Conquer Club

Firstly I am really and increasingly enjoying this map so thanks very much for all your effort designing it. I did my A Level Project on Kemal at Gallipolli 20 years ago so it's nice to be able to play it.

A couple of small things I feel could be improved are as follows:

It is hard to see which routes can be attacked on land. The graphics could be clearer over which territories have attackable boundaries.

The Gendarmerie is too powerful. It can cause havoc with so many landing craft which is crucial for autodeploys but for many of them it is almost inacessible. I would imagine that in many games the winner is whoever controls it at the start. Could it be one of the territories that could be bombarded by the battleships and then it wouldn't be such a big bonus to randomly receive it as a starting position.

Thanks again for creating such a cool map.

I am posting for the BetaMarch challenge. Thanks for putting this together!

I do like this map, but I think the coastal batteries could be weighted a bit differently. I wouldn't increase the bombard zones for Kum Kale since it could be fortified heavily and hard to take down. Perhaps Gendarmerie could have fewer bombard zones or both could be split among three batteries. Also, as others have mentioned the borders/mountains could be made clearer.

I really like the goal of eliminating land holdings.

Thanks!

I'm currently playing a game on this map where it keeps freezing and you can't use mouse controls on the map. You often have to move back to the menu and re-enter the game to take a move. Just checking you're aware of this problem

I am posting for the beta March challenge.

Thank you for putting this together. I am really enjoying this map. I have played it many times with many settings.

I like the way that the beach assault works.

Too frequently it does feel like one side has a starting advantage, which I find frustrating. It is usually when one side has a strong position cluster around either Gendarmere or Kum Kale. However this 'issue' is tempered by the large variety in the gameplay.

I think i may have found a couple of minor bugs with the map. Where do i report them?

facet wrote:I think i may have found a couple of minor bugs with the map. Where do i report them?

here.

just describe what's wrong as best as you can. missing connections, wrong bonuses, etc. also if possible give some game numbers and/or screenshots.

Thanks for your quick reply DiM

I seem to have found some weirdness. It looks like Krithia is linked to madios and to Sedd el Barr. Am I right?
http://aloe.software.coop/owncloud/public.php?service=files&t=b78ac5cfe00789350fabe2e2769a85f3 (link set to expire 20/3.)

This one allowed me to reinforce when I wasn't sure that I should have been able. With my next click, I was able to reinforce from the yellow squared location with 10 units to the territory with the cursor. http://aloe.software.coop/owncloud/public.php?service=files&t=d649ee212ad9d8e0e8a53f6db8c478f4 (link set to expire 20/3.)

Both from same map. Not parachute. What am I missing?

[post updated with description further to comment below - thanks Gilligan)

facet wrote:Thanks for your quick reply DiM

I seem to have found some weirdness. It looks like Krithia is linked to madios and to Sedd el Barr. Am I right?
http://aloe.software.coop/owncloud/public.php?service=files&t=b78ac5cfe00789350fabe2e2769a85f3 (link set to expire 20/3.)

This one allowed me to reinforce when I wasn't sure that I should have been able (I did so with the next click). http://aloe.software.coop/owncloud/public.php?service=files&t=d649ee212ad9d8e0e8a53f6db8c478f4 (link set to expire 20/3.)

Both from same map. Not parachute. What am I missing?

For your first image, look to the right of the map - "Villages border the next village via roads"

Second, what territories are you talking about?

Ahh, now I fully understand that text. So it is to do with looking very carefully for the wee boxes - the villages! ahem. Thanks Gilligan.

I was able to reinforce from the yellow squared location with 10 units to the territory with the cursor. My apologies for not describing it.

facet wrote:Ahh, now I fully understand that text. So it is to do with looking very carefully for the wee boxes - the villages! ahem. Thanks Gilligan.

I was able to reinforce from the yellow squared location with 10 units to the territory with the cursor. My apologies for not describing it.

That's what I thought, I just wanted to be sure.

Anyway, look right above the village blurb I just pointed you to. You have Madios and Chanak Kale that border to cross the water.

/me facepalm. TY

facet wrote:/me facepalm. TY

Haha, no worries. There's a lot going on with this map and it's easy to overlook things. Took me a few minutes myself...

