[Abandoned] - Epic Epoch

[Evil DIMwit]

Your neutrals seem good. It might also be worth it to put 2 on EM1 or EM2, OE1 or OE2, and all of the territories with local markets. EM and OE, just cuz they're 2-territory bonuses, and the markets because it would help against too much of a starting bonus since resource pairs wouldn't be too difficult to drop.

As I've noted, I'm putting 3 neutrals on each market.

As for EM and OE, they're 1 troop each and on a map this big, I'd think it wouldn't make much difference.

[Victor Sullivan]

Your neutrals seem good. It might also be worth it to put 2 on EM1 or EM2, OE1 or OE2, and all of the territories with local markets. EM and OE, just cuz they're 2-territory bonuses, and the markets because it would help against too much of a starting bonus since resource pairs wouldn't be too difficult to drop.

As I've noted, I'm putting 3 neutrals on each market.

As for EM and OE, they're 1 troop each and on a map this big, I'd think it wouldn't make much difference.

(Sorry, I guess I need to read more thoroughly ) I suppose you could adjust starting positions if you wanted to as well, but that's fine. What's next on the agenda?

[Evil DIMwit]

Now...

Click image to enlarge.

Now we wait for more input.

[natty dread]

A lot of the maps on this map are objective maps. Yet this map doesn't have an objective.

Have you considered one?

[Evil DIMwit]

An objective would be tricky to balance. It'd have to be big enough that you have to be active in a large part of the map but small enough that it doesn't require you to take over the whole map already. I can see it being balanced if it's something like...
Hold 3 of the following:
- The Twin Oasis
- 6 Castles
- 4 Markets
- The Throne
- All Stores

But that's quite complex so I don't know if it's a good idea.

[natty dread]

I like the idea. If only you can find the legend space for it...

[Evil DIMwit]

What I could do is, I could make a little special icon, and then distribute it throughout the map -- say, one on each castle, store, and market, two on each Twin Oasis terr., three on the Throne, say, and then say "Hold 12 to win" or some such. But then people would have to count, too.

[natty dread]

But then people would have to count, too.

Oh noes, brain hurt!

[Bruceswar]

But then people would have to count, too.

Oh noes, brain hurt!

I thought the same thing also! LOL If someone is holding 12 that likely means they are going to win anyhow... just a thought...

[Evil DIMwit]

But then people would have to count, too.

Oh noes, brain hurt!

I thought the same thing also! LOL If someone is holding 12 that likely means they are going to win anyhow... just a thought...

Well, it's borderline, which I think the good objectives (e.g. Europe 1914, Third Crusade) are. You can get it with all the Castles and the Twin Oasis; with the Throne, half the castles, and all the Markets; with Newtown, Seascape, and Fahrenheit; but it might be easier to go with a mix. It actually might be an interesting way to incentivize people to spread their interests out over the map and to prevent games from going on too long.

[Victor Sullivan]

I like the objective you suggested. I say roll with it. Like you said, it could counteract those nastily long No Spoils games.

[MrBenn]

Continents can be part of objectives, so there's no problem with the "hold any 3 of these 6 mini-objectives" concept. As for legend, if more space is needed, we can make the map a little wider.

[Evil DIMwit]

You know, I almost doubted for a minute that I could cram those victory conditions in, but here they are plain as day.

Click image to enlarge.

I hope that's clear.

[Teflon Kris]

You know, I almost doubted for a minute that I could cram those victory conditions in, but here they are plain as day.

I hope that's clear.

Yes, clear enough for anyone with reasonable intelligence.

Maybe, just to pronounce the importance of Helipads - the Helipad in the legend could be at the tope of the Newtown legend right-hand column - creates a bit of symmetry with the ports legend position.

Good progress here evil.

[Evil DIMwit]

Maybe, just to pronounce the importance of Helipads - the Helipad in the legend could be at the tope of the Newtown legend right-hand column - creates a bit of symmetry with the ports legend position.

A fine suggestion. Done.

[Evil DIMwit]

Here's that version implemented:

Click image to enlarge.

[Victor Sullivan]

Lookin' mighty fine! My only quibble would be that the icon used to depict the Twin Oasis is somewhat incorrect, as it shows the surrounding desert as well, and could be a tad misleading.

-Sully

[Evil DIMwit]

That's a good point. I'll change it around once I have enough changes to justify a new update.

