Conquer Club

Far more verbose. More intense colours to be clearer.



I feel this bonus structure makes for more complete use of the map.

But I am also concerned that the main focus, the expedition routes, will be ignored as land bonuses are taken instead. I wonder if a more grayscale version would allow the focus to stay on the expedition routes, through their use of colour, while allowing the bonus structure to remain with 8-10 instead of 5 regions. This black 'n blue version is also easily colourblind safe.



Perhaps it's all we need to keep land-bonuses in the back seat?

For the colors, I'm wondering if maybe you could make franklin or Hudson a different color, since they're both shades of purple? Also, I find the green and the purples a bit hard to see, especially the green. Could you do brighter colors? Btw, I like the black n blue version best.

-Sully

Another aside from real life: Purported Franklin Expedition records found

Thanks for the article Ender, I hadn't seen that one yet! My husband has been keeping me posted on the case. He says they are probably Amundsen's, who supposedly made many cairns with notes underneath. And the man who buried them was reported to be in possession of some of Amundsen's notes. I think we're all very curious to see if they are not Amundsen's. I guess by some time in October we should know!

He follows Visions of the North: http://visionsnorth.blogspot.com/

shakeycat wrote:But I am also concerned that the main focus, the expedition routes, will be ignored as land bonuses are taken instead. I wonder if a more grayscale version would allow the focus to stay on the expedition routes, through their use of colour, while allowing the bonus structure to remain with 8-10 instead of 5 regions.

this could work.

shakeycat wrote:This black 'n blue version is also easily colourblind safe.

these colours seem to be thematically apt.

u have 48 starting regions, which is a bad number for 2v2 games. see if u can find a way to bring the number up to 52 or down to 47. the latter is presumably easier.

ian.

I'm finding this version is growing on me too. I do prefer the wider gameplay, though I'm still not sure if it in itself pulls attention from the objective. It's not as pretty as the colours, but I suppose that's all worked out in the next forum anyway. Still with some unmatching bits, here's today:



With Amund Ringnes neutral to bring it down to 47 starting. Trying different route colours as well.

And now I disappear for just over two weeks.

looking good! a neutral on one region of the +3 south qikiktaaluk bonus ought to do it.

ian.

Aren't 47 or 46 poor numbers for starting territories? I thought the good numbers around this size were 42, 43, 44, and 52 and 53. With 47 or 46, in games with 2 or 3 players, everyone starts with 15 territories, which yields 5 troops for the first deployment, and then it is easy for the first player to take one territory from an opponent and bump that player down to 14 territories for 4 troops.

Good insight, ender. Yes, this would definitely be problematic and probably abused to a certain extent. What is the current territory total?

Another aside: the box unearthed from the cairn up north last month had nothing of historic value in it.

ender516 wrote:With 47 or 46, in games with 2 or 3 players, everyone starts with 15 territories, which yields 5 troops for the first deployment, and then it is easy for the first player to take one territory from an opponent and bump that player down to 14 territories for 4 troops.

that's true, ender. if we let one region of the +3 south qikiktaaluk start neutral, as i suggested above, then remove the starting neutral from yellowknife, then we have 47 starting regions. this, coupled with 4 start positions for northwest territories, will result in 16 starting regions per player in 1v1. this leaves 3-player games with 15 starting regions per player, but does have the advantage that we don't have to lose 2 or 3 regions from the map.

one thing i'm not seeing though: to which bonus does mansel island belong?

ian.

You think you could tint the continents the color they are on the mini map? Just a tiny bit of color would be nice, as I find it a tad difficult to determine the boundaries of certain bonuses. I know you already tried a color one:

shakeycat wrote:

Click image to enlarge.

...but I was thinking of something less intense.

Cheers,
Sully

Okay, I'll be getting back on the horse soon. Back from holiday.

Sully - tinted but less intense, I will try it.
Ender - Was just discussing that case this morning! I hear the box was pretty much empty, since everything in it had been removed 30 years ago.
Ian - Mansel belongs with Melville, Igloolik, and Prince Charles.
Victor - 47/69 if I count correctly. 69 territories, 47 are open to start on (22 neutral).

shakeycat wrote:Ian - Mansel belongs with Melville, Igloolik, and Prince Charles.

in that case, ignore everything i said about moving the neutral from yellowknife to one of those three regions. the neutral can go to one of the sverdrup islands instead, since that's a 3-region bonus zone that's easier for someone to drop.

ian.

What if the land territories of the expeditions were available to start on? It wouldn't change things much. The biggest change is that 3/10 Franklins potentially start with someone on them: no advantage. And it would give us 52 territories open to start on. 52/3 = 17 each and 1 spare in a 1v1. And we can keep the neutrals on easy bonuses (neutrals start with 2).



ever changing .. but it's about gameplay at the moment.

What else am I forgetting?

Looks good! I agree that you should include the land expedition territories as drops. That wouldn't increase the chances of someone dropping a bonus by anything significant, would it?

Oh wait .. that makes Greenland a possible drop with 3 open territories. Will remove neutral from Yellowknife and place on Disko Island or Ilulisat. All other bonuses appear safe.

I just noticed: there aren't obvious connections between the islands and other territories...

What connections? Islands connect to water.

Oh! I get it now. Are there any benefits/penalties for occupying a sea territory?

A sea territory with its troop counter in a coloured circle is part of one or more expedition routes, each of which can earn a bonus, if held completely.

But nothing happens if you hold a sea that's not apart of an expedition route?

I think that non-route sea territories are just territories like any other ordinary territory. I suppose they contribute to the usual +1 deploy for every three territories.

Ah, okay. It seems like they should do something, though.

None, unless they're part of the expedition route, then it's +1 for each 2 owned.