Conquer Club

KING of the MOUNTAINS MAP [Quenched]

Care to peruse completed maps? Take a stroll through the Atlas.

Moderator: Cartographers

Forum rules
Please read the Community Guidelines before posting.

Kings

Postby demonicplague on Mon Feb 05, 2007 1:19 am

Just an opinion.. but I think if the kings could attack other kings it would create more flow especially in like red, it would also make it a little easier to get ahold of the 5 kings bonus?
Sergeant 1st Class demonicplague
 
Posts: 4
Joined: Fri May 19, 2006 10:13 am
Location: South Dakota, USA

Postby WidowMakers on Tue Feb 06, 2007 7:39 am

Here is an updated map with texture on the mountains.
There have been some suggestions to have bonuses for holding 2,3,4 and 5 Kings. Here is the XML for that
http://jmhooton.iweb.bsu.edu/joel/KOTM/ ... 0kings.xml

Here is the map for this also
Image
and here is the small one.
http://jmhooton.iweb.bsu.edu/joel/KOTM/KOTM5.S.jpg

Marvaddin wrote:
Marvaddin wrote:I still would like to see some connections far from the bases of the "mountains". Arent connections allowed near the top?

If I counted correctly, there are 49 territories. Can I suggest remove some? I think the red mountain, for example, is useless with 13 territories.

Nothing about this? Are you assuming this configuration as final? Because the country dispersion is a bit strange: 3, 4, 4, 4 (no mountains), 5, 8, 9, 13. 3 big continents, and bordering each other... what a desert!Couldnt you at least reduce some territories? Like -1 for blue, -3 for red and -3 for green mountains.


I have address this. There have been lots of different opinions about this map. The curernt map is based on a suggestion of another person
Dickie B. wrote:I really like the way it looks right now. The geometric shapes and defined borders make it very easy to tell which territories are linked. The only thing I would do differently is to move the bridge between G3 and R4 up to connect G4 and R6 and also connect it to B4. That would give Blue Mountain one extra border and make the border count go in a descending order starting with Red that has 6 and ending with Yellow that has 2. It also makes it harder to hold for the 5 bonus armies. I really enjoy that the helipads will play a huge role in the game, potentially creating an additional three borders to any given hilltop. They will be very strategic points. You will also have to be careful of how many armies you fortify to the top of the hill if you conquer it from a helipad because once they are up there they are stranded with down being the only way out, assuming that you cannot fortify down to the helipad from the peaks. I would like to know how the fortification would work from peak to helipad. I didn't notice any details on it but I think it would take more strategy if it wasn't possible, but it would also make the helipads more valuable if it was possible and create more incentive to hold the pads and the Square, Triangle, Circle groups than the 1 bonus army. Overall I think it is an excellent map.

If everyone got what they wanted it would be impossible to make it. The bonuses are reflective of the level of difficulty in holding a Mountian. Some people want multiple king bonuses, some don't. Some want to be able to attack from king to king, some don't. I can't please everyone.
And I don't want to reduce territories becasue I wanted a map that could better handle larger numbers of people.

My initial concept of this map was a single King of the Hill. It is hard to own the hill. Everyone is going at you. I don't want to make it easier to get everywhere on the map just because people want to. The point of the map is KING OF THE MOUNTAINS.
I REALLY don't like the idea of Kings attacking Kings. It defeats the purpose of this map. This map was designed to be different and if basicallly every territory is an offensive/defensive point, it is like every other map. It just looks different, there is no original gameplay.

Once the poll is up I will put on this new one.

