Conqueropoly [Back!]

[Night Strike]

I REALLY hope you don't make this a conquest map with just starting pieces. That would completely ruin a great idea in my mind.

[Super Nova]

I REALLY hope you don't make this a conquest map with just starting pieces. That would completely ruin a great idea in my mind.

Care to illuminate?

[Night Strike]

I REALLY hope you don't make this a conquest map with just starting pieces. That would completely ruin a great idea in my mind.

Care to illuminate?

Conquest maps are extremely lame and rely only on building up your troops and then picking a time where you think you'll be lucky enough to make it through all the neutrals to your opponents stacks. This monopoly-like map should be a standard map played on a monopoly-like theme instead of doing conquest race around the map. All this start with a piece and everyone follow the same path around the board is lame and will just result in stalemates. Put together a standard map where the properties, cards, pieces, and some money are territories that everyone fights for instead of following a set path around the board. Anything conquest-style will just ruin a great map theme.

[natty dread]

Conquest maps are extremely lame and rely only on building up your troops and then picking a time where you think you'll be lucky enough to make it through all the neutrals to your opponents stacks.

You're painting with a broad brush there. Yes, this might be the case on maps like Feudal or Pelo war where the gameplay features encourage this type of play... especially in feudal where it's easy to stay in one place and bombard for cards. But there are conquest maps with more dynamic gameplay, where staying still is not a good option.

[Joodoo]

I couldn't find an answer to this question after looking at this map for a while. Are ALL of the houses gonna be "starting positions"? (ex. round 1 begins with 8+ starting positions), or is only one house from each colour group part of the starting position (ex.8 starting positions as there are 8 colour groups).
Also a question about the Luck Deck and Online Community bonus, do you only have to hold 3 territories (eg.the ones in the pile) or 7 territories (the ones in the pile plus the symbols on the board) for the bonus?
Great map and gives a good feel of the actual Monopoly board game.

[MarshalNey]

There hasn't been an update in quite some time. I would like to see some more explicit information on the first post as well, to answer basic questions for posters about the gameplay, as per the PM I sent.

-- Marshal Ney

P.S. If you don't have the time right now Saxlad to work on the map, then I can put this on Vacation until you do. Just let me know as soon as you can, thanks

[MarshalNey]

Sadly, it appears that this map's development has stalled. If at any time the mapmaker wants to revive this project, please post an update, and then pending Foundry review Conqueropoly will be re-activated.

-- Marshal Ney

[TheSaxlad]

Update Made, Waiting for Moderators.

[MarshalNey]

OK, good to see the first post with some more info. One thing:
-- Could you put up the neutral values that you were considering for the various places on the board? At the moment all I can see are that the Houses that are not starting positions have 5 neutrals. Either put the information as text, or put white numbers on the map itself.

As for the map itself, there are some good elements here and obviously your theme is based off of a Monopoly board, so that's well defined. The Mr.Moody and Horseshoe regions open up the board a bit, as do the Trains and the Multi/Bust Multi 1-way attack, but I'm still a bit concerned about easy bottlenecks and stalemates. I'm also not a huge fan of dead-end regions such as the decks.

As for your question about 12-square attacks, well yes technically it's possible to make a region that can attack at any range, but long ranges are something I usually frown upon unless there's a good reason... in this case, if it were restricted to a single region and only went in one direction, then it might not be so terrible. If the range includes the houses, decks, and everything else however, I don't think it's a good idea.

Overall, what I'm really looking for in this map is a driving force behind the gameplay. At the moment what I see are a collection of varied bonuses that are (sort of) trying to model actual Monopoly gameplay- this is a mistake, as the CC Riskesque game engine won't let you make anything remotely like Monopoly. Look at the Pacheesi map (sadly in the bin right now) as an example... the gameplay isn't anything like the actual board game, but there is a well-defined framework there where the elements support each other. Another good example is the Struggle for Oil and the Second Indochina War, both of which started with many elements trying to closely model real life, and underwent vast improvements by questioning their basic design goals and overhauling their gameplay framework. The latter actually, had a huge revamp.

I'm not saying that a passing similarity to Monopoly gameplay won't be nice, but Monopoly is going to define your theme and general gameplay more than it will detail all of your gameplay elements. Right now, some of your elements are working in parallel rather than in concert in your attempt to mimic many of the various rules of Monopoly. I think that's why the conversation surrounding this map seems to have so many directions, because there's no clear focus.

