel Lubawski
 
Posts: 1095
Joined: Tue May 29, 2007 2:59 pm
Location: Boston, Mass
Medals: 42
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (3) Quadruples Achievement (3) Terminator Achievement (1)
Fog of War Achievement (3) Speed Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (2) Cross-Map Achievement (3) Ratings Achievement (3)
Tournament Achievement (1) General Achievement (2) Clan Achievement (14)

Re: WWII Pearl Harbor - [Quenched]

Postby Greycloak on Sun Sep 13, 2009 2:59 pm

Knight2254 wrote:I play this map quite a bit as well and have had great success. As far as imbalanced -- I'm not so sure it is. Sometimes, but not everytime. I'm 16 for 19 with a rating of "equalitarian." If you exclude the 8 player free for all I just finished I'm 16 for 18 in team games so there must be something I do differently than everybody else because certainly I've had more than 2 "bad drops" yet I maintained a 88+% win percentage.


I am in the same boat. I love the map as it is, play it all the time and would hate to lose the big plane bonus. I'm currently in the Premier League 2v2 tournament with it as our "home" map and we are 13-2 on it so far. We have not gotten 13 first drops so clearly strategy matters. At 4 planes to earn a bonus, it is not worth going for it as it is not defensible because of the AA coverage. As it sits now, there are several corners away from the AA guns where one can take and hold a bonus.

Sure, the drop is important but given even elite opponents the team that gets the drop has a significant advantage on *every single* map on this site, more so on the really large no-neutral maps and on the smaller maps. This map is now all about who controls the skies - attacking opponents' planes and protecting your own. If this proposal goes through, this map will be reduced from something that is unique and fun to play to the sad state of being a slightly quirky medium-large map with a couple of huge choke points that plays like all the rest. There is a significant fan base for this map so the haters should leave it alone for those of us who love it.
User avatar
Major Greycloak
 
Posts: 74
Joined: Sat Oct 14, 2006 4:06 pm
Location: Bowness, Alberta, Canada
Medals: 44
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (2) Terminator Achievement (3)
Assassin Achievement (3) Manual Troops Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (3)
Speed Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (2) Random Map Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (3) Ratings Achievement (3)
Tournament Achievement (3) Clan Achievement (9)

Re: WWII Pearl Harbor - [Quenched]

Postby cairnswk on Sun Sep 13, 2009 3:39 pm

Greycloak wrote:... There is a significant fan base for this map so the haters should leave it alone for those of us who love it.

It's not the haters who want to change it...It is only the drop inbalance that needs to be changed.
As i said, there is always going to be someone who is unhappy.
This map was quenched 370 days ago. It has had 22374 games started on it.
That's 60 games started per day average.
Compare that with Age of Realms....106425 over 309 days = 344 games average per day.
I'd hardly call PH totally popular.
A fan base it may have, but sometimes i wonder if the fan base comes from those who have learned to "win" the map since the map doesn't change its connections each time you play it. As with all these maps there is a certain leanrability about how they play.
As such, I see two advantages in changing the map. Removing the advantage of the drop, and putting everyone back on even footing. :)
User avatar
Private cairnswk
 
Posts: 11492
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2007 8:32 pm
Medals: 51
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (1) Speed Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (1)
Cross-Map Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (3) General Achievement (2) Map Contribution (36) General Contribution (3)

Re: WWII Pearl Harbor - [Quenched]

Postby Greycloak on Sun Sep 13, 2009 4:14 pm

When you take away the plane bonus, the map changes from something unique to yet another map whose bonuses are not defendable in any meaningful sense. The only bonuses that will be in play will be the +1 for an AA gun. Once people take the AA guns and kill the halo of enemy planes around them, there will be no incentive to retake the planes because defending 4 isolated points that are covered so well by bombardments for a measly +3 bonus is not a good return on units. All the games will end up with a bunch of wasted neutral planes and the struggle will be for the choke points and to leverage your coverage into more attacking units.

There are tons of maps on this site that have lots of theoretical bonuses and victory conditions that rarely enter into game play in singles and almost never are of importance in team games (Gazala to name an example). This change will turn this map into another one of those.

