Conquer Club

MrBenn wrote:http://www.fileden.com/files/2010/1/27/2739987/xml17092010.xml

Was it just the addition of starting positions that have been changed?

Starting Positions and a +3 bonus for Henegouwen, as requested.

If the bonus has changed, then we'll need new map images too (unless I've missed them)... Could you post the most recent/final image and xml links in one post for me?

Sorry to keep you waiting! didn't get a notification...

Last XML:
http://www.fileden.com/files/2010/1/27/2739987/xml17092010.xml

Last Images:
http://www.fileden.com/files/2010/1/27/2739987/BOTGS4S.tif
http://www.fileden.com/files/2010/1/27/2739987/BOTGS4L.tif

there you go

And the update has gone live

Very intricate piece of work here



Great in every format I've tried it on!

everyone agreed with the bonus +3 for Henegouwen and the new startingpositions?
looks like a finished map to me, no?

correction,
some things starts to irritate me.
- What about the neutrals on Arras and Brugge. I see too much games where those important places aren't occupied.
Are there too much neutral troops on it? I find the 5 neutrals pretty high too, especially in the beginning of the game.
- Lokeren is a crucial spot and too easy to hold. By holding Lokeren, one can secure 4 ambachten and Brabant, and so winning the game. I saw this strategy a few times, always with succes. What about moving the border of Eeklo to the right so it have access to 4 ambachten too?

DubWarrior wrote:correction,
some things starts to irritate me.
- What about the neutrals on Arras and Brugge. I see too much games where those important places aren't occupied.
Are there too much neutral troops on it? I find the 5 neutrals pretty high too, especially in the beginning of the game.
- Lokeren is a crucial spot and too easy to hold. By holding Lokeren, one can secure 4 ambachten and Brabant, and so winning the game. I saw this strategy a few times, always with succes. What about moving the border of Eeklo to the right so it have access to 4 ambachten too?

Well, I think at this stage it's up to you... I was about to give you the final push out of the Final Forge, but will wait and see what you decide to do.

Personally I would support dropping the neutral 5s to 4s, or possibly 3s... as you say, it's all about finding a balance between making it too easy and not worth it.

if you want people to fight for Arras and Brugge put them at 3
if you want it more like a stronghold then 4
creating an Elko-Axel link will open more this north end
maybe more balanced
but maybe geographically less accurate
aren't those delta regions supposed to be swampy and less accessible?

Changes:
-Arras & Brugge: both 3 neutrals (to get them more in the game, in all types and earlier. This is were the scenario is all about.)
- Eeklo borders Axel now (giving acces to the north of the map, 4 ambachten and Brabant, and lowering the importance of Lokeren.)

These are the new links
new XML
http://www.fileden.com/files/2010/1/27/2739987//xml29102010.xml
new maps, TIFF formats
http://www.fileden.com/files/2010/1/27/2739987//BOTGS5L.tif
http://www.fileden.com/files/2010/1/27/2739987//BOTGS5S.tif

Updated files have been sent to lackattack

MrBenn wrote:Updated files have been sent to lackattack

And they're live.

Let's see how things go now...

Thanks, I'm a right: I still see a 5 neutral on Arras and a 4 neutral on Brugge,
instead of the changed 3 neutrals for both...

DubWarrior wrote:Thanks, I'm a right: I still see a 5 neutral on Arras and a 4 neutral on Brugge,
instead of the changed 3 neutrals for both...

The neutral values won;t change on existing games; only on new ones.

you should put more than 3 neutral on bruge and arras ... 3 is too easy for a +2 auto-deploy

ben79 wrote:you should put more than 3 neutral on bruge and arras ... 3 is too easy for a +2 auto-deploy

I've never understood why Brugge is +2. As unaccessible as it is +1 is more than enough.

And why is Arras going to a 3 neutral?

See pag. 19, replies by myself, MrBenn and Pamoa why Brugge and Arras have now a 3 neutral.
Brugge has a +2 because this is a historical map about a real conflict, in which Brugge played an important role.
Gameplay-wise this has been translated to the +2 auto-deploy for Arras and Brugge.

still too easy with a 3 neutral, 4 or 5 neutral would be much better for real

it need to be easy and tempting
so the main fight will be for those

I understand why it was moved down to 3 but I still don't think it's a smart idea. a person is able to take it easily, and once he controls it, control of the game becomes too easy, I understand why you want to make it come more into play, but just a 3 for a +2 seems way too small. If you look around at other maps, you'll find very few that are like it.
I just don't get why a normal neutral 3 can be worth +2, if I'm getting my point across. I think a 4 would be infinitely more preferable....

Leehar wrote:I understand why it was moved down to 3 but I still don't think it's a smart idea. a person is able to take it easily, and once he controls it, control of the game becomes too easy, I understand why you want to make it come more into play, but just a 3 for a +2 seems way too small. If you look around at other maps, you'll find very few that are like it.
I just don't get why a normal neutral 3 can be worth +2, if I'm getting my point across. I think a 4 would be infinitely more preferable....

5 would be better, but 4 if that'a all the mapmakers can allow

on a 1 vs 1 game the first player got 12 regions, so it gives him 4 troops to deploy, if arras and bruge are only 3 neutrals it's too easy for them to take it.
a 5 neutral would be the best for both 1 vs 1 and 8 polayers ... etc

ben79 wrote:5 would be better, but 4 if that'a all the mapmakers can allow

Yeah, but it was 5 initially. Changing it back will just be a case of 1 step forward, 2 steps back.

ben79 wrote:on a 1 vs 1 game the first player got 12 regions, so it gives him 4 troops to deploy, if arras and bruge are only 3 neutrals it's too easy for them to take it.
a 5 neutral would be the best for both 1 vs 1 and 8 polayers ... etc

so nobody will ever attack them
just the beginning of this conversation

pamoa wrote:

ben79 wrote:on a 1 vs 1 game the first player got 12 regions, so it gives him 4 troops to deploy, if arras and bruge are only 3 neutrals it's too easy for them to take it.
a 5 neutral would be the best for both 1 vs 1 and 8 polayers ... etc

so nobody will ever attack them
just the beginning of this conversation

they will in multi-players game, but on a 1vs1 it's too easy, so how about a 4 neutral ?