nolefan5311 wrote:I will take one final look at it tonight to and address skychaser's comments before stamping. Sound good Seamus?
skychaser wrote:Well. Talking on gameplay. Don't we need more bonuses? Wei is surelly stronger, but at this map is the only one who's got easy bonuses.
Take Yang as an example. You must have 6 territories to get a +3 bonus, 6X3 = 18. So you must maybe conquer 18 territories to get a bonus +3. Which will pay itself in over 6 rounds Which means that in most absolute of the matches we will never have one of these territories being taken.
Shu has no bonuses except that unexperienced players of no card and fixed cards may try to take something.
Wei has only two bonuses we can account. Most people would take then given that they are dropped with most territories there. The central part of Wei is not that much of a bonus. You must defeat 27 armies to have a bonus of 5 and 666 borders to defend.
I think this map with virtually no bonuses tends a little to lesser action. Most people would never take nothing than the +1 bonuses and it's not something to make someone jealous or something.
I don't know if people agree to me but I would put a little bit of numbers to the bonuses, the +1 would become +2 and the +2 become +4. All the other with the addiction of 2.
The Bison King wrote:That being said I think Sky Chaser is over emphasizing the need for more obtainable bonuses. I can see 2 bonuses in the red region that could be easily held with 2 territories. You could probably have either of them within round 5. It may not need any serious adjustment.
skychaser wrote:I didn't make myself clear so let me try again.
The bonuses aren't "hard" do obtain. I mean. Only that People go (in classic) for Australia cause it's easy to obtain and easy to protect. Very seldom one would go for such bonuses after round 3 however. A bonus obtainable by round 5 is a bonus that mostly doesn't exists at least at 6 players escalating(I don't know but I think it's the most played mode.
These bonus will very seldom be taken at escalating.
They will be still taken if it's played by 4 people or less.
They will be taken at Fixed cards and no cards.
They will be taken at escalating provided people are playing fog of war mode(my favorite).
Not ranting here. Just that I thought a slight more bonus would make more wars about these bonuses. I can't see however not many ways of winning in this map aside from turtling in clear escalating game.
Benzorrr wrote:Just wanted to say, awesome concept for a map. Romance of the Three Kingdoms is a great book.
Vlasov wrote:Mongolia, perhaps?
The Bison King wrote:The first is the obvious solution break up some of the larger bonuses into smaller ones.
The second is a little different. You could scrap the +4 for all the capitals rule. I think that's a little bit of a tired convention and doesn't add much to the map anyway. With that rule scraped you could add a new rule. Something to the tune of +1 for any 3 territories within a kingdom held with the capital. This would make the larger bonus regions more of just a territory buffet. You wouldn't need the entire region to reap a reward so long as you have the capital. The actual territory bonus would probably only come into play at the end game (as it probably would already). This would also give the kingdoms more of a unified feel if holding the capital along with bonus regions was a reward in and of itself.
nolefan5311 wrote:Sorry it's taken me so long to post Seamus, but I've had a busy week.
nolefan5311 wrote:Strictly speaking for the territorial bonuses, the only one I would recommend changing is increasing Central Wei to a +6, but this probably isn't going to matter. Bonuses like this one (ala Asia in Classic) are never held, so it's not going to matter much.
nolefan5311 wrote:One change I think needs to be made is to change the connection from Jianye to He Fei instead of Xu Chang. Currently it's a 6 region +3 bonus that can held by holding two territories (Lu-Ling and Xu Chang). The additional territory being able to attack in would justify the +3 a little more.
V.J. and I are going to mull it over a bit, but you know I hate bonuses that don't get used, so a +1 for each and then +4 for all 3 is good to me.nolefan5311 wrote:Changing that connection would also put the +4 for the Capital bonus more in line with what it should be. Another option for the Capitals is to just make them +1 for holding 1, and then awarding an additional troop for holding all of them at the same time. I'm not sure what your ideal vision for the map is Seamus but currently it appears games will revolve around the Cities and Capitals and this change would further encourage that.
I agree with you on this one, V.J. and I will come back with an update tomorrow and hopefully we can keep this one moving along at a nice pace.nolefan5311 wrote:As far as the +1 for every territory held within a Kingdom as long as you hold a Capital...not really a fan of that idea. As most people will probably only ever receive a +2 (prior to the endgame), so I don't think that change is a good idea. But, it's your map, and if that's the direction you decide to go, then godspeed.
Also, the more I mull over your capital bonus thoughts the more I like it. There is nothing more I dislike than bonuses that don't get used, so something like this is more appealing. Would the capitals still start 3n or maybe go to 4n because of the new importance?
Users browsing this forum: No registered users