[Abandoned] Pirates and Merchants - V9 - Pg 1&13

[Gilligan]

how is this concept any different than das schloss? you have to hold the objective to win, that's the only way to do it. yes, there's a way to eliminate, but does anyone do it? no.

Game 6511902 - they do when they have problems holding the objective for an entire round. Which could be a thing with enough players in Escalating Sequential: after enough turns, someone's probably going to cash in a set between any two of your turns, getting significantly more armies than you got on your last set, and they probably only have to break 1 or 2 of your areas (especially if you have a mission that requires spots by name). Unless you ban sunny from this map, then sunny 8 player Escalating Sequential: as before and everyone knows exactly where to stop you.

I proposed blocking sunny from this map, but DiM thought it would only help farmers.

[Dukasaur]

i'm sorry i'm not posting more often but my time is extremely limited.

i haven't had the time to play this too much but so far i agree 1v1 can become an attrition battle especially if both players are pirates/merchants.

assassin and terminator games would just play as a standard game so not sure if they really need to be blocked.

not sure how zombies actually work, but the nukes could indeed provide a nasty surprise if your ship gets bombed. i'm not decided on whether this should be blocked or not. i guess the majority's opinion should decide it.

people were exploiting loopholes with manual (ie, manual AoR....but it's not actually manual since you only have one tert) to avoid having to play *real* manual. I don't see how would be any different, for people that don't actually want to play assassin or terminator games but can use this map as an easy get around for the medals.

I tend to agree.

[RobbieDub]

has anyone mentioned that the impassible rivers between places like weam & kinga are not listed on the map?
I suppose it isn't completely necessary but it seems most other cc maps make these things a bit more clear.

[zimmah]

has anyone mentioned that the impassible rivers between places like weam & kinga are not listed on the map?
I suppose it isn't completely necessary but it seems most other cc maps make these things a bit more clear.

It is assumed that this map is used mostly by advanced players and therefore they know rivers are in general impassable.

[zimmah]

i'm sorry i'm not posting more often but my time is extremely limited.

i haven't had the time to play this too much but so far i agree 1v1 can become an attrition battle especially if both players are pirates/merchants.

assassin and terminator games would just play as a standard game so not sure if they really need to be blocked.

not sure how zombies actually work, but the nukes could indeed provide a nasty surprise if your ship gets bombed. i'm not decided on whether this should be blocked or not. i guess the majority's opinion should decide it.

people were exploiting loopholes with manual (ie, manual AoR....but it's not actually manual since you only have one tert) to avoid having to play *real* manual. I don't see how would be any different, for people that don't actually want to play assassin or terminator games but can use this map as an easy get around for the medals.

I tend to agree.

Nukes/zombie should probably be blocked, as when you lose your ship you lose your only way to win*

*It would be theoretically possible to eliminate all the others if you manage to nuke their ship as well, but it would turn the game up-site down completely. So it would not be completely unplayable, just not advisable. However since some people like strange settings, maybe it should not be blocked after all. Maybe a warning message while joining/creating a game with nuke/zombie spoils on this map is in order. Such as "Warning! Playing this map with the currently selected settings will seriously affect the intended play-style of the map and is not advised for inexperienced players"

[Gilligan]

The way I see it, we have two options.

1) block nukes/zombies
2) make not owning a ship a losing condition, so if your ship does get nuked/zombied, you're out of the game (but that leaves your stacks as neutrals on the board)

I'd vote #1

[Dukasaur]

The way I see it, we have two options.

1) block nukes/zombies
2) make not owning a ship a losing condition, so if your ship does get nuked/zombied, you're out of the game (but that leaves your stacks as neutrals on the board)

I'd vote #1

I'd vote #2.

But one or the other has to be done. Otherwise you will end up in a situation where someone rules the map but cannot win for lack of a ship, while the other player owns a ship but can't win due to the other's overwhelming deploy.

[DiM]

i like #2, too.

[Swimmerdude99]

Quesiton, sorry if its been stated before. In a doubles, triples, quadruples game. Is it possible to not drop one of each type of ship? for instance one team have piraates and the other team have only merchants?

[DiM]

Quesiton, sorry if its been stated before. In a doubles, triples, quadruples game. Is it possible to not drop one of each type of ship? for instance one team have piraates and the other team have only merchants?

yes, i'd like this too but i don't think it can be done.

[DiM]

what do you guys think if the pirates can no longer attack all coastal regions?
instead they'll only be able to attack ports and coastal treasures. that should make regions easier to hold for merchants.

[Dukasaur]

what do you guys think if the pirates can no longer attack all coastal regions?
instead they'll only be able to attack ports and coastal treasures. that should make regions easier to hold for merchants.

It will help. Not sure if it will make a huge difference.

[iAmCaffeine]

what do you guys think if the pirates can no longer attack all coastal regions?
instead they'll only be able to attack ports and coastal treasures. that should make regions easier to hold for merchants.

It will help. Not sure if it will make a huge difference.

Pirates have a huge advantage over merchants. I think pirates should only be able to attack treasures and merchants only attack ports. I'm in a quads game and we have one pirate whilst the other team has three, it's way one-sided.

[jackal31]

you know....playing this map has to either go to round limit or to staging (and keeping) an objective. Has there been any thought to adding a single cannon, at the top of a hill between 5 neuts or something like that, that when accessed, can bomb the ships?

Would be similar to Antarctica, but would offer another outlet for game completion.

[EdwinG]

There should be a mention on the map that ports can attack each other. I found it to be a surprise.

[TX AG 90]

what do you guys think if the pirates can no longer attack all coastal regions?
instead they'll only be able to attack ports and coastal treasures. that should make regions easier to hold for merchants.

