All Your Base Are Belong To Us

[manchild1]

After playing this map a few times, I think that taking the level 3 technology objective is a bit too easy -- the first person to make it to level 3-2 technologies wins every time. Perhaps if each territory on this level had say 3 neutrals it would give others a chance to get their and protect against the victory.

Perhaps this has been discussed previously in the thread (33 pages is a bit daunting to read!). If it has, feel free to ignore.

[Victor Sullivan]

I think the problem is it doesn't get used if there is more than 1 troop on those territories (or so it seems to me).

-Sully

[DiM]

I think the problem is it doesn't get used if there is more than 1 troop on those territories (or so it seems to me).

-Sully

yep. as it is now it's a good balance between being too easy to take early in the game and being too hard to take at all.

[Jippd]

After playing this map a few times, I think that taking the level 3 technology objective is a bit too easy -- the first person to make it to level 3-2 technologies wins every time. Perhaps if each territory on this level had say 3 neutrals it would give others a chance to get their and protect against the victory.

Perhaps this has been discussed previously in the thread (33 pages is a bit daunting to read!). If it has, feel free to ignore.

I have yet to play a game on this map where someone held that objective...how did they hold all four of those and defend all the autodeploys which give you access to break it? would seem if they could do that might as well hold the objective of the base with all the matching autodeploys which I have seen win on this map.

That being said I think tech level 3 should be back to n10 instead of n8 would encourage more play on other parts of the map i think. Maybe comprimise and n9

[Victor Sullivan]

After playing this map a few times, I think that taking the level 3 technology objective is a bit too easy -- the first person to make it to level 3-2 technologies wins every time. Perhaps if each territory on this level had say 3 neutrals it would give others a chance to get their and protect against the victory.

Perhaps this has been discussed previously in the thread (33 pages is a bit daunting to read!). If it has, feel free to ignore.

I have yet to play a game on this map where someone held that objective...how did they hold all four of those and defend all the autodeploys which give you access to break it? would seem if they could do that might as well hold the objective of the base with all the matching autodeploys which I have seen win on this map.

That being said I think tech level 3 should be back to n10 instead of n8 would encourage more play on other parts of the map i think. Maybe comprimise and n9

I'm willing to give it a shot. DiM?

-Sully

[DiM]

i don't really think it will make any difference to have 9 neutrals instead of 8. if we were talking about increasing from 1 to 2 it would have been something cause that would have given the defender 1 extra die. but between 8 and 9 the difference is really small. and the higher the numbers go the smaller this difference becomes.

i'm all for changes as long as they bring something significant, when they don't, i'd rather leave the map as it is. changing it too often can be detrimental to the people that are just getting used to it.

[Jippd]

Has anyone played this quads?

[Victor Sullivan]

i don't really think it will make any difference to have 9 neutrals instead of 8. if we were talking about increasing from 1 to 2 it would have been something cause that would have given the defender 1 extra die. but between 8 and 9 the difference is really small. and the higher the numbers go the smaller this difference becomes.

i'm all for changes as long as they bring something significant, when they don't, i'd rather leave the map as it is. changing it too often can be detrimental to the people that are just getting used to it.

But the increase to 10 would be fairly significant.

-Sully

[DiM]

i don't really think it will make any difference to have 9 neutrals instead of 8. if we were talking about increasing from 1 to 2 it would have been something cause that would have given the defender 1 extra die. but between 8 and 9 the difference is really small. and the higher the numbers go the smaller this difference becomes.

i'm all for changes as long as they bring something significant, when they don't, i'd rather leave the map as it is. changing it too often can be detrimental to the people that are just getting used to it.

But the increase to 10 would be fairly significant.

-Sully

but we already had 10 there. we should go towards something new not revert to something old.
with the neutral 8 i think we have a good balance now. i'm in a aybabtu tourney and people seem to be interested in all parts of the map.
i don't know how it works for teams but in single games it's ok as it is now.

[thenobodies80]

Thanks, manchild1, for bringing the error to my attention. It has been fixed:

AllYourXMLAreBelongToSully8.xml

-Sully

Sent to the turtle!

[ask me2]

I'm sorry, but the grammar is driving me crazy. I mean, All Your Base are Belong to Us? Really?

[DiM]

I'm sorry, but the grammar is driving me crazy. I mean, All Your Base are Belong to Us? Really?

really? in this day and age and you can't use a search engine.... tsk tsk tsk

click here

[Jippd]

He is only 1 so he was probably too young when that came out lolz

[ask me2]

He is only 1 so he was probably too young when that came out lolz

Exactly! You expect us youngsters to know about all this old school stuff. And how was I to know to search it? I wasn't aware you could steal lines and such from games and such to use in the map.

[zimmah]

He is only 1 so he was probably too young when that came out lolz

Exactly! You expect us youngsters to know about all this old school stuff. And how was I to know to search it? I wasn't aware you could steal lines and such from games and such to use in the map.

it's like, one of the most well known game phrases ever. it's quite close to "stop poking me" and maybe even to "IT'S DANGEROUS TO GO ALONE! TAKE THIS."

also a nice one: "i feel asleep" (and no, i didn't misstype that)

get real used to the taste of failure! It's your special flavor.

now guess that quote.

[koontz1973]

get real used to the taste of failure! It's your special flavor.

now guess that quote.

Zelda.

Groose to be more exact. See, I can use a search engine.

[natty dread]

"i feel asleep"

Metal Gear, NES version.

(didn't even need a search engine for that)

[zimmah]

you're both correct, you win a cookie.

[Victor Sullivan]

you're both correct, you win a cookie.

All your cookie are belong to me!!!!

-Sully

[natty dread]

you're both correct, you win a cookie.

All your cookie are belong to me!!!!

-Sully

[nebsmith]

I don't know it this has been mentioned but I think the win conditions need to be made clearer.
holding all of the DNA or Nukes with a base is clear, because it is stated in the map legend, but holding the bottom row if either tech could be explained more clearly.

For me the problem is having the full name of the Tech in the victory conditions. wouldn't it be easier and clearer to just have the abbreviations used on the map. Or to just state "Hold the bottom row of either tech level 3"
I think the same could be said for the DNA and Nuke win conditions at the side of the map. Is it necessary to restate them there ?

[s3xt0y]

I think we should throw some more win conditions in, make the fog game a little more interesting

[DiM]

I think we should throw some more win conditions in, make the fog game a little more interesting

if you want a map with plenty of win conditions check out pirates and merchants

[thenobodies80]

mmm....apart the title thing, spelling, grammar etc etc

Is there something else that needs to be changed on the map? Are you happy with it?

Nobodies

[crazymilkshake5]

YES! Quench it! so that way I can use it in clan wars