1)King bonus for only holding the 5 Kings and Kings CANNOT attack each other
2)King bonus for only holding 2,3,4 and 5 Kings and Kings CANNOT attack each other

I know I can't please everyone but I am trying my best.
Major WidowMakers
 
Posts: 2771
Joined: Mon Nov 20, 2006 9:25 am
Location: Detroit, MI
Medals: 82
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (3) Terminator Achievement (1)
Fog of War Achievement (3) Trench Warfare Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (1) Random Map Achievement (2) Cross-Map Achievement (3)
Ratings Achievement (2) General Achievement (6) Clan Achievement (19) Map Contribution (21) General Contribution (14)

Postby Wisse on Tue Feb 06, 2007 8:28 am

you darkened it to much can you make it a bit lighter?
Image Image
User avatar
Sergeant Wisse
 
Posts: 4448
Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2006 2:59 pm
Location: The netherlands, gelderland, epe
Medals: 12
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (2) Freestyle Achievement (2) Teammate Achievement (2)
Cross-Map Achievement (1) Map Contribution (1)

Postby Marvaddin on Tue Feb 06, 2007 10:36 am

The problem, mate, is: as the map is currently, there is no need to get any mountain territories to become king. What do you expect for playability of this one? Of course mountains wont be played, except the little yellow one. The groups will dominate the game totally, and even more with the helipads and the several bonuses for holding each king beyond 1. The mountains will be great deserts this way.

And looks like you didnt think about these bonuses. Lets imagine I have 3 kings, A, B, and C. In the xml, A and B will give me a pair bonus, as will A and C, and B and C. So a person holding A, B and C will receive 3 bonuses for a pair, plus the bonus for the triple.

In fact, the idea of a cumulative gigantic bonus would be interesting, but not with the gray groups dominating the game like it will probably be, and directly connected to the kings. I think would be better, then, remove the helipads and add more connections, including some near the top pf the mountains.

And in fact, I think you can remove the group in the center, and exchange the position of Yellow and Blue piramids. As you see, the groups of small continents connected can estimulate people to never escalate the mountains :)

And I know you are doing your best, but I dont know, however, if what you are doing will have the effect you expect. In fact, whats exactly the new playability you want to try?
Image
User avatar
Major Marvaddin
 
Posts: 2545
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2006 5:06 pm
Location: Belo Horizonte, Brazil
Medals: 15
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (2) Terminator Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (1)
Fog of War Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (1) Map Contribution (3)

Postby bedplay on Tue Feb 06, 2007 11:27 am

Marvaddin wrote:And looks like you didnt think about these bonuses. Lets imagine I have 3 kings, A, B, and C. In the xml, A and B will give me a pair bonus, as will A and C, and B and C. So a person holding A, B and C will receive 3 bonuses for a pair, plus the bonus for the triple.


You can work that with minus bonuses.
"It is fatal to enter any war without the will to win it."
- General Douglas MacArthur
User avatar
Private 1st Class bedplay
 
Posts: 171
Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2007 2:00 pm

Postby eagustin on Tue Feb 06, 2007 11:30 am

This map is very close. It looks great and it builds on the childhood game of trying to get and hold the top of the mountain.

I think the playability will be surprisingly fun.

"And looks like you didnt think about these bonuses. Lets imagine I have 3 kings, A, B, and C. In the xml, A and B will give me a pair bonus, as will A and C, and B and C. So a person holding A, B and C will receive 3 bonuses for a pair, plus the bonus for the triple."

This will work out fine because if you look at the XML, if you own 2 it's plus one bonus, if you own 3 it's plus 3 minus 1 which is 2. So it doesn't work like the way described in the quote above. In my opinion it works correctly.

Widowmakers should keep the map the way it is. It looks great and makes sense. The helipads are fun and cool. It's different and unique from the other maps out there which will take us to an interesting level of play.

From the comments, it's looking like a lot of people are itching to play this map.
Sergeant 1st Class eagustin
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Sun Nov 19, 2006 8:15 pm
Medals: 1
Standard Achievement (1)

Postby WidowMakers on Tue Feb 06, 2007 12:38 pm

Marvaddin wrote:The problem, mate, is: as the map is currently, there is no need to get any mountain territories to become king. What do you expect for playability of this one? Of course mountains wont be played, except the little yellow one. The groups will dominate the game totally, and even more with the helipads and the several bonuses for holding each king beyond 1. The mountains will be great deserts this way.

