The Third Crusade [Quenched] Revamping

by **natty dread** on Fri Jun 18, 2010 6:19 am

Jerusalem only, and all the other territories mentioned in the objective.

by **iancanton** on Fri Sep 17, 2010 1:41 am

the objective is a total of four regions, so jerusalem, in this case, means the star of david only.

ian.

by **talonz** on Sun Oct 03, 2010 1:34 pm

Team victory conditions not working on this map. As a team we hold a starting position, granada, antioch and jeruselam at start of my turn (and my partners turn) but no victory....our entire plans were based around that...now we are out of position badly.....pls fix.

Game 7450179

by **Victor Sullivan** on Sun Oct 03, 2010 1:41 pm

One person alone must hold all of the objective points.

by **talonz** on Sun Oct 03, 2010 7:55 pm

That just confirms what I said...team victory conditions are not working.

by **Incandenza** on Sun Oct 03, 2010 8:00 pm

talonz wrote:That just confirms what I said...team victory conditions are not working.

There are no "team victory conditions." VCs are just like bonuses, they can't be jointly held by a team.

by **talonz** on Sun Oct 03, 2010 9:53 pm

VCs are nothing like bonuses, and should be able to be jointly held by a team...otherwise there is no point to teamplay outside of total destruction of other teams, which in itself is another victory condition...

by **Incandenza** on Sun Oct 03, 2010 9:55 pm

talonz wrote:VCs are nothing like bonuses, and should be able to be jointly held by a team...otherwise there is no point to teamplay outside of total destruction of other teams, which in itself is another victory condition...

Well, then, I'd recommend you swing by the suggestions forum.

by **ender516** on Mon Oct 04, 2010 12:32 am

talonz wrote:VCs are nothing like bonuses, and should be able to be jointly held by a team...otherwise there is no point to teamplay outside of total destruction of other teams, which in itself is another victory condition...

Victory conditions are very much like bonuses. A bonus is not awarded if a team holds a group of territories, only if an individual holds the group. If a team wants to earn a bonus, they must cooperate to allow one member to take and hold the group. Victory conditions work in precisely the same fashion and if you want your team to win via a victory condition, it will require the same type of cooperation. In fact, in order to explain victory conditions to those who show up in the Foundry (usually during the Beta phase) to complain that they have taken the territories but not immediately won, I usually describe a victory condition as the ultimate bonus. When your turn starts, if you hold all the regions of a bonus zone, you get extra troops to deploy, and if you hold all the regions of a victory condition, you win the game.

by **talonz** on Mon Oct 04, 2010 9:12 pm

You do realize the incongruity that not all victory conditions are treated like that, given that the standard victory condition is 'remove all opposing players from the board' and one *can* do that as a team?

And sure, alt. victory conditions are currently treated like bonuses, my point being is that they shouldnt be.

They are not the same animal.

At any rate, started a thread in suggestions forum given that this is apparently not a single map issue.

by **ender516** on Tue Oct 05, 2010 12:21 am

Here on Conquer Club, the term "victory condition" is applied only to special situations apart from the "remove all opposing players from the board" method, and as such, are all treated like that. I applaud your submission of a suggestion (you could post a link here). Such innovations are always worth discussing.

by **talonz** on Tue Oct 05, 2010 1:30 am

ender516 wrote:Here on Conquer Club, the term "victory condition" is applied only to special situations apart from the "remove all opposing players from the board" method, ...

Given how the majority of the general public will view that as a 'victory condition' (it can really be nothing else) I would suggest that to treat it as otherwise is pointless.

by **ender516** on Tue Oct 05, 2010 7:34 am

If you read the Instructions for this site, you will see the following statements:

In the Overview, the creators of Conquer Club wrote:Conquer Club is a turn-based strategy game. Opponents engage in combat and the last remaining player wins.

In the Gameplay Notes (emphasis mine), the creators of Conquer Club wrote:Some maps have objectives which you must conquer and hold for one round to win the game.

