Forum

by **cairnswk** on Thu Jan 10, 2013 3:19 pm

nolefan5311 wrote:Just to confirm cairns...it's a max of 2 starting positions (to only affect 2 & 3 player games), or a max of 3 starting positions?

as per discussion top of page 25 which you wrote...<positions max="2">

by **nolefan5311** on Thu Jan 10, 2013 3:34 pm

cairnswk wrote:
nolefan5311 wrote:Just to confirm cairns...it's a max of 2 starting positions (to only affect 2 & 3 player games), or a max of 3 starting positions?

as per discussion top of page 25 which you wrote...<positions max="2">

Just making sure we're still at 2. Thanks.

by **nolefan5311** on Thu Jan 10, 2013 3:46 pm

The updated XML is linked and attached.

http://www.fileden.com/files/2012/5/13/3303803/Classic_Cities__Pot_Mosbi_01-10.xml

by **cairnswk** on Thu Jan 10, 2013 3:47 pm

nolefan5311 wrote:
cairnswk wrote:
nolefan5311 wrote:Just to confirm cairns...it's a max of 2 starting positions (to only affect 2 & 3 player games), or a max of 3 starting positions?

as per discussion top of page 25 which you wrote...<positions max="2">

Just making sure we're still at 2. Thanks.

you could confirm that with iancanton. :idea:

although when i wrote it, there was no dicsussion on it, os i assume it was OK.

by **nolefan5311** on Thu Jan 10, 2013 3:52 pm

cairnswk wrote:
nolefan5311 wrote:
cairnswk wrote:
nolefan5311 wrote:Just to confirm cairns...it's a max of 2 starting positions (to only affect 2 & 3 player games), or a max of 3 starting positions?

as per discussion top of page 25 which you wrote...<positions max="2">

Just making sure we're still at 2. Thanks.

you could confirm that with iancanton.
although when i wrote it, there was no dicsussion on it, os i assume it was OK.

I will just go with 2 right now. If ian wants it different, I'm sure he'll let us know

by **cairnswk** on Thu Jan 10, 2013 4:56 pm

nolefan5311 wrote:I will just go with 2 right now. If ian wants it different, I'm sure he'll let us know

OK, thanks.

by **GoranZ** on Thu Jan 10, 2013 5:40 pm

IDK if it was proposed or not(27 pages... too much) but I think that Utilities should have 6-7 neutrals on them... as it is they are too powerful(especially for team games and unlimited reinforcements)

by **cairnswk** on Thu Jan 10, 2013 8:41 pm

GoranZ wrote:IDK if it was proposed or not(27 pages... too much) but I think that Utilities should have 6-7 neutrals on them... as it is they are too powerful(especially for team games and unlimited reinforcements)

GoranZ. thanks for feedback.
i don't beleive it was proposed...
are you saying it is too strong as a bonus when collected in those games...
and how many bad experiences did you have with this...
and where would you put the 6-7 neutrals if you had them?

by **GoranZ** on Fri Jan 11, 2013 7:21 pm

No they are too powerful when it comes to ease of connecting remote areas of the map. And since they are initially ether to some player or neutral it gives them very powerful role(Almost all attack will go threw them, and defenders cant defend since no one will know where the attack force will go to). But if they are initially neutral with certain amount of units on them their role for blitzkrieg attack in the beginning stages of the game will be reduced although they will still be quite powerful later in the game. Cretan amount of neutrals on them(it doesn't have to be 6-7... it can be 5) will probably render their usefulness in round 1, but not for later rounds. If there is a change in them then probably the utilities bonus should be changed also.

cairnswk wrote:and how many bad experiences did you have with this...
and where would you put the 6-7 neutrals if you had them?

All Utilities territories should start with neutrals on them... I had surprising experience(not bad) in one of the games I play on the map when I realized what can be done with those connecting territories

... Generally the goal for my proposal is to make the map littlebit slower when it comes to eliminating an enemy in the begining stages of the game, especially in unlimited reinforcements.

Other then this the map looks quite impressive.

by **benga** on Tue Jan 15, 2013 10:52 am

Losing conditions don't work or are badly described!!!

I am holding all tribes and my opponent still lives!!!

by **cairnswk** on Tue Jan 15, 2013 11:14 am

benga wrote:Losing conditions don't work or are badly described!!!

I am holding all tribes and my opponent still lives!!!

Game 12200217

benga, unfortuntely unless your take a screenshot and post it for me, i am unable to assist you since you will insist on playing fog when the map is in beta...i can't see a darned thing about who holds what, and the game log is just as useless.

are you sure ViperOverLord does not hold a tribe? or is there a tribe that is neutral?

by **benga** on Tue Jan 15, 2013 3:32 pm

cairnswk wrote:
benga wrote:Losing conditions don't work or are badly described!!!

I am holding all tribes and my opponent still lives!!!

Game 12200217

benga, unfortuntely unless your take a screenshot and post it for me, i am unable to assist you since you will insist on playing fog when the map is in beta...i can't see a darned thing about who holds what, and the game log is just as useless.

are you sure ViperOverLord does not hold a tribe? or is there a tribe that is neutral?

We are still playing so I can post snap later, I took over all of his tribes have 8 of them now, not sure where Motu is.

Oh found Motu, my bad, somehow thought I have 8 tribes

Thx for your time!

by **cairnswk** on Tue Jan 15, 2013 4:18 pm

benga wrote:....

We are still playing so I can post snap later, I took over all of his tribes have 8 of them now, not sure where Motu is.

Oh found Motu, my bad, somehow thought I have 8 tribes

Thx for your time!

You don't have to actually take-over 8 tribes to win, just eliminate your opponent's tribes, so it may be that VOL has the Motu Tribe, which is why the game hasn't finished.