Conquer Club

v4


everything is neutral except for the Knights in the Battlefield.

[list=][/list]BF Knights start with 3
NONBF Knights start with n3
Archers start with n5
Catapults start with n7
Walls start with n10 (neutral killer)
Castles start with n1
Kings start with n3
-------------PAST VERSIONS------------------
v3- http://i36.tinypic.com/2vipaw0.jpg
v2- http://i37.tinypic.com/23ljqzc.jpg

neat idea, i'd go with 'cannons!'

as for the first, second, third rows i'd have first attack all three, second attack only second & 3rd, and third attack 3 & generals, i think that'd work better. puts more of an emphasis on maintaining first row cannons but also remembering to have enough on the third row to get a general.

how are you thinking of doing the drop, everyone starts with a general & that general can attack anyone in their respective color?

trapyoung wrote:neat idea, i'd go with 'cannons!'

as for the first, second, third rows i'd have first attack all three, second attack only second & 3rd, and third attack 3 & generals, i think that'd work better. puts more of an emphasis on maintaining first row cannons but also remembering to have enough on the third row to get a general.

how are you thinking of doing the drop, everyone starts with a general & that general can attack anyone in their respective color?

Hm..that's a good idea I want to see what others say first though

And you are aright about the drop.

btw: Im going away for a a couple of days, so dont expect me to answer anything

Interesting map idea.

First look tells me that this map could easily become a stalemate. Only being able to bombard, won't that mean that each player is trapped in whatever army they start with? So the only way to win would be to bombard THE ENTIRE MAP, but you only have one set of cannons to do that with. And the way the bonuses work, you would only get a maximum of 9 armies each turn to do that with, so it would be difficult to pull off a big kill.
It looks like that could easily develop into a build game, because it would be much easier to sit and build your own armies than waste them bombarding your opponent.

Oh, and once your general is gone, you are very screwed, because you won't be able to take any more territories.

And if someone gets strong with a lot of armies, the ease of attacking means that the other players in the game will basically team up on the strongest guy, to weaken him.

I don't know. maybe thats ok, but to me it looks like it would make for a very long game of just bombarding back and forth.

Isnt that what a cannon battle is like?!

but seriously, i'll think about.

Is there a reason the third row can bombard the generals, or is it just a gameplay tweak? It seems kind of weird...

dunc_2007 wrote:Is there a reason the third row can bombard the generals, or is it just a gameplay tweak? It seems kind of weird...

I couldnt think of any other way of killing the Generals. If nothing can attack the Generals, the game would never end, and no one would ever lose.

If you have a better idea, please post it

What if you changed the focus of this map by taking away most of the cannons and leaving one line each, and adding cavalry and infantry and giving them different abilities? For example, cannons can bombard enemy cannons, infantry can attack certain territories in the center of the field, and cavalry could do...something. You get the idea. You could still call it Battlefield that way, and it wouldn't be as stalemated as the current version. Of course, I'd recommend keeping it as simple as possible. With those added features, it'd be easy to get lost.

ZeakCytho wrote:What if you changed the focus of this map by taking away most of the cannons and leaving one line each, and adding cavalry and infantry and giving them different abilities? For example, cannons can bombard enemy cannons, infantry can attack certain territories in the center of the field, and cavalry could do...something. You get the idea. You could still call it Battlefield that way, and it wouldn't be as stalemated as the current version. Of course, I'd recommend keeping it as simple as possible. With those added features, it'd be easy to get lost.

So kinda like a symmetrical version of Waterloo? Interesting...

The only problem is that there only so much one can do with the current xml...and the abilities would be pretty boring.

Maybe if you put a line of infantry in front of each cannon. Then set up a few territories in the center as "no mans land". infantry can attack to there, and through that reach another set of cannons. So infantry is basically a set of regular territories. Why don't you make it [first row] can bombard no-mans land. [second row] can bombard infantry. [3rd row] can bombard other cannons and Generals.
That would open up gameplay a lot, because it would allow you to invade an enemies area and use their cannons. And it would be more realistic, because you would never have cannons in a battle without infantry to support them.

