Czecho Slovak Fragmentation [Quenched]

[Jippd]

I don't know if you had to eliminate the towns bonus completely. Changing it to +1 for every 6 would fix the 1 v 1 issue. Though as others have pointed out there are a lot of maps that are unfair for 1 v 1.

But keeping it +1 for every 6 might make say 3 player or 4 player games more interesting for example.

[chapcrap]

I think that having all of the territories start with 2 on them, neutrals included, would help to solve some problems.

[Oneyed]

I don't know if you had to eliminate the towns bonus completely. Changing it to +1 for every 6 would fix the 1 v 1 issue. Though as others have pointed out there are a lot of maps that are unfair for 1 v 1.

to be honest, I like Town bonus. but what I hate more are maps where one player holds any bonus from start (and another no)...

But keeping it +1 for every 6 might make say 3 player or 4 player games more interesting for example.

this should works. I also want to eliminate 1 v 1 game problems. so ones more is here question - could be in 1 v 1 game codded more neutrals as in other games?
we have 32 territories for deploying. if in 1 v 1 game will each player starts with 12 territories this gives us 11 neutrals. if Town bonus will be +1 for 6, 12 territories will give to each player +1. I do not think there will be situation when one player will starts with 12 towns and no one region... ian?

I think that having all of the territories start with 2 on them, neutrals included, would help to solve some problems.

but this does not solve the main problem - no one (or both in 1 v 1) player could start with Town bonus.

Oneyed

[iancanton]

But keeping it +1 for every 6 might make say 3 player or 4 player games more interesting for example.

this should works. I also want to eliminate 1 v 1 game problems. so ones more is here question - could be in 1 v 1 game codded more neutrals as in other games?
we have 32 territories for deploying. if in 1 v 1 game will each player starts with 12 territories this gives us 11 neutrals. if Town bonus will be +1 for 6, 12 territories will give to each player +1. I do not think there will be situation when one player will starts with 12 towns and no one region... ian?

by default, each 1v1 game starts with each player having 10 territories, with 12 random neutrals and 3 fixed neutrals. if u want to have +1 for holding 6 towns, then it is possible to code the 22 towns (excluding brno) as underlying neutral start positions and let each player have maximum 5 positions. if u do this, then 1v1 games will start with each player having exactly 5 towns and 3 coloured regions, with 13 neutral towns (including brno), 4 neutral regions and 2 neutral capitals.

unlike the two capitals, brno has no special bonus of its own, so why does it always start neutral? why not let it be a normal town? or are u planning to use brno as a special part of the town bonus?

ian.

[Jippd]

But keeping it +1 for every 6 might make say 3 player or 4 player games more interesting for example.

this should works. I also want to eliminate 1 v 1 game problems. so ones more is here question - could be in 1 v 1 game codded more neutrals as in other games?
we have 32 territories for deploying. if in 1 v 1 game will each player starts with 12 territories this gives us 11 neutrals. if Town bonus will be +1 for 6, 12 territories will give to each player +1. I do not think there will be situation when one player will starts with 12 towns and no one region... ian?

by default, each 1v1 game starts with each player having 10 territories, with 12 random neutrals and 3 fixed neutrals. if u want to have +1 for holding 6 towns, then it is possible to code the 22 towns (excluding brno) as underlying neutral start positions and let each player have maximum 5 positions. if u do this, then 1v1 games will start with each player having exactly 5 towns and 3 coloured regions, with 13 neutral towns (including brno), 4 neutral regions and 2 neutral capitals.

unlike the two capitals, brno has no special bonus of its own, so why does it always start neutral? why not let it be a normal town? or are u planning to use brno as a special part of the town bonus?

ian.

BRNO I believe is neutral because it connects the capitals.

As far as what you suggested about the underlying neutral start positions to code the towns...what does that mean? Just make some of the towns permanent neutrals?

[Oneyed]

I will post this info just for your review oneyed (this is just 1v1):

Town Bonus +1 for 4 - chances of dropping at least 4 towns is 99.7%. Chances of dropping 8 towns is 31.02%

Town Bonus +1 for 5 - chances of dropping at least 5 towns is 97.32%. Chances of dropping 10 towns is 1%.

Town Bonus for +1 for 6 - chances of dropping at least 6 towns is 87.03%. Chances of dropping 12 (all of your starting territories for a +2) is miniscule.

I agree with ian in that eliminating the town bonus would probably be the best option to make the gameplay more balanced. Increasing it to 5 would significantly lower the chances of a player dropping a +2, but the chances of dropping a +1 are so high (and the chances of dropping 7 is over 62%), that the first player could easily get the 8th town on his first turn for the +2 while also knocking down his opponents chances of getting the +2. That's a longwinded way of saying I think getting rid of the town bonus is the best bet.

