Moderator: Cartographers
Commander62890 wrote:This is a tough decision, but I really think that C will result in players not going for the bonus, for the most part.
Bruceswar wrote:If it was 1 on each instead of 2, then I think the ports would be of more use to most people.
MrBenn wrote:After a bit of thought, I've decided to drop the ports to neutral 1s, and see how things go. Hopefully this will bring the ports into play a little bit more easily; I'll consider amending the bonus to holding two ports for a +1 bonus, but for now I'll see how things go with lower neutrals.
http://www.fileden.com/files/2009/1/9/2259283/Mexico4.xml
MrBenn wrote:I'm not sure if there was any serious thoughts into making the ports start neutral - I;d sort of assumed it would be a sensible thing to do... Having said that, I would definitely prefer keeping them in normal play
The options I see are:
a) Leave it as it was before (with no designated neutrals). The downside of this, is that it leaves 37 starting terrs, meaning 2/3p games start with 12 terrs and an extra advantage to whoever starts
b) Make one port on each ocean start neutral (2 neutral armies), and leave the bonus as it is. (although this still means there's a 33% chance of dropping one of the bonuses.
c) Make one port on each ocean start neutral, but change the bonus to +2 for holding all the ports on the same sea
My favourite is probably option C, with the two central ports starting neutral.
MrBenn wrote:After a bit of thought, I've decided to drop the ports to neutral 1s, and see how things go. Hopefully this will bring the ports into play a little bit more easily; I'll consider amending the bonus to holding two ports for a +1 bonus, but for now I'll see how things go with lower neutrals.
http://www.fileden.com/files/2009/1/9/2259283/Mexico4.xml
Sethiroth wrote:Im not sure if I like the + 2 bonus for the spot that only has 2spots to get into it I think it should just be +1 bonus just an idea
thenobodies80 wrote:
Quenching
---The Beta period has concluded for the Mexico Map. All objections have had their time. The Foundry and I hereby brand this map with the Foundry Brand. Let it be known that this map is now ready to be released into live play.
Congratulations MrBenn and fumandomuerte, your shiny new medal are well-earned
Conquer Club, enjoy!
--thenobodies80
drunkmunky wrote:Hi everyone, not sure if this is something that's come up before but unless I'm reading the map wrong, I think I've found a bug. (really more likely I'm reading it wrong cos it's my first time on the map). And as it's a map bug I wasn't sure if this post should go into this thread or separately into the bug forum under a new topic.
Game 8941584
In this game, I control DF in the centre Val de Anehuac or whatever it is. I ended my assault phase and should've been capable of forting to either Morelos or Edo Mex. as both are controlled by my team mates. I wasn't given the option to fort to Morelos and thus has to fort to Edo Mex. Granted, this is where I was going to fort anyway, but something I thought could possibly be an issue.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users