It will help. Not sure if it will make a huge difference.

Pirates have a huge advantage over merchants. I think pirates should only be able to attack treasures and merchants only attack ports. I'm in a quads game and we have one pirate whilst the other team has three, it's way one-sided.

This - in a 1v1 game and I have 2 Merchants vs. 2 Pirates - he can continue to collect Treasure bonuses which I can't see - but any Port I grab can be countered by a Pirate.

[iAmCaffeine]

what do you guys think if the pirates can no longer attack all coastal regions?
instead they'll only be able to attack ports and coastal treasures. that should make regions easier to hold for merchants.

It will help. Not sure if it will make a huge difference.

Pirates have a huge advantage over merchants. I think pirates should only be able to attack treasures and merchants only attack ports. I'm in a quads game and we have one pirate whilst the other team has three, it's way one-sided.

This - in a 1v1 game and I have 2 Merchants vs. 2 Pirates - he can continue to collect Treasure bonuses which I can't see - but any Port I grab can be countered by a Pirate.

Is there a way of having the starting positions evenly split?

[EdwinG]

A quick analysis of the games finished to date shows that it is imbalanced in favor of the pirates. 60 standard games with at least 3 players have been finished (1 game was won by 2 of the 3 players deadbeating so it's not included in the tally). If all the winning conditions were equal then we would expect each ship to have won 8 or 9 games. Of the 59 games here's the # of wins by ship (initials):
FD - 5
RB - 12
ED - 16
JO - 8
SZ - 10
LM - 4
HH - 2
BB - 2
A pirate won 41 of the 59 games. It should be noted that the wins by HH and BB occurred when they faced no more than 1 pirate ship among their opponents.

It's pretty clear that Erik the Dark has a significant advantage, winning twice as many games as would have been expected.

If we confine the analysis to the 9 8-player standard games finished so far we have the following wins:
FD - 0
RB - 2
ED - 3
JO - 2
SZ - 1
LM - 1
HH - 0
BB - 0
Not enough for a statistical analysis, but pirates (and ED in particular) still seem to have an advantage.

[EdwinG]

My 2 cents on changes.
It's admirable that you tried to make objectives that were very different from each other, but it's almost impossible to do this without creating an imbalance.

Erik the Dark's objective is too easy. He can win by controlling as few as 6 territories: the Province of Arawa plus 2 additional treasures and 1 more port. Red Beard needs to control only 7 territories (all can be coastal), none of which can be attacked directly from Merchant ships. Lady Mia needs to control an entire province plus at least 6 more ports (a minimum of 9 territories), nearly all of which can be directly attacked by everyone. Meanwhile you have Jesse the Ox who has to control 14 territories. Herr Hindenberg and Baron von Bucht have to fight their way up to the Highlands from both sides of the island. It's nearly impossible when they're also trying to hold ports.

Pirate ships should be able to attack only coastal treasure sites. Not ports and not isolated islands. Maybe make the number of ports equal to the number of coastal treasure sites. There are 4 inland treasure sites but no inland ports. Perhaps convert 1 or 2 of these to a town that a merchant can control for the bonus. Hagan and Mendi are both a distance of 3 away from a coastal port or treasure. Maybe make these worth a higher bonus because they are so far away. Make one a town and the other a treasure.

There are a number of islands and highland territories that are a distance of 2 away from a port or coastal treasure: Randova, Ferguson, Kavieng, Umbai, Karkar, Telefomiu, Kiunga, Tari, Wabag, and Kundiawa (excuse me if I misspelled or missed any). Everyone should have as part of their objective the control of one of these. That way everyone would have to fight away from a port or coastal treasure to gain control of an isolated territory. It would also be fairly safe from direct attack.

Anyone should be able to get bonuses for controlling a province. The advantage to Merchants of being able to get bonuses for provinces held is negated by pirates who can very easily break the bonuses so that they are never received.

[thelord]

what do you guys think if the pirates can no longer attack all coastal regions?
instead they'll only be able to attack ports and coastal treasures. that should make regions easier to hold for merchants.

Needs a change. Got two games right now. One we are pirates they are merchants. All over. The other quads. We only merchants! Can't do anything. Maybe just make ports out of bounds to pirates due to naval presence or similar. Or only able to attacked from land.
Lots of guesswork right now.

[iAmCaffeine]

what do you guys think if the pirates can no longer attack all coastal regions?
instead they'll only be able to attack ports and coastal treasures. that should make regions easier to hold for merchants.

Needs a change. Got two games right now. One we are pirates they are merchants. All over. The other quads. We only merchants! Can't do anything. Maybe just make ports out of bounds to pirates due to naval presence or similar. Or only able to attacked from land.
Lots of guesswork right now.

Is that our doubles by any chance? I've said it before and it still applies now, when one team totally controls the pirates and the other team is entirely merchants, pirates will win every time. It even happens in 1v1 which is ridiculous.

I don't see the issue with making it so pirates can only attack treasures & land units from their ship, and merchants can only attack ports & land units from their ship. Obviously anything neighbouring can be attacked by land units. It would change the gameplay but it would be balanced.

[Armandolas]

agree with the previous comments. Merchants should be allowed to hit the treasures as well. It gives the pirates a nice advantage.

Ive only played poly 2s in a tournament i created, and all the feedback is that the map(weather u are pirate ,merchant or both) its tottally dice related only

Graphics are great and i love them. I just wish i have enjoyed more of the gameplay

[iAmCaffeine]

No no, merchants should only hit ports and pirates should only hit treasures. Maybe they could both hit regions on the coast that aren't treasure or port.

[Armandolas]

No no, merchants should only hit ports and pirates should only hit treasures. Maybe they could both hit regions on the coast that aren't treasure or port.

or that