What's odd is that you chose Age of Realms as a map to compare to. Those three are among the trickiest to play where if you know "the strategy" you cannot lose against some poor schmuck who doesn't - exactly the learnability issue you decry above. I don't care for how the gameplay works in those maps so despite knowing the tricks, I choose not to play them. I love nothing more than coming from behind in a PH game because it's fluid, it's full of objectives that will all work and it's different than the vanilla maps out there. I'll be sad if this changes because something that is unique will be lost.
User avatar
Major Greycloak
 
Posts: 74
Joined: Sat Oct 14, 2006 4:06 pm
Location: Bowness, Alberta, Canada
Medals: 44
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (2) Terminator Achievement (3)
Assassin Achievement (3) Manual Troops Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (3)
Speed Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (2) Random Map Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (3) Ratings Achievement (3)
Tournament Achievement (3) Clan Achievement (9)

Re: WWII Pearl Harbor - [Quenched]

Postby OTE on Sat Sep 19, 2009 12:45 pm

I agree with Greycloak completely. Why change the bonus structure it is a great map as is. OTE
User avatar
Major OTE
 
Posts: 31
Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2007 9:48 pm
Location: Texas
Medals: 13
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (2) Fog of War Achievement (2) Speed Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (1)
Cross-Map Achievement (2) Ratings Achievement (1) Tournament Achievement (1)

Re: WWII Pearl Harbor - [Quenched]

Postby captainwalrus on Sun Sep 20, 2009 5:04 pm

OTE wrote:I agree with Greycloak completely. Why change the bonus structure it is a great map as is. OTE

I once saw someone start off the game by getting 12 troops a turn while I was only getting 3. That is hardly balanced. It needed to be changed.
~ CaptainWalrus
User avatar
Private 1st Class captainwalrus
 
Posts: 1031
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2007 3:19 pm
Location: Finnmark
Medals: 5
Standard Achievement (1) Doubles Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (1)

Re: WWII Pearl Harbor - [Quenched]

Postby Thezzaruz on Mon Sep 28, 2009 3:53 am

captainwalrus wrote:I once saw someone start off the game by getting 12 troops a turn while I was only getting 3. That is hardly balanced. It needed to be changed.


Making a 2 or 3 player game on a large map that has many continent bonuses in play is the real problem there, not the map itself.
User avatar
Lieutenant Thezzaruz
 
Posts: 1112
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2008 2:10 pm
Location: OTF most of the time.
Medals: 8
Standard Achievement (2) Terminator Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (1)
Ratings Achievement (2)

Re: WWII Pearl Harbor - [Quenched]

Postby Knight2254 on Mon Sep 28, 2009 3:43 pm

Greycloak wrote:When you take away the plane bonus, the map changes from something unique to yet another map whose bonuses are not defendable in any meaningful sense. The only bonuses that will be in play will be the +1 for an AA gun. Once people take the AA guns and kill the halo of enemy planes around them, there will be no incentive to retake the planes because defending 4 isolated points that are covered so well by bombardments for a measly +3 bonus is not a good return on units. All the games will end up with a bunch of wasted neutral planes and the struggle will be for the choke points and to leverage your coverage into more attacking units.

There are tons of maps on this site that have lots of theoretical bonuses and victory conditions that rarely enter into game play in singles and almost never are of importance in team games (Gazala to name an example). This change will turn this map into another one of those.

What's odd is that you chose Age of Realms as a map to compare to. Those three are among the trickiest to play where if you know "the strategy" you cannot lose against some poor schmuck who doesn't - exactly the learnability issue you decry above. I don't care for how the gameplay works in those maps so despite knowing the tricks, I choose not to play them. I love nothing more than coming from behind in a PH game because it's fluid, it's full of objectives that will all work and it's different than the vanilla maps out there. I'll be sad if this changes because something that is unique will be lost.


Well said. This map does have the potential for drop favoritism, but this is just as likely to go for you as against. In the long run it should even out... And really good players can overcome bad drops some of the time.

As I stated earlier the only effective points on the map are going to be the AA guns because they are +1 by holding 1 territory while you potentially have to hold 4 isolated points for +3? This makes little sense to me.
User avatar
Brigadier Knight2254
 
Posts: 377
Joined: Tue May 01, 2007 9:21 pm
Medals: 31
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (3) Quadruples Achievement (3) Terminator Achievement (1)
Freestyle Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (2) Teammate Achievement (2) Random Map Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (2)
Ratings Achievement (2) General Achievement (2) Clan Achievement (7) Tournament Contribution (1)

Re: WWII Pearl Harbor - [Quenched]

Postby iancanton on Wed Sep 30, 2009 2:53 pm

if everyone thinks that +3 is too low for holding 4 planes, then the simplest xml change (which has the merit of xml continuity) is simply to zero the 2-plane bonus and leave the 4-plane bonus unchanged. however, as far as i know, this is not under consideration by the author at the moment.

ian. :)
Image
User avatar
Brigadier iancanton
Cartography Assistant
Cartography Assistant
 
Posts: 1706
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2007 5:40 am
Location: europe
Medals: 51
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (2) Manual Troops Achievement (1)
Freestyle Achievement (2) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (3) Teammate Achievement (2) Random Map Achievement (2)
Cross-Map Achievement (3) Ratings Achievement (4) General Achievement (4) Clan Achievement (7) General Contribution (13)

Re: WWII Pearl Harbor - [Quenched]

Postby captainwalrus on Wed Sep 30, 2009 5:01 pm

Thezzaruz wrote:
captainwalrus wrote:I once saw someone start off the game by getting 12 troops a turn while I was only getting 3. That is hardly balanced. It needed to be changed.


