lt_oddball wrote:My two cents on bonusses:
Instead of the usual bonusformula of lands/3 plus +1 for each open border for each bonuszone I think it is wise to downturn the bonusses of regions falling inbetween the soviet rear and those of the german heartland, and same for those inbetween the populace west allies and the german heart lands.
Firstly because those regions didnot yield immediately masses of new troops or heavy industry once it had been occupied (during active wartime), and secondly because after a while the player that grows from the east (his rear backed) and the player from the west (his rear backed) will not suffer from attacks from all wind directions on each bonuszone.
west germany : 6
east Germany : 2 (berlin gives +1 already)
Central Europe : 5
Balkan : 5
Polish : 4 (important zone)
East Prussia : 2
v Leeb : 2
v Bock : 3
v Rundstedt : 3
Italy : 3 (once controlled from east or west, it requires only few defense points)
I'd like Moscow to be downed to 5
and Stalingrad down to 4
Also, I think you can add the "hold any three stars" stars to important capitols in the east :
Budapest, Bukarest, Prague, Warschau, koenigsberg.
Shouldn't the N1 star be moved to N6 (Milan!) ? and the W6 star moved to W7 (Muenchen) ?
You know that in all the multiplayer Risk games it always ends in a gridlock of three final players.
Obviously here one will stem from the UK/France side, the other most definitely from the soviet side. The third will have originated from the central german or balkan side.
At that point, the flank players have no direct way of hitting the opposite opponent, so naturally the central player will be kicked most of the time, and is sure to wither.
So an extra bonus for the player having West and East Germany and Central europe is quite necessary.
say, an extra +4 for this ? (to include Prussia in this would be too much to ask)
Call it a "Reichs" or "Heimat" bonus
pamoa wrote:I'm not sure you should go that way.
If you are central player you know from begining you cannot wait and hope to resist in the center.
So it's imperative and historically acurate to attack first and the sooner the better.
So instead of this Heimat bonus which one would get only at the end of the game when it's too late.
You can either give an extra +1 to each central region or have 1 autodeploy army on each attacking territory (G1 C2 B1 E1 P5 B5).
It could be called hitlerian youth bonus.
I also think, like lt_oddball suggested, you should remove 1 western attack route.
Let's say W8>C2 which I could immagine is the less historically important/probable.
lt_oddball wrote:hmmm.. the idea is that such a bonus should work towards the endstages of the match when there are just three surviving players.
And give a 'balanced' bonus to the player facing two oponents who have the benefit of having their backs covered.
Having control of the 3 regions in early stages of the match (in a field of 8 players? difficult!) at least is comparable to the big warproduction of Germany in the early war years.
The difference is that once the soviet player has one of these territories HE gets the immediate benefit of it..whereas he is supposed to encounter "waste lands/scorched earth".
I really think the "reichs"/"Heimat" bonus for an intact central german governance fits better in the gaming/simulation experience.
Once it is breached neither the Germans or the Soviets or the Allies have benefit of it ...until they control that entire "heimat" region as well (post war idea
)
qwert wrote:You must understand that maps with to manny bonuses,dont good for play,because give advance to player who play first.
W8>C2? are you sure that itoddbal sugested that?
west germany : 6-ok
east Germany : 2 (berlin gives +1 already)-ok
Central Europe : 5-ok
Balkan : 5-ok
Polish : 4 (important zone)-ok
East Prussia : 2-ok
v Leeb : 2-in original Eastern front map have same value,are you sure.
v Bock : 3-in original Eastern front map bonus for these country is 4,now you want to be 3,and now its even harder to hold,i think that bonuse must be same or biger.
v Rundstedt : 3-in original Eastern front map bonus for these country is 5,now you want to be 3,and now its even harder to hold,i think that bonuse must be same or biger.
Italy : 3 (once controlled from east or west, it requires only few defense points)-ok
I'd like Moscow to be downed to 5 -these is very good balanced bonuse from Eastern front,nothing change and i dont see reason why will change that,they have most terittory then other countrys(10),and from played games,its very dificulty to take,and most people main plan is not to take these country,and go for easy to hold.
and Stalingrad down to 4-its a same like Moscow-its a huge country,and people tactic is not to conquer so big countrys,and i dont se reason for these down.
lt_oddball wrote:Well, and then there is space in the legend to place this suggested "heimat" or "Reichs" bonus
It's only a matter of text in the legend (Reichs bonus +4 for W+G+C), no need for special markings in the main map.
What Androidz thinks about is the fact that Germany was so quick to "invade" N-Italy when the allies liberated Rome. But he forgets that Germany did not
fight through the Austrian/Italo Alps to get there.
Fighting your way through the alps is nearly impossible. Swinging around it (N2 B1 C2 and vice versa ) is more realistically.
lt_oddball wrote:that's why the Italy bonus is less than you'd expect from (territ/3 + n*border territ).. is it right?
asl80 wrote:- East Prussia seems a bit rich getting plus 2 for 2 borders and 3 territories, especially when it could easily become an asset for the polish front?
