Three Kingdoms of Korea [Quenched]

by **natty dread** on Wed Mar 16, 2011 10:13 am

Look above the "mountains & rivers" text.

Speaking of mountains, I wasn't totally satisfied with the composition of the southern mountains, so I made some tweaks here & there.

Click image to enlarge.

by **natty dread** on Wed Mar 16, 2011 11:47 am

Also... I think I'm going to redraw the castles, capitals & junks with the same technique I used for the mountains. To get them to look less pasted-on...

Anyway, what to do with the gameplay? I think we could just run it as is, and if Wa presents any kind of trouble in beta we can figure out something there.

by **Industrial Helix** on Wed Mar 16, 2011 1:17 pm

A right... I'll be getting it out to you next time i make a scan.

by **natty dread** on Wed Mar 16, 2011 1:29 pm

Industrial Helix wrote:A right... I'll be getting it out to you next time i make a scan.

Neat. It will be a nice detail.

by **natty dread** on Thu Mar 17, 2011 6:11 pm

Ok, something has come up...

It seems that it may not be possible to implement the striped territories in such a way that they only count towards the larger bonus if both capitals are held. Mainly this is problematic for Tang, Gaya and Baekje shared territories, since they are counted in pairs...

So we are looking into alternatives, or if anyone can figure out a way how to implement it as it is now... :-k

by **Industrial Helix** on Thu Mar 17, 2011 9:56 pm

I mentioned our XML dilemma to Gilligan and perhaps he'll come up with something. I'm working on thinking of an alternative...

Instead of the bonuses overriding each other... could we just let a player double dip and get the bonus for holding both capitals and a duel marked territory? Would that throw things out of whack too much?

Also, here' s my signature.

by **natty dread** on Fri Mar 18, 2011 2:34 am

Industrial Helix wrote:Instead of the bonuses overriding each other... could we just let a player double dip and get the bonus for holding both capitals and a duel marked territory? Would that throw things out of whack too much?

No, I think it would be fine. This map has strong bonuses either way, so...

Also, here' s my signature.

Nice! I'll put it on the map.

by **natty dread** on Fri Mar 18, 2011 8:31 am

Ok here's this... I took the liberty of removing the part about striped terts not counting for both... If we can (perhaps with xml update) figure out a way to do it then we can put it back in...

Also stuff done here and there. IH sig added, title renewed.

Click image to enlarge.

by **RjBeals** on Fri Mar 18, 2011 8:42 am

shouldn't this be in the graphics forum by now?

by **theBastard** on Fri Mar 18, 2011 10:09 am

what about to change "any wa territory with any capital -4" to "wa with any capital -4"?

and how it is about tamna? this is striped region valid for wa and baekje and to hold baekje bonus you must hold namgyeong - so in the fact you hold capital and wa region...

by **natty dread** on Fri Mar 18, 2011 10:12 am

theBastard wrote:and how it is about tamna? this is striped region valid for wa and baekje and to hold baekje bonus you must hold namgyeong - so in the fact you hold capital and wa region...

No it's not, it's between Baekje & Silla.

by **theBastard** on Fri Mar 18, 2011 10:14 am

natty_dread wrote:
theBastard wrote:and how it is about tamna? this is striped region valid for wa and baekje and to hold baekje bonus you must hold namgyeong - so in the fact you hold capital and wa region...

No it's not, it's between Baekje & Silla.

need I glasses? :geek:

ok, and what about my firts point? without notice about tamna...

by **natty dread** on Fri Mar 18, 2011 10:20 am

Do you have some kind of reasoning behind that suggestion?

by **theBastard** on Fri Mar 18, 2011 10:42 am

for what is Wa (Japan) here? I mean gameplay, not historic...

only holding capital gives bonus for any Kingdom´s regions. for what somebody wants to hold any region in Wa when he can not holds any capital - so any bonus without penalty... Wa regions are also not so important as sea connections, because there is no one way from one Korean coast to another which realy needs any Wa "ports". so what advantage will We gives? why any player will try to holds any Wa region?

but holding all Wa gives +2 so somebody could try to holds it.

by **natty dread** on Fri Mar 18, 2011 11:52 am

That's the whole point of Wa. You can't hold it with any other bonus without getting a penalty.

