[Abandoned] - Maze Craze

[pepperonibread]

Oh? I thought killer neutrals were already a feature

They are... though currently it only works like this: Start with X # of neutrals, respawn to X # of neutrals.
This map will require: Start with X # of neutrals, respawn to Y # of neutrals.

[yeti_c]

Oh? I thought killer neutrals were already a feature

They are... though currently it only works like this: Start with X # of neutrals, respawn to X # of neutrals.
This map will require: Start with X # of neutrals, respawn to Y # of neutrals.

What he said.

C.

[laci_mae]

I'm not super convinced that dropping column I is a good idea. I think it's going to be very confusing. I rely pretty heavily on BOB when I play new maps, but we can't assume that everyone has the mouse-over territory identifier. Regardless, skipping from H to J is going to cause some mis-deployments.

LMR

[Unit_2]

No offence WM but this is just like a cross word 2.0, make it more fun... more graphics less blank color.

[TaCktiX]

He did have more graphics, but people complained it was too much graphics. Makes you wonder who's right and who's wrong.

[WidowMakers]

No offence WM but this is just like a cross word 2.0, make it more fun... more graphics less blank color.

No offense Unit_2 but, you obviously have not read the posts explaining the map. It may look like crossword 2.0 by the colors but there are 460 territories and killer respawning neutrals. Just becasue I am using teh same colors as crossword and I happen to be using square territories that can attack U,D,L and R, does not mean this is a crossword map. And....

He did have more graphics, but people complained it was too much graphics. Makes you wonder who's right and who's wrong.

what he said.

This is already a complex map due to the number of territories involved and the size. If you can come up with a reason to add more graphics that serves a purpose and is not so overpowering, I will look at it. But as it was already mentioned, I have been down that road and it did not work.

Still looking for input on

-Colors
-Bonuses
-Subgroup bonuses/breakups

WM

[laci_mae]

Still looking for input on

-Colors
-Bonuses
-Subgroup bonuses/breakups

WM

I think all three are fine. You did an especially good job splitting up similar colors so they can't be mistaken. I like the way the subgroup bonuses are set-up too.

Best,
LMR

[bbqpenguin]

Still looking for input on

-Colors
-Bonuses
-Subgroup bonuses/breakups

WM

I think all three are fine. You did an especially good job splitting up similar colors so they can't be mistaken. I like the way the subgroup bonuses are set-up too.

Best,
LMR

i pretty much agree man, i think this is just about done. if i had my 'druthers, i'd make the neutral respawns 8 or even 10, but 5 isn't bad. congrats this really looks good

[WidowMakers]

i pretty much agree man, i think this is just about done. if i had my 'druthers, i'd make the neutral respawns 8 or even 10, but 5 isn't bad. congrats this really looks good

I wish it were about done. I figure at least 3 more weeks of little updates and color tweaks plus we need to wait for the XML update so that is really the thing holding the map back right now.

I agree with you about the neutrals. I like starting at 2 but respawning to 8.

WM

[Ditocoaf]

I think starting at 2 and respawning to 5 is actually perfect. Those are key numbers, as 2 is just one under the starting player strength of 3, and 5 is just one under the starting strength of 3 plus the baseline bonus of 3. A strong player will still be able to cut through 5, but any territory that has recently been attacked or forted away from will need a turn or two to build up to a conquering level again.

If you do decide to raise the level that the walls respawn to, I really recommend not going any higher than 7.

[bbqpenguin]

i pretty much agree man, i think this is just about done. if i had my 'druthers, i'd make the neutral respawns 8 or even 10, but 5 isn't bad. congrats this really looks good

I wish it were about done. I figure at least 3 more weeks of little updates and color tweaks plus we need to wait for the XML update so that is really the thing holding the map back right now.

I agree with you about the neutrals. I like starting at 2 but respawning to 8.

WM

oh ok i wasn't sure where you stood on the neutrals because the most recent map on the OP says 5, but it's a few days old so the mistake is understandable. and i disagree with dito on this one, 5 is really just too weak of a number to make a respectable wall, 8 is the minimum i'd say that that provides a reasonably tough barrier for any player (not counting escalating games).it's small enough where it's possible to break through, but large enough that it will really make the players think twice about wasting all those armies breaking through

[Ditocoaf]

oh ok i wasn't sure where you stood on the neutrals because the most recent map on the OP says 5, but it's a few days old so the mistake is understandable. and i disagree with dito on this one, 5 is really just too weak of a number to make a respectable wall, 8 is the minimum i'd say that that provides a reasonably tough barrier for any player (not counting escalating games).it's small enough where it's possible to break through, but large enough that it will really make the players think twice about wasting all those armies breaking through

FYI, you're actually disagreeing with me. I just made an argument to the opposite...

maybe I should take another look at my phrasing, perhaps I wasn't clear...

