Moderator: Cartographers
oaktown wrote:i admit to not having spent much time playing this map so I won't speak to what you should do, but as for what you can do... yes, it would be possible to set up the code so that territories are split up in two and/or three player games. You could code three start positions so it would only affect 2 and 3 player games - if there are more than three players the start positions would be ignored.
Blitzaholic wrote:There should be 3 neutrals on every torri region to avoid players who start first from gaining an unfair advantage
this is my feedback ruben
awesome map by the way
Acquaviva Serravalle
CittĆ di Borgo Maggiore
San Marino
Domagnano
Chiesanuova
Faetano
Fiorentino
Montegiardino
saaimen wrote:Nice map, Ruben!
I'm gonna do some nitpicking again Don't know whether this has been discussed before, I'm sorry if it has.
How did you choose the order of the region names for you legend? Clockwise, I'm guessing?
I was very confused when I first saw it. IMHO, it would be more logical to place them more like their actual location on the map.
A suggestion:
- Code: Select all
Acquaviva Serravalle
CittĆ di Borgo Maggiore
San Marino
Domagnano
Chiesanuova
Faetano
Fiorentino
Montegiardino
... or something like it. Hope you get my point
Ruben Cassar wrote:Sorry but I'm not doing any of those changes at this stage.
I will try to improve the gameplay though with that neutral option.
saaimen wrote:Ruben Cassar wrote:Sorry but I'm not doing any of those changes at this stage.
I will try to improve the gameplay though with that neutral option.
Why not ?
It's bĆØta...
Does anyone back up my point, or doesn't it make sense to you guys?
Ruben Cassar wrote:However on a personal note, even if you would have mentioned this before in the development stage I would not have agreed with you. I prefer the regions to be listed in a clockwise order, as you said earlier. Just because you prefer them in another way it does not mean I would have changed it, this is just a matter of personal taste not an improvement per se.
MrBenn wrote:The purpose of the Beta Phase is iron out any gameplay glitches (such as occurred on Das Schloss), and to ensure that there are no significant flaws affecting the way games play (missing connections in XML; imbalanced gameplay). It's a failsafe to the foundry process, rather than a time for nitpicking - the nitpicking should come before the map is quenched.
If you get yourself signed up onto the review mailing lists (threads in Not Maps subforum), then you'll be alerted when maps are earlier on in the development process
yeti_c wrote:XML Updated and checked to now have all torri territories start as 2 neutral.
http://www.fileden.com/files/2008/1/19/1707364/San_Marino.xml
C.
Ruben Cassar wrote:Ok guys...I'm playing a doubles on it right now and to me it seems more balanced now.
Let me know what you think.
Thanks.
jwithington wrote:I liked it better when it was random--made it so that perhaps one or both players could start with a bonus.
I voted in the poll as such too....Ruben Cassar wrote:Ok guys...I'm playing a doubles on it right now and to me it seems more balanced now.
Let me know what you think.
Thanks.
Ruben Cassar wrote:jwithington wrote:I liked it better when it was random--made it so that perhaps one or both players could start with a bonus.
I voted in the poll as such too....Ruben Cassar wrote:Ok guys...I'm playing a doubles on it right now and to me it seems more balanced now.
Let me know what you think.
Thanks.
Yes but that's what makes it less balanced and is exactly what we wanted to avoid!
It's not fair that whoever starts get a bonus.
MrBenn wrote:Hmmm... I'm not too sure how I feel about the neutral armies - it just feels like there are a lot of them, and it's not as if this is the biggest map in the world in the first place
I think a better solution would be to create 3 starting positions, as follows:
This breaks up all the small bonus regions, and ensures that in 2/3 player games, nobody will get a small bonus from the drop (and that each player will have at least 1 torri, but not all of them). The territories not included in starting positions are then divided equally among the players, so the rest of the map will be allocated randomly. The start positions are ignored if there are more players than positions, so will not effect larger player games, where it can be argued that the drop is less of an influencing factor.
I'd be inclined to leave 2 neutrals on Borgo Maggiore and Serravalle to ensure that nobody starts with the biggest bonuses in any case.
Ruben Cassar wrote: Something is not normal in this game. Apart from the 2 neutrals on the torri territories, there are also 10 territories with 3 neutrals on them which should not be there! Those 10 territories should be equally distributed among players 1 and 2. So I guess that's why you have the feeling that there are too many neutrals because in fact there are 10 territories which should not be neutral. I don't know if it's something to do with the XML, but that's not normal and is something that I will have to look into.
Edit: Is it possible that that particular tournament game was created before the XML was updated at that this somehow messed things up because in the new games I started I did not have this problem?
MrBenn wrote:The starting neutrals (as designated in the XML) are excluded from the territories that are allocated as player starts.
In 1v1 games, 1/3 of the 'allocatable' territories are assigned neutral. In these games then, you've got 1 neutral in each area, and then the additional neutrals in 1v1 games. The starting positions I proposed were purely to counter the massive amount of neutrals in 1v1 games (and would provide a fairer distribution in 3p games). Basically, each player would have at least 1 territory in each of the small areas that would prevent anybody getting the small bonuses from the drop...
Users browsing this forum: No registered users