Page 1 of 1

Re: Warring Cousins [27.8.13] V06 - GP(p1)

PostPosted: Sun Aug 11, 2013 6:10 pm
by cairnswk
Map Name: Warring Cousins
Mapmaker(s): cairnswk; ?
Number of Territories: As of V4 - 76
Special Features: Buildings, possible bombardments (discussion for gameplay)
What Makes This Map Worthy of Being Made:
    * An alternative view to the War of The Roses currently being made
    * A sister map (family tree) to Poison Rome
    * An inverted veiw of the family tree (because Roses grow upwards) using the marriage and children concept
    * CONDITIONAL: this one has wars that have to be won before proceeding up the family tree.
Gameplay
    * For discussion - start with all the board or have starting positions at the bottom of the board - the current layout needs to be enhanced for 8 player start positions if this is to be the case
    * Getting married earns +1
    + Having the children +1
    * Controlling the war and the parties in it +2
    * Parties with shields can fight the wars, and have to control the Battlefield before moving up the family tree

Map Image V6:
Small - 630x600px

Image


show: Other Versions


Original Image
Image

Re: Waring Cousins V01

PostPosted: Sun Aug 11, 2013 7:51 pm
by Aleena
I like this map...

Re: Waring Cousins V01

PostPosted: Mon Aug 12, 2013 4:12 pm
by cairnswk
Aleena wrote:I like this map...

Thanks Aleena.
What in particular to do like/dislike?

Re: Waring Cousins V01

PostPosted: Mon Aug 12, 2013 4:47 pm
by Aleena
Historically Speaking:
....I like how you show the connections in the family trees, and how that directs the game upward along the rose vine..

As For Bonuses:
....Think it's a Cute Idea to give bonuses for the wedding connections and children connections, though they do not seemed to be labeled spaces.. Assume - it'll be listed as both names with either child or wed in it...

Issue / though Like:
..... I like the idea that the battles must flow in one direction... Though the top is not connected in any way to the bottom, so on games like Nuclear Spoils, it will cause issues....
....Also if the winning condition is to control all parties and the war... Do not think all starting points can reach all positions by just moving up...
....Though I can see 12 starting points all ready if you wanted to make it up to a 12 player map...

Think the map space count is off:
10 Yellow Roses
17 White Roses
2 Pink Roses
1 Grey Rose
14 Red Roses
16 children connections
5 Marriage connections (w/o children)
8 Parties
5 French Flores
____
78 areas I count ...

Over-all Look -
--- -I think it's beautiful and cute :)

Like the fact that it is a simple map - meaning does not have any bombardments, or killer/decay neutrals

Looks clean and easy to follow the path way to each connection..

And most importantly - even though it is on the same subject, it in no way looks like mine....It is it's own master piece...

viewtopic.php?f=10&t=191687

Re: Waring Cousins [13.8.13] V03 - GP(p1)

PostPosted: Mon Aug 12, 2013 6:52 pm
by cairnswk
Aleena wrote:Historically Speaking:
....I like how you show the connections in the family trees, and how that directs the game upward along the rose vine..

thank-you :)

As For Bonuses:
....Think it's a Cute Idea to give bonuses for the wedding connections and children connections, though they do not seemed to be labeled spaces.. Assume - it'll be listed as both names with either child or wed in it...

Yes. probably in the xml it will be listed as "marriage: X and Y" and
"family: X and Y and A and B and C" or something similar

Issue / though Like:
..... I like the idea that the battles must flow in one direction... Though the top is not connected in any way to the bottom, so on games like Nuclear Spoils, it will cause issues....

I understand, but this is the case in any map where there is starting postions. It is afterall more of a risk in nuclear becasue you cannot control the card you get to nuke, so in many cases they are wasted...but this is the nature of nuclear combined with the map mostly starting neutral

....Also if the winning condition is to control all parties and the war... Do not think all starting points can reach all positions by just moving up...
....Though I can see 12 starting points all ready if you wanted to make it up to a 12 player map...

Oh OK. In V3 i have added the 8 player starts i think are good.
Please advise where you think there are 12 :)

Think the map space count is off:
10 Yellow Roses
17 White Roses
2 Pink Roses
1 Grey Rose
14 Red Roses
16 children connections
5 Marriage connections (w/o children)
8 Parties
5 French Flores
____
78 areas I count ...