[cicero]

I think I am liking 2 and 8 neutrals for the border territories. It will allow for a game to be very chaotic in the beginning but eventually form into the maze at the end.

Still looking for input on

-Colors
-Bonuses
-Subgroup bonuses/breakups

Re the respawn levels ...
If I've understood correctly you're waiting for an XML update to allow the "X then Y" option. Since, as yeti explained I think, at present XML only allows for "X then X".
Do you happen to know that this XML update is going to be done soon ? And either way are you definitely going to wait for it so that you can incorporate this option ?

Re the actual numbers I think 2 then 4 might well be fine, contrary to many posters I think ...
Does the map only really work well when the walls are inpenetrable? If so then that would require 2 then 5 or more I guess ...

Re the things you actually request feedback on ...
Colors - Speaking as a colourblind person I do like colors and where there is any ambiguity the bonus legend top right really helps.
Bonuses and subgroup bonuses - subgroups are definitely right as they are ... main color Bonuses I'm not so sure ... For example why is yellow (bottom right-ish) 22 when blue (top right corner) is only + 11 ? I appreciate that yellow is bigger etc and should be higher, but that much higher ?
It seems to me that getting the main bonuses right is very much interdependent with the spawn/respawn levels ...

[laci_mae]

It seems to me that getting the main bonuses right is very much interdependent with the spawn/respawn levels ...

Excellent point cicero.

I agree that these discussions and final decisions are interdependent.

LMR

[WidowMakers]

Re the actual numbers I think 2 then 4 might well be fine, contrary to many posters I think ...
Does the map only really work well when the walls are inpenetrable? If so then that would require 2 then 5 or more I guess ...

I think we might end up needing a vote for this. We shall see how it goes.

Re the things you actually request feedback on ...
Colors - Speaking as a colourblind person I do like colors and where there is any ambiguity the bonus legend top right really helps.

Thanks I had hoped to get this issue over with quic. If there are any other people with issues or comments on the colors I would be glad to hear them. Thanks

Bonuses and subgroup bonuses - subgroups are definitely right as they are ... main color Bonuses I'm not so sure ... For example why is yellow (bottom right-ish) 22 when blue (top right corner) is only + 11 ? I appreciate that yellow is bigger etc and should be higher, but that much higher ?

I agree the sub bonuses are good. I might want to tweak the subgroup groupings in each color a bit. I tried to get each color to have sub groups of differing numbers. I did not want a color to have all 5 or all 4 and 7 subgroups.

And as for the overall color bonuses, I originally did those before the START/FINISH territories. That is why the numbers are off. Those really need to re redo based on the
1) number and type of subgroups each color has
2) Number of borders with other colored groups
3) Location on the map. Outer groups have less neutral borders to deal with
4) The respawn level. the lower the respawn level the harder to hold so the higher the bonus. Or the higher the respawn level the lower the bonus. Here is where I think we need the most discussion.

It seems to me that getting the main bonuses right is very much interdependent with the spawn/respawn levels ...

I agree.

WM

[laci_mae]

What I read into the gameplay was that higher respawn levels could only be overtaken with larger bonuses being received.

LMR

[WidowMakers]

Well I tweaked the borders and the groups a little. Here is the next version. Forgive the graphics. I really just want to discuss the organization, then I will cleanup the map.

I redid the layout to try to get each color group to have a diverse mix of subgroups (4,5,6,7). Below is the new map and breakdown of the new subgroups.

Click image to enlarge.

Here is a breakdown of the territories.

Code: Select all

              Subgroups               
group      4   5   6   7   Total Borders
Blue       1   1   1   0   15     3
Brown      1   1   1   1   22     6
Green      2   1   1   0   19     3
Purple     1   1   1   0   15     2
Orange     1   1   1   1   22     6
Red        2   1   1   1   26     6
Cream      0   2   1   1   23     6
Magenta    1   1   1   1   22     5
Cyan       1   1   1   1   22     6
Black      3   1   1   1   30     5
D. Green   1   1   0   1   16     2
Yellow     1   1   2   1   28     3
Start/Finish               2   

            Starting Territories   262   
            Neutrals   192   

            Total   454

What does everyone think?
I was also thinking about changing the standard territory bonus from 1 army every 3 territories to 1 every 5 or 6. What do you think?