I can not see any problem with +2 for Town bonus from start when Town bonus will looks +1 for 6 towns. and also +1 for Town bonus in 1 v 1 game is eliminated if I good understand ian´s suggestion below. in 1 v 1 game each player starts with 10 regions.

by default, each 1v1 game starts with each player having 10 territories, with 12 random neutrals and 3 fixed neutrals. if u want to have +1 for holding 6 towns, then it is possible to code the 22 towns (excluding brno) as underlying neutral start positions and let each player have maximum 5 positions. if u do this, then 1v1 games will start with each player having exactly 5 towns and 3 coloured regions, with 13 neutral towns (including brno), 4 neutral regions and 2 neutral capitals.

unlike the two capitals, brno has no special bonus of its own, so why does it always start neutral? why not let it be a normal town? or are u planning to use brno as a special part of the town bonus?

ian.

so ian, when this is possible to code, do you still against Town bonus? also if I changed it to +1 for 6 towns, also if we code that each player in 1 v 1 game starts with only 5 towns?

BRNO I believe is neutral because it connects the capitals.

As far as what you suggested about the underlying neutral start positions to code the towns...what does that mean? Just make some of the towns permanent neutrals?

Jippd is right. Brno is permanent neutral because it connects capitals. there are 4 positions from where can be Praha assaulted directly and 4 from where can be Bratislava assaulted directly. if Brno will be held by any player from start it gives him big advantage because this player will has 2 positions from where can be any of capitals assaulted.

thanks for help, guys

Oneyed

[nolefan5311]

I will post this info just for your review oneyed (this is just 1v1):

Town Bonus +1 for 4 - chances of dropping at least 4 towns is 99.7%. Chances of dropping 8 towns is 31.02%

Town Bonus +1 for 5 - chances of dropping at least 5 towns is 97.32%. Chances of dropping 10 towns is 1%.

Town Bonus for +1 for 6 - chances of dropping at least 6 towns is 87.03%. Chances of dropping 12 (all of your starting territories for a +2) is miniscule.

I agree with ian in that eliminating the town bonus would probably be the best option to make the gameplay more balanced. Increasing it to 5 would significantly lower the chances of a player dropping a +2, but the chances of dropping a +1 are so high (and the chances of dropping 7 is over 62%), that the first player could easily get the 8th town on his first turn for the +2 while also knocking down his opponents chances of getting the +2. That's a longwinded way of saying I think getting rid of the town bonus is the best bet.

I can not see any problem with +2 for Town bonus from start when Town bonus will looks +1 for 6 towns. and also +1 for Town bonus in 1 v 1 game is eliminated if I good understand ian´s suggestion below. in 1 v 1 game each player starts with 10 regions.

by default, each 1v1 game starts with each player having 10 territories, with 12 random neutrals and 3 fixed neutrals. if u want to have +1 for holding 6 towns, then it is possible to code the 22 towns (excluding brno) as underlying neutral start positions and let each player have maximum 5 positions. if u do this, then 1v1 games will start with each player having exactly 5 towns and 3 coloured regions, with 13 neutral towns (including brno), 4 neutral regions and 2 neutral capitals.

unlike the two capitals, brno has no special bonus of its own, so why does it always start neutral? why not let it be a normal town? or are u planning to use brno as a special part of the town bonus?

ian.

so ian, when this is possible to code, do you still against Town bonus? also if I changed it to +1 for 6 towns, also if we code that each player in 1 v 1 game starts with only 5 towns?

BRNO I believe is neutral because it connects the capitals.

As far as what you suggested about the underlying neutral start positions to code the towns...what does that mean? Just make some of the towns permanent neutrals?

Jippd is right. Brno is permanent neutral because it connects capitals. there are 4 positions from where can be Praha assaulted directly and 4 from where can be Bratislava assaulted directly. if Brno will be held by any player from start it gives him big advantage because this player will has 2 positions from where can be any of capitals assaulted.

thanks for help, guys

Oneyed

You're right, I dont know why I all of the sudden thought each player had 12 starting positions. I suppose I need to pay more attention, . I do need to ask whats the point of having that bonus if both players drop it...all that does is allow the first player to drop the extra troop and hit the other players bonus before he can collect it. With an 87% chance of dropping a +1, that's going to be the case in a lot of games.

I will let ian respond to his post, but what he's talking about is dropping the start positions from 10 to 8. Is that something you want to do?

Honestly, I like the idea of +2 for 10 towns (leave out the +1 altogether). There is a 1% chance that a player drops 10 towns (or all of his starting positions), which is tiny, but that provides a nice incentive to work towards. Just my opinion.

[Oneyed]

I do need to ask whats the point of having that bonus if both players drop it...

because I like maps with more different bonuses. forgot the 1 v 1 game problem for now...

all that does is allow the first player to drop the extra troop and hit the other players bonus before he can collect it. With an 87% chance of dropping a +1, that's going to be the case in a lot of games.