Mmm. I have added 4 terts to V3, and having done the initial xml (so that i can count the terts) it only shows 60 now.

Over-all Look -
--- -I think it's beautiful and cute :)
Like the fact that it is a simple map - meaning does not have any bombardments, or killer/decay neutrals
Looks clean and easy to follow the path way to each connection..

OK. :)

And most importantly - even though it is on the same subject, it in no way looks like mine....It is it's own master piece...
viewtopic.php?f=10&t=191687

Yes i did consider that quite a lot - the interference...but saw your map based on land regions so decided to proceed.

I have yet to finalise:
1. the shields, and am deciding, given i only want 8 battles in the game...whether Edgecote Moor is more important Mortimer's Cross.
This will depend on where the mosts important participants were killed as these have to be included.
2. any other cross map connections through marriage.

Image

Re: Re: Waring Cousins [13.8.13] V03 - GP(p1)

PostPosted: Mon Aug 12, 2013 7:18 pm
by Aleena
Quick thought to fix for Nuclear Spoils - Just an idea if you like them....

You want 8 starting points....
You have 8 Parties that are two-way connected to the vine by shields....

If each one of these 8 parties also have a one-way connection to a starting point, then you can form a seamless loop with out sacrificing any integrity to the map itself...

Just an idea...

Re: Re: Waring Cousins [13.8.13] V03 - GP(p1)

PostPosted: Mon Aug 12, 2013 8:00 pm
by cairnswk
Aleena wrote:Quick thought to fix for Nuclear Spoils - Just an idea if you like them....

You want 8 starting points....
You have 8 Parties that are two-way connected to the vine by shields....

If each one of these 8 parties also have a one-way connection to a starting point, then you can form a seamless loop with out sacrificing any integrity to the map itself...

Just an idea...


OK, i appreciate your idea, but i am not following at this point.

There are indeed 8 starting parties, 7 of which connect to the "family vine" through marriages; the other - Charles VI of France - connects immediately to Agincourt Battle through the shields, and therefore battles with Owen Tudor, and Humprhey and Henry VI of Lancaster.

As i understand it, nuclear is from gameplay instuctions
Nuclear sets are not worth any troops. Instead, each region in the set is nuked to a single neutral troop (even if you own it!).

Therefore any players playing their nuke cards at any time can eliminate either themselves or other players terts in the early stages.

I'm sorry I don't understand the loop referring to.

On another note, I have a found another cross-map link: that of John of Gaunt through another marriage to Blanche of Derby where he is the father of Henry IV (Bolingbroke), although for the start of the game, i am not sure this would be ideal to include, since it would give capacity for either party to eliminate the other at the start of the game. :o

Re: Re: Waring Cousins [13.8.13] V03 - GP(p1)

PostPosted: Mon Aug 12, 2013 8:15 pm
by Aleena
Nothing is wrong with a little blood bath - maybe just make that connection 3X or 4X stronger so players who attempt to wipe out a family early off will have to sacrifice a lot of resources to make that connection...

*********
Victory condition control ALL PARTIES and THE WAR...

It is clear that the player needs to control the 8 parties to win...
But they also need to control the war??

The war - I assume is the battlefield which takes place on the rose vine... To control the entire rose vine, makes me think that a player needs to pretty much wipe out all neutrals and all enemies - leaving only themselves on the field of battle...

If this is the case, or if their is any reason why a player needs to back-track... That is what I suggest that each party has one - one-way link to a different starting point... So that they can take control of all areas on the map - including the starting positions of other players - even if they have become neutral do to a nuclear spoil.... It just creates a small loop allowing players to attack all spaces on the board... It does not effect the initial start for players need to move up the vines to even get to one of these parties in the first place..

------

In any case it was just a suggestion that would allow a fluid map - instead of a linear map... Though players will still have to attack only in one direction - up the vine - so the integrity and concept remains....

Sort of makes it simular to Circus Maximus in the concept that you can only attack in one direction, but their is a way to loop back to the start...

Re: Re: Waring Cousins [13.8.13] V03 - GP(p1)

PostPosted: Tue Aug 13, 2013 7:09 pm
by cairnswk
Aleena wrote:Nothing is wrong with a little blood bath - maybe just make that connection 3X or 4X stronger so players who attempt to wipe out a family early off will have to sacrifice a lot of resources to make that connection...


