Moderator: Cartographers
koontz1973 wrote:Map images and xml to holding 40 squares before getting the extra 5.
[url]
http://img213.imageshack.us/img213/784/nklm.png[/url]
http://img545.imageshack.us/img545/350/nks.png
http://www.fileden.com/files/2012/1/27/3255536/KNIGHTS.xml
The Cheat wrote:The current language: "You will receive 5 troops per round and 5 extra troops when you control 40 squares" is awkward ...
Perhaps it should read: "You will receive 5 troops per round." ... and then list the 5 bonus troops for controlling 40 squares under the bonuses ... with the rest of the bonuses ...
koontz1973 wrote:It might be in the xml as a bonus, but it is not a bonus as such. I do not want to describe it as such. If they was a way to do it as reinforcements within the xml then I would. I could change the name of that bonus continent to Extra Reinforcements though.
ender516 wrote:I don't understand your reluctance to call it a bonus.
army of nobunaga wrote:no bonus would have been better
but as it is, I like it
sirgermaine wrote:This map is specifically geared towards 1v1 games; aren't maps supposed to be reasonably playable at all settings? I am in an eight player game on this, and the extra +5 troops is totally out of reach for anyone, as well as for the most part shield bonuses (nobody has had 4 of a color for even one turn, even in a fog game). How does this map address playability for more players than the specifically designed 1v1 setting, or is there some admin or higher-up that said that it's okay to ignore that?
nolefan5311 wrote:The ability to take/hold bonuses is not considered in the playability of map, in the sense you're talking about. The only thing we make sure of is as fair a drop as possible (which this map has because the shields begin neutral), or that certain bonuses don't yield too many reinforcements for the amount of territories and/or access points.
Cyprus, Luxembourg, etc. (most of the smaller maps), also aren't conducive to players holding bonuses in 8 player games. Those aren't flaws in those maps...it's just the way it is.
koontz1973 wrote:sirgermaine wrote:This map is specifically geared towards 1v1 games; aren't maps supposed to be reasonably playable at all settings? I am in an eight player game on this, and the extra +5 troops is totally out of reach for anyone, as well as for the most part shield bonuses (nobody has had 4 of a color for even one turn, even in a fog game). How does this map address playability for more players than the specifically designed 1v1 setting, or is there some admin or higher-up that said that it's okay to ignore that?
You are right that this map has an xml designed for 1v1 games in as much as the positions are set at both sides of the board. But I also took into account the larger games. It is superb fun in assassin mode or even terminator large games. The bonuses where added as a way for extra troops, not that you need them. The extra 5 was placed there to end games faster when you are a few turns from finishing.
Large games, you need to build up slowly and not be so aggressive. This is not your typical land grab, bonus holding game but one of slow methodical turns, out thinking your opponents every turn. You need to be able to think a few goes ahead and plan for the long game. Reacting to what your opponents do each and every turn. Key points to think about, centre is the strongest position as your knights can attack 8 ways, but also the weakest as 8 can attack them. Starting at a corner and working out is the best for the large game as you leave no one behind you to attack.
for a game where all the players follow good strategy.
koontz1973 wrote:Harsh, I found it amusing.
It is not mentioned on the board and only appears when it is done?
Users browsing this forum: No registered users