The mountains will be used becasue that is where the bulk of the territories are. Holding the green or blue mountains is easier than holding the all three shape groups and you get the same bonus. Having a helipad is a strategic advantage but it is not a army bonus advantage. You will still need and will have players fighting in the mountains. Players will need to decide if they want to try and hold a helipad and slowing build up armies to attack the king. Or Build up on one of the mountians and get stronger faster but have less quick acces to the rest of the board.

Marvaddin wrote:And looks like you didnt think about these bonuses. Lets imagine I have 3 kings, A, B, and C. In the xml, A and B will give me a pair bonus, as will A and C, and B and C. So a person holding A, B and C will receive 3 bonuses for a pair, plus the bonus for the triple.

The XML is setup to give +1 for each pair of Kings. Holding 3 Kings would give you 3 pair (+3) BUT the XML also give -1 for holding any 3 Kings. So holding 2 Kings is 1+1+1+(-1)=2
It also works with 4 pair by (1+1+1+1+1)+(-1-1-1-1)+(1)=3
Look at the xml
http://jmhooton.iweb.bsu.edu/joel/KOTM/ ... 0kings.xml

[/quote]
Major WidowMakers
 
Posts: 2771
Joined: Mon Nov 20, 2006 9:25 am
Location: Detroit, MI
Medals: 82
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (3) Terminator Achievement (1)
Fog of War Achievement (3) Trench Warfare Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (1) Random Map Achievement (2) Cross-Map Achievement (3)
Ratings Achievement (2) General Achievement (6) Clan Achievement (19) Map Contribution (21) General Contribution (14)

Postby Marvaddin on Tue Feb 06, 2007 5:59 pm

WidowMakers wrote:Players will need to decide if they want to try and hold a helipad and slowing build up armies to attack the king. Or Build up on one of the mountians and get stronger faster but have less quick acces to the rest of the board.

No offense, man, but you are the one that have completed only 28 games. This decision is not difficult. Not even a bit. I wouldnt even call it a decision. Trust me, the big mountains wont be played.

The XML is setup to give +1 for each pair of Kings. Holding 3 Kings would give you 3 pair (+3) BUT the XML also give -1 for holding any 3 Kings. So holding 2 Kings is 1+1+1+(-1)=2
It also works with 4 pair by (1+1+1+1+1)+(-1-1-1-1)+(1)=3
Look at the xml
http://jmhooton.iweb.bsu.edu/joel/KOTM/ ... 0kings.xml

So, let me see:
Any 2 = +1
Any 3 = +1+1+1 (pair) -1 (triple)= +2
Any 4 = +1+1+1+1+1+1 (pair) -1-1-1-1 (triple) +1 (four) = +3
Any 5 = +1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1 (pair) -1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1 (triple) +1+1+1+1+1 (four) +1 (all) = +6

Yep, looks like you are correct. You put wrong number in your post, but correct ones in the map and xml :)
Image
User avatar
Major Marvaddin
 
Posts: 2545
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2006 5:06 pm
Location: Belo Horizonte, Brazil
Medals: 15
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (2) Terminator Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (1)
Fog of War Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (1) Map Contribution (3)

Postby WidowMakers on Tue Feb 06, 2007 6:57 pm

Marvaddin wrote:No offense, man, but you are the one that have completed only 28 games. This decision is not difficult. Not even a bit. I wouldnt even call it a decision. Trust me, the big mountains wont be played.

just because I have not played a lot of games on CC does not mean I have never played before and have no clue about risk. This is a new type of map. Nobody has played this. I will stand by my statement. People will play on the mountains because that is where the majority of territories are. Holding a helipad means nothing if you do not have armies to back it up.
Many people in this forum have expressed interest in this map. No one else seems to think that this is going to be an issue. If the kings can attack each (king to king) then this is just a different looking map with the same game play as the others. I wanted to make something different.
Anyway here is the newest large map
Image