I like how easy you can eliminate someone by taking their land territories but I do not like how dang confusing the map is and how to get around mostly had trouble finding my way around the northern part once you get onto land off your battleships hard to navigate

I thought I already posted this but I don't see it.
Put some friggin ARROWS to indicate attack crossings. Little "L's" are not standard and not obvious. You would have to search everywhere to find that symbol and see where to attack defend. It's not intuitive. Arrows are obvious and intuitive.

If you're worried about arrows crossing arrows, as would happen in the crossing deep in the channel, don't worry. Seeing something that might be confusing is better than never having a remote idea that something exists at all. If you want an example of arrows crossing, check stalingrad.

Here's the thing, people look at the map first, key second. You look at the key to clarify something you don't understand. Let's say you make your crossings arrows red. People see the arrows and understand what they mean. But if they have any questions, then they look at the key to find out why they are blue. Key says something like, "Blue arrows indicate attacks between land territories on either side of the water". All is clear.

Leave the "L" shaped harbors if you want, but why make people search the coasts for them. I had incredible frustration getting beaten by some farming a-holes who knew the map better than me and they only won because of that. Your map should make it easier for new people to understand it and not get farmed by a-holes.

A few of the territ's along coast line are a little hard to tell if you can advance out or attack to a adjacent area. I really like that it is the most real life map for how the actual battle took place. Can get bogged down on the beach with those battleships. Wish the D-Day map was more like this.

biscuit boy wrote:A few of the territ's along coast line are a little hard to tell if you can advance out or attack to a adjacent area. I really like that it is the most real life map for how the actual battle took place. Can get bogged down on the beach with those battleships. Wish the D-Day map was more like this.

biscuit boy is right about that. If you have BOB installed, you can mouse over territories and check. I have no idea how anyone could play this map (or, for example, Das Schloss) without BOB. It would be a near-guaranteed loss.

Perhaps you should add some double-ended arrows for some of those beach territories. The hardest ones are the ones in the mountains, I think. The eyes don't easily notice those tiny breaks in the mountain ridges.

You could move the one-directional arrow for Gendarmere->Lower Suvla down south to the other side of the gun. Then you would have room for a little double-ended arrow between Lower Suvla and Kirich Tepe. Beach Z<->Monash Gully is another one. Maybe Kum Tepe<->Seri Tepe Ridge, Dardanos<->F7, Kizilchilali<->F6 as well.

It seems like some of these maps are only tested with BOB installed. Until BOB functionality is incorporated into the site, the maps should make it visually obvious what attacks what, IMO.

I liked the representation by the map of a significant historical event

However, as others mentioned, I didn't like how crucial first-turn advantage was on this map, it's not unusual for players to be eliminated even before they gain an opportunity to play, and if you haven't been killed yet, you still face a significant uphill battle in coming back in 1v1's, despite any strategic nous.

judge_reinhold wrote:It seems like some of these maps are only tested with BOB installed. Until BOB functionality is incorporated into the site, the maps should make it visually obvious what attacks what, IMO.

I thought BOB was incorporated with the recent Panel interface amendment?
http://www.conquerclub.com/player.php?mode=settings

like the map a lot. very interestig game play. maybe there is a slight problem with the player going first. if one has good rolls might be gg already! also i think there should be a little better marker regarding the connection of the villages! if it wasn't for BOB it would take me ages to figure it out1

It's a typical first turn typically wins type of map. Wonder if you can make it that whoever is deployed on spots that are bombarded gets to go first or make the deployment even on who gets those spots.

If you want some fun try the settings of 3 or 4 poly 2 player game with parachute reinforcements....

biscuit boy wrote:It's a typical first turn typically wins type of map. Wonder if you can make it that whoever is deployed on spots that are bombarded gets to go first or make the deployment even on who gets those spots.

If you want some fun try the settings of 3 or 4 poly 2 player game with parachute reinforcements....

