Conquer Club

Great map mibi!

Goalie wrote:i am an expert
ur the loser

Hay if you don't like a map then fine, say so and then leave... DON'T BE RUDE!!!!!!!!

whats your opinon on this being a coalition rather than a USE vs Iraq map, Mibi?

Alot of non american troops gave there lives in Iraq and i think this should be acknowledged in this map!

hulmey wrote:whats your opinon on this being a coalition rather than a USE vs Iraq map, Mibi?

Alot of non american troops gave there lives in Iraq and i think this should be acknowledged in this map!

Personally I do not think it should be a Coalition as it effectively obfuscates this unilateral action.

The US had 85% of the troops when it began and 95% of the troops now. The war was started by the US and is ultimately a product of the US military and politics.

true, non-american troops have been killed, but this map isn't about honoring the dead. It is supposed to be non-partisan map of the realities and players involved in the conflict. Using a loaded term like Coalition would add undue bias.

what needs to be done to get this into the foundry? there is a lot of flotsam in here.

I'd move it myself except for you've added me as an author so we are at cairnswk's mercy due to conflict of interest.

The only thing I could see him justifiably forcing upon us is for you to make another update of some kind. Although you're already at Version 3, so it would be a stretch.

Coleman wrote:I'd move it myself except for you've added me as an author so we are at cairnswk's mercy due to conflict of interest.

The only thing I could see him justifiably forcing upon us is for you to make another update of some kind.

cool, well i am waiting on some more feedback to the below issues before i update again...

So here are my outstanding issues.

1. Should there be more than 3 combatants? Should I add another, The Mahdi Army or two more including the PKK (Kurdistan Workers Party). Right now this looks like a great 3 player map. But once you have 4-6 players it becomes more of a fight to control one combatant rather than combatants against each other. An issue to consider is size, added one or two more boxes to each city would cramp it, as well as extra legend copy.

2. Should the neutrals be in standard 1-3-2 format as they are now, or should they reflect the geopolitics on the ground? for example, the Kurds hate the baathists so to ally a kurddish city with the baathists you would need to conquer 3 instead of 1. Also, al-Queda is more popular in Sunni territory so cities in Anbar would only have 1 neutral on they al-queda square. Some bonus and ability balancing would need to be done if this were the case. The Americas would always be 3 or 4 since no one really likes them.

3. How should multiple combatants in the same town work? For example, I don't like the idea of stackable bonus where if you own the US and al-aeda in one city you get a bonus for each, it doesnt make sense. One idea I had was to make a negative bonus of -2 if you own two combatants in the same city. If neutralize this negative bonus, you would have to conquer all the combatants in the city, which would then be +0. Is this even possible in the xml?

eh?

I answered 3. Possible, and I'd like it just as you said. By neutralize it do you mean make it no longer apply to the allegiance bonus?

No idea on 2.

As for 1, adding more would be up to you, but it may complicate the map more. The Mahdi Army may be worth adding, but I wouldn't worry about having 6 different ones.

i don't think you should add the pkk, they seem to be attacking turkey more than anyone in iraq.

history is written by those who win, and since this piece of history hasn't been written yet it's hard to say how it should look. I say you pick a date at the beginning of the war and represent Iraq at that point rather than trying to represent all of the changes and new interests that have ocurred since Bush invaded months/years ago. Otherwise this map will always be changing and always upset some people.

Changes:

1. Added the Mahdi Army
2. Changed the neutral areas so that the Mahdis are easiest to get in the Shiai areas, al-queda is easiest to get in the Sunni areas, the Baathists are easy to get anywhere except in the Kurdish area and the US is hard to get everywhere. They may be some balancing issues here but thinking about it makes my brain explode. Others who are more adept at balancing can look into it.
3. Legend and rule changes. Holding 2 groups in one city is bad, holding 3 is some serious sectarian violence and even worse and -2. Holding them all is chaos and no bonuses is awarded, so you don't get stuck with multiple -2's. Again I am not too sure how this will affect gameplay. Serious minds can hash it out.

Outstanding issues:

1. Balancing, are the neutrals proper? Are the bonuses blaanced?
2. Bagdad can be split into sunni and shia but that might complicate things.
3. There is an issue with the possible one way attacks from a city to an alighnment.
a. Should attacks be one-way from cities to alignments, there by ensurring an enemy alignment doesnt come back and invade the city?
b.Would this one way alignment leave stranded Baathist and US alignments since they are the only 2 groups who can't attack out of the alignment square.
c. What should be done about this?
4. The negative bonuses need to be ironed out. What are the pitfalls? Think about it.

Ok here it is.



I will start the final graphics once these issues are worked out.

I feel Mibi has well and truly satisfied the requirements on this map in Map Ideas....