I might suggest looking at ways to focus more on one or two elements from a Monopoly game and making those the cerntal idea that all of the gameplay elements try to support. For instance, you could focus on doing more with bonuses related to a color group or set (in the case of trains, cards or "utilities") or the method of movement (i.e., the card decks in the traditional game had one give money and the other often allowed quick movement- the "Advance to..." or "Take a ride on the Reading" cards). You could introduce a losing condition and have that be a focus for winning the map, since Backruptcy for all opponents was the goal in the Monopoly game. You could introduce "CC score" (instead of "money") as a starting position element that allows players to "own" (buy) certain pre-set areas on the map, etc.

Anyway, I'm not trying to send you back to the drawing board, but I think you need to take a look at your broad goals for the map's gameplay, and then be open to wherever that leads. Actually, I suspect that most of the map can remain intact for whatever gameplay you care to use; what may change are the legend, the attack routes, the neutral values, etc.

-- Marshal Ney

[TheSaxlad]

Would Like some other feedback on this guys.

I have been having a think and I think that the 1500 troop start, attack the star and then you can attack any colour would work nicely considering there are 8 colours. Like the Baseball King of Diamonds. I believe that could work a treat.

So anyone have any ideas on how gameplay could work? Star can attack all colours and then can attack 12 squares ahead. Or should just be able to attack anywhere? Once I have some other feedback and a feel for where this is going ill post a new draft.

[TheSaxlad]

Come on guys I know this was binned, but please just a little direction?

[natty dread]

Ok, let's start by posting your map in the end of the thread, so people won't have to jump on page 1 to see it... it's good practice to always post map updates to both the first and last post of your thread.

Click image to enlarge.

[natty dread]

There are cars in the legend, but none on the map...?

[Riskismy]

Well, I think you got some great feedback recently. Here. I think you'll probably get more feedback if you address these things either on the map or here on the forum.

Did I read that right, 1500 troops to start?

[TheSaxlad]

There are cars in the legend, but none on the map...?

Its on the to do list, currently recording but will be done in the VERY near future.

Well, I think you got some great feedback recently. Here. I think you'll probably get more feedback if you address these things either on the map or here on the forum.

Did I read that right, 1500 troops to start?

Yeah you did, it was an interesting idea put forward. Would it work do you think?

[Victor Sullivan]

No need to fear, Sully's here!

Using the 1500 starting troops (I quite liked that):

1. Bonuses
   
   1. Monopoly bonuses (all are doubled if all of one color is held)
      
      • Brown - 10, 20
      • Light Blue - 30, 30, 40
      • Pink - 50, 50, 60
      • Orange - 70, 70, 80
      • Red - 90, 90, 100
      • Yellow - 110, 110, 120
      • Green - 130, 130, 150
      • Dark Blue - 175, 200
   2. Railroads
      
      • 25 for 1, 50 for 2, 100 for 3, 200 for 4
      • You need ownership territories for the railroads.
   3. Corner Spaces
      
      • Star Space - 200
      • Free Troop - 500
      • Multis, Bust Multis - Explained later
   4. Decks
      
      • Explained later
2. Neutrals
   
   1. Property Houses
      
      • Brown - 60, 60
      • Light Blue - 100, 100, 120
      • Pink - 140, 140, 160
      • Orange - 180, 180, 200
      • Red - 220, 220, 240
      • Yellow - 260, 260, 280
      • Green - 300, 300, 320
      • Dark Blue - 350, 400
      • Railroads - 200
   2. Property Spaces
      
      • 1 each
      • 2 for railroads
   3. Deck/Dead Beat Spaces
      
      • 3 each
   4. Corner Spaces
      
      • 5 for Free Troop
      • 4 for Bust Multis
      • 4 for Star Space
      • Multis explained later.
3. Nomenclature
   
   1. Properties
      
      • If you have mods for properties, it kinda looks like slavery I suggest using the forums:
        
        • Brown - Forum Games, Off-Topics
        • Light Blue - Mafia Archives, Mafia Discussions, Mafia Games
        • Pink - Usergroups, Callouts, General Discussion
        • Orange - Clan Forums, Clan Challenges, Tournaments
        • Red - Q&A, Official Strategy Guides, SoC Training Grounds
        • Yellow - Suggestions, Tools & Enhancements, Bug Reports
        • Green - Map Foundry, Cheating & Abuse Reports, CC Newsletter
        • Dark Blue - Announcements, TeamCC Forums
        • Railroads - Should be changed to a different symbol, maybe a cursor would work nicely for these: Wall Post, PM, Live Chat, eTicket
        • These are just suggestions, you can move stuff around as you like. I tried to group things appropriately, but I kind of ran out of groupings at Green You could consider changing around the colors to match the forums or something.
   2. Decks
      