WM

[oaktown]

i don't care much for having the borders neutrals start at two - players are going to hit them for easy takes in card games. I'd say if they're going to represent solid boundaries, have them start as such - I see no problem with making them fives to begin with.

the white/black dotted borders can be mistaken for impassables... maybe this needs a better explanation, like putting an example of a horizontal dotted line next to the words "dotted line" in the legend.

[yeti_c]

I was also thinking about changing the standard territory bonus from 1 army every 3 territories to 1 every 5 or 6. What do you think?

WM

I'd go with at least 6... you have so many territories on this map that you're gonna need to up it a fair way.

C.

[WidowMakers]

i don't care much for having the borders neutrals start at two - players are going to hit them for easy takes in card games. I'd say if they're going to represent solid boundaries, have them start as such - I see no problem with making them fives to begin with.

Well the idea is that they are not solid at the beginning. I wanted the map to start oout as a free for all ans slowly (as more borders are attacked, turn into a maze. I say 3-4 to start and 8 respawn.

the white/black dotted borders can be mistaken for impassables... maybe this needs a better explanation, like putting an example of a horizontal dotted line next to the words "dotted line" in the legend.

It is in the legend but for some reason it is missing. See the space to the right of the words "dotted line" in blue? That is where the dotted line should be.

I was also thinking about changing the standard territory bonus from 1 army every 3 territories to 1 every 5 or 6. What do you think?
WM

I'd go with at least 6... you have so many territories on this map that you're gonna need to up it a fair way.
C.

I agree . Now I just need to find room in the legend and figure out how to explain it.

Need input

1) bonus values- I would like peoples opinions of bonus values based on the number of territories,borders and location of each group
2) Subgroup values - is +1 for a 4 subgroup really good or should it be more? Example Subgroup: 4=+2 / 5=+3 /6=+5 /7=+8
3) Start and finish bonus
4) discussion on oaktowns idea of starting the neutrals out stronger than originally discussed.

Thanks
WM

[yeti_c]

Personally I like the 2 idea - as yes that allows easy cards - but then you get punished for the easy card by losing that territory and providing a bigger border...

C.

[WidowMakers]

Discussion Please.

Click image to enlarge.

Here is a breakdown of the territories.

Code: Select all

              Subgroups               
group      4   5   6   7   Total Borders
Blue       1   1   1   0   15     3
Brown      1   1   1   1   22     6
Green      2   1   1   0   19     3
Purple     1   1   1   0   15     2
Orange     1   1   1   1   22     6
Red        2   1   1   1   26     6
Cream      0   2   1   1   23     6
Magenta    1   1   1   1   22     5
Cyan       1   1   1   1   22     6
Black      3   1   1   1   30     5
D. Green   1   1   0   1   16     2
Yellow     1   1   2   1   28     3
Start/Finish               2   

            Starting Territories   262   
            Neutrals   192   

            Total   454

Need input

1) bonus values- I would like peoples opinions of bonus values based on the number of territories,borders and location of each group
2) Subgroup values - is +1 for a 4 subgroup really good or should it be more? Example Subgroup: 4=+2 / 5=+3 /6=+5 /7=+8
3) Start and finish bonus
4) discussion on oaktowns idea of starting the neutrals out stronger than originally discussed.

Thanks
WM

[WidowMakers]

OK here is version 10

Changes:

Changed the subgroup bonuses (advise??)
Changed the total bonus per color
Slight modification from V9 in lower right corner (yellow/black)

WM

[whitestazn88]

do you have to hold 4 territs for start and finish or not?

if the answer is not... +5 is kind of high considering someone could easily drop on both of those in a game and have a huge advantage from the start. even if you do have to hold 4 territs, i think its a bit excessive.

on another note, i the the walls starting out as the standard 3 neutrals would be better, and then have it ramp up to like 7-8 because then its really not that easy to take them for a card.

[InkL0sed]

do you have to hold 4 territs for start and finish or not?

if the answer is not... +5 is kind of high considering someone could easily drop on both of those in a game and have a huge advantage from the start. even if you do have to hold 4 territs, i think its a bit excessive.

on another note, i the the walls starting out as the standard 3 neutrals would be better, and then have it ramp up to like 7-8 because then its really not that easy to take them for a card.

Dude. There's one(1) army circle. How many territories do you think it is?

I think there will be neutrals on it to begin with, right?