The special terminology has been created to recognize a special situation, where victory can be achieved in a way that might be otherwise unexpected.

by **MrBenn** on Wed Oct 06, 2010 4:19 pm

Once you have defeated all your opponents, your victory is unconditional.

We could play semantics all day

by **Xelot** on Wed Jul 18, 2012 9:05 pm

Here is the scenario:

Blue is closing in on taking over the known world. There are a few hold outs which will be crushed in due time. One of which, the English, are holed up on their island. Because this is trench warfare, you cannot move an army more than one region at a time. Crossing the English Channel becomes problematic because any troops left there at the end of the turn disappear/are killed the next turn and are replaced with 3 neutral armies.

How does one attack England in this case?

Thanks,
Xelot

by **cairnswk** on Wed Jul 18, 2012 9:14 pm

Xelot...can you please post the game number in any queries you have about games so that it is easier for those advising to track the map...thanks

by **perchorin** on Wed Jul 18, 2012 9:16 pm

Killer neutrals i.e. the one you're referring to in the English Channel are not bound by the trench warfare rules. You can attack beyond the Channel. No glitch.

by **thenobodies80** on Thu Jul 19, 2012 3:06 am

[Merged] with the map discussion thread.

by **Kabanellas** on Sun Mar 10, 2013 7:47 am

Now that I'm on this revisiting mood, I'd like to change the Vatican and Granada starting Neutrals from 5 to 4 (at least)

The Vatican is barely touched , and Granada is acting like a protection wall for the Iberian Kingdoms.

by **pamoa** on Sun Mar 10, 2013 2:32 pm

Kabanellas wrote:Now that I'm on this revisiting mood, I'd like to change the Vatican and Granada starting Neutrals from 5 to 4 (at least)
The Vatican is barely touched , and Granada is acting like a protection wall for the Iberian Kingdoms.

it would really open the map
do it

by **Kabanellas** on Sun Mar 17, 2013 4:30 am

ok.. so here it is. I've reduced the numbers in most of starting neutrals:

Granada from 5 to 4
The Vatican from 5 to 3
Venice from 3 to 2
Constantinople from 3 to 2
Cyprus from 5 to 4 (also reduced London-Cyprus bonus from 2 to 1)
Tyre from 4 to 3 (also reduced Paris-Tyre bonus from 2 to 1)
Seleucia from 3 to 2 (also reduced Ratisbon-Seleucia bonus from 2 to 1)
Antioch from 5 to 4
Krak des Chevaliers from 3 to 2
Rakka from 2 to 1
Jerusalem from 5 to 4

Considering:
The reduction of Iberian Kingdoms bonus from 4 to 3.
Currently if you add Granada you'll get +5 to protect 4 borders, with the possibility of bottle necking on Toulouse. Reducing those 4 borders to 3. On the other hand IK is a continent with a lot of territories to conquer. Nevertheless.... not totally sure about this part. Would like some opinions.

Click image to enlarge.

by **jj3044** on Sun Mar 17, 2013 9:06 am

Kabanellas wrote:ok.. so here it is. I've reduced the numbers in most of starting neutrals:

Granada from 5 to 4
The Vatican from 5 to 3
Venice from 3 to 2
Constantinople from 3 to 2
Cyprus from 5 to 4 (also reduced London-Cyprus bonus from 2 to 1)
Tyre from 4 to 3 (also reduced Paris-Tyre bonus from 2 to 1)
Seleucia from 3 to 2 (also reduced Ratisbon-Seleucia bonus from 2 to 1)
Antioch from 5 to 4
Krak des Chevaliers from 3 to 2
Rakka from 2 to 1
Jerusalem from 5 to 4

Considering:
The reduction of Iberian Kingdoms bonus from 4 to 3.
Currently if you add Granada you'll get +5 to protect 4 borders, with the possibility of bottle necking on Toulouse. Reducing those 4 borders to 3. On the other hand IK is a continent with a lot of territories to conquer. Nevertheless.... not totally sure about this part. Would like some opinions.