Small map too:
http://jmhooton.iweb.bsu.edu/joel/KOTM/KOTM6.S.jpg
and the XML
http://jmhooton.iweb.bsu.edu/joel/KOTM/ ... rkings.xml
I had to adjust some of the circles to better fit.
Major WidowMakers
 
Posts: 2771
Joined: Mon Nov 20, 2006 9:25 am
Location: Detroit, MI
Medals: 82
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (3) Terminator Achievement (1)
Fog of War Achievement (3) Trench Warfare Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (1) Random Map Achievement (2) Cross-Map Achievement (3)
Ratings Achievement (2) General Achievement (6) Clan Achievement (19) Map Contribution (21) General Contribution (14)

Postby Marvaddin on Tue Feb 06, 2007 7:57 pm

I dont know if you have misunderstood me... Did I say kings should attack each other? Or did I say this cant be interesting? What Im saying is: the mountains wont be played.

In fact, looking better at the bonuses, I changed my mind, the purple mountain will be played, because it has a ridiculously high bonus. About the red mountain, for example, or the other big ones, why will people fight for those territories? To get more armies from the spread? Like having 12 territories to receive 4 armies turn? Dont be silly, do you usually see people going for Asia instead of South America and Oceania? People like small, easy bonuses. Its exactly what the groups and yellow mountain are. If you can get more 2 armies per turn, maybe conquering 1-2 more territories, why wouldnt you try? And even more when your little continent have free acess to other possibly easy bonuses. It remember me the guy that did World 2.0 map. He said that a lot of small continents would help to increase the value of full continents, and we know its not true. You are doing the same way, going against the main strategy: try the easier bonus as 1st option, dont care how small it is.

So, dont be offended, Im not talking this map cant be a good one this way, but you are making the big mountains a desert, period. If its your goal, ok. If it isnt, you can change something or just remember my words when you realize Im right. Now, do as you wish.
Image
User avatar
Major Marvaddin
 
Posts: 2545
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2006 5:06 pm
Location: Belo Horizonte, Brazil
Medals: 15
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (2) Terminator Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (1)
Fog of War Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (1) Map Contribution (3)

Postby WidowMakers on Tue Feb 06, 2007 10:41 pm

Marvaddin wrote:It remember me the guy that did World 2.0 map. He said that a lot of small continents would help to increase the value of full continents, and we know its not true. You are doing the same way, going against the main strategy: try the easier bonus as 1st option, dont care how small it is.

I actually like the way the World 2.0 turned out. Yes you do go after the small bonus early (you need to) but you eventually wan the big one.

I see what you are saying but the small shape groups are nothing like South America or Australia. They each have at least 4 different neighboring territory's. You can't just pile up all of your guys in 1 spot (i.e. Australia). I if anything I am leaning toward making the bonus for the groups go back to 1. I appreciate your input and would like it if others would comment on the past several posts. How does everyone else feel?

BTW thanks for the time Marvaddin. I DO really appreciate it. I do want this map to be good!
Major WidowMakers
 
Posts: 2771
Joined: Mon Nov 20, 2006 9:25 am
Location: Detroit, MI
Medals: 82
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (3) Terminator Achievement (1)
Fog of War Achievement (3) Trench Warfare Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (1) Random Map Achievement (2) Cross-Map Achievement (3)
Ratings Achievement (2) General Achievement (6) Clan Achievement (19) Map Contribution (21) General Contribution (14)

Postby Enigma on Wed Feb 07, 2007 10:50 am

bonuses for the continents are too high. why is yellow worth 3? only 3 territories and 2 borders. they all need to be brought down.
the bonus for holding 2 kings seems way too easy.
interesting new texture, lol it looks like a sponge. i dont not like it, but is there anything else more applicable?
Do you need an excuse to have a war? I mean, who for? Can't you just say "You got lots of cash and land, but I've got a big sword, so divy up right now, chop chop."
Terry Pratchet
User avatar
Lieutenant Enigma
 
Posts: 367
Joined: Mon Jul 03, 2006 10:23 pm
Location: Classified
Medals: 8
Standard Achievement (1) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (2) Fog of War Achievement (1)
Cross-Map Achievement (1)

