The Third Crusade [Quenched] Revamping

[Commander9]

Well, I've found a bug. During my game I've attacked English Channel and only managed to revert it to 3. However, next turn it didn't revert to 4 and I've still had to take only 3. That's pretty much it.

I don't think I would call it a bug in the map, because I am pretty sure it is not something that the XML could change. Killer neutrals only revert to a fixed number of neutrals when held by a player. If you only kill some of the troops, then the territory is not reverted to its initial troop count at the next turn, and anybody has a shot at finishing the job.

Ah, sorry, my bad. Nevermind then.

[JustCallMeStupid]

I have new suggestion. For the starting locations that are normally a 6. When playing 3v3 these territories start with a 6 neutral on them. In one game luckily for me, the other team has the 3 territories west of Castile, but Castile is neutral at 6 units. I see this same issue with Cairo, protecting K of J border if Cairo is neutral. Is it possible to change starting points to only a 1 neutral if no player starts there? They are not worth bonus units and since everyone starts with one at the begging there is almost no advantage to them taking a second starting point.
-js-

[Kabanellas]

I've had that same experience and I feel the same, could make sense dropping those starting neutrals to 3 or 2 when not attributed to any player. Maybe Andrew can enlighten us about this possibility.

[eigenvector]

Hey,

I think I found a small bug: the map says Torlosa while the game log says Torsola (like in game #5973350).

Thanks for the map!

[Shrinky]

Hey,

I think I found a small bug: the map says Torlosa while the game log says Torsola (like in game #5973350).

Thanks for the map!

bug noted already it will be fixed in next map update

[AndrewB]

I've had that same experience and I feel the same, could make sense dropping those starting neutrals to 3 or 2 when not attributed to any player. Maybe Andrew can enlighten us about this possibility.

Yes, it is possible

[keane]

I'd like to add my thanks to all those who've helped create this map - I've played 20 games already and it's well on its way to becoming my favourite.

I'd also like to add my vote to keeping the objective to either granada tor vatican - i feel this is already difficult to hold for one turn and if you made both necessary, then I doubt it could be done.

Keep up the good work guys!

[AndrewB]

Updated XML:

http://bolonniy.com/CC/Third_Crusade_v8.xml

List of the changes:

1. Corrected spelling of Balkan, Tripoli and Torlosa
2. London starting army is raised to 6.
3. decrease Constantinople, Seleucia, Venice, Malta and Krak des Chevaliers neutral troops to 3 only
4. decrease Tyre neutral troops to 4
5. decrease France bonus to +3
6. decrease Kingdom of Jerusalem bonus to +2
7. decrease the Almohads bonus to +3
8. Undealt starting positions are starting with neutral 2 in them.

[snufkin]

Great map..

.. although it´s more than a little weird that Cairo is located on the Sinai peninsula.

[jefjef]

I don't agree with increasing London. You have that killer 4 neutral to go thru.

England/London isn't even critical to win. It's a luxury.

Great map btw.

[barterer2002]

OK I've got 13 games of various sorts under my belt so it seems time to add my 2¢

1). This map should not be available to new players-its way to complicated on that.

2). I don't like the split map insert (but I don't like it in WWII Europe either) but don't really have an option to replace it.

3). I tend to agree with jefjef that London doesn't need the extra armies since nobody can attack it right away anyway. Making it a 6 instead of a 3 means that whoever starts in London can take Wales for a +1 without even having to deploy up there. As a 3, to take wales would at least require a deployment to london.

4). I tend to think the Almohads are overbonused. They tend to be protected by a N5 on Grenada meaning you've only got 3 borders to protect 5 terts (if you take Baloceric) which to me means a +5 is overdone.

5). I don't really like the auto deploy on Venice, Constantonople and Cyprus. Venice particularly bothers me here as I'm not sure why its warrented based on the time frame of the map. Not to say that Venice wasn't an important city but certainly not as much as others of its day. Can't quite figure out why its an autodeploy.

[Kabanellas]

Thanks Jefjef and Barterer for the critics.

London has definitely a problem staying the way it is now... unless London is a player’s only Starting Position, no one will bother spending a round of deployment there. On the other side I don’t want to make it to appealing.... I do support raising its starting troops to 6, we could of course, raise Wales to 5. Maybe that could even things a bit. Let’s see what Andrew thinks. (btw, 4 neutral killers in the EC are not such a big thing in my opinion)

As for those autodeploys in Venice and Constantinople (Cyprus doesn’t have any) they are much needed. In terms of gameplay Venice can be of great help for the player starting in Ratisbon because that is probably the most difficult position to start on in the map. Having that nearby base to get some much needed bonuses has been proven quite necessary.
The same applies to Constantinople.

