Conquer Club

Earlier today I saw an 1v1 map here in the foundry. The idea seems to be abandoned right now, but the subject (1v1 maps) are an interesting thing anyway.

I disagree with the site policy about making all maps playable with all settings. However, I understand that it is how things are going to work in the near (and not so near) future and I had an idea about making maps playable for 1v1 and also for more players.

It would be enough to add a new tag to the positions part of the XML. We can tell the engine which territories are starting territories. We can even say how many starting positions each player gets. Going one more step beyond would be to tell the engine which positions are suitable for 2 players and which positions aren't.

Imagine that we divide a map in two different areas. One for each player in an 1v1 setting. We define the two "ideal" starting position for this 1v1 game. And then, we add 6 more positions to fit 8 player games. Now, we mark the two "ideal" starting positions as "2 player start" and as result, when there are 2p games, the engine will always assign the two "ideal" positions and never the 6 "not so ideal" positions. For 3 or more player games, the engine would assign all positions.

Do you think it's a good idea? Should I try to figure the XML tag for it?

Why just for 2-player games? It'd be nice if you could specify the starting positions separately for each game type...

Isn't this why the new XML update allowed for mapmakers to set a number of starting positions based on number of players?

Neat idea! But you would have to make 8 non-ideal starting positions, because otherwise two players would get the ideal positions and therefore the advantage, no?

shocked439 wrote:Isn't this why the new XML update allowed for mapmakers to set a number of starting positions based on number of players?

Sort of. The XML update was so that you could set a maximum number of starting positions (g.e. There might be eight starting positions, but you set it so that one can only get a max of 2 of those, so when you play 1v1, you aren't each getting 4 starting positions).

Victor Sullivan wrote:Neat idea! But you would have to make 8 non-ideal starting positions, because otherwise two players would get the ideal positions and therefore the advantage, no?

I think you misunderstand the word "ideal" in this context...

I see it more like this: you have 8 positions, which are all equally balanced in an 8-player game.

But for 2-player games, you could set which positions one player gets and which positions the other player gets. This way you could set 2 distinct areas, and you could ensure a balanced game for both game types.

Taking this further: you could set for 2v2 games, that one team starts in one area, and the other team starts in the other area. The same with trips and quads...

I've rushed my reading hre but would the "Team Starting Positions" idea work to also cater for 1 v 1 positions too?

Hmmm

For those interested in this topic, there is a map in the drafting room that accomplishes multiple gameplay.

Give it a look...
viewtopic.php?f=583&t=158696

everything would be so much easier if multiple xmls per map were allowed. i asked for this years ago but my plea fell on deaf ears.

DiM wrote:everything would be so much easier if multiple xmls per map were allowed. i asked for this years ago but my plea fell on deaf ears.

I officially asked that (or something like that) few months ago directly to the turtle but it was an unlucky attempt. It requires some heavy changes to the current code, so it's not a feasible thing right now.

But I'm a stubborn guy....you'll see.

We trust in you!

thenobodies80 wrote:

DiM wrote:everything would be so much easier if multiple xmls per map were allowed. i asked for this years ago but my plea fell on deaf ears.

I officially asked that (or something like that) few months ago directly to the turtle but it was an unlucky attempt. It requires some heavy changes to the current code, so it's not a feasible thing right now.

But I'm a stubborn guy....you'll see.

It would only require changes to the code if the goal was to record all games using all the XML variants as belonging to one map. Frankly, I don't see the reason to do that. If the XML is different, then the gameplay is different, and the records should be kept separate. Put them on the map browser as D-Day (2 Player) and D-Day (3 or more). There's no reason why two maps could not be created using common images (or separate but identical copies) and different XML files. And apparently, the system can enforce an upper limit on the number of players (some maps are restricted to six or less, I believe). So restricting that further to just two players seems relatively straightforward. However, it would likely require code changes to enforce a new minimum number of players. I can only speculate as to how extensive such changes would be, but it is hard to imagine them being much of anything.