Moderator: Cartographers
spaceghst44 wrote:Dim, as an avid fan of magic, the main reason that i like magic more than might, is that in magic all the ports cannot attack each other. This causes for more of a stategy and not just waiting for people to kill each other. when 1/3 of the ports can attack each other instead of all, it take a little bit of the luck of the dice out of the game and lets players who lose a 21 v 3, which happens a lot on magic, rebound and keep fighting. Blocking the ports advantages skill and removes luck.
Torter_of_Worlds wrote:As I understand it, to get the +2 bonus for holding a power rune only requires one of the two runes in a particular realm, correct? Only double checking since this is a change from the current set up on magic.
Thanks!
jwithington wrote:spaceghst44 wrote:Dim, as an avid fan of magic, the main reason that i like magic more than might, is that in magic all the ports cannot attack each other. This causes for more of a stategy and not just waiting for people to kill each other. when 1/3 of the ports can attack each other instead of all, it take a little bit of the luck of the dice out of the game and lets players who lose a 21 v 3, which happens a lot on magic, rebound and keep fighting. Blocking the ports advantages skill and removes luck.
Seconding this! The "all ports attack each other" on Might means that it's all a big race, and you have to avoid the docks, whereas on Magic you can actually build towards some docks as a strategy.
spaceghst44 wrote:i understand the second annswer, it is a world of mayhem. but the first, if there is no logic to block the docks, then why do it in magic? as for the third, you are right there is a incentive to build inside your terr, but there is also an incentive for people in figye and xi to attack themselves first, the person in borun will be sandwhiched between an attacking ghyr and aoria and mua will just build, because people do fear the docks, while they are attacking one person from one dock, someone comes in behind them and attacks them, while someone comes in behind them, and someone coems in behind them.
DiM wrote:spaceghst44 wrote:i understand the second annswer, it is a world of mayhem. but the first, if there is no logic to block the docks, then why do it in magic? as for the third, you are right there is a incentive to build inside your terr, but there is also an incentive for people in figye and xi to attack themselves first, the person in borun will be sandwhiched between an attacking ghyr and aoria and mua will just build, because people do fear the docks, while they are attacking one person from one dock, someone comes in behind them and attacks them, while someone comes in behind them, and someone coems in behind them.
when i say there's no logic i mean there's no realistic reason. in magic there was the ice so i had a reason to make the icebridge, now i can't build a bridge out of nothing. it would have no logical explanation.
as for the attacking, it depends a lot on what type of game you play, or where you suppose certain people are, or simply whether you are the aggressive type or the lethargic builder that waits for a final blow while it allows others to kill themselves. just like on classic map. if you hold africa it's obvious your next move will be on south america but on the other hand perhaps laying low would be better or perhaps you need to go to australia for the target.
point is in a standard game you don't necessarily want to trash your armies on a suicide move from fygie to xi because any other player could come through the docks and take you out.
yes the ice bridge in magic offered a different approach but it also had it's disadvantages. for example in an assassin game if you are i aoria and your target is in mua and the guy in ghyr is a deadbeat then the guy in mua can expand easily and take ghyr and you are very far and can't do much.
Erland wrote:I like this map a lot; one reason is it's significantly different from both might and magic. I would resist trying to make it more like either of them. Regarding the ports: Might plays quickly in part because there's no autodeploy. This map is a nice compromise; I think the effect of autodeploy and easier-to-get resource bonuses offset the advantages of ports (which aren't as valuable either--no resource bonuses for cities), and the blood waters throw in a new wrinkle. The idea of boats is interesting...the idea that you can attack a boat from a dock and reach any dock from a boat is actually implied in the current concept; it's just that the boats are omitted!
This map has so much that is new, I recommend waiting until the 4th map to implement the boat or other new idea...
bryguy wrote:oooooh i just had a cool idea.... but it would require changing a big portion of the map..... the water part...
oh well onto my idea, i just had an idea that instead of water, you could have it that the water all evaporated and only sand is left
so basically changing the water to sand
DiM wrote:bryguy wrote:oooooh i just had a cool idea.... but it would require changing a big portion of the map..... the water part...
oh well onto my idea, i just had an idea that instead of water, you could have it that the water all evaporated and only sand is left
so basically changing the water to sand
changing water to sand, hmmm. wouldn't that mean a whole lot of new terits? wouldn't that mean no impassable borders? basically the map would become too open
spaceghst44 wrote:DiM wrote:bryguy wrote:oooooh i just had a cool idea.... but it would require changing a big portion of the map..... the water part...
oh well onto my idea, i just had an idea that instead of water, you could have it that the water all evaporated and only sand is left
so basically changing the water to sand
changing water to sand, hmmm. wouldn't that mean a whole lot of new terits? wouldn't that mean no impassable borders? basically the map would become too open
the sand could become impassable, like a valley of death, and instead of ports, you now have bridges.
Kaplowitz wrote:spaceghst44 wrote:DiM wrote:changing water to sand, hmmm. wouldn't that mean a whole lot of new terits? wouldn't that mean no impassable borders? basically the map would become too open
the sand could become impassable, like a valley of death, and instead of ports, you now have bridges.
or you could make it a bottomless pit of death...
Users browsing this forum: No registered users