Help Please - Map Gameplay Tags

[Incandenza]

Well, one thing that jumps out at me is Middle East (and the revamp), which has neither ranged attack nor naming confusion. Should be a None.

[TaCktiX]

Well I was going to help, but it appears that everyone already got all the stuff. I would motion for another tag to be added: Open Gameplay.

Open Gameplay Through a lot of connections or a lack of impassables, movement on this map is very unrestricted, making some bonuses harder to achieve.

Maps that have Open Gameplay off the top of my head: The Citadel (4-way Battalion connections...and the Deck), Conquer 4 (8-ways), City Mogul (those subways)

EDIT: And The Citadel has Dead Space, in the form of The Parade Deck, The Trailers, Locker Rooms, and McAlister Field House. None of them contribute to bonuses.

EDIT 2: Oasis isn't done yet, so...
Oasis Decay, Dead Space, Strategic Resources, Victory Condition, Open Gameplay (if it's accepted)

[chipv]

Quick question as I never have played them -

AOR 2 has autodeploy or autodecay or both?
AOR 3 has autodeploy or autodecay or both?

[killmanic]

Quick question as I never have played them -

AOR 2 has autodeploy or autodecay or both?
AOR 3 has autodeploy or autodecay or both?

both and both

[TaCktiX]

AoR 2 has both autodeploy (on the castles) and autodecay (everything not important)
AoR 3 has both autodeploy (on the castles and the Sanctuary) and autodecay (on certain continents, including the blood water territories)

[chipv]

Yes, tag list is not set in stone. For example Staring Neutrals.

[the.killing.44]

Impassables as a tag?

.44

[TaCktiX]

Impassables as a tag?

.44

Impassables are a given in a lot of maps. The absence or severe reduction in them should be noted. Their presence should not.

[the.killing.44]

Impassables as a tag?

.44

Impassables are a given in a lot of maps. The absence or severe reduction in them should be noted. Their presence should not.

then maybe that's it — "no impassables"

.44

[gimil]

I don't think impassables should be considered as some kind of gameplay technique. Impassables come in forms from rivers to mountains to lakes. All they do is represent borders that do not connect on the map.

[chipv]

Well I was going to help, but it appears that everyone already got all the stuff. I would motion for another tag to be added: Open Gameplay.

Open Gameplay Through a lot of connections or a lack of impassables, movement on this map is very unrestricted, making some bonuses harder to achieve.

Maps that have Open Gameplay off the top of my head: The Citadel (4-way Battalion connections...and the Deck), Conquer 4 (8-ways), City Mogul (those subways)

EDIT: And The Citadel has Dead Space, in the form of The Parade Deck, The Trailers, Locker Rooms, and McAlister Field House. None of them contribute to bonuses.

EDIT 2: Oasis isn't done yet, so...
Oasis Decay, Dead Space, Strategic Resources, Victory Condition, Open Gameplay (if it's accepted)

Ok, now about tags. If any additional tags are agreed upon, I will need the full list of maps that each tag applies to.
So in this case the complete list of maps with Open Gameplay.

[TaCktiX]

One thing I'm noticing missing that I think should be present is examples of the gameplay techniques we're finding. Perhaps it can be an exhaustive list of territories affected, or maybe text examples. Here's what that'd look like for The Citadel:

Dead Space: The Parade Deck, The Trailers, McAlister Field House, and Locker Rooms
Killer Neutrals: The Parade Deck
Open Gameplay: Anything connecting to the Parade Deck and the battalion 4-way connections

[chipv]

One thing I'm noticing missing that I think should be present is examples of the gameplay techniques we're finding. Perhaps it can be an exhaustive list of territories affected, or maybe text examples. Here's what that'd look like for The Citadel:

Dead Space: The Parade Deck, The Trailers, McAlister Field House, and Locker Rooms
Killer Neutrals: The Parade Deck
Open Gameplay: Anything connecting to the Parade Deck and the battalion 4-way connections

That's good. I think one example each personally.

If anyone wants to see how things look now, I can upload a new web page with the new tag links.

Note this is not finished at all - just to show what things will look like.

[BaldAdonis]

Age of Merchants has Ranged Attacks and Strategic Resources.
American Civil War has Capitals and either Double Dipping or Strategic Resources, depending on how you veiw the bonuses for a collection of cities. Might even be covered under capitals, if you allow 4-capital bonuses.
Circus Maximus has one way attacks.
City Mogul has Starting Positions.
Conquer 4 does not have One Way Borders; it has None.
D-Day has Dead Space.
Egypt Upper has Ranged Attacks.
Egypt: Valley Of The Kings does not have Capitals.
Feudal War has a Victory Condition.
King of the Mountain does not have Double Dipping (as long as you are going to list Capitals, they cover all the double dipping on the map).
Philippines has Double Dipping or Capitals (but not both).