Postby Wisse on Wed Feb 07, 2007 11:50 am

the effect on the down side of the hills etc. is good but i think you must do that more near the corners, because i think there is where it mostly happens that the grass grows over the hill ;)
Image Image
User avatar
Sergeant Wisse
 
Posts: 4448
Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2006 2:59 pm
Location: The netherlands, gelderland, epe
Medals: 12
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (2) Freestyle Achievement (2) Teammate Achievement (2)
Cross-Map Achievement (1) Map Contribution (1)

Postby WidowMakers on Wed Feb 07, 2007 6:13 pm

Here are the bonuses adjusted to make the gray shape groups less powerful
Image
http://jmhooton.iweb.bsu.edu/joel/KOTM/KOTM7.S.jpg

XML is the same as the last update.
Major WidowMakers
 
Posts: 2771
Joined: Mon Nov 20, 2006 9:25 am
Location: Detroit, MI
Medals: 82
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (3) Terminator Achievement (1)
Fog of War Achievement (3) Trench Warfare Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (1) Random Map Achievement (2) Cross-Map Achievement (3)
Ratings Achievement (2) General Achievement (6) Clan Achievement (19) Map Contribution (21) General Contribution (14)

Postby ericisshort on Wed Feb 07, 2007 8:57 pm

I still think the red should come down to 8 armies... and the purple down to 3.

The shapes shouldnt even be bonused because they are already a good strategic move for attacking the tops.


And the kings should either be a 6 army bonus for holding ALL of them or a bonus that increases linearly.

I agree that the world 2.0 bonuses are too high in a lot of cases, which makes it REALLY easy to kill off the other players once you get past a certain critical mass. This is a really nice map idea and I think that setting the bonuses too high would absolutely ruin it. If bonuses are too low, it make it easy to upset the balance anywhere in the game. But if its too high, something as random as a great starting position can end the game too quickly.
Last edited by ericisshort on Thu Feb 08, 2007 6:33 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Captain ericisshort
 
Posts: 37
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 4:02 pm
Location: oklahoma

Postby Molacole on Wed Feb 07, 2007 11:23 pm

this map is very good looking. I prefer the textured colors though. second to last picture you posted.

Game play looks like a nightmare =/

red will never be taken unless the game is already in the bag and somebody was just wasting time trying to conquer it.
You would have to give a HUGE bonus to make somebody even consider taking it... probably even 15 wouldn't tempt me to go for it. It's just too damm easy to build up strong and attack it from the heli pads especially considering the heli pads is also a border to a bonus.

What I would change if I could would be the king bonuses. beef those up and give people a reason to build up ON the mountains. As of right now I see 90% of the games being won on the shapes not on the mountains.

How realistic would it be for somebody to hold 3 kings and not get broken up. they would get destroyed by the heli pads!

2 kings = 1 - need protection against 5 territories
3 kings = 3 - need protection against 6 territories
4 kings = 5 - need protection against 7 territories
all kings = 7 - need protection against 8 territories

you could probably go even higher than that. The reason I say this is because 3 of each of those territories is PRIME time real estate and is going to be the easist and most desired bonuses for people to start off with. So those borders will be strong at the early stages of the game. This way anybody grabbing a shape bonus and tryin to branch out for a king bonus runs the chance of losing both their bonuses...
User avatar
Lieutenant Molacole
 
Posts: 552
Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2006 8:19 am
Location: W 2.0 map by ZIM
Medals: 12
Standard Achievement (1) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (3) Terminator Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (2)
Teammate Achievement (2) Cross-Map Achievement (1)

Postby lVlaniac on Wed Feb 07, 2007 11:37 pm

:shock: your map is awesome i hope i could play with you in this map soon :P
I Could Eat A Bowl Of Alphabet Soup And Crap Out A Better Conversation Than Yours.


