Conquer Club

This was the result of a site bug which has now been fixed: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=111229

I would very like a bigger map. Isnt there an option to make a bigger map with all te countries, i think there are enough player who want to play that. Only bad thing is that you have to scroll very much.

I think it would be fun to add every country in the world:D. This would mean that you need to be very strategic to win the game.


greetz,

Marcooo

If you want big maps, play Hive... unfortunately Lackattack has set us these size restrictions for maps and as long as they are in place we can not make bigger maps.

World 2.1 needs bonuses update
by TenHanger on Apr 30th, '10, 21:37

I love world 2.1, it's the best; however, it needs some bonuses to be updated to reflect actual difficulty levels in obtaining the bonus. Outright, Europe getting 6 extra men just for conquering 5 "extras" countries is WAY too generous. To get Europe is almost the easiest feat in the game. Unlike Central America, which is always under attack, Scandanavia has no natural enemies and is easily conquered and defended. From there, it's just a matter of time to get central europe for 3, and then it's easy to get the rest for SIX! While in "RISK" Europe is nearly impossible to get an hold, this is not the case in World 2.1. So this reward is too generous, and really makes it hard on the other players who actually have to work to obtain and defend their bonuses. The guy who gets dealt a good hand in Europe, is automatically at huge advantage.

SECOND SUGGESTION: The all-of-asia bonus is just THREE? I've actually never seen anyone get the Asia bonus it's so hard. By the time anyone gets it, the game is over anyway. So as extra incentive to get people to try for it, THAT bonus should be 6 or 7. Still likely to happen very little, but at least it will be tempting and menacing for someone to obtain it.

THIRD SUGGESTION: No one can get or hold Arabian bonus. It should be rewarded heavily, with at LEAST a 5 bonus similar to Redfrika. Like Europe in "RISK", Arabia is CONSTANTLY right in between the easiest of all bonuses, Eastfrika (orange) and India bonus. So the owners of these two bonsuses, PLUS the owner of Europe always battle for this bonus of a mere 4. If one actually gets it, it should be worth 5 minimum, and 6 might be logical.

Call this world 2.2 or 3.0 with the simple changes, and I guarantee (especially the Europe x 11 thing) the game is better. At the very least, take Europe down to just a 10.

sinc'y,
TenHanger

TenHanger wrote:World 2.1 needs bonuses update
by TenHanger on Apr 30th, '10, 21:37

I love world 2.1, it's the best; however, it needs some bonuses to be updated to reflect actual difficulty levels in obtaining the bonus. Outright, Europe getting 6 extra men just for conquering 5 "extras" countries is WAY too generous. To get Europe is almost the easiest feat in the game. Unlike Central America, which is always under attack, Scandanavia has no natural enemies and is easily conquered and defended. From there, it's just a matter of time to get central europe for 3, and then it's easy to get the rest for SIX! While in "RISK" Europe is nearly impossible to get an hold, this is not the case in World 2.1. So this reward is too generous, and really makes it hard on the other players who actually have to work to obtain and defend their bonuses. The guy who gets dealt a good hand in Europe, is automatically at huge advantage.

SECOND SUGGESTION: The all-of-asia bonus is just THREE? I've actually never seen anyone get the Asia bonus it's so hard. By the time anyone gets it, the game is over anyway. So as extra incentive to get people to try for it, THAT bonus should be 6 or 7. Still likely to happen very little, but at least it will be tempting and menacing for someone to obtain it.

THIRD SUGGESTION: No one can get or hold Arabian bonus. It should be rewarded heavily, with at LEAST a 5 bonus similar to Redfrika. Like Europe in "RISK", Arabia is CONSTANTLY right in between the easiest of all bonuses, Eastfrika (orange) and India bonus. So the owners of these two bonsuses, PLUS the owner of Europe always battle for this bonus of a mere 4. If one actually gets it, it should be worth 5 minimum, and 6 might be logical.

Call this world 2.2 or 3.0 with the simple changes, and I guarantee (especially the Europe x 11 thing) the game is better. At the very least, take Europe down to just a 10.

sinc'y,
TenHanger

Well, nearly 300000 games have been played on 2.1, its not going to change for just a few little corrections in bonus recalculations, since the current ones work quite well. If a new map based on the world is made however, these would make sense to consider.

TenHanger wrote:World 2.1 needs bonuses update
by TenHanger on Apr 30th, '10, 21:37

I love world 2.1, it's the best; however, it needs some bonuses to be updated to reflect actual difficulty levels in obtaining the bonus. Outright, Europe getting 6 extra men just for conquering 5 "extras" countries is WAY too generous. To get Europe is almost the easiest feat in the game. Unlike Central America, which is always under attack, Scandanavia has no natural enemies and is easily conquered and defended. From there, it's just a matter of time to get central europe for 3, and then it's easy to get the rest for SIX! While in "RISK" Europe is nearly impossible to get an hold, this is not the case in World 2.1. So this reward is too generous, and really makes it hard on the other players who actually have to work to obtain and defend their bonuses. The guy who gets dealt a good hand in Europe, is automatically at huge advantage.