Moving into the Map Foundry....congrats Mibi.

Ok here's something that is just about making this map more easy to read... It's very interesting to see the divitions in the diferent citys as to who has more power and all but it would be much easyer to read if you just had the strongest powers simble above or near the city in question... cos I get lost in the big list in the top right.

That's the only thing that I can think of just now... congrats on moving to the Foundry

yamahafazer wrote:Ok here's something that is just about making this map more easy to read... It's very interesting to see the divitions in the diferent citys as to who has more power and all but it would be much easyer to read if you just had the strongest powers simble above or near the city in question... cos I get lost in the big list in the top right.

That's the only thing that I can think of just now... congrats on moving to the Foundry

Im not sure what you mean.

mibi wrote:

yamahafazer wrote:Ok here's something that is just about making this map more easy to read... It's very interesting to see the divitions in the diferent citys as to who has more power and all but it would be much easyer to read if you just had the strongest powers simble above or near the city in question... cos I get lost in the big list in the top right.

That's the only thing that I can think of just now... congrats on moving to the Foundry

Im not sure what you mean.

Sorry it wasn't very clear was it...

The thing that I cant see for myself is:

1. You have a lot of space given to the "CITY ALIGNMENT" thing but I cant see what it's there for.

2. You have bonuses for the number of allied cities that you hold in the "Madi Army", "Baathist", "al-qaeda" and "United States". But I cant see how you differenceate between the citys... Which citys are part of which groups.

OR I just haven't understood the bonus sistem at all.

yamahafazer wrote:

mibi wrote:

yamahafazer wrote:Ok here's something that is just about making this map more easy to read... It's very interesting to see the divitions in the diferent citys as to who has more power and all but it would be much easyer to read if you just had the strongest powers simble above or near the city in question... cos I get lost in the big list in the top right.

That's the only thing that I can think of just now... congrats on moving to the Foundry

Im not sure what you mean.

Sorry it wasn't very clear was it...

The thing that I cant see for myself is:

1. You have a lot of space given to the "CITY ALIGNMENT" thing but I cant see what it's there for.

2. You have bonuses for the number of allied cities that you hold in the "Madi Army", "Baathist", "al-qaeda" and "United States". But I cant see how you differenceate between the citys... Which citys are part of which groups.

OR I just haven't understood the bonus sistem at all.

The city allignment allows a player to try and take on a side of the battle. Depending on the initial drop a player can choose the side of the the US or al-Queda and try to win by taking over cities in the name of the US or al-Queda. Each alignment has different 'abilities' and nuances as reflected in the bonus structure. The purpose of this is to reflect on the complexity of the situation which would not be possible with a standard 'bonus area' map, although one is included in the ethnic bonus parts.

The grey numbers are not bonuses, they are starting neutrals which must be conquered to receive a bonus. At the beginning not city is aligned to any group. All the alignments start neutral although some are harder to take then others.

For example, lets say from the initial drop you have strong position in the Shia area with 3 armies in both Umm Qasr and Nasiryah. Now in those cities the Mahdi Army presence is strong so you only have to conquer 1 neutral. So you attack from Umm Qasr to the Mahdi alignment in the Umm Qasr alignment box. And you do the same for Nasirylah. Then you use the road to attack from Umm Qasr to Basrah and install the Mahdi Army there. From there you see that Karbala has some Mahdi affections since its only 2 neutrals, so you take that over as well. Then you have 4 cities aligned as Mahdi Army and receive the +8 bonus, which you can then use to hammer Baghdad from your special entrance to Sadr city or from Karbala to East Rashid, via the road.

Of course this assumes other players haven't aready broken your bonuses.

Understand?

It's not a bad idea but the way you are selling it is all wrong and quite tasteless. some people on here (including myself) were there and opinions aside it's not to be mocked. Just have a battle for Iraq and it could be anytime and very generic. first of all most of the people on this board have no clue about tribes and loyalties over there so you'd just be wasting your time with all of the details. al qaida in iraq is not so much an entitiy but a jihadist ideal that bonds cells of mostly foreign fighters and they often fight eachother so you'd have to get quite detailed to make it realistic.

mibi wrote:

yamahafazer wrote:

mibi wrote:

yamahafazer wrote:Ok here's something that is just about making this map more easy to read... It's very interesting to see the divitions in the diferent citys as to who has more power and all but it would be much easyer to read if you just had the strongest powers simble above or near the city in question... cos I get lost in the big list in the top right.

That's the only thing that I can think of just now... congrats on moving to the Foundry

Im not sure what you mean.

Sorry it wasn't very clear was it...