Making a 2 or 3 player game on a large map that has many continent bonuses in play is the real problem there, not the map itself.

It was a 4 player game, the one person just beat all of us. Maps should try to be as balanced as possible for all settings though, not just 8 player games.
~ CaptainWalrus
User avatar
Private 1st Class captainwalrus
 
Posts: 1031
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2007 3:19 pm
Location: Finnmark
Medals: 5
Standard Achievement (1) Doubles Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (1)

Re: WWII Pearl Harbor - [Quenched]

Postby shidarin on Tue Oct 13, 2009 7:21 pm

captainwalrus wrote:
Thezzaruz wrote:
captainwalrus wrote:I once saw someone start off the game by getting 12 troops a turn while I was only getting 3. That is hardly balanced. It needed to be changed.


Making a 2 or 3 player game on a large map that has many continent bonuses in play is the real problem there, not the map itself.

It was a 4 player game, the one person just beat all of us. Maps should try to be as balanced as possible for all settings though, not just 8 player games.


I wanted to see this game, so I took a look at your game records,

According to the list, you've only played 2 Pearl Harbor games, one a doubles with 6 people, January of 2008, and one with 6 people in Nov 2007.

What's up with that?

This map is fantastic as is- please do a poll before the change- I think you'll see the haters are in the minority.
Lieutenant shidarin
 
Posts: 15
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2009 1:23 pm
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Medals: 8
Standard Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (1) Quadruples Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (2) Cross-Map Achievement (1)
Ratings Achievement (1)

Re: WWII Pearl Harbor - [Quenched]

Postby owenshooter on Tue Oct 13, 2009 7:31 pm

Knight2254 wrote:As I stated earlier the only effective points on the map are going to be the AA guns because they are +1 by holding 1 territory while you potentially have to hold 4 isolated points for +3? This makes little sense to me.

or you could keep the guns at +1, but make the bonus automatically added to the gun... never thought of that before.. as far as the planes go, there are some really good ideas in here. when someone lands on a plane bonus, it is just too hard to get them off of it, and often times it is the end of the game if they hold it for their turn... still love the map... but these bonus updates are an interesting fix...-0
Image
Krazy gurls love Cool-0!!!!
User avatar
Lieutenant owenshooter
 
Posts: 8681
Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2007 6:01 pm
Location: Deep in the Heart of Tx
Medals: 27
Standard Achievement (1) Doubles Achievement (4) Triples Achievement (3) Quadruples Achievement (2) Polymorphic Achievement (1)
Fog of War Achievement (2) Teammate Achievement (1) Random Map Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (3) Ratings Achievement (3)
Tournament Achievement (1) General Achievement (3) Clan Achievement (2)

Re: WWII Pearl Harbor - [Quenched]

Postby waseemalim on Wed Oct 14, 2009 3:05 am

Knight2254 wrote:Well said. This map does have the potential for drop favoritism, but this is just as likely to go for you as against. In the long run it should even out... And really good players can overcome bad drops some of the time.

As I stated earlier the only effective points on the map are going to be the AA guns because they are +1 by holding 1 territory while you potentially have to hold 4 isolated points for +3? This makes little sense to me.



Agreed that in the long run better players will have a greater than 50% win rate. But the win rate can not be significantly higher than 50% because the randomness is just going to bring it down. Most of the top team players and complex map enthusiasts willfully avoid this map because of this fact alone.

I wouldnt be making a fuss about it if this was doodle -- but this map has a lot of potential. It is being stunted by its rubbish bonus structure.

+1 for 1 territory makes a lot more sense than +3 for 2 territories -- dont you think? The bonuses dont have to be in perfect ratio, but there shouldnt be any outliers. Given the size of the map,I doubt that the +1 bonuses will be of much use even if one gets a couple in his drop. I could be wrong here... but I am pretty sure that the changes being suggested would make this game a lot more playable.
Life is what happens while you are busy playing Conquer Club.
General waseemalim
 
Posts: 520
Joined: Mon May 21, 2007 11:24 pm
Medals: 35
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (2) Terminator Achievement (1)
Assassin Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (2) Fog of War Achievement (3) Speed Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (3)
Ratings Achievement (2) Tournament Achievement (7) General Achievement (1) Clan Achievement (6)

PreviousNext

Return to The Atlas

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users

Login