Conquer Club

You really like blow, nuking, or generally breaking apart America, don't you?

It's definately something I'd play though, looks intresting.

swimmerdude99 wrote:Can you clarify what it means in the legend under Fighters?
"Attack Range of 1
Bombard range of 2
Can atack or bombard any region"
That last line seems inconsistent with the first two lines? I don't understand that...

Cool map

Reworded. It now reads "Can attack or bombard any unit"

Campin_Killer wrote:You really like blow, nuking, or generally breaking apart America, don't you?

It's definately something I'd play though, looks intresting.

Nah!!! Hope you come back soon to keep up with the updates!!

Changes made:
1 - Reworded as above
2 - Added in examples of attack/bombard ranges

Do we really need the examples?

koontz1973 wrote:Do we really need the examples?

Well you know how people are, so I want to make sure as much as possible that there is no mistaken what attacks/bombards what. If need be I can remove the examples later.

Euro - Russian Pact. Soviet sounds so 80s Rocky/Rambo.
All of the text that is for the fronts is almost unreadable and even hard to notice. Not really needed is it?
Are we getting a symbol for the infantry?
Black lines as impassable? And with the impassables, are they based on anything in particular?
An idea for you, how about giving each wave its own unique win condition but leave out the US troops from this. They just have to survive.

In 2154 after a century of US hostility, some of the nations decided to end the hostilities and made a co-ordinated attack. Taken by surprise, it was all the US could do to fight back. Your orders: Defend the country against overwhelming numbers!

This is the premise for the new map brought to you by isaiah40. After Fractured America and China, will this map sit nicely with the others we have? Would you like to see this game in the future and if so, do you see anything that might need changing?

koontz1973 wrote:Euro - Russian Pact. Soviet sounds so 80s Rocky/Rambo.

Nah Soviet, this is the future so who knows.

All of the text that is for the fronts is almost unreadable and even hard to notice. Not really needed is it?

It is needed as a name for the invasion waves. I'm working on the text.

Are we getting a symbol for the infantry?

No, as everything is top down, it would just be a circle pretty much

Black lines as impassable? And with the impassables, are they based on anything in particular?

Yes they are. Not really, just a line that really gives each player a change in the first couple of rounds.

An idea for you, how about giving each wave its own unique win condition but leave out the US troops from this. They just have to survive.

It possibly can be done, but then I would have to change the name of the map and call it "Attack America"

isaiah40 wrote:It possibly can be done, but then I would have to change the name of the map and call it "Attack America"

It could be possible with 6 players or less, you all attack America. A name change might be appropriate.

koontz1973 wrote:

isaiah40 wrote:It possibly can be done, but then I would have to change the name of the map and call it "Attack America"

It could be possible with 6 players or less, you all attack America. A name change might be appropriate.

I wonder if more or less people would play "Defend America" vs "Attack America."


--Andy

There used to be a board game that was close to this concept. Except each group had a laser tower in one territory that could recharge and nuke a region every so many turns.

So there is my great contribution to this map. Use it as you see fit. When do I get my map achievement medal?


Seriously, though, I like the concept.

AndyDufresne wrote:

koontz1973 wrote:

isaiah40 wrote:It possibly can be done, but then I would have to change the name of the map and call it "Attack America"

It could be possible with 6 players or less, you all attack America. A name change might be appropriate.

I wonder if more or less people would play "Defend America" vs "Attack America."


--Andy

Any way we can find this out. Maybe a poll or something?

koontz1973 wrote:

AndyDufresne wrote:

koontz1973 wrote:

isaiah40 wrote:It possibly can be done, but then I would have to change the name of the map and call it "Attack America"

It could be possible with 6 players or less, you all attack America. A name change might be appropriate.

I wonder if more or less people would play "Defend America" vs "Attack America."


--Andy

Any way we can find this out. Maybe a poll or something?

My post was more of an idle rumination than a real interest in a poll. But I am still curious.


--Andy

Going to sticky this now isaiah40 and send you on your way in a couple of days.

Nice map !

Reworded some of the instructions a bit to try and make it a little clearer.

Looking good, Isaiah. In regards to the legend, since you said you were just working on it, have you thought about flipping the 4th column (I.E. 'You will only.. / All empty regions... / All units withing...') to the left side of the legend? The information therewithin seems like info I'd want to read over first before moving onto the icon information (reading left to right more so).

Additionally in terms of the legend, I am always in favor of adding bullet points if you aren't using space to separate main ideas (like the 4th column does with spacing).

I'll check back with some other feedback soon hopefully!


--Andy

AndyDufresne wrote:Looking good, Isaiah. In regards to the legend, since you said you were just working on it, have you thought about flipping the 4th column (I.E. 'You will only.. / All empty regions... / All units withing...') to the left side of the legend? The information therewithin seems like info I'd want to read over first before moving onto the icon information (reading left to right more so).