The thing that I cant see for myself is:

1. You have a lot of space given to the "CITY ALIGNMENT" thing but I cant see what it's there for.

2. You have bonuses for the number of allied cities that you hold in the "Madi Army", "Baathist", "al-qaeda" and "United States". But I cant see how you differenceate between the citys... Which citys are part of which groups.

OR I just haven't understood the bonus sistem at all.

The city allignment allows a player to try and take on a side of the battle. Depending on the initial drop a player can choose the side of the the US or al-Queda and try to win by taking over cities in the name of the US or al-Queda. Each alignment has different 'abilities' and nuances as reflected in the bonus structure. The purpose of this is to reflect on the complexity of the situation which would not be possible with a standard 'bonus area' map, although one is included in the ethnic bonus parts.

The grey numbers are not bonuses, they are starting neutrals which must be conquered to receive a bonus. At the beginning not city is aligned to any group. All the alignments start neutral although some are harder to take then others.

For example, lets say from the initial drop you have strong position in the Shia area with 3 armies in both Umm Qasr and Nasiryah. Now in those cities the Mahdi Army presence is strong so you only have to conquer 1 neutral. So you attack from Umm Qasr to the Mahdi alignment in the Umm Qasr alignment box. And you do the same for Nasirylah. Then you use the road to attack from Umm Qasr to Basrah and install the Mahdi Army there. From there you see that Karbala has some Mahdi affections since its only 2 neutrals, so you take that over as well. Then you have 4 cities aligned as Mahdi Army and receive the +8 bonus, which you can then use to hammer Baghdad from your special entrance to Sadr city or from Karbala to East Rashid, via the road.

Of course this assumes other players haven't aready broken your bonuses.

Understand?

Humm yes I do understand it better now... just one Q. can a city be held by multiple players at one time??

yamahafazer wrote:

mibi wrote:

yamahafazer wrote:

mibi wrote:

yamahafazer wrote:Ok here's something that is just about making this map more easy to read... It's very interesting to see the divitions in the diferent citys as to who has more power and all but it would be much easyer to read if you just had the strongest powers simble above or near the city in question... cos I get lost in the big list in the top right.

That's the only thing that I can think of just now... congrats on moving to the Foundry

Im not sure what you mean.

Sorry it wasn't very clear was it...

The thing that I cant see for myself is:

1. You have a lot of space given to the "CITY ALIGNMENT" thing but I cant see what it's there for.

2. You have bonuses for the number of allied cities that you hold in the "Madi Army", "Baathist", "al-qaeda" and "United States". But I cant see how you differenceate between the citys... Which citys are part of which groups.

OR I just haven't understood the bonus sistem at all.

The city allignment allows a player to try and take on a side of the battle. Depending on the initial drop a player can choose the side of the the US or al-Queda and try to win by taking over cities in the name of the US or al-Queda. Each alignment has different 'abilities' and nuances as reflected in the bonus structure. The purpose of this is to reflect on the complexity of the situation which would not be possible with a standard 'bonus area' map, although one is included in the ethnic bonus parts.

The grey numbers are not bonuses, they are starting neutrals which must be conquered to receive a bonus. At the beginning not city is aligned to any group. All the alignments start neutral although some are harder to take then others.

For example, lets say from the initial drop you have strong position in the Shia area with 3 armies in both Umm Qasr and Nasiryah. Now in those cities the Mahdi Army presence is strong so you only have to conquer 1 neutral. So you attack from Umm Qasr to the Mahdi alignment in the Umm Qasr alignment box. And you do the same for Nasirylah. Then you use the road to attack from Umm Qasr to Basrah and install the Mahdi Army there. From there you see that Karbala has some Mahdi affections since its only 2 neutrals, so you take that over as well. Then you have 4 cities aligned as Mahdi Army and receive the +8 bonus, which you can then use to hammer Baghdad from your special entrance to Sadr city or from Karbala to East Rashid, via the road.

Of course this assumes other players haven't aready broken your bonuses.

Understand?

Humm yes I do understand it better now... just one Q. can a city be held by multiple players at one time??

no, there can only be on player on the actual city circle. however there can be multiple players in the alihnments for one city, but you need the actal city circle to get the bonus.

You haven't the slightest idea of actual factions in Iraq and you're making a tasteless map. I'm glad to see the Iraq War is being made into an online risk game.

Besides that, the map is inaccurate. How come you only have two Shia cities?? There are many other large cities in the Shia south area whose control has large implications. Hilla, and Al Kut to name a few. Like I said before in another post Al Qaeda is not one entity in Iraq, unless you want Al Qaeda to represent all foreign fighters in Iraq but you wouldn't be accounting for them fighting eachother. You'd have to break it down a lot deeper to be realistic. But YOU'RE the expert so keep checking out your Wikipedia to get your latest.

