- Couldn't find any good translations, sorry. Seems like they don't really do it, but rather just use the regions names "as is" in English.natty_dread wrote:Updated version where North Norway is a +2.
Now are there any more gameplay tweaks that need doing? Or should I start pushing the map to graphics workshop?
If you have any suggestions for the gameplay, let's hear it. Do you want the baltic island bonus back? Do you want different bonus system for Svalbard & Faroe? Do you think any part of the game dynamics is unbalanced? Now is the time to speak up. I'm open for all suggestions.
v.32a
Gengoldy wrote:Of all the games I've played, and there have been some poor sports and cursing players out there, you are by far the lowest and with the least class.
Ok, I'll just go with the current ones.- Couldn't find any good translations, sorry. Seems like they don't really do it, but rather just use the regions names "as is" in English.
This is doable...- Would tweak the Skåne/Småland border a bit north (a bit more than the coast belongs to Bleking which is consumed by Skåne.
... but this I wouldn't like doing, since it would also disrupt the border between the bonus areas (also being a whole lot more work, but that's not the reason, honestly- Would also tweak Värmland/Bohuslän border, probably a bit south so that whole of Dalsland is consumed by Värmland.
)Yeah, it only has 3 borders though (maybe I need to make it more clear, but Lofoten only borders Troms and Nordland) but I guess I'll just change it back to +3.- North Norway bonus +2. Seems low. The key to bonus areas is not so much how many areas you have to take, but rather how many areas in which you have to defend once you get the bonus. North Norway can be attacked in 4 areas, that's a lot for just +2. +3 seems fairer here (personally though, unless it's easy or I otherwise have to, I rarely bother to try to grab/hold bonuses that doesn't at least give me a 1/1 ration, i.e. for each area I comit to defend, I would want 1 bonus troop next round).
Ah, but Köbenhavn is included in the Denmark bonus, which makes Denmark a +3 really. And with Faroe, you get a total of +4 with only 2 borders to defend. You think it should be higher then? Well...ManBungalow wrote:At the moment I'm thinking that the Denmark bonus is quite under-valued, having 5 regions.
Hmm, that's an interesting idea. I probably won't be adding any more cities though... the main reason being, there really aren't any large cities in the northern parts of the big countries. But beside that, it just seems to me it would complicate the gameplay needlessly...In games that are sequential and/or have more players, the larger bonuses (Finland, Norway and Sweden) are really out of the question due to the sheer number of borders they have. For that reason, you may want to consider making the auto-deploy on the capitals a +2 (assuming they start as neutrals) seeing how they will be the focus. Additionally, I think you could add in some more auto-deploy bonuses (large cities and so on) which might only be +1.
Ok. How do you suggest accomplishing this? Some glow / drop shadow to accentuate the text more, or maybe a partly opaque text box to frame the text? I'll try both...Also, the "Island boni" section could be a little more obvious at a glance.
Aww, you're making me blushAs for the graphics...well, they're almost kiss-able
There are smaller +2 and +3 bonuses to take as well... I don't want to remove the capitals, because basically, they offer an easy way of snatching some bonus troops, and they balance out the huge mainland bonuses somewhat. But anyway, I can up the neutral count on the capitals a bit. How's 4 troops sound?captainwalrus wrote:I honestly don't like the capitals at all. It makes it so someone starting near a capital can get an easy +1 but everyone else has to fight it out for the larger +4 bonuses. I would be fine seeing them taken out.
Thanks, will be taken in consideration.Lufsen75 wrote:If the map is in scandinavian laguage in all countries why not in the bonus areas in total to and not only Norrland?
Otherwise I really like it.
Deployment is balanced, territory count has been optimized for balanced deployment, also adding to the balance is the coding of territories near capitals to starting points, which gives everyone an equal chance to grab capitals at the start of the game.The development of solid, balanced gameplay is one of the first challenges of map development. In order to meet gameplay expectations and make your map successful, you will need to incorporate the following elements:
Balanced deployment - It should be unlikely that one or more players can start the game with a major advantage as a result of the initial drop or getting the first turn. Conquer Club is primarily a strategy game, and we therefore like to minimise as many of the luck factors as possible - the dice are randomness enough!