Additionally in terms of the legend, I am always in favor of adding bullet points if you aren't using space to separate main ideas (like the 4th column does with spacing).

I'll check back with some other feedback soon hopefully!


--Andy

All of the above are good suggestions and will be done for the next updatre.

As promised before the strike (communism at its finest ), here is your stamp. Good luck.

koontz

A quick update, just switched the legend around per the monkeys suggestion, * hands Andy another banana*

The first thing that comes to mind is that the legend needs some clarification as far as what can and can't be attacked. The attack routes all seem a little incoherent. So I think the best solution is to list what can't be attacked as opposed to what can be attacked. That'll significantly reduce space usage in the legend and clear things up quite a bit.

Suggestions:

Empty Regions
Can attack all adjacent regions

INF
Can attack all adjacent regions except for Bombers.

Fighters
Attack range of 1
Bombard range of 2
(since there appears to not be any restriction on what Fighters can attack)

Bombers
Attack range of 2
Bombard range of 3
Can't attack Fighters or other Bombers

Hover-Tanks
Attack range of 2.
Can't attack Fighters or Bombers

Cities
Can attack all adjacent regions

Assuming this is all correct, what do you think?

nolefan5311 wrote:The first thing that comes to mind is that the legend needs some clarification as far as what can and can't be attacked. The attack routes all seem a little incoherent. So I think the best solution is to list what can't be attacked as opposed to what can be attacked. That'll significantly reduce space usage in the legend and clear things up quite a bit.

Suggestions:

Empty Regions
Can attack all adjacent regions

INF
Can attack all adjacent regions except for Bombers.

Fighters
Attack range of 1
Bombard range of 2
(since there appears to not be any restriction on what Fighters can attack)

Bombers
Attack range of 2
Bombard range of 3
Can't attack Fighters or other Bombers

Hover-Tanks
Attack range of 2.
Can't attack Fighters or Bombers

Cities
Can attack all adjacent regions

Assuming this is all correct, what do you think?

This would be a much better way of listing the information. As it is, it's very unclear what attacks what.

Nolefan's suggestions would go a long way towards clearing up the attack routes.

My 2 cents.

nolefan5311 wrote:The first thing that comes to mind is that the legend needs some clarification as far as what can and can't be attacked. The attack routes all seem a little incoherent. So I think the best solution is to list what can't be attacked as opposed to what can be attacked. That'll significantly reduce space usage in the legend and clear things up quite a bit.

Suggestions:

Empty Regions
Can attack all adjacent regions

INF
Can attack all adjacent regions except for Bombers.

Fighters
Attack range of 1
Bombard range of 2
(since there appears to not be any restriction on what Fighters can attack)

Bombers
Attack range of 2
Bombard range of 3
Can't attack Fighters or other Bombers

Hover-Tanks
Attack range of 2.
Can't attack Fighters or Bombers

Cities
Can attack all adjacent regions

Assuming this is all correct, what do you think?

I can deal with these suggestions with the exception of the Bombers bombard range. I would prefer to leave it worded as it is now "Bombards 3 regions away". Bombard "range" denotes up to the regions.

isaiah40 wrote:

nolefan5311 wrote:The first thing that comes to mind is that the legend needs some clarification as far as what can and can't be attacked. The attack routes all seem a little incoherent. So I think the best solution is to list what can't be attacked as opposed to what can be attacked. That'll significantly reduce space usage in the legend and clear things up quite a bit.

Suggestions:

Empty Regions
Can attack all adjacent regions

INF
Can attack all adjacent regions except for Bombers.

Fighters
Attack range of 1
Bombard range of 2
(since there appears to not be any restriction on what Fighters can attack)

Bombers
Attack range of 2
Bombard range of 3
Can't attack Fighters or other Bombers

Hover-Tanks
Attack range of 2.
Can't attack Fighters or Bombers

Cities
Can attack all adjacent regions

Assuming this is all correct, what do you think?

I can deal with these suggestions with the exception of the Bombers bombard range. I would prefer to leave it worded as it is now "Bombards 3 regions away". Bombard "range" denotes up to the regions.

I honestly don't see a difference, but if that's what you want to go with, that's fine.

Legend has been updated. Added an outline around the map.

Now for the in-depth game-play analysis please!!

Updated OP with starting neutrals, autodeploys etc.

just a personal opinion, shouldn't the nuetrals for the territories that have higher auto deploy have a higher neutral count? for instance the bommer gets +3, granted it can't attack planes or other bombers, but seriously?! I mean think about it, you kill 3 nuetrals to MAKE up the troops you kill in one turn. I think that will turn into the only type of territ people want, obviously it will be most valuable even if you raise it to a higher nuetral count, maybe the +1 autos could be nuetral 2, then +2 autos are nuetral 3, and then the +3 autos are nuetral 4? just throwing that out there