      • "Luck Deck" needs to change. Consider "Intensity Cubes Deck" if you wanted to go the "luck" route.
   3. Dead Beat Spaces
      
      • Gourmet Peanut Butter Tax, Banana Tax
   4. Corner Spaces
      
      • Star Space (or whatever) I think could cleverly be named, STARt.
      • Free Troop --> Withdrawal or Anonymous Deposit or "The Black Jesus Charity" (as we're more using the troops as money, much like City Mogul)
      • Bust Multis --> or simply, BUSTED!
      • Multis --> Guests or Banned Users
4. Other
   
   1. Petty things
      
      • You mixed up your blues in the legend.
   2. One-Way
      
      • One-way attacks clockwise.
   3. Tax Spaces
      
      • Put the first Tax space in its rightful place: 4 spaces past the STARt space.
      • -75 for holding one tax space.
      • Possibly a bonus for holding both to balance things? It really depends on how movement is going to work.
   4. Deck Spaces
      
      • Make these function more like passages/gateways to other parts of the map.
      • Each Deck Space can attack its corresponding Deck (which is composed of just one territory) and the Decks can attack any corresponding Deck Space.
      • Decks are killer neutrals of approx. 10-15.
   5. Guests/Banned Users
      
      • Divided into two territories: Guests/Banned Users and "Just Viewing Profile".
      • Guests/Banned Users one-way assaults Just Viewing Profile.
      • Only BUSTED! can assault Guests/Banned Users.
      • Just Viewing Profile has 2 neutrals, no bonus, and is assaulted by Mafia Games and assaults Usergroups, as per "Just Visiting" in Monopoly.
      • -50 for holding Guests/Banned Users
   6. Starting Pieces
      
      • Have at least 8 starting pieces that can assault up to 12 spaces ahead of STARt (but not STARt itself).
      • Adjacent attacking aside from starting position assaults (meaning, you can only assault up to 12 spaces ahead with the starting pieces, not regular territories).
      • Nothing can assault starting pieces except Guests/Banned Users.
      • Losing Conditions maybe?

Well, what a way to spend two and a half hours! Hopefully this helps. I know there's probably some holes in m gameplay suggestions, but I figure it's best to start with gameplay similar to the original game, see how it looks on a draft, then reanalyze.

Cheers,
Sully

[Riskismy]

Did I read that right, 1500 troops to start?

Yeah you did, it was an interesting idea put forward. Would it work do you think?

I was sceptic as first, but I think it just might work. At the very least it'll make battles more predictable, which is nice.

@Sully: Awesome feedback!

[TheSaxlad]

Wow. Ill see what I can do.

I may have to include you on the map for that marathon...

[TheSaxlad]

Reading Sully's feedback id just realised, would it be worth sticking killer neutrals on the starting spot. This looks like its going to become a conquest map, and it might get people to move their asses onto the board rather than stay on the starting spots and load up?

[DoomYoshi]

It's been done before of course:



I don't like 1500 troops. It will crash slower internet/computers on use of Auto-Attack.
Also, it will make battles more predictable, which isn't nice.
I would be worried about getting too excited about ultra-simulation also. I find it usually doesn't work.

I agree with Sully that one-way attacks are where it's at.

For Deck: I am not in favour of the transport idea. That can be handled by the railways. What they can do is that you can attack the deck from any of the 3 squares and then the decks have a list of territories they can bomb.

For bonuses: From a simulationist perspective it makes sense to have increasing bonuses as you go around the board. From a gamist perspective, it sucks. Don't believe me? Grab a monopoly board and try it for yourself. The bonuses should be assigned for size and difficulty; not high accuracy to a game which isn't actually all that exciting once you figure it out.

If people are set on the 1500 troop thing, it would be neat if you had a way to hide money. Like an under the table area where you can reinforce your money and deploy whenever you want to. I used to use that trick a lot in Monopoly I think perhaps everyone gets a starting token and the rest of the territories are assigned randomly (except taxes and other special ones).

I agree with Victor's idea for starting pieces. What you could do in addition is have each of the starting pieces have 4 paths they can go. One path leads to Start, one to Jail etc. And then be able to attack any territory on THAT side (instead of 12).

