[Abandoned] Marooned

[Gillipig]

First off I'd like to say I'm glad you decided to pick this up again.
This new version is much easier gameplay wise. No fishing regions, no win condition, no beacon. Not sure I like that it's so simple in gameplay but it's at least a step away from the overly cluttered versions that were before.

[NZHostel]

yes please

[ManBungalow]

I'm not 100% on the regularity of the gameplay as it is, and it doesn't seem like anyone else is either, so I could try putting together a slightly different gameplay schematic. Then we could compare that to the existing version and see which will work out best. After that, I don't want to do any more 'overhauls'; and will get this finalised in terms of graphics when the gameplay is stable.

[isaiah40]

Sorry manbung, I will give this another look over within the next couple of days and get back with you on it.

[DoomYoshi]

At this point it is TOO simple. I agree that the victory conditions made sense to get rid of, but this seems a lot more boring. As a smaller, the current gameplay would be pretty frantic I think.

[ManBungalow]

For the record, things are happening with this map...slowly.

[Victor Sullivan]

Cool beans, ManB. Good to hear things are still chugging along! Just like DiM with that bottle of scotch. Easy, boy...

-Sully

[ManBungalow]

Update with new stuff. Go vote in the poll.

[DiM]

Update with new stuff. Go vote in the poll.

vote for what?

[ManBungalow]

Update with new stuff. Go vote in the poll.

vote for what?

CTRL + F5 and/or clear your cache? Both images work fine for me.

[DiM]

CTRL + F5 and/or clear your cache? Both images work fine for me.

i always do that when an image doesn't work. still nothing.
i even looked inside your pot and got the link for one of the images.
http://i495.photobucket.com/albums/rr317/ManBungalow/maroonedv04.png
put it in my address bad, hit enter and firefox tells he he can't find that address.

[ManBungalow]

Is this any better?:

A

Click image to enlarge.

[DiM]

Is this any better?:

A

Click image to enlarge.

yep i can see it.
do the other one too

[ManBungalow]

B

Click image to enlarge.

[isaiah40]

On the shelters, how many men do you plan on starting them with?

[DoomYoshi]

I voted exhibit A.

One of the more popular maps is the AoR series. That series proved that the different starting regions don't have to be equal to make a really enjoyable game. I like how in exhibit a, some shelters connect directly to each other for early war opportunities and some have up to 4 different resources they can get.

I have a few questions though: is exhibit a's map perfectly fixed? There are a few things that could be changed. Also, when you get 2 starting territories, are they independent of each other?

[ManBungalow]

I voted exhibit A.

One of the more popular maps is the AoR series. That series proved that the different starting regions don't have to be equal to make a really enjoyable game. I like how in exhibit a, some shelters connect directly to each other for early war opportunities and some have up to 4 different resources they can get.

I have a few questions though: is exhibit a's map perfectly fixed? There are a few things that could be changed. Also, when you get 2 starting territories, are they independent of each other?

No, none of the gameplay aspects on either map are fixed.
Yes, the starting territories are independent of each other. You can deploy on one/several shelters, and even try to connect them if that's your game.

On the shelters, how many men do you plan on starting them with?

That depends on the rest of the map and the functionality. In other words; I don't know, but that's what we'll have to work out when I've decided which exhibit will be the most fun.


Now, carthographers, I'd like to know which of the two exhibits (A or B) is most likely to get me a gameplay stamp. You can say "oh, any map can work if it's done right" or some other dismissive statement, but one of these two maps is better than the other. Evaluate the existing maps on this site and determine which better fits a gap in the market (as it were) if you must, it doesn't make much difference to me. Personally, I prefer exhibit A. The alternative gives me a St Patrick's Day crapshoot kinda feel, and probably would end up with some stale games. As has already been stated, maps such as Feudal and AoR are interesting because each start position has slightly different properties.

[DoomYoshi]

I voted exhibit A.