SECOND SUGGESTION: The all-of-asia bonus is just THREE? I've actually never seen anyone get the Asia bonus it's so hard. By the time anyone gets it, the game is over anyway. So as extra incentive to get people to try for it, THAT bonus should be 6 or 7. Still likely to happen very little, but at least it will be tempting and menacing for someone to obtain it.

THIRD SUGGESTION: No one can get or hold Arabian bonus. It should be rewarded heavily, with at LEAST a 5 bonus similar to Redfrika. Like Europe in "RISK", Arabia is CONSTANTLY right in between the easiest of all bonuses, Eastfrika (orange) and India bonus. So the owners of these two bonsuses, PLUS the owner of Europe always battle for this bonus of a mere 4. If one actually gets it, it should be worth 5 minimum, and 6 might be logical.

Call this world 2.2 or 3.0 with the simple changes, and I guarantee (especially the Europe x 11 thing) the game is better. At the very least, take Europe down to just a 10.

sinc'y,
TenHanger

Well, nearly 300000 games have been played on 2.1, its not going to change for just a few little corrections in bonus recalculations, since the current ones work quite well, and, because of the size of the map, those few bonus changes would actually mean very little to very few games. If a new map based on the world is made however, these would make sense to consider.

What Im saying is, you are probably even right, but its mostly irrelevant. The bonuses mean so little that they simply dont have to be perfect on a map this big, and the uniformity of play far outweighs any need for perfection when it comes to perceived bonus value. Its kind of like arguing about which presidents are on Mt Rushmore. You may have a case for 4 better ones, but unless you make a new mountain, its all conjecture.

The more popular a map, the harder it is to get gameplay changed...

I like it! It would be something for more experienced players -- a better challenge!
It seems well suited to the one turn per day style, with plenty of time to plan between turns. I agree it may need to be modified, but only slightly. But what about the 'blank' areas, like Greenland and Eastern Europe. Shouldn't they be 'counted' as well, regardless of current political situations (which change almost daily)?
It's a good map and I encourage you to go forward with this.

The 1200x600 map or even bigger would be awesome. Just think if there was like a 16 player version with 4 teams of 4 people. That would be epic as hell.

where could I get this map in printable version to play on board?

Just for a bit of clarification do Tierra del Fuego and/or Chile belong to the La Plata region? Thanks, it´s a great map, I like how sometimes you can do your own thing because there are so many regions where people are fighting, leaving a few other areas nearly uncontested. Thanks a lot!

WorldCup4James wrote:Just for a bit of clarification do Tierra del Fuego and/or Chile belong to the La Plata region? Thanks, it´s a great map, I like how sometimes you can do your own thing because there are so many regions where people are fighting, leaving a few other areas nearly uncontested. Thanks a lot!

No, neither is part of La Plata. They, like Guyanas and North East Brazil, are only part of the overall South America bonus.

Okay, cool. Kind of a new idea that isn´t on the Classic map. I guess they kind of serve as buffer countries to defend your regions.

Yes, I suppose they do. I just see them as the leftovers which complete the continents which are mostly made up of smaller regions more suitable to gameplay. There are some of these leftovers on each continent, coloured to match the box next to the "Continent (total)" lines of the legend. They also do NOT appear in the little inset map, since they have no bonus of their own -- they only complete the superbonus. (Sorry if this is a little obvious to you or others reading this topic, but you never know when a new recruit may come looking around.)

Okay yeah, now I notice how obvious it is.

Is Greece connected to Turkey?
Thanks.

PS I did search!

derivative133 wrote:Is Greece connected to Turkey?
Thanks.

PS I did search!

Yes it should be, why are you having problems with attacking it?

if so report in bugs.

hopes this helps

No problems, I love the map. I just want to make sure before I waste a bunch of troops. Thanks

I think this should really be attached to the appropriate topic in the Viewing Gallery.

derivative133 wrote:Is Greece connected to Turkey?
Thanks.

PS I did search!

[Merged]

Instead of using political borders why not use major cultural zones that would decrease the # of countries while increasing there size.

Langobardi wrote:Instead of using political borders why not use major cultural zones that would decrease the # of countries while increasing there size.

This map is not likely to change, but that's a good idea for a new one, intermediate in size between this one and the Classic map. Put some more thought into this, and post it in the Melting Pot of the Map Foundry.

One question. Why is it called 2.1?

patrickaa317 wrote:One question. Why is it called 2.1?

As far as I know, it was originally called "World 2", and the original mapmaker made some minor changes after it first went live, and it got renamed to maintain versioning.