I notice Starting Neutrals isn't on your list, but it's listed for Age of Merchants. Could be useful to include.

Didn't Coleman have a list like this? Far fewer maps obviously, but it'd be interesting to see the discussion there about tags.

[gameplayer]

Pretty sure Greater China has dead space and neutral starts

[chipv]

Ok here is what it will look like (maybe easier going through here)

Map/Mapmaker Information

When you click on a map you will see its tags. Click on the tag to see tag description.

[TaCktiX]

Here's my tentative list for maps with Open Gameplay:

Africa
Alexander's Empire
Asia
Bamboo Jack
Battle For Iraq!
Battle Of Actium
Brazil
Chinese Checkers
The Citadel
City Mogul
Conquer 4
Dust Bowl
France
Germany
High Seas
Middle East
Middle East[REVAMP]
Poker Club
Supermax: Prison Riot!
Sydney Metro
Oasis
Europe 1914

Some are fairly obvious, but some of them I would justify by noting nigh-unholdable bonuses in the middle of the maps.

[BaldAdonis]

So in this case the complete list of maps with Open Gameplay.

I think this is too vague to quantify. You could look at the average number of adjacent territories, but then the example of The Citadel doesn't have much more than most other maps. It just has one, large central territory, with 15 connections. The rest bring the average down to 4.3. Compare Classic, which averages 3.8, and Waterloo or Supermax, each of which has at least 14 territories with around 20 connections each, and average 10 and 8.
Maps with Dead ends are useful to know, but it's more valuable with the number of such territories (ie. for setting up escalating games, 1 or 2 are alright, but a map with 8 leads to stalemates).

[chipv]

I'll take a look at all of this tomorrow when I'll run through the remaining additions and corrections.

I will also add a tag search on the web page so you can search for maps with specific tags.

[ZeakCytho]

Would it be possible to search by tag?

[TaCktiX]

So in this case the complete list of maps with Open Gameplay.

I think this is too vague to quantify. You could look at the average number of adjacent territories, but then the example of The Citadel doesn't have much more than most other maps. It just has one, large central territory, with 15 connections. The rest bring the average down to 4.3. Compare Classic, which averages 3.8, and Waterloo or Supermax, each of which has at least 14 territories with around 20 connections each, and average 10 and 8.
Maps with Dead ends are useful to know, but it's more valuable with the number of such territories (ie. for setting up escalating games, 1 or 2 are alright, but a map with 8 leads to stalemates).

By Open Gameplay, I'm mostly looking at the bonuses. The Citadel's bonuses are very hard to hold due to the connections. It's why holding a 5 territory continent gives you a +4 bonus. Looking at 1st Battalion, it's 4 territories defending against 4. 3rd Battalion is 4 territories defending against 7. That's rather Open Gameplay compared to Waterloo's smaller bonuses, though the latter's can be bombarded away.

[BaldAdonis]

And I think those continents are just over valued, and aren't hard to hold at all, especially when the centre is killed every round. If there were some legitimate way to classify maps as "Open Gameplay", then it would make sense to tag the maps. If it's just what you imagine about a map, and there's no consensus, then I don't see how it would be useful to anyone looking for a game.

[chipv]

Would it be possible to search by tag?

Yep, that's coming.

[cairnswk]

Magnificent effort.

Ok, we're bound to have arguments over Naming confusion but please post any corrections here and / or additions when they come.

I am writing the new code for this to go into the database now so we'll get a good look soon. (Easy to edit after).

naming confusion....->My word you will. Especially from me. i just found this thread.

May i suggest that i accept that some of my maps (and others have naming confusion as you call it) however, because the word confusion has negative connotations, perhaps you would consider using "naming challenges".

If i wanted to be a real bad guy and "confuse" players with my difficult maps, then you could accuse me of being confusing, however, i prefer to "challenge" players to use their gray matter and think about some situations before they "jump in" the deep end.

[chipv]

Magnificent effort.

Ok, we're bound to have arguments over Naming confusion but please post any corrections here and / or additions when they come.

I am writing the new code for this to go into the database now so we'll get a good look soon. (Easy to edit after).

naming confusion....->My word you will. Especially from me. i just found this thread.

May i suggest that i accept that some of my maps (and others have naming confusion as you call it) however, because the word confusion has negative connotations, perhaps you would consider using "naming challenges".

If i wanted to be a real bad guy and "confuse" players with my difficult maps, then you could accuse me of being confusing, however, i prefer to "challenge" players to use their gray matter and think about some situations before they "jump in" the deep end.

These tags were not my idea, you can dispute this with Coleman.
Also the tags applied to your maps were clearly not my decision if you read the whole thread.

The same thing happened with complexity tags when you were extremely and unnecessarily rude to me.

I think you have made a very good point, though and I will change the tag.