One of the more popular maps is the AoR series. That series proved that the different starting regions don't have to be equal to make a really enjoyable game. I like how in exhibit a, some shelters connect directly to each other for early war opportunities and some have up to 4 different resources they can get.

I have a few questions though: is exhibit a's map perfectly fixed? There are a few things that could be changed. Also, when you get 2 starting territories, are they independent of each other?

No, none of the gameplay aspects on either map are fixed.

Ok, it is good they are not fixed, so what we should do if A gets chosen is actually make sure that most of the starting positions are unique.
Yes, the starting territories are independent of each other. You can deploy on one/several shelters, and even try to connect them if that's your game.
What I meant by independent is if you start with A, do you also start with B? So, the 2 you start with will be randomly chosen (like AoR).

On the shelters, how many men do you plan on starting them with?

That depends on the rest of the map and the functionality. In other words; I don't know, but that's what we'll have to work out when I've decided which exhibit will be the most fun.


Now, carthographers, I'd like to know which of the two exhibits (A or B) is most likely to get me a gameplay stamp. You can say "oh, any map can work if it's done right" or some other dismissive statement, but one of these two maps is better than the other. Evaluate the existing maps on this site and determine which better fits a gap in the market (as it were) if you must, it doesn't make much difference to me. Personally, I prefer exhibit A. The alternative gives me a St Patrick's Day crapshoot kinda feel, and probably would end up with some stale games. As has already been stated, maps such as Feudal and AoR are interesting because each start position has slightly different properties.

Unfortunately, the split is right down the middle.

[isaiah40]

Sorry there manbungalow, I totally spaced this one out. As for your two versions, well they are both basically the same except for that 'A' has a few more territories like in bunny trails. I say pick one and go with that one.

[Gillipig]

I like that there are more ways to move around the map in Exhibit A. It's more open than Exhibit B.
But it has way too many shelters and bonuses. Take away some regions from Exhibit A and I think you've found your base !

[ManBungalow]

For those who are interested, here's a preview of where I'm going with this map (which is largely based on exhibit A);

Click image to enlarge.

[ManBungalow]

Bump with a decent update:

Click image to enlarge.

I think (hope) we're onto a winner with this gameplay schematic.
As before, the shelters are the start positions, and everything else is neutral.
When thinking about the gameplay, imagine that you're faced with a drop of 2+ regions (even in 8 player games, you have 2 shelters), and you have to decide which direction to move in. This is the main strategy element (particularly in foggy games, I'd think).
Perhaps those 'bridges' aren't so clear as they could be (the lines across the shallow points of the river) but we'll get to that aspect in due course.

As I've said before: what now do I have to do to get a gameplay stamp on this bad boy ?

[isaiah40]

Can you post a version with starting values on it please so we can have a better idea of how it will work? This includes starting neutrals on the jungle territories. You don't have to do the whole map, just one section would be fine. Thank you.

isaiah40

[ManBungalow]

Can you post a version with starting values on it please so we can have a better idea of how it will work? This includes starting neutrals on the jungle territories. You don't have to do the whole map, just one section would be fine. Thank you.

isaiah40

Click image to enlarge.

I'm thinking of increasing the bonuses slightly to make the 2s in the jungle easier to traverse.
For example; 7 vs 2,2 can be extremely irritating, as you could forfeit the entire attack just by losing two consecutive rolls. I intend to keep the jungle regions at 2 neutrals apiece.

Somewhere on my agenda is to try and create a better image for the shelter/food regions, making it easier to read the map at a glance.
Also, I forgot to draw the bridge between 016 an 086, though I suspect the 'bridges' will need some work regardless.

That is all.

[DoomYoshi]

Hmm... a pretty open map this is.

Starting spots 124, 093 are almost identical.

Starting spots 116 and 110 are also identical. They are both strictly worse than 143 and 133.

Territories 080 and 135 is my personal favourite. Interesting formation down around 049-056.

037 is the worst possible starting location; should probably be beefed up a bit.