Moderator: Cartographers
Code: Select all
<positions
<position><territory>Suchet</territory>
<territory>Pratzen</territory></position>
<position><territory>Kellerman</territory>
<territory>Skolnitz</territory></position>
<position><territory>Caffarelli</territory>
<territory>Telnitz</territory></position>
</positions>Starting positions are divided by 2 in 2 player games, so using starting positions does change the drop for 2-player games.With 3 starting positions, each player gets 1 position and the 3rd position is distributed regularly with the other territories. With 34 territories on the map, this would mean that each would start with 12 territories in a 2-player game, so it won't work for 2-player games.pamoa wrote:in a 2 player game you have one red one green one neutral
as in such games territories are always splitted in 3

Tisha you have only to code 3 regions to start neutral, maybe Goose Bay, Saint John and Avalon Peninsula.Tisha wrote:Sorry I'm clueless about gameplay. I am reading all this, just clueless as of how to fix it..
Yes much better.Tisha wrote:http://h1.ripway.com/Tisha1276/Golfe.xmlthenobodies80 wrote:Blue numbers are a bit hard to see on Cape Breton, I suggest to move the coords few pixels down, where you have a lighter color.
better?
Oh, I thought the guideline was to get the probability of a bonus on the drop down to 1%, but if 2% is okay, then yes, 3 neutrals is probably best.thenobodies80 wrote:Tisha you have only to code 3 regions to start neutral, maybe Goose Bay, Saint John and Avalon Peninsula.Tisha wrote:Sorry I'm clueless about gameplay. I am reading all this, just clueless as of how to fix it..
In this way you'll have 31 regions at the start, that is a good number, and a just a 2% that any player start with a 4 regions bonus.
Starting positions are not necessary in this case.
I don't want to derail the topic away from Tisha's amazing map but I am going to have a go at checking around from time to time again.DiM wrote:coleman giving feedback on a map. after such a long time. is this a one time only occasion or are you back in the foundry?
it is nice to see you aroundColeman, (:Coleman wrote:
@Tisha, It looks like you have a solid XML person but it seems you may be aprehensive about the neutrals suggestion (or I am completely misreading the convo which is 1000% possible). If you need any help let me know.
My game on this map was not so bad. It seems that the +2 bonus regions are so well connected to the surrounding areas that keeping them can be very difficult. Unfortunately this somewhat makes the whole map built around constantly breaking the small bonus regions which isn't the gameplay I expected/wanted. But even placing a neutral in each place wouldn't solve this 'problem' it would just delay it by a turn or so.Tisha wrote:I really dislike neutrals on a map, but understand that the games on the map can be decided before you even get a first turn..
I agree. In addition I've looked again at the numbers, I don't think that 8,27% (3p -any player)or 5,51% (2p - any player) are so big values.Coleman wrote:It seems that the +2 bonus regions are so well connected to the surrounding areas that keeping them can be very difficult.

drunkmonkey wrote:I'm filing a C&A report right now. Its nice because they have a drop-down for "jefjef".

Tisha, what do you think about this?jefjef wrote:Very nice map!
New Brunswick - considering it's location + number of border terts + the terts that have to be defended just to hold it probably should be a +3.
I think I'd prefer it at three also.thenobodies80 wrote:Tisha, what do you think about this?jefjef wrote:Very nice map!
New Brunswick - considering it's location + number of border terts + the terts that have to be defended just to hold it probably should be a +3.
I was going to quench this one, but I'd like to understand what's your opinion about the above before doing it.