- This could apply also to east germany? (which would effectively result as +2 anyway)
lt_oddball wrote:"The W8 to C2 attack should perhaps be dropped ..so that the western allies have only 2 invasion points and the central germans 3.(same as east/soviet player).You want to say,that two attack from Western front is enough?"
yes-no-i don't know
.. historically/realistically I would say it should stay..but gameboard technically (with leaving out this "reichs"bonus) I 'd say there should be one invasion from west to central area less (than that in the opposite direction).
asl80 wrote: I still think the East Germany bonus should go down to +1, which really eventuates as +2, as you get the Berlin bonus with it. Your thoughts on this one qwert and peoples?
lt_oddball wrote:Hey, you talk about the Reichscapital here..
caught between two fires in the west and east..both a reason to round-off upwards: +2 for the area and the +1 for Berlin proper.
lt_oddball wrote:Like mentioned before: in a multiplayer game after a while you ALWAYS wind up with 3 players in a gridlock.
Principally each player should have the same chance of winning the game. But on this map it will be obvious that two of 3 players have their backs covered (atlantic for the western player, and Soviet far east for the eastern player). The "german" player is caught between the two, and between the two there is almost no way of hitting eachother (via Balkan-Italy?>> in control of German player) BEFORE the german player is marginalised.
Thus, the German player WILL always be hammered between the 2 before either will spare some troops to advance all the way to the east or west.
So The German player needs some extra help:
One is the three invasion attacks out of germany versus the 2 invasion attacks inside Germany over the frontlines.
The other would be an extra higher bonus for one or more german bonus zones.
And for god's sake, it is supposed to be the heart of the demon reich..that deserves an extra fanatics bonus..
qwert wrote:I think that these is a good decent logical explanation,why East Germany must have bonus +2.
Do you agree with that ASL?
asl80 wrote:hehe - thanks for the explanation, but still not convinced;
* firstly, with maps designed for each player to take a side, unless it's conquest, it rarely works out so perfectly as east-west etc.
* my main concern is with it's aquirability at the start of the game, no doubt that this (even at +1, i.e. +2) is going to be the principle small territory to snap up at the start of the game, and as such, it is always good to have these ones at a relatively low value so as not to decide the game immediately.
* in response to the disadvantage of the central front, if it did turn into a 3p 3 front game; each of the east and west territories have to hold and defend 3 attackable positions, while the centre front has 4, but two of which (one on each side), is also an attacking position.
* i would support increasing the value of the Balkan front to +6, and possibly even to +7 (+6 as it pretty much has a similar defence attack ratio to france/moscow, and +7 as this is further compounded by the fact that it is attackable from all three fronts, and also because this would increase the value of the centre front by a tiny bit, to bring it closer to the other two)
* And finally, in response to your more historical point ... piggy in the middle for the ww2 germans hey? well that's what you get when you start a war on too many fronts ... the map will represent this well, if someone starts there and gets the quick easy bonuses of east germany/polish/prussia (that's 4 defendable territories for +7 - or at the moment +8), then they will be the ones well suited to start the early multifaceted offensive. hehehe
... but i'm not going to dig my heels in, if your not convinced also, we should proceed with it staying at +2, and revisit it when the map makes its way into the forge ... by then i'm sure the other foundry regulars will review the board and gameplay too.
qwert wrote:I think that you have for every front ,one country who is very worthy to take-Western Front-Britain,Eastern front-Von Leeb,so why central front not have East Germany,do you see a point.
You give example of holding E,Germany,Polish and Prussia,but its not easy to take 12 terittory in begining. I dont think that player who take east germany will have any advantages over other players.
The main problem is how to create map to be good for all kind of player numbers,when you play 1v1 then every time some player will have advantages(these is hepend in all big maps who dont have starting terittories),and we can not do nothing with that.These map will be most suitabile for 4 player and bigger number of player.
Something what mising here is some kind of experimental zone,where you can check map gameplay.
lt_oddball wrote:a way to get a feeling in which way a player in one corner is having an advantage or not over the other players is to look at how many territories he has to conquer to get a simple to defend chunk of continents...
This is just speculating, but if you take the example of a 3 player gridlock then
the western player has a good position with 22 lands (choke points S6, S3, V4, V6)* yielding 20 men or 29 lands (S6, S3, N2)* yielding 28 men
The Central player can "relax" after 26 lands (G3, B1, B4, P5) yielding 26 men and
the eastern player has a bigger task ahead: 45 lands (VR2, VB5,VL2) yielding 46 new men //or in comparison with a territory with 20-30 lands:(L7, VB2,VR2) with 27 lands yielding 25 new men.
Yah..I think this balances it quite well...and pretty soon the german player has to decide whether to take on the western player in W-Germany to keep him small, or to venture out in the vacuum of the "von" Areas before the eastern player controls all that space..
*I forgot: The V2 missiles..that requires troops to deploy as defense in Britain; 1 extra choke point..
Androidz wrote:Come to think about it +3 might be a bit large for britain. Like fogames i belive most people will forget about that place.
I dont want another Indochina map which has that +3 which was way to large. atleast make it a 2. or 1.
lt_oddball wrote:don't agree..normally, when you have a "continent" you build up forces in the continent, you clear out its territories and have to worry about ONLY a handful of chokepoints immediately afterwards.
Here you clean out britain..but you have no direct means of taking out the threat of the V2 missiles..in worst case you have to fight all the way thru France and Siegfried to take out that threat ..meanwhile always throwing in defenses on Britain, more troops and defenses on the acquired lands of the V2 missiles and the path to it...
So, the +3 can stay..it has proved its merits in the W-europe map..
Is that an decent explanation about bonus structure