I put that connection cross-map in from John of Gaunt, but it reduced the starting territories, so i took it out.
As it was i had to place extra terts in the map to give the starts opportunity at making some families and thus building troops before the wars started.

Victory condition control ALL PARTIES and THE WAR...

It is clear that the player needs to control the 8 parties to win...
But they also need to control the war??

The war - I assume is the battlefield which takes place on the rose vine... To control the entire rose vine, makes me think that a player needs to pretty much wipe out all neutrals and all enemies - leaving only themselves on the field of battle...

If this is the case, or if their is any reason why a player needs to back-track... That is what I suggest that each party has one - one-way link to a different starting point... So that they can take control of all areas on the map - including the starting positions of other players - even if they have become neutral do to a nuclear spoil.... It just creates a small loop allowing players to attack all spaces on the board... It does not effect the initial start for players need to move up the vines to even get to one of these parties in the first place..


The legend says:
"To win each war - control all parties & the war"
This means you must be attacker (from shield person), hold the war region, and overcome all other parties on that war to get the bonus
From what i understand of those days, to ensure their own survival and that of their line, opponents and their families were commonly but not always wiped out.
This means it is feasible to assault your opponent in the war, win that war by assaulting all other parties, and then proceed to wipe out the opponents family backwards.
That way your gain control of the board and win the map, and this in itself creates a loop backward to start positions, but you have to use resources of course to wipe out the family (your opponent)

In any case it was just a suggestion that would allow a fluid map - instead of a linear map... Though players will still have to attack only in one direction - up the vine - so the integrity and concept remains....
Sort of makes it simular to Circus Maximus in the concept that you can only attack in one direction, but their is a way to loop back to the start...


I don't see it as being one-way up entirely. It is only this way initially, until you start reaching the wars.
Agincourt is the first battle.

I think it would be good if the conditionals were used...so that you could only assault the battlefield if your opponent was active (ie that tert not being neutral, but i don't know if this is possible with the conditional function.

For now, 76 terts in Version 4.
Image

Re: Waring Cousins [17.8.13] V05 - GP(p1)

PostPosted: Sat Aug 17, 2013 1:20 am
by cairnswk
Filling this design out a little...
1. decided to include Edgecote Moor in the map as this was a Lancashire victory
2. some more 3D elements
3. some more filling of explanation

Version 5
Image

Re: Waring Cousins [17.8.13] V05 - GP(p1)

PostPosted: Fri Aug 23, 2013 9:37 am
by ViperOverLord
Warring has two R's; unless Waring is someone's last name.

Re: Re: Waring Cousins [17.8.13] V05 - GP(p1)

PostPosted: Fri Aug 23, 2013 9:49 am
by Aleena
Good catch viperoverload

Re: Waring Cousins [27.8.13] V06 - GP(p1)

PostPosted: Mon Aug 26, 2013 11:39 am
by cairnswk
ViperOverLord wrote:Warring has two R's; unless Waring is someone's last name.

Thank-you :)

Onto V6. Some gameplay concepts I am toying with at this stage.
I'm not sure if some of these things can be done with current xml, although i suspect there is a lot of conditionals in it if it can.

1. Wars are gateways to further climbing the family tree i.e. you must win a war in order to advance.
2. You must also control the Knights and Lords in the Parliament in order to wage the war.
3. i think all the shields are in pace for those participants that have to fight the war.
4. there are 8 family trees in this map...more in RL.
5. Jacquetta and Richard Neville have something going on with witchcraft :twisted:
6. two cross-map connections have been removed to make easier side-to-side gameplay

Image

Re: Warring Cousins [27.8.13] V06 - GP(p1)

PostPosted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 4:38 pm
by cairnswk
So far there have been 2 repsondants to this map, which pretty much indicates no interest at this time.

Please bin this map.

Re: Warring Cousins [27.8.13] V06 - GP(p1)

PostPosted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 11:33 pm
by koontz1973
cairnswk wrote:So far there have been 2 repsondants to this map, which pretty much indicates no interest at this time.

Please bin this map.


[Moved]

    As per mapmakers request. Over to the ideas forum you go.

      koontz