Let's go through the bonuses one by one...Reasonable bonus structure - Bonuses should make sense given the size/style of the map, and be based on a consistent formula. Consideration should be given to balancing the strength of the board, ensuring that no specific area of the map gives an overwhelming advantage from the start of a game.
2 players: Each player starts with 20 territories, of which 4 are next to capitals. There are 5 capitals so they won't be even if both go for capitals... However, different strategies can be applied in the start. One can go straight for the capitals, or jump on his opponent straight away, or go for the smaller bonus areas.Game type flexibility - The map should support various game types and not be designed with specific/limited game settings in mind (standard, assassin, fog of war, 2 players, etc.). Maps designed for fewer than 8-players should be discouraged, and will only be approved if the map is really something special.
Well, I think everything is fairly easy to understand. If there's anything in the map that's hard to understand I'll be grateful if someone points it out to me.Player-friendliness - Any information you need to know to play a map should be easy to gather by looking at the map itself. The legend should be clear, concise and consistent; the map itself should be free of unnecessary or cumbersome rules that push it over the line separating complex from confusing.
I think this part is also well covered within the map. Anyone disagree?Open-play - There should be many ways a game might progress on a map, and many roads to victory. Such features as unpassable borders should enhance, not limit, gameplay, and every effort should be made to limit the number of dead ends and bottlenecks in a map, unless they are justified by the desired play of the map. The map should be fun to play, not frustrating.
Should be, I think. The minimap will help anyone who may have problems with the colour scheme.Function trumps form - The style of the graphics should not detract from ease of play: borders should be clear, titles and numbers easy to read, colors easy to distinguish, etc...
Thanks for your opinion, but... the capitals are a crucial part of the gameplay. There's too few small bonuses without the capitals, they are acting as a balance towards the openness of the Finland/Sweden area.Industrial Helix wrote:Wel, I've said it a couple of times but I really don't like the capitals. This map is huge the way it is, I think that capitals only crowd the graphics and map as well as add a layer of unneeded confusion. I think, given that this map has a large amount of territories, you should drop the capitals.
Lack of choke points?Speaking of having large amount of territories... the lack of choke points makes me want to stray away from this map. I feel like if I ever secured a bonus that I could never defend it. I feel like it removes a lot of strategy and opens a lot up to chance.
I'm sorry IH, but that just sounds like BS to me. First of all this map is not about scandinavia, this is about Nordic countries. That's 5 (five) countries, with different cultures each. Granted, the population is relatively low, and the density of population too, if you compare with places like USA. We don't have any cities with 20-30 million people. But I don't see why that should mean an accurate representation of the area could not be made. To me, the amount of territories reflects the variety of culture in the area. Even within the same countries, the culture is very different in different parts of the countries.The large amount of territories also seem, to me, uncharacteristic of Scandinavia. I mean, I've never been there so I might be full of it but my perception is that there's a lot of expansive space. Having many territories is reflective of lack of space, and this map kind of gives the perception that Scandinavia is as crowded as Tokyo.
Umm, not likely to happen. But tell you what: I'll look for a way to add some more impassables between the bonus areas. I'll search the maps for some rivers, forests, whatever, to reduce the borders on 2 or 3 bonuses in sweden & finland. And thus also reducing a few bonuses. That should be a happy compromiseSo in summation, I'd favor grouping some of the territories, especially up north, and reducing a few of the bonuses to give some players a chance at getting a bonus.
Nice.Industrial Helix wrote:I like the change, I think it balances the map out more. Before it looked too much like players were going to grab Denmark and Iceland or both and then win the game. I should have clarified that I thought it was the right side of the map that was like a giant Asia. But I think these new impassables help, especially given the terr. size of the map.
But why? There's already only 3 borders in both central and northern finland. I fear that making southern finland only 3 borders would make it too easy to take whole finland. South Finland already has a capital, which makes it easier to take: you can first take the capital, then use the bonus to take the rest of the bonus area. I think having one extra border on the bonus balances this nicely. The same as in Sweden, the bonus with the capital has the most borders.Might I suggest extending the forest to protect Kymenlaakso as well? I know that bonus down there can be reduced to 3 borders, but it's 8 territories large and you have to expand onto other areas as to protect.