You still seem to enjoy to play it no?

hip hip hoorah
very interesting map lots of complexity in the different bombardments deploys for defense, and bottlenecks. and the no land tert elim creitera is brilliant.

have enjoyed all games so far... one of the better news maps with unique features not just basic map abc in a different country

1 vs 1 is always tough on player 2. i wonder if it would be more possible to win as player 2 if no one dropped on the land batteries that elim ships; in fog that would give player 2 the opportunity to stack big take a battery and sink some enemy navy round 3 or so; and also have a could chance if he stacks next to the battery player 1 goes for, by taking it after 1 kills the neutrals

Nola_Lifer wrote:

biscuit boy wrote:It's a typical first turn typically wins type of map. Wonder if you can make it that whoever is deployed on spots that are bombarded gets to go first or make the deployment even on who gets those spots.

If you want some fun try the settings of 3 or 4 poly 2 player game with parachute reinforcements....

You still seem to enjoy to play it no?

I must admit, I thought that first turn represents a huge advantage, but upon checking my games I was probably suffering from a confirmation bias.

Total Games completed 33 (Team games with 1 vs 1, 2 vs 2, 3 vs 3 or 4 vs 4, some polymorphic)

out of these: 15 won by the team/player moving first and 18 won by the team moving second. So in conclusion no indication that it is a "first turn typically wins" map.

I really like the map as it makes for exellent gameplay with chances to turn around "lost" situations.

Great job by cairnswk!!!

Only one thing I am suggesting to change: If possible, the same team / player should not hold both Gendarmerie and Kum Kale with the initial drop. That really makes for too much of an uphill fight for the team not in posession of these two pieces of real estate.

so i really liked the map itself it looks very nice game playwise i like that everything comes from the starting positions and you want to liberate the island.

the dislike would be that there is a lot of neutrals. but thats to make the objective easier

Steiner75 wrote:

Nola_Lifer wrote:

biscuit boy wrote:It's a typical first turn typically wins type of map. Wonder if you can make it that whoever is deployed on spots that are bombarded gets to go first or make the deployment even on who gets those spots.

If you want some fun try the settings of 3 or 4 poly 2 player game with parachute reinforcements....

You still seem to enjoy to play it no?

I must admit, I thought that first turn represents a huge advantage, but upon checking my games I was probably suffering from a confirmation bias.

Total Games completed 33 (Team games with 1 vs 1, 2 vs 2, 3 vs 3 or 4 vs 4, some polymorphic)

out of these: 15 won by the team/player moving first and 18 won by the team moving second. So in conclusion no indication that it is a "first turn typically wins" map.

I really like the map as it makes for exellent gameplay with chances to turn around "lost" situations.

Great job by cairnswk!!!

Only one thing I am suggesting to change: If possible, the same team / player should not hold both Gendarmerie and Kum Kale with the initial drop. That really makes for too much of an uphill fight for the team not in posession of these two pieces of real estate.

Good to see someone actually look at the numbers and see!

Dukasaur wrote:

Steiner75 wrote:

Nola_Lifer wrote:

biscuit boy wrote:It's a typical first turn typically wins type of map. Wonder if you can make it that whoever is deployed on spots that are bombarded gets to go first or make the deployment even on who gets those spots.

If you want some fun try the settings of 3 or 4 poly 2 player game with parachute reinforcements....

You still seem to enjoy to play it no?

I must admit, I thought that first turn represents a huge advantage, but upon checking my games I was probably suffering from a confirmation bias.

Total Games completed 33 (Team games with 1 vs 1, 2 vs 2, 3 vs 3 or 4 vs 4, some polymorphic)

out of these: 15 won by the team/player moving first and 18 won by the team moving second. So in conclusion no indication that it is a "first turn typically wins" map.

I really like the map as it makes for exellent gameplay with chances to turn around "lost" situations.

Great job by cairnswk!!!

Only one thing I am suggesting to change: If possible, the same team / player should not hold both Gendarmerie and Kum Kale with the initial drop. That really makes for too much of an uphill fight for the team not in posession of these two pieces of real estate.

Good to see someone actually look at the numbers and see!

Well, yes, off course... remember, the plural of "anectdotes" is NOT "data"

Seems like it would be more fair if the territories that can bombard landing ships always start out neutral. Especially in the south were once the landing ship is lost, you can't get it back.