K

[eigenvector]

Updated XML:

http://bolonniy.com/CC/Third_Crusade_v8.xml

List of the changes:

1. Corrected spelling of Balkan, Tripoli and Torlosa
2. London starting army is raised to 6.
3. decrease Constantinople, Seleucia, Venice, Malta and Krak des Chevaliers neutral troops to 3 only
4. decrease Tyre neutral troops to 4
5. decrease France bonus to +3
6. decrease Kingdom of Jerusalem bonus to +2
7. decrease the Almohads bonus to +3
8. Undealt starting positions are starting with neutral 2 in them.

Hi,
Are you sure about #6? I think that the bonus as it stood, chimed with the map's atmosphere and now that you've reduced the neutrals to 2 it'll be probably more difficult to hold the K of J anyway. I'd suggest you consider returning it to +3.

Best wishes!

[MrBenn]

Updated XML:

http://bolonniy.com/CC/Third_Crusade_v8.xml

List of the changes:

1. Corrected spelling of Balkan, Tripoli and Torlosa
2. London starting army is raised to 6.
3. decrease Constantinople, Seleucia, Venice, Malta and Krak des Chevaliers neutral troops to 3 only
4. decrease Tyre neutral troops to 4
5. decrease France bonus to +3
6. decrease Kingdom of Jerusalem bonus to +2
7. decrease the Almohads bonus to +3
8. Undealt starting positions are starting with neutral 2 in them.

Hi,
Are you sure about #6? I think that the bonus as it stood, chimed with the map's atmosphere and now that you've reduced the neutrals to 2 it'll be probably more difficult to hold the K of J anyway. I'd suggest you consider returning it to +3.

Best wishes!

I think raising Wales too would be a good move.

Adjustments to any region bonuses also require an update to the legend on the map graphic (unless I've skimmed past them )

[Kabanellas]

All done Benn - posted already in the first page

[luxCRUSADER]

You'll be happy to know that players are playing for the victory conditions a lot more frequently.

I for one have about 5 or 6 games won on your amazing map visa vie attaining the victory conditions ...

I love you map m8

And I love the changes that will hopefully be applied sooner than later ...

[jefjef]

Thanks Jefjef and Barterer for the critics.

London has definitely a problem staying the way it is now... unless London is a player’s only Starting Position, no one will bother spending a round of deployment there. On the other side I don’t want to make it to appealing.... I do support raising its starting troops to 6, we could of course, raise Wales to 5. Maybe that could even things a bit. Let’s see what Andrew thinks. (btw, 4 neutral killers in the EC are not such a big thing in my opinion)

K

Well Kab. When invading London/England From France/Normandy The EC 4 + London 6 is/will be Quite a bit to attack thru. It will require a good # of troops or really good dice. This will make Invasion of England even less attractive.

And if I got London on the start and it had 6 I would for sure attack wales with out dropping on London even if wales is raised to 5.

If you raise London then Wales really needs to be upped. Maybe even consider making EC a 2.

[AndrewB]

Lets raise the wales too (maybe to 5-6). And decrease with EC to 2 sounds good too.

[Commander9]

I think lowering it to 2 would be too drastic, but I wouldn't mind lowering it to 3.

[Incandenza]

Lets raise the wales too (maybe to 5-6). And decrease with EC to 2 sounds good too.

I like Wales at 5 (only a 50% shot to kill with just the dropped 6 in London) and EC at 2. Don't want to make Wales too tough to take, and besides, there are other places where players can pick up relatively quick +1s.

[Kabanellas]

I'd definitely support the idea of Wales having 5. As for the the EC, I think 2 might be low, I'd settle on 3.

[cutebastard71]

I am too lazy to go through the whole thread, but I do have one question... in our trips game, everybody started with 30 armies, only teal started with 27 armies ? I think that the problem is that London (which teal got) doesn't start with 6, is this intentional or is it an error ? As far as I can see London should be 6 at the start of the game. Right now it started with 3 which created this inequality in the initial number of armies i.e. teal got 9*3 instead 8*3+6 like everybody else although he got London

EDIT: If needed I grabbed the snapshot.

[AndrewB]

I'd definitely support the idea of Wales having 5. As for the the EC, I think 2 might be low, I'd settle on 3.

XML Version 9 is created with these changes:

http://bolonniy.com/CC/Third_Crusade_v9.xml

[MrBenn]

If I've got this right, then these are the updated links for the XML and the images.

I'd definitely support the idea of Wales having 5. As for the the EC, I think 2 might be low, I'd settle on 3.

XML Version 9 is created with these changes:

http://bolonniy.com/CC/Third_Crusade_v9.xml

Large: http://i998.photobucket.com/albums/af10 ... CClast.png
Small: http://i998.photobucket.com/albums/af10 ... CClast.png

Could you just confirm that there has been no change to the ordering of territories/continents - and then I'll pop the files across to lackattack

[cubfanpgh]

In a game I started recently, it took me 3 turns as London to take Wales. Just so we understand.
Game 5991504