EDIT: and make it so the cannons can attack the cannons next to them. so then infantry would actually be able to take over the cannons of another player.

Yes diffrent units will deffently make more like a battlefield.

it feels like you come out with a different map every week but then never do anything with them.
--
I dont find the map appealing, purely because it seems boring and everything is set out for you, basic stratigies, but go for it

How about mixing the cannon together or something? I like the idea of adding other units, but as the map is now, your strategy is already set out for you. Maps gotta have lots of strategy for people to really get behind them. Otherwise it is a nice concept.

Kaplowitz wrote:Do the cannons look like cannons? The one person who saw them thought they were cellos!

They're cellos. If you're really hard pressed, take a cannon piece from your Risk set, scan it with the top facing down, and tweak the look in Photoshop.

Do the stars fit the theme? Should they even be 3d?

Generals are Stars. It fits.

Am I crazy? Is this idea good?

It needs a lot of tweaking, similar to what wca is saying. Have a balanced starting force, say your infantry is the first line or two and have standard one-attack. There's a neutral area in the middle that everyone fights over. Cavalry is the third line and can range attack both infantry lines and the first line of no man's right outside. Fourth line (doesn't exist yet) is cannons, and they can bombard the entire no man's land and the first line of anybody else, as well as attack to the cavalry. That right there gives you a battlefield that breaks the symmetry problem by having gameplay just different enough.

Which title is better? "Battlefield" or "Cannons!"?

Battlefield.

Are the neutral values, starting values, and bonuses good?

I would say go with 1's and 2's with the infantry, 4 on the cavalry, and 7 on the cannons.

i like the gameplay on this one, don't change too much on that. though the cannons DO look like music instruments to me lol.

i am always of the opinion that different is good, and this is definately different run with it, id like to see it in final form!

t-o-m wrote:it feels like you come out with a different map every week but then never do anything with them.
--
I dont find the map appealing, purely because it seems boring and everything is set out for you, basic stratigies, but go for it

I want to find something that people like. I dont want to do just something that everyone has already done, so starting something that is unique and popular enough to get through the Foundry is tough. If I wanted to make a map with Classic gameplay (like Swiss) than I would worry less about people liking it, because it's fairly easy to get good game-play and make a good map. You dont really need as much support for a Classic Game-play map. If you look through FF you will notice that the maps that have more unique game-play have many more pages, and there are much less of them. You really need a lot of different opinions, and a lot of supporters.

Im not saying it's harder to make that kind of map, I'm just saying it's harder to leave Map Ideas sometimes.

Juan_Bottom wrote:How about mixing the cannon together or something? I like the idea of adding other units, but as the map is now, your strategy is already set out for you. Maps gotta have lots of strategy for people to really get behind them. Otherwise it is a nice concept.

I'm gonna keep thinking on this one...

TaCktiX wrote:

Kaplowitz wrote:Do the cannons look like cannons? The one person who saw them thought they were cellos!

They're cellos. If you're really hard pressed, take a cannon piece from your Risk set, scan it with the top facing down, and tweak the look in Photoshop.

I have another version where i did this...it didnt look too good!

Do the stars fit the theme? Should they even be 3d?

Generals are Stars. It fits.

Cool.

Am I crazy? Is this idea good?

It needs a lot of tweaking, similar to what wca is saying. Have a balanced starting force, say your infantry is the first line or two and have standard one-attack. There's a neutral area in the middle that everyone fights over. Cavalry is the third line and can range attack both infantry lines and the first line of no man's right outside. Fourth line (doesn't exist yet) is cannons, and they can bombard the entire no man's land and the first line of anybody else, as well as attack to the cavalry. That right there gives you a battlefield that breaks the symmetry problem by having gameplay just different enough.