Image
User avatar
Private 1st Class lVlaniac
 
Posts: 118
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2006 3:54 pm
Location: santiago de chile

Postby AndyDufresne on Wed Feb 07, 2007 11:40 pm

Hm, just to throw this out there, perhaps a 'half-mountain' would be interesting. If people believe red is two big, you could slice it in half...either horizontally or vertically... might make things interesting, but also might make game play more difficult. :) But an idea, nonetheless.


--Andy
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class AndyDufresne
 
Posts: 24917
Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2006 8:22 pm
Location: A Banana Palm in Zihuatanejo
Medals: 20
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (1) Triples Achievement (1) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (1)
Freestyle Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (1) Trench Warfare Achievement (1) Speed Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (1)
Cross-Map Achievement (3) General Achievement (4) General Contribution (2)

Postby Coleman on Wed Feb 07, 2007 11:43 pm

I liked the high bonus version better with the textures. I think everyone else here has a different vision for the map then me, I like throwing lots of armies around.
User avatar
Sergeant Coleman
 
Posts: 5402
Joined: Tue Jan 02, 2007 10:36 pm
Location: Midwest
Medals: 25
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (1) Triples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (1) Assassin Achievement (1)
Freestyle Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (1) Speed Achievement (2) Cross-Map Achievement (2) Ratings Achievement (2)
Training Achievement (1) Map Contribution (6) Tournament Contribution (2) General Contribution (2)

Postby WidowMakers on Fri Feb 09, 2007 7:30 am

OK. Looking at what several people have posted, I made some changes to the map.

ericisshort wrote:The shapes shouldnt even be bonused because they are already a good strategic move for attacking the tops.

There was some concern that the smaller shape groups would be played to quickly and would dover power the game. I reduced their bonus from 2 each to 1 for a pair and 3 for all. They still will get you something but not much.
I sort of split the difference between Nothing and 1 per group.

Secondly, that map was to big. Too many territories in the large Mountains. I eliminated 3 from the red and 1 from the Blue. Bringing the total to 45.
I feel the combo of lowering the shape group substantially and making the big mountains more usable helps a lot.
Enigma wrote:bonuses for the continents are too high. why is yellow worth 3? only 3 territories and 2 borders. they all need to be brought down.

Based on the lowering of territories and such all of the other bonuses were also lowered.
Molacole wrote:this map is very good looking. I prefer the textured colors though. second to last picture you posted.
How realistic would it be for somebody to hold 3 kings and not get broken up. they would get destroyed by the heli pads!

2 kings = 1 - need protection against 5 territories
3 kings = 3 - need protection against 6 territories
4 kings = 5 - need protection against 7 territories
all kings = 7 - need protection against 8 territories

The king bonus was also increase progressively to help entice players to try and get them.
Image
http://jmhooton.iweb.bsu.edu/joel/KOTM/KOTM8.S.jpg
http://jmhooton.iweb.bsu.edu/joel/KOTM/ ... rkings.xml
Last edited by WidowMakers on Thu Feb 15, 2007 10:10 pm, edited 3 times in total.
Major WidowMakers
 
Posts: 2771
Joined: Mon Nov 20, 2006 9:25 am
Location: Detroit, MI
Medals: 82
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (3) Terminator Achievement (1)
Fog of War Achievement (3) Trench Warfare Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (1) Random Map Achievement (2) Cross-Map Achievement (3)
Ratings Achievement (2) General Achievement (6) Clan Achievement (19) Map Contribution (21) General Contribution (14)

Postby Molacole on Fri Feb 09, 2007 9:10 am

I think with this latest update you've given people a reason to fight on the mountains. Good work!

yellow and purple bonuses stand out a bit to me. yellow is easier to hold than the shapes and worth more. It's also prone to more attacks from anyone trying to grab kings plus it promotes fighting on the mountains so not a big concern.

I think if you wanted to you could raise purple since you lowered the bonuses for shapes. Shareing a border for squares while holding purple isn't a big deal anymore. This too could go either way so it doesn't matter much to me.