If a player gets kicked out of capitals, he can try to recover by fleeing to Wa, where no other players want to attack him because they would be getting the troop penalty. Then he can build in Wa and try to expand by taking castles.

We're fully aware that Wa probably won't even come in play in all games. It's meant to be a last resort thing, something you can try when you're desperate.

by **natty dread** on Fri Mar 18, 2011 12:01 pm

Anyway, you had a point about Tamna being hard to see if it belongs to Baekje/Wa or Baekje/Silla, so I tweaked the colours somewhat.

Click image to enlarge.

by **theBastard** on Fri Mar 18, 2011 12:44 pm

the colours are better now. it is much more clear.

I still think "my" version about Wa is better, but it is your map

by **natty dread** on Sat Mar 19, 2011 4:44 pm

theBastard wrote:I still think "my" version about Wa is better, but it is your map

Sorry, but "your" version doesn't really make sense... If the penalty would only be given with both Wa territories, then someone could take one of the Wa territories without penalty... Ok. But what would anyone do with just one Wa territory anyway? You can't move through Wa if you only take the one, you can't eliminate someone who holds both Wa territories... there's absolutely no benefit to be gained by being able to hold one Wa territory while holding a capital.

Besides, the current way already accomplishes what "your" version tries to: if you take one Wa territory while holding a capital, you get -4, but if you take both Wa territories while holding a capital, you only get -2, because you get the +2 Wa bonus. So there's that.

Also, Wa starts with neutral 1:s, so nobody will be screwed by starting with it, and it is very easy to take... but taking it comes with a price.

by **natty dread** on Sun Mar 20, 2011 11:42 am

There's one way we can have the striped territories only give the larger bonus:

If we consider striped territories independently from the core territories, it will be possible. For the bonuses that give a bonus per 1 territory, this would be the same. The only difference would be for bonuses that give a bonus per each 2 territories, like Baekje... for instance, if you would hold 7 Baekje core territories and 1 striped Baekje territory, you would only get the bonus from 6 Baekje territories. But if you would hold 7 Baekje territories and 2 striped Baekje territories, then you'd get the bonus for 8....

So would this be acceptable? We'd just have to add a line like "striped territories are considered independently from core territories" or something.

by **Nola_Lifer** on Tue Mar 22, 2011 4:22 pm

Are the capitals and castle going to be one region or is there going to be a capital inside the region? For example, you'd have to take Sabi to take Sabi castle.

by **natty dread** on Tue Mar 22, 2011 4:27 pm

Nola_Lifer wrote:Are the capitals and castle going to be one region or is there going to be a capital inside the region? For example, you'd have to take Sabi to take Sabi castle.

They're one region.

by **Nola_Lifer** on Tue Mar 22, 2011 4:30 pm

natty_dread wrote:
Nola_Lifer wrote:Are the capitals and castle going to be one region or is there going to be a capital inside the region? For example, you'd have to take Sabi to take Sabi castle.

They're one region.

Same with junks, also?

by **Nola_Lifer** on Tue Mar 22, 2011 4:32 pm

Each bonus area only gives a bonus if it's corresponding capital is held, with exception of Wa, which gives a bonus if you hold both territories.

This isn't explained on the physical map. Well its explained indirectly.

by **natty dread** on Tue Mar 22, 2011 4:40 pm

Nola_Lifer wrote:
natty_dread wrote:
Nola_Lifer wrote:Are the capitals and castle going to be one region or is there going to be a capital inside the region? For example, you'd have to take Sabi to take Sabi castle.

They're one region.

Same with junks, also?

Yes. None of the icons are extra territories. This is a simple layout, one territory label per one territory. I suppose it will be more obvious with the army numbers on.

Nola_Lifer wrote:This isn't explained on the physical map. Well its explained indirectly.

Well... that's why we added the capital icons next to the region names. We thought it best to mention the regions you need to hold to get the bonuses by name so they would be easier to find. We then added the capital icons to convey the idea that they all are capital regions... I think the player should be able to figure it out quite quickly.

by **TaCktiX** on Wed Mar 23, 2011 11:48 am

The color gradation on the junks makes it hard to directly connect Chonsong Fortress and Honshu right off the bat particularly due to the separation in space, and the red junks almost run into the same difficulty. For sake of clarity, excluding the junks from the lightening and darkening on the map itself might be necessary.