Good idea for a map. I spent a lot of time working on this as a kid, so I loved when I saw it come up:)

[Victor Sullivan]

Reading Sully's feedback id just realised, would it be worth sticking killer neutrals on the starting spot. This looks like its going to become a conquest map, and it might get people to move their asses onto the board rather than stay on the starting spots and load up?

Due to the nature of killer neutrals, when one starts their turn they would be immediately eliminated! With the starting positions' being able to attack 12 spaces ahead of STARt and the tall bonuses waiting to be taken, I think that will motivate people enough.

Wow. Ill see what I can do.

I may have to include you on the map for that marathon...

*Teehee* I'd be honoured, but you don't have to. It's all apart of being Foundry Executive Also, (believe it or not) I forgot something: Make it so there is no territory bonus, but instead a flat rate of about 10.

[Victor Sullivan]

Fastposted :

I don't like 1500 troops. It will crash slower internet/computers on use of Auto-Attack.
Also, it will make battles more predictable, which isn't nice.
I would be worried about getting too excited about ultra-simulation also. I find it usually doesn't work.
It won't crash slower internets/computers. There's a chance it might slow things down a bit, but it will by no means crash anything.
I don't understand how more fair results when attacking will make this map bad. With so many people complaining about the dice, wouldn't you think people would favor higher troop values for?
Simulating the gameplay as closely as possible, I agree, won't always work, but it's best to start there then evolve to get the best gameplay results, and that's certainly no reason to dismiss similar gameplay.

I agree with Sully that one-way attacks are where it's at.

For Deck: I am not in favour of the transport idea. That can be handled by the railways. What they can do is that you can attack the deck from any of the 3 squares and then the decks have a list of territories they can bomb.
Meh, the Deck Spaces open up the board more, and it frankly doesn't make a whole lot of sense that the decks would yield a bonus anyhow.

For bonuses: From a simulationist perspective it makes sense to have increasing bonuses as you go around the board. From a gamist perspective, it sucks. Don't believe me? Grab a monopoly board and try it for yourself. The bonuses should be assigned for size and difficulty; not high accuracy to a game which isn't actually all that exciting once you figure it out.
I think the neutral values solve your problem here.

If people are set on the 1500 troop thing, it would be neat if you had a way to hide money. Like an under the table area where you can reinforce your money and deploy whenever you want to. I used to use that trick a lot in Monopoly I think perhaps everyone gets a starting token and the rest of the territories are assigned randomly (except taxes and other special ones).
As for your first suggestion here, I don't believe that's possible with the current XML.
As for your second... Maybe, if it was limited to only the movement territories, but even so I'm not fond of the idea.

I agree with Victor's idea for starting pieces. What you could do in addition is have each of the starting pieces have 4 paths they can go. One path leads to Start, one to Jail etc. And then be able to attack any territory on THAT side (instead of 12).
I think that opens the board up too much, and since the corner territories have different functions and the territory values are different, it just unbalances things far too much.

Good idea for a map. I spent a lot of time working on this as a kid, so I loved when I saw it come up:)

[DoomYoshi]

Using the autoattack promotes timeouts. I don't have a statistical proof of this: just experience with it.

For some more information on the problem:http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=506&t=134779

I have never complained about the dice. Yes a lot of people complain but there are many strategy games which don't use dice and here they are anyway;). Since the map is shaping up to be a complicated one anyway, most of the players who use it will not be the casual dice complainers anyway.

[MarshalNey]

In case my suggestions were too abstract, let me state my thoughts more simply:
Please don't try too hard to simulate Monopoly gameplay in every detail. I think that this map will be in Gameplay Development Hell for years trying to tweak a hundred different little things, and all for a result that quite possibly would turn out worse than a simpler design.

As for what Sully's saying for a gameplay approach... it could work to start extensive and then cut back, but in my experience few people have the temperment to chop off 'neat ideas' to get down to the core elements that drive the gameplay. So, in all deference to the time that you spent Sully with that post, I strongly suggest to be thinking simpler right now, rather than having to chop off half of the map rules later.

That said, I do think there are many good ideas (including the many ones in Sully's post) that have been presented, but it's time to start focusing on which ones help the overall gameplay 'goal' of the map and which ones are just distractions.

I would feel much more comfortable if I knew exactly what core elements you wanted in your map Saxlad. From there, it would be much easier to answer basic questions, like whether this should be a conquest map, open deployment or some mixture thereof.

-- Marshal Ney

[TheSaxlad]

Hang on, why cant we have killer neutrals that take only 10-15 off each time, can it not be coded?