Moderator: Cartographers
Spockers wrote:DiM wrote:Telvannia wrote:Goalie wrote:this map is terrible
never touch it again
Good god, someone call in the multihunters, it is spockers multi
(anyone else notice that spockers vanished when keyogi did?)
well they're both from australia, they played a lot of games in the same team and when they played standard games or when spockers was on another team keyogi always won.
i smell a multi.
Any more hard hitting evidence, House?
rebelman wrote:DiM wrote:
it's not autodeploy.
i thought the sanctuary was auto deploy
Coleman wrote:Just one shield, for villages. The others would be incredibly redundant, unless you have a plan to make it look really good, which you probably do. But the only insistence is on the village shield.
DiM wrote:i have added shields for castles villages and the sanctuary in the legend but i have removed the glow for those words. i feel that the shields provide enough info. and to have just some words colored seemed odd. i'd rather have the words not colored than to color everything. i think it's more than clear the way it is now.
rebelman wrote:DiM wrote:i have added shields for castles villages and the sanctuary in the legend but i have removed the glow for those words. i feel that the shields provide enough info. and to have just some words colored seemed odd. i'd rather have the words not colored than to color everything. i think it's more than clear the way it is now.
grrr you are starting to make this too easy to follow - my major point farming plans might have to be put on hold
mibi wrote:so you get +5 just for holding one castle? are they going to start neutral?
mibi wrote:so you get +5 just for holding one castle? are they going to start neutral?
mibi wrote:yeti_c wrote:mibi wrote:so you get +5 just for holding one castle? are they going to start neutral?
No no - the castle is where you start...
C.
so what about 2 or 4 players? wouldnt that be imbalanced.
yeti_c wrote:Coleman wrote:Yeah, this was conquest gameplay, we discussed this a while back.
Not imbalanced.
In fact possibly the most balanced map here...
C.
DiM wrote:
in 2p games each player gets 2 castles and 2 are neutral
in 3p games each player gets 2 castles and 0 are neutral
in 4p games each player gets 1 castle and 2 are neutral
in 5p games each player gets 1 castle and 1 is neutral
in 6p games each player gets 1 castle and 0 are neutral
i don't see what's imbalanced
Coleman wrote:There is a slight concern with going first at 3 players and below. A particularly lucky player with the dice could do a lot of damage to another player before they could act.
That said, they couldn't hope to charge two castles simultaneously, and a failure would leave a trail of 1s back to the aggressive castle.
Coleman wrote:It'd be similar to the code that blocks 5 players from playing doubles.
If map (part of selection) than players > than 6 not allowed. It's really that simple (in psuedocode anyways). Err, assuming this app is in a code that has selections.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users