Conquer Club

Capital Competition thread --> viewtopic.php?f=467&t=128815

MIDDLE AGES

Graphics: thenobodies80
Gameplay: Evil DIMwit

Files:
http://www.fileden.com/files/2009/3/21/2373685/competition/final_files/M_A.xml
http://www.wcforums.org/foundry/Middle%20Ages/M_A.S.png
http://www.wcforums.org/foundry/Middle%20Ages/M_A.L.png

show: etc etc

I'm having trouble matching up your map to the gameplay scheme... And some of the bonuses don't quite sit well with me.

-Sully

Victor Sullivan wrote:I'm having trouble matching up your map to the gameplay scheme... And some of the bonuses don't quite sit well with me.

-Sully

d'oh!
You are correct, it doesn't match because i flipped it.
Should be ok now. Thanks

First, congrats! Very cool map.

In terms of suggestions: the first thing I notice is that the text in the legend is a bit blurry. Maybe its just my old monitor I'm using now because I don't remember thinking this a few weeks ago. Also (I made this comment in the other thread after the most recent update, so forgive me for being redundant) I do not think it is obvious that the Gates are part of the City regions.

Ok... I think your map needs more contrast. The army numbers seem to get lost in that image somehow. How about making the forests dark green? I think this would help with clarity.

I like this a lot and agree with Natty's suggestion of making the trees darker.

However, I don't feel there's enough incentive to leave your city and attack; the 'outside of city' bonuses (Towers, Shacks and such...) should be worth more bonus troops in my opinion.

Really great effort - I love the theme and everything about it.

You know, I hadn't really looked that critically at the gameplay since the competition was only about graphics. But now that I have, the discrepancy in city bonuses is astonishing. I think this might be a fatal flaw in the gameplay, and I think it needs to seriously be looked at.

Also, Noeh is worth +4 but has no borders with other cities, while Aery is worth +3 and has 3 borders with other cities.

I haven't really looking at everything, those are just a few things that jumped out. I know the point was to get a map into live play asap, but I think this needs to briefly go back to the gameplay workshop.

Noeh has a border with Loens via mines, also the village witch is close to the city so it could be considered another "half" connections with Tayt. But a Gameplay Guy could give you a more thoughtful answer In any case i'm open to change any bonus value but, PLEASE don't ask for a general overhaul!
I have a quick update ready, dark trees and some other minor improvements. The legend needs more work, i know...
About gates are part of the cities, i'll add a line into the legend if necessary. btw , city territories have white circles beneath the numbers.

You're right, I didn't notice the mine entrance. I wasn't suggesting a complete overhaul or anything, I just meant that there should be a conversation about the gameplay (regarding minor things like if the starting positions are equal, etc). If that can be done in the FF, then great.

BTW, the darker trees look great

I'm quite happy this map has made it through... it's really quite cool and it reminds me of Legend of Zelda for snes.

But I do have a few recommendations:
In the legend where it lists the bonus for the shacks and woodcutters, I think it might be clearer if it had the icons, like the shacks... though you may have to whip something up for the woodcutters. Same thing applies to the towers.

Other than that, I can't wait to play!

Dark trees make a big difference... huge improvement! Though, I wonder if the river could also be darkened a bit...

One thing that bothers me slightly, the grey walls are harder to see than the brown walls... The brown walls really stand out, making the bonus areas easy to recognize, but the grey ones kinda get lost in there... is there any way you could make the grey walls stand out more?

Also, small nitpick: in the legend, you have "Three Shacks" and "Three Woodcutters Village" - I think you could remove the word "three" and just have "Shacks" and "Woodcutters Village", kinda like you just have "Northern Plains" even though it also has 3 territories...

beautiful map. the look is a bit reminiscent of carcassonne after all of the tiles have been laid.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carcassonne_(board_game)

carl makes a good point about noeh, which is in a quiet corner and directly attacked only by aery, while having an easy expansion to woodcutters village. for noeh not to have a clear advantage in games of 5 to 8 players, the bonus must be reduced, preferably to +2, though +3 is also possible.

loent is perhaps slightly too powerful at +6, when none of the others are more than +4. i'd be tempted to bring down its bonus to +5.

some of the roads are unclear because of the angle of the junctions: are there connections between shacks c and tower f, tower g and gate p, gate s and tower k and butcher and baker? these have to be made clearer.

ian.

yes, carcassone was exactly from where i took my inspiration; i love it, it's a good startegic board game to play with friends.
I can change all the values as suggested.