Hi I like the idea but I think it needs some improvementsnatty_dread wrote:Ok here's a map of Nordic Countries!
Latest versions
v.34
- Click image to enlarge.
V.33a & 33b
! to 4 (I think South Sweden would be a better name) How about a bonus if holding all capitals? And a big bonus if holding: Rovaniemi, Kemijärvi, Pohjios lappi, Käsivarsi, Finnmark, Troms, Lofoten, Norra lappland and Norrbotten. The bonus could be called Lappland. I also think the route from Iceland to Svalbard should go through Reykjavik since it's from there EVERYTHING is controlled on Iceland (that would also give Reykjavik a bigger value!) And I aslo think that finland's great lake Saimaa should be an impassable. And aditionally I think that there should be some twist to it, maybe a war theme or something! I'm looking forward to play on this map however it turns out ! 
Don't feel bad for that I'm just brainstorming, if the ideas doesn't fit then you shouldn't use them! I see that you've come a long way with this map already so I understand that you're reluctant towards major changes especially when it comes to bonuses and game themes. In my ideal dreams this map would've had a war theme maybe about the Swedish Empire and then Denmark shoul've had more territs. And there should've been ships to conquer! But until there's a map like that this will be my favorite map!!! I'm thinking of creating a map myself but I don't really know how to do it. What programs do I need and etc?natty_dread wrote:Thanks for your input Gillipig!
Unfortunately I'll have to tell you that bonus values are chosen for gameplay reasons, they are not meant to reflect any real world structures.
I will also not be making Denmark harder to hold, the map needs bonuses that are easy to hold, Denmark & Iceland are the only bonus areas that have only 2 borders so I will not be adding any borders to either of them. This just can't be done.
The lapland bonus you suggest sounds intriguing, but I fear it would make the map too complicated. I don't see a feasible way to implement it.
Gothland is the actual translation of "Götaland". See here -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gothland
I will also have to turn down your idea of connecting Svalbard to Reykjavik. Again this is for gameplay reasons, I don't want to make Iceland only have 1 border.
Your worries about the bonuses of Denmark are unfounded, I assure you. It is probably the strongest areas in the map, it can be held with only 2 territories to defend, and can be easily expanded to create very strong bonus combinations: On one side you can expand to Faroe and further to Iceland, on the other you can expand to Gothland. It is a very strong area, I think you'll find that in most games players will be going for Denmark first, if they can.
As was explained earlier in the thread, the lakes of Finland are too small and scattered and do not match any of the territory borders. It would be impossible to use them as impassables in this scale. I'd like to, but it's just not feasible.
A bonus for holding all capitals, well, in a way you already get one: you get 5 troops for holding all capitals, although scattered all over the map... do you think they should give even more? How could that be balanced against the rest of the map? Do you see a way to do this without making the capitals too strong?
I feel a bit bad for shooting down all of your suggestions. Your ideas are good, but at this point in map development, they just don't fit the gameplay of the map. I really liked your idea of making a bonus for holding the lapland area, and actually I have been thinking something similar myself. But alas, I can not see a way to implement this without making the map too complex and confusing. Sorry.
Feel free to pm me if you wish to discuss these issues more in depth.
! Not really reluctant as such... You had some good ideas such as the lapland bonus, but like I said I don't see a feasible way to implement it at this point.Gillipig wrote: Don't feel bad for that I'm just brainstorming, if the ideas doesn't fit then you shouldn't use them! I see that you've come a long way with this map already so I understand that you're reluctant towards major changes especially when it comes to bonuses and game themes.
Thanks for that. Yeah, maybe a map like that could be made in the future, but this map is more a general representation of the modern day Nordics and their territories.In my ideal dreams this map would've had a war theme maybe about the Swedish Empire and then Denmark shoul've had more territs. And there should've been ships to conquer! But until there's a map like that this will be my favorite map!!!
Any graphics software that utilizes layers will do. I myself use paint.net. Most use photoshop or GIMP, though.I'm thinking of creating a map myself but I don't really know how to do it. What programs do I need and etc?
Yeah. I think the english name sounds cool though. Gothland has a nice gothic feel to it...I didn't know that Götaland translates into Gothland in English but since Göteborg is Gothenburgh in English I should've been able to guess it