I really like how you lowered the bonuses and borders for the mountains. I think this is going to be a very fun map to play. Keep up the good work!
User avatar
Lieutenant Molacole
 
Posts: 552
Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2006 8:19 am
Location: W 2.0 map by ZIM
Medals: 12
Standard Achievement (1) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (3) Terminator Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (2)
Teammate Achievement (2) Cross-Map Achievement (1)

Postby Marvaddin on Fri Feb 09, 2007 10:30 am

Oh, yeah! This is much better :)
Now the playability is moving to what you were wanting :)

Well, well, lets continue the job:
I think the blue mountain bonus should really be 4, it has only 7 territories and 3 borders. And I also suggest red bonus being 7. Red mountain is now surely more playable :)

I would still keep the small groups as 1 bonus. If you want keep them really undervalued like they are now, maybe you could at least remove some C1 and S3, but in fact a bigger bonuses would be a better bonus in my opinion. 1 army for 2 groups is in practice the same of nothing.

The "stairs", the mountains blocks that eliminate a step, like B2, R4 and R8 are ugly, but I liked them a lot in terms of playability. In fact, I think they are genial, and could increase very much the mountains interest (You know, the helipads still are a shorter path). I think we could use some more of these territories.

I would like to suggest 2 more things:
- maybe remove a helipad??? (surely the central one)
- I dont know if we should have bonuses for 2 kings... and 3 kings shouldnt have a bonus of 3... this because people can start the game with them... and even more in games with 3-4 people... so I think it could be unfair. Although I like the bonuses, what do you guys think? Of course, 4 and 5 kings could get really good bonuses.

Good Job! Now my interest about this one is increasing quickly :)
Image
User avatar
Major Marvaddin
 
Posts: 2545
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2006 5:06 pm
Location: Belo Horizonte, Brazil
Medals: 15
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (2) Terminator Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (1)
Fog of War Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (1) Map Contribution (3)

Postby santon836 on Fri Feb 09, 2007 11:19 am

I really like this map. It's making huge improvements at the moment.

What I don't understand, is the low bonus you all want for the red mountain. It's a huge continent, and 8 is too low in my opinion. Making it 9 again is better I think.
Much better is splitting it up. Make it two continents, with +2 and +3 for upper and lower, and 8 or 9 for total. It IS big.
User avatar
Private santon836
 
Posts: 126
Joined: Mon Nov 06, 2006 9:44 am
Medals: 2
Standard Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (1)

Postby WidowMakers on Sat Feb 10, 2007 8:18 am

No one is voting. Vote People! Vote!
Major WidowMakers
 
Posts: 2771
Joined: Mon Nov 20, 2006 9:25 am
Location: Detroit, MI
Medals: 82
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (3) Terminator Achievement (1)
Fog of War Achievement (3) Trench Warfare Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (1) Random Map Achievement (2) Cross-Map Achievement (3)
Ratings Achievement (2) General Achievement (6) Clan Achievement (19) Map Contribution (21) General Contribution (14)

Postby Gilligan on Sat Feb 10, 2007 9:24 am

should there be a bonus for holding all the helipads?
Image
User avatar
Lieutenant Gilligan
 
Posts: 12477
Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 4:59 pm
Location: Providence, RI
Medals: 204
Monthly Leader Silver (1) Monthly Leader Bronze (1) Most Improved Silver (1) Standard Achievement (4) Doubles Achievement (3)
Triples Achievement (3) Quadruples Achievement (3) Terminator Achievement (3) Assassin Achievement (3) Manual Troops Achievement (3)
Freestyle Achievement (4) Polymorphic Achievement (2) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (3) Fog of War Achievement (4) Trench Warfare Achievement (3)
Speed Achievement (4) Teammate Achievement (3) Random Map Achievement (3) Cross-Map Achievement (4) Beta Map Achievement (2)
Battle Royale Achievement (3) Bot Achievement (2) Ratings Achievement (4) Tournament Achievement (30) General Achievement (33)
Clan Achievement (8) Challenge Achievement (7) Map Contribution (10) Tournament Contribution (30) General Contribution (20)

PreviousNext

Return to The Atlas

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users