About connections, i can clarify grocer and tavern, schack c and tower f. About the others you listed i'm not sure...to me it's clear that they border(since there's a road that makes a connection)....but what i can do is to draw something like what i did to link alchemist, church and tayt square....that triangular shape....it could help?

Methinks Towers G-J need to be +3: 3 borders, 4 territories. Seems justified.

-Sully

P.S. I <3 Carcassonne

Regarding the gameplay, I am worried that games will stalemate really fast. Everyone will get their city bonus, but then there is relatively little motivation to expand and lots of motivation to protect (the losing condition). Do other people see this as a problem? The small regions all have at least 3 territories in them and even if players expand to them, I don't see it helping the stalemate problem. I think a few other/unique ways of getting bonuses would go a long way.

One thought is to have sort of player specific bonuses. What I mean is "Hold the monestary and the church" for +3", for example, and "hold sawmill and carpentry for +3", "butcher and grocer", etc. This would motivate expansion in different ways for each player and would open up the map.

Also, the Niad city can take the Village bonus and not have to protect any additional territories, essentially making it a +5 region. I suggest having Village A connect to Noeh Square.

Yeah, I could see Loent -> 5; Noeh -> 3; Niad -> 2.

carlpgoodrich wrote:One thought is to have sort of player specific bonuses. What I mean is "Hold the monestary and the church" for +3", for example, and "hold sawmill and carpentry for +3", "butcher and grocer", etc. This would motivate expansion in different ways for each player and would open up the map.

Maybe, but note that this map isn't conquest, so players start spread out all over the map, capitals notwithstanding. So they wouldn't quite be player specific.

Evil DIMwit wrote:Maybe, but note that this map isn't conquest, so players start spread out all over the map, capitals notwithstanding. So they wouldn't quite be player specific.

I did not realize this. That completely changes the way I look at this map. I guess my one question now is how many troops to players start with on their capitals? I would be worried about first round eliminations, especially in multiplayer games. If this hasn't been decided, I would suggest having the capital start with a large number (in the 7-10 range).

Each palace starts with 9 troops; the player who starts with a palace also starts with its connecting square, which starts with 3 (this is to make it so players don't mobilize their whole stack on the first turn).

one further bonus to reduce is ykele. by any measure u choose, ykele is somewhat less connected than aery, which has a +3 bonus, so ykele ought to have a bonus of no more than +3.

Victor Sullivan wrote:Methinks Towers G-J need to be +3: 3 borders, 4 territories. Seems justified.

agreed.

thenobodies80 wrote:About connections, i can clarify grocer and tavern, schack c and tower f. About the others you listed i'm not sure...to me it's clear that they border(since there's a road that makes a connection)....but what i can do is to draw something like what i did to link alchemist, church and tayt square....that triangular shape....it could help?

yes, adding triangular junctions will eliminate all doubt.

my revised summary of the order of difficulty of holding bonuses, taking into account that this isn't a conquest map and that the minor bonuses do not start fully-neutral (i had known this from before, but was still fooled by the white 88s - sorry for any confusion caused): loent (+5 or +6), nyw and yana (both +4 or +5), tayt (+3 or +4), noeh (+3), aery (+3), niad and ykele (both +2 or +3), towers ghjk (+2 or +3), minor bonuses (+2). i can see the argument behind the original design for each city to give a minimum +3, so that there's a clear difference between the cities and the smallest bonuses.

carlpgoodrich wrote:Regarding the gameplay, I am worried that games will stalemate really fast. Everyone will get their city bonus, but then there is relatively little motivation to expand and lots of motivation to protect (the losing condition). Do other people see this as a problem?

we can possibly make it so that holding 3 or more cities will increase trading wealth and therefore double all of ur city bonuses, to give some incentive to take someone else's city in a 3-player or 4-player game. might that help?

ian.

If there are no other comments or concerns, I'd like to make the small version

I just find it a bit odd that the legend says "assaults are allowed only during the roads" which conflicts with the alchemist/miner assaults.

No other issues.

In this way?

I think you should use the same glow you used in the legend for the city bonuses for the city territory names. It'll make the bonuses a lot easier to distinguish.

-Sully

All names or do you mean only the gray labels for the cities?

thenobodies80 wrote:All names or do you mean only the gray labels for the cities?

Both.