[MarshalNey]

long-ish comment forthcoming (likely tomorrow). Beyond my first reaction (which is "Supersize this cramped puppy") I think that I will restrict myself to the general things that grab my attention, as analyzing this in detail might take two or three solar years. If anyone notices any details (or anything for that matter) which are amiss, speak up!

-- Marshal Ney

[Victor Sullivan]

Beyond my first reaction (which is "Supersize this cramped puppy")

That'd be nice. I think this map could benefit from supersize. IMO it'd be especially nice to see Ocean not as a inset, I just think it's a little odd thaty the entire Ocean section is about the size of one territory.

-Sully

[Evil DIMwit]

I think it's a little odd that the castle in Enclave is as big as three full realms in Aeternum.

[natty dread]

I think it's a little odd that the castle in Enclave is as big as three full realms in Aeternum.

Well that's basically what I was saying earlier...

[MarshalNey]

Heh, I'm not trying to reopen an old argument by saying "Supersize". Really, it's just the obvious, um, "fullness" of the map that prompted my reaction. I'd be the first to say, for instance, that Waterloo could have used a wee bit more room. And just to be clear, in no way was I proposing more territories or other gameplay elements, just some extra space so that the map has a little more room to breathe. Anyway, Evil D has done a wonderful job of getting everything into the space he has and still keeping it to the Foundry standard for clarity. Yes, that's right, I feel it meets the standard; I also feel that a little more room could improve the map clarity. However ultimately it's up to the mapmaker, and re-sizing a map is a huge pain in the butt, so this is the last that I'll say on the matter unless Evil D brings it up.

As for the map gameplay, I'm happy with the framework, and the elements seem to have gotten a huge boost (from my perspective anyway) from the Victory Conditions. In fact, my one overall suggestion for the gameplay is simply to emphasize the Victory Condition regions further, and to pull back on some of the larger bonuses.

Here's my thought- in all of the current Victory Condition maps (where the Victory Condition is viable, anyway) only one player can hold the needed regions to gain victory; if more than one player is pursuing the Victory Condition, they have to fight over the regions. However, this map has 24 possible Victory "Points" available and a requirement of only 12 VP to win. Thus, two players could be pursuing the Victory Condition in parallel and never have to fight, giving the map more a feel of a race.

I like this, it's different but not gimmicky or complicated. In fact, it might be nice to expand the number of VP available so that 2 players could pursue Victory more comfortably, so that it would have a real possibility of coming up in an actual game.

What could encourage pursuit of VPs further (without making it an overpowering element of the map) would be to tone down some of the bonuses associated with VP regions, thus making them less attractive to players who are merely pursuing lots of reinforcements. Then VPs could be pursued more for their own sake. Finally, by reducing bonuses that are already a bit out of line with the other 'continents' (Epochs), it provides more balance to the map as a whole, although that really isn't strictly necessary the way the map deployment is laid out.

I would suggest reducing the huge bonus for the Twin Oasis (btw is there a plural for 'Oasis'?) a bit, maybe down to a +10? The bonus for the castles and villages might work out as a +2 autodeploy and +1 auto.

Really that's about all I've got, and even those are just preferences, I don't think the map gameplay is imbalanced as it is. The routes through the ports and helipads really keep any one Epoch from being overpowering.

Oh one other thing, what are the probabilities for a bonus on the drop, and how big? I notice some +2 for 3 regions bonuses (like on the inset) and a several +1s as well...

As for looks, well, the region names will get a bit hairy to sort out when a person actually has to find 'AA2' or some such. The naming conventions are consistent and easy to grasp, but not as easy to find, because some of the Epochs are so large. I think perhaps some things could be done in this area to improve the clarity, but right now it's only a feeling... I may have some concrete suggestions in the near future.

-- Marshal Ney

[Evil DIMwit]

I'll follow this up with responses and analysis and such at a slightly later date, but for now I just wanted to remark:

re-sizing a map is a huge pain in the butt

This is the opposite of the case; since I work in vector graphics, resizing is pretty easy.

[Boler]

This looks really fun!

One little thing though, the twin oasis has a rather large +15 bonus which is a bit too close for my liking to 2 ideal starting locations, Timber, and Mire. Timber is only 5 territories away, and Mire is 6.
If any one got a hold of the Twin Oasis that fast I would expect them to win.

But i'd play it anyway.