Three Kingdoms of Korea [Quenched]

[natty dread]

Ok, to get the gameplay discussion started, let's start with starting territories...

We have 45 territories total. Capitals and castles obviously need to start neutral, so that takes of 11... bringing it to 34. Gaya should have 2 neutrals at least to keep anyone from starting with the Gaya bonus. Wa is only 2 territories so maybe it should also have 1 neutral?

So this would bring the starting territories down to 31. Hm, 32 would be better, so is there anywhere we could add a territory?

Also...

I'm thinking Hanju ought to border Ungjin Baekje is a little bottled up there.

Sorry IH, I seem to have missed this. Maybe a bridge there?


edit: on the neutrals, perhaps we can make each gaya & wa territory into a starting position, so we wouldn't need neutrals there... but that's only 6 territories, so in 7 and 8 player games someone could still start with them... perhaps we could make some other 2 territories into starting positions?

[natty dread]

Bridge added: (I'll probably do a fancier bridge once we get to graphics)

Click image to enlarge.

Another possible solution for Wa/Gaya:

Set 2 neutrals in Gaya, 2 starting positions in Gaya and 2 starting positions in Wa. This way, in 2 player games, either both get a +1 bonus or neither one gets it. In 5-8 player games someone could still drop a bonus in either but it should be less likely in those games...

[Industrial Helix]

I just never drew in a connection for Hanju and Ungjin because I was unsure if I really wanted it at the time.

Well, the starting position thing isn't good because Wa has a negative bonus with any other capital... its not a the greatest spring board. Whereas Gaya doesn't have that and has a very quick opportunity to expand into the other Gaya territories as well.

Option A: Neutral 1s for Honshu
Option B: Starting positions in Wa and Gaya, 6 total.
Option C: not sure... I'm running out of ideas here for that.

[natty dread]

I just never drew in a connection for Hanju and Ungjin because I was unsure if I really wanted it at the time.

Well, the starting position thing isn't good because Wa has a negative bonus with any other capital... its not a the greatest spring board. Whereas Gaya doesn't have that and has a very quick opportunity to expand into the other Gaya territories as well.

right, didn't think of that...

So how about this: both Wa territories start neutral, 4 starting positions for Gaya?


Also, can we up the Wa bonus to 2? 1 seems a bit unattractive, no one will want to take it because you can't hold any capitals with it.


Hey, another option would be to change the Gaya bonus to +3 for all Gaya territories. It would be harder to get but it would give a better bonus, by 1.

[Riskismy]

I like the bonus scheme (that you don't absolutely have to have all territories to get a bonus). However, I'd rephrase the legend to read 'the capital', as opposed to naming each territory. Took me several minutes to locate the first territory and home in on the idea. It conveys the same idea, only now you don't have to look around the map (so much) to understand it.

[natty dread]

I like the bonus scheme (that you don't absolutely have to have all territories to get a bonus). However, I'd rephrase the legend to read 'the capital', as opposed to naming each territory. Took me several minutes to locate the first territory and home in on the idea. It conveys the same idea, only now you don't have to look around the map (so much) to understand it.

The problem with that is that it would suggest that you could hold any capital to get the bonus, when in fact you need to hold the matching capital of the area to get that area's bonus. With limited space in the legend, the current solution is the best I can see for now.

[Industrial Helix]

I like the bonus scheme (that you don't absolutely have to have all territories to get a bonus). However, I'd rephrase the legend to read 'the capital', as opposed to naming each territory. Took me several minutes to locate the first territory and home in on the idea. It conveys the same idea, only now you don't have to look around the map (so much) to understand it.

The problem with that is that it would suggest that you could hold any capital to get the bonus, when in fact you need to hold the matching capital of the area to get that area's bonus. With limited space in the legend, the current solution is the best I can see for now.

Maybe Natty can fit a little version of the capital icon in there after the territory name. Legend space is tight, but I'm just saying...

[AndyDufresne]

In the legend, since we are talking about it---could you make the number digits stand out more? Perhaps making them either slightly larger / in a different but similar font? The numbers kind of get lost in the font, since it is not a typical one. I think enhancing the numbers might also make for understanding the gameplay (the current topic of discussion) easier.


--Andy

[natty dread]

Maybe Natty can fit a little version of the capital icon in there after the territory name. Legend space is tight, but I'm just saying...

Well.. if I stretch the legend a bit, it should be doable.

In the legend, since we are talking about it---could you make the number digits stand out more?

Yes.

So IH, how about this idea:

- both Wa terts start with neutral 1:s
- Gaya is made into "hold all for +3" and starts normal

No starting positions, 32 starting territories.



Here's legend fixes:

Click image to enlarge.

[Industrial Helix]

I can live with Wa starting at neutral 1s.

I don't like the Gaya solution. Gaya needs to act like an early small bonus but not large enough to carry a player through a game.

I'm favoring 4 starting positions for Gaya.

[natty dread]

I can live with Wa starting at neutral 1s.

I don't like the Gaya solution. Gaya needs to act like an early small bonus but not large enough to carry a player through a game.

I'm favoring 4 starting positions for Gaya.

But that wouldn't solve 5-8 player games.

If we could add 2 territories somewhere, then we could make 2 Gaya territories neutrals...

[natty dread]

...or, we could just add 2 Gaya neutrals and settle for 30 starting territories.
I mean, it's not like you have to play this with more than 6 players...

[Riskismy]

I like the bonus scheme (that you don't absolutely have to have all territories to get a bonus). However, I'd rephrase the legend to read 'the capital', as opposed to naming each territory. Took me several minutes to locate the first territory and home in on the idea. It conveys the same idea, only now you don't have to look around the map (so much) to understand it.

The problem with that is that it would suggest that you could hold any capital to get the bonus, when in fact you need to hold the matching capital of the area to get that area's bonus. With limited space in the legend, the current solution is the best I can see for now.

Come now. Only a complete fool or noob would think that you could hold just any capital and get the bonus, when you have one line for each bonus region, as well as mentioning the name of that region.

oh, I really like the changes to the font of the legend. Much more legible now.

[natty dread]

Come now. Only a complete fool or noob would think that you could hold just any capital and get the bonus, when you have one line for each bonus region, as well as mentioning the name of that region.

No, that's not good enough. We can't make an unclear legend and assume that the players will "get it", it needs to be unambiguous in all aspects.

[Riskismy]

If the players are clever enough to use a browser, they'll understand what the bonus scheme is just fine, even with just 'the capital' - in fact, I posit they'll understand it much better and not least faster.
Personally, I don't care. I (finally) figured it out. I just figured you'd like to make it easier on your players.