Click image to enlarge.

It will definitely change the gameplay and make the map more complex. One other suggestion is changing Wales to a 4 neutral from 5.

by **Oneyed** on Sun Mar 17, 2013 9:14 am

Kabanellas wrote:ok.. so here it is. I've reduced the numbers in most of starting neutrals:

The Vatican from 5 to 3
Venice from 3 to 2
Seleucia from 3 to 2 (also reduced Ratisbon-Seleucia bonus from 2 to 1)
Rakka from 2 to 1
Jerusalem from 5 to 4

the Vatican should be 4 (as Granada) - Vatican has own bonus +1 autodeploy and is needed only as victory objective.
similar for Venice - also gives +1 autodeploy and is not needed for any land bonus.
Seleucia should be n3 (as the rest regions with "shields") - owner of Ratisbon will has advantage against owners of Paris, London. and Seleucia gives also second bonus as part of Principality of Armenia.
Rakka should stay n2 as others "muslim" bonuses.
Jerusalem gives maybe too much bonuses: autodeploy, part of Kingdom of Jerusalem, muslim bonus, victory objective... hm, it was the most important city in these days so it is ok but maybe n5 is fine.

Kabanellas wrote:Considering:
The reduction of Iberian Kingdoms bonus from 4 to 3.
Currently if you add Granada you'll get +5 to protect 4 borders, with the possibility of bottle necking on Toulouse. Reducing those 4 borders to 3. On the other hand IK is a continent with a lot of territories to conquer. Nevertheless.... not totally sure about this part. Would like some opinions.

no. it is not easy to gain 7 regions of Iberian kingdoms and when you not hold Touluse you need to secure 3 borders and Granada now with n4 is more open to attack from Africa.

Do you think about difference between 4 regions of France (3 to secure) with bonus 3 and extra bonus for Tyre and Kingdom of Hungary with 4 regions (4 to secure) with bonus only 1? I know that Hungary was not important for crusades but difference in big here.

Oneyed

by **Kabanellas** on Sun Mar 17, 2013 3:19 pm

Well,
One of the big problems with this map, particularly on team games, is that no one uses 80% of those neutrals. I've never seen any one assaulting the Vatican in any of my team games... and i know for a fact that even at 4 no one will waste troops there. That's why it should stay at 3.

As for Seleucia, I've reduced it by 1 as I've done with Cyprus and Tyre. To keep it coherent. And it makes sense, if you think about it. HRE/Ratisbon is a very hard starting point, harder that Paris. Being so, it makes sense that if Tyre has 3 neutral starters Seleucia stays with 2. Remember that I'm also reducing the bonus from these links from 2 to 1.

Rakka - no one takes it..

.. muslim bonus are seldom used... maybe leaving Rakka at 1 will bring some more dynamics to that bonus. just saying.... it can stay at 2 though

Jerusalem - and again, never used. That's why it needs to be leveled down a notch. As for Jerusalem Kingdom is not so protected anymore. Decreasing Cyprus and Tyre neutrals will help to make it more reachable.

Iberia Kingdoms - I agree.... (just not totally sure about it) I guess it should stay as it is for now.

Wales (@JJ) - the all idea of decreasing Cyprus instead of Wales is to make the movement towards the East more appealing. Also, the payback will be the same (1 bonus), but Cyprus will be much harder to hold, that's why it should be cheaper than Wales.

by **chapcrap** on Tue Mar 19, 2013 7:50 am

Kabanellas wrote:Well,
One of the big problems with this map, particularly on team games, is that no one uses 80% of those neutrals. I've never seen any one assaulting the Vatican in any of my team games... and i know for a fact that even at 4 no one will waste troops there. That's why it should stay at 3.

But, this map is not one just used for team games. There have almost been 2800 Team games on the map and over 24000 total. Team games make up less than 12% of the games. I'm not sure changing things for the sake of team game utilization, at this point, is a very good idea.