Conquer Club

I wanted to create a map that forced players to constantly fight for a common area, and yet not have that be the sole purpose of the map (the GREY countries). I also wanted a small map for a smaller number of players not playing teams. I know my graphics aren't great, but I'm working on them.



33 countries
5 continents
ORANGE/RED/BLUE/GREEN = +2 (all have 6 countries)
GREY = +1 each (four of these)
YELLOW = +6 (five countries)

Comments?

EDIT: 2.26.07 added comments

Even though you want to make a map for less players, I think 29 is still not enough. Even if you just added 1 more it would mean in a 3 player game there would be no neutral territories.

Is the map based of anything? Or is it just something you've come up with. Generally people arent interested in playing maps that arent based off anything.

First suggestion is to make the text in the legend readable. It is way too light, maybe put them against a black background?

Teya wrote:Even though you want to make a map for less players, I think 29 is still not enough. Even if you just added 1 more it would mean in a 3 player game there would be no neutral territories.

Is the map based of anything? Or is it just something you've come up with. Generally people arent interested in playing maps that arent based off anything.

Hmm, I could add some more countries. And no, the map isn't based off anything. I like to focus more on gameplay than interesting storylines, but I see your point.

And that's a good idea, Coleman. Thanks.

Edited them in.

could work I like it

I can barely distinguish between the various colours.

Green and yellow look exactly the same, as do blue and green.

I'm colour blind, but it effects 5% of males, so there are quite a few out there.

Try making the colours brighter and more contrasted

Ahh, alright. Hmm. I'll see what I can do for them.

It's an interesting idea. You need, first of all, a better name, or rather, a name. Yellow is almost overvalued... the only thing saving it is the lack of acces to gray areas, and even at that... maybe reduce its value to four or five? Oh, and I don't think this will work at all as a three player map in its current state - one person would start off the game with an advantage of 1, best case, and it would be a walkover because someone started owning a corner and all the greys, wost case. Be aware that this map will only work for four or more players, and so may not be fulfilling your purpose very well.

This map makes me think about an old board game, "Superpower"

Normally I would say that Yellow should be +5 since it only has 5 territories and 4 borders, but I think the concept is "fighting for the middle" so I'm good with it. Maybe it is overvalued, but everyone has access to it so everyone will fight for it.

Orange/Red/Blue/Green should all be +3.

The Greys..........sigh........ I know it's the new big map making fad to have 1 space that gives +1, but it's just not fair for the people who don't start there when the map is initialized. And you've got 4 of them! I'm sure a lot of people on this forum will tell you they like it, but I assure you they represent the minority. Most people will play this map a few times where their opponents get the Greys, and they'll get frustrated and refuse to play it again. Or, like me, they'll see it coming and won't play it in the first place.

Samus.. Speaking of the fad for map making. I also used the +1 bonus in my italy map. Would you play that map? Or do you think it is also unfair?

Yeah, my thoughts are more or less the same. I really don't think they fit with the concept of region bonuses, which is to hold a specific area of territories for a reward. They're more like whoever happens to be on them at the time, much more random and it feels like players didn't really "earn" extra armies.

Hmm. What would you think about making the greys worth +1 as a whole?

Did you want +3 instead of +2 on Red/Blue/Green/Orange for any specific reason, or ? I think the +2 really make the fight for the middle worth more than a +3.

Right now, this map really has zero appeal to me.


--Andy

rickr wrote:Hmm. What would you think about making the greys worth +1 as a whole?

Did you want +3 instead of +2 on Red/Blue/Green/Orange for any specific reason, or ? I think the +2 really make the fight for the middle worth more than a +3.

I would not be opposed to an idea similar to a few other maps, which would be 1 Grey = nothing, any 2 Greys = +1, any 3 Greys = +2, all 4 Greys = +4. So you'd want your two neighboring Greys, but so does the next guy so it's more to fight over.

The +3 is based on 6 territories with 3 borders to 3 regions. I think it gives you more armies to go after the Center with, but that's still what you ultimately want to go after. You could even up the Center to +7 or +8, which is clearly overvalued but that's the point, you MUST make sure none of your opponents ever get it. Given the layout, you can attack it from anywhere so it's your own fault if you let them get that bonus.

AndyDufresne wrote:Right now, this map really has zero appeal to me.


--Andy

Man, you don't hold back, do you Andy? I will now be imagining your posts being said by Simon Cowell.

Well sometimes things do need to be said. I've said the same about a lot of maps, and they've grown on me, and I've developed a taste for them. But this current idea, doesn't speak to me.


--Andy

I second Andy's opinion. There's just nothing about this map that would make me want to play it.

the Arctic map already works like this - territories move in a circle around the poll, which can be hit by every continent (err, maybe all but one). That map looks good and plays well, so you'd have to develop something pretty solid to compete for users' playing time.