Tom2891 wrote:You haven't the slightest idea of actual factions in Iraq and you're making a tasteless map. I'm glad to see the Iraq War is being made into an online risk game.

Besides that, the map is inaccurate. How come you only have two Shia cities?? There are many other large cities in the Shia south area whose control has large implications. Hilla, and Al Kut to name a few. Like I said before in another post Al Qaeda is not one entity in Iraq, unless you want Al Qaeda to represent all foreign fighters in Iraq but you wouldn't be accounting for them fighting eachother. You'd have to break it down a lot deeper to be realistic. But YOU'RE the expert so keep checking out your Wikipedia to get your latest.

How is this a tasteless map? How am I mocking the Iraq war?

I can tell you have obviously spent a lot of time looking over this map since there are THREE Shia cities, and not two. I chose cities that were of importance or had major conflicts or battles. Sorry if you feel I left some out, I had to take in consideration that this map is designed as part of a game, and not a presentation at the Pentagon.

I responded to your al-Qaeda issue. If you feel the wikipedia entry is inaccurate please edit it and I will make changes to the map if your edit stands. You seem to be portrary your self as the EXPERT since you were there. What was your role there? Were you some analyst?

This map is going for broad appeal and includes the major players, not just on the ground, but in the media as well. Which is why al-Qaeda is there and not 101 separate insurgent groups.

You seem to be new to the foundry process, welcome. Keep in mind there is more to map making then nailing the current political accuracies.

Mocking may not be the right word but when you know people who died and Iraqis who were killed by the Madhi militia it's annoying to see people who have no idea about Iraq make a game out of the situation. I never claimed to be an expert but I can bet I know a whole lot more than you as I dealt with the local population as well as local Government on a daily basis. The wikipedia comment was not to suggest that the content needs to be edited but that you seem like a wikipedist to me in that you are limited and your research is to what's on wikipedia. I never said you need to nail the current political situation but telling you what's accurate. Sorry I missed a Shia city, but there is still a lot more Sunni populated cities.

Tom2891 wrote:Mocking may not be the right word but when you know people who died and Iraqis who were killed by the Madhi militia it's annoying to see people who have no idea about Iraq make a game out of the situation. I never claimed to be an expert but I can bet I know a whole lot more than you as I dealt with the local population as well as local Government on a daily basis. The wikipedia comment was not to suggest that the content needs to be edited but that you seem like a wikipedist to me in that you are limited and your research is to what's on wikipedia. I never said you need to nail the current political situation but telling you what's accurate. Sorry I missed a Shia city, but there is still a lot more Sunni populated cities.

Soon there will be no less than 3 maps on this site where you can be Nazi Germany. Are these maps disparaging 6 million jews? I don't think so. This Iraq map is just as much a part of history as WW2 and fair game as I see it. It is YOU who are bringing the politics and bias into an otherwise neutral map. What if some Islamic CC player who knew people blown up by US bombs came by with their grievances. Truth is, there all many sides to this war, and I tried my best to represent them all with accuracy and balance inrespect to the facts and gameplay. I know full well that I can't please everyone however.

mibi wrote:

Tom2891 wrote:Mocking may not be the right word but when you know people who died and Iraqis who were killed by the Madhi militia it's annoying to see people who have no idea about Iraq make a game out of the situation. I never claimed to be an expert but I can bet I know a whole lot more than you as I dealt with the local population as well as local Government on a daily basis. The wikipedia comment was not to suggest that the content needs to be edited but that you seem like a wikipedist to me in that you are limited and your research is to what's on wikipedia. I never said you need to nail the current political situation but telling you what's accurate. Sorry I missed a Shia city, but there is still a lot more Sunni populated cities.

Soon there will be no less than 3 maps on this site where you can be Nazi Germany. Are these maps disparaging 6 million jews? I don't think so. This Iraq map is just as much a part of history as WW2 and fair game as I see it. It is YOU who are bringing the politics and bias into an otherwise neutral map. What if some Islamic CC player who knew people blown up by US bombs came by with their grievances. Truth is, there all many sides to this war, and I tried my best to represent them all with accuracy and balance inrespect to the facts and gameplay. I know full well that I can't please everyone however.

Agreed.

yamahafazer wrote:The thing that I cant see for myself is:

1. You have a lot of space given to the "CITY ALIGNMENT" thing but I cant see what it's there for.

2. You have bonuses for the number of allied cities that you hold in the "Madi Army", "Baathist", "al-qaeda" and "United States". But I cant see how you differenceate between the citys... Which citys are part of which groups.

OR I just haven't understood the bonus sistem at all.

I agree completely... I look at this map and my first thought is "i don't get it, so i shouldn't play it." If somebody can't size it up in under 60 seconds they're likely to move on.