Okay, im gonna try some stuff out and post it.

kap I very much dislike this idea. But thats not my main concern, my main concern is that you start loads and finish nothing this is ruining your creditability. Im less likely to stamp any more of your ideas until you actually finish something. Switerland is getting there I suggest you finish it before going after new projects.

gimil wrote:kap I very much dislike this idea. But thats not my main concern, my main concern is that you start loads and finish nothing this is ruining your creditability. Im less likely to stamp any more of your ideas until you actually finish something. Switerland is getting there I suggest you finish it before going after new projects.

Read my post in reply to Tom.
Swiss is getting no comments...people are complaining but arent saying what they dont like!

The second thing: It's summer and im freakin' bored!

Kaplowitz wrote:

gimil wrote:kap I very much dislike this idea. But thats not my main concern, my main concern is that you start loads and finish nothing this is ruining your creditability. Im less likely to stamp any more of your ideas until you actually finish something. Switerland is getting there I suggest you finish it before going after new projects.

Read my post in reply to Tom.
Swiss is getting no comments...people are complaining but arent saying what they dont like!

The second thing: It's summer and im freakin' bored!

they are saying what they dont like.
it doesnt say switzerland, ive been saying it since V1 and you keep ignoring people when they say it.

but for me, this is too semetrical, and everyone would have the same stratigies and it would be a repetative game. You start so many map threads with just one version, then abandon them, no one ever knows whether you will continue it or not!
But aanyway, its your choice

--tom

t-o-m wrote:

Kaplowitz wrote:

gimil wrote:kap I very much dislike this idea. But thats not my main concern, my main concern is that you start loads and finish nothing this is ruining your creditability. Im less likely to stamp any more of your ideas until you actually finish something. Switerland is getting there I suggest you finish it before going after new projects.

Read my post in reply to Tom.
Swiss is getting no comments...people are complaining but arent saying what they dont like!

The second thing: It's summer and im freakin' bored!

they are saying what they dont like.
it doesnt say switzerland, ive been saying it since V1 and you keep ignoring people when they say it.

but for me, this is too semetrical, and everyone would have the same stratigies and it would be a repetative game. You start so many map threads with just one version, then abandon them, no one ever knows whether you will continue it or not!
But aanyway, its your choice

--tom

Okay, lets move this conversation to Switzerland's thread...before that one dies. You can quote this post.

The thing is, you have been ignoring me. Two or three people think that the map doesnt feel like Switzerland. They pop in, say "It only says Swiss in the title!" and leave. What the heck does that mean!? I have absolutely no clue. If you want me to change it, please tell me what to change. If you did say, please remind me...i dont remember or I missed it. I want to make the map as good as possible. Im not ignoring anyone on purpose.

So I decided I would put up a poll to see who really doesnt like the feel of the map. A couple of people popped in saying it was fine. Where were the people who didnt like it all along?

You say you didnt like it since v1...you didnt start telling me anything other than brightness (which was fixed a while back) until like v25...and you weren't specific at all.

I'll see ya over in the Switzerland thread...please say something that I can actually use to better the map....and please don't just copy whatever the hell mibi says like your last couple of posts.

1) I dont like how the word RULES: is so pixely
2) why isnt the star in the legend 3D?
3) The example that is in grey is very confusing
4) To me it seems the grass is all swirly

cannons look like shit... straight up frosty the snowman shits going on there.... fix it up

but i do like the idea somewhat
a little bland, like more could be added to it to make it better

my initial thought is that this is a terrible idea... once the generals are knocked out there is no strategy - just hoping you get good dice. Maybe I'm missing something, but it looks like a game of dice.

oaktown wrote:my initial thought is that this is a terrible idea... once the generals are knocked out there is no strategy - just hoping you get good dice. Maybe I'm missing something, but it looks like a game of dice.

are you sure they are cannon's?? i thought they were guitar's. I like the title name but the rest is rubbish. Work on it, improve the gameplay...

Maybe you could have infrantyon teh flanks and soldiers before the cannon's. This map looks like it could be fun and i have a few ideas if you want to pm me, then i'll tell you them