...we still talking about 1 v 1 game. only here would this problem become, but I think in other games this bonus will be interesting for players.

I will let ian respond to his post, but what he's talking about is dropping the start positions from 10 to 8. Is that something you want to do?

I do not know, because I do not know anything about xml. if there will be codded some "permanent" starting positions everything looks solved. the 8 territories bordering with capitals could be starting positions:
towns: Plzeň, Kladno, Benešov, Trenčín, Nitra, Komárno and regions: StČK, ZSK. the rest of map could be codded as random deployed...

Honestly, I like the idea of +2 for 10 towns (leave out the +1 altogether). There is a 1% chance that a player drops 10 towns (or all of his starting positions), which is tiny, but that provides a nice incentive to work towards. Just my opinion.

+2 for 10? I am afraid in 8, 7, 6 players games it will be too hard to get any bonus. but I am fine go without Town bonus as is done in last version. btw, this is map about fragmentation, so now without common Town bonus all bonuses depending on fragmentation...

Oneyed

[nolefan5311]

I do need to ask whats the point of having that bonus if both players drop it...

because I like maps with more different bonuses. forgot the 1 v 1 game problem for now...

I agree that it does add an extra dimension to the gameplay

all that does is allow the first player to drop the extra troop and hit the other players bonus before he can collect it. With an 87% chance of dropping a +1, that's going to be the case in a lot of games.

...we still talking about 1 v 1 game. only here would this problem become, but I think in other games this bonus will be interesting for players.

Right, this issue is only for the 1v1. But a lot of 1v1 games will be played on it, so we need to try to work out some element of fairness for that game type.

I will let ian respond to his post, but what he's talking about is dropping the start positions from 10 to 8. Is that something you want to do?

I do not know, because I do not know anything about xml. if there will be codded some "permanent" starting positions everything looks solved. the 8 territories bordering with capitals could be starting positions:
towns: Plzeň, Kladno, Benešov, Trenčín, Nitra, Komárno and regions: StČK, ZSK. the rest of map could be codded as random deployed...

The issue with this is that if it is a permanently coded start position, it has to be permanently coded for all game types, not just 1v1. You can have those coded as permanent neutrals, along with Praha, Bratislava, and Brno, but they will have to be permanent in all games. That drops the total number of starting regions to 24 (35 regions with 11 coded neutrals) with 16 towns (+6 coded neutrals, excluding Brno and the capitals). With that in mind, with 8 starting territories for a player in 1v1, there's a 44.68% chance that a player will drop 6 towns (and by extension, a 89.36 chance both players will drop the bonus), a 14.19% chance that a player will drop 7 towns, and a 1.75% chance that a player will drop 8 towns. Check out the golden numbers spreadsheet for how many regions each player will drop in larger game types.

Honestly, I like the idea of +2 for 10 towns (leave out the +1 altogether). There is a 1% chance that a player drops 10 towns (or all of his starting positions), which is tiny, but that provides a nice incentive to work towards. Just my opinion.

+2 for 10? I am afraid in 8, 7, 6 players games it will be too hard to get any bonus. but I am fine go without Town bonus as is done in last version. btw, this is map about fragmentation, so now without common Town bonus all bonuses depending on fragmentation...

Oneyed

Without the town bonus the map is ready for the gameplay stamp. I can apply it now, and if you really want the town bonus we can continue working on it. If it doesn't work out, you can always fall back to the stamped version without the town bonus. Honestly, I do like the idea of the town bonus but we need to figure out a better probability

[iancanton]

as others have pointed out there are a lot of maps that are unfair for 1 v 1.

on most small or medium-sized maps, the vast majority of games are 1v1. this is a small map, therefore it must be made fair for 1v1, above any other format. an example: macedonia has had 6,951 games finished so far, where 4,835 (70%) were 1v1 and 902 (13%) were 4-player, with 1,214 (17%) for all other formats together.

if u want to have +1 for holding 6 towns, then it is possible to code the 22 towns (excluding brno) as underlying neutral start positions and let each player have maximum 5 positions. if u do this, then 1v1 games will start with each player having exactly 5 towns and 3 coloured regions, with 13 neutral towns (including brno), 4 neutral regions and 2 neutral capitals.

As far as what you suggested about the underlying neutral start positions to code the towns...what does that mean? Just make some of the towns permanent neutrals?

a normal start position, if not allocated to a player, is put back into the pot for random distribution, so it can go to either player. an underlying neutral start position, if allocated to a player, is the same as a normal start position; if not allocated, it starts neutral.

in the example above, the mapmaker codes 22 underlying neutral start positions of 1 town each; he also codes codes a maximum of 5 positions per player (if he does not do this, then there is no limit, so both players start with 11 towns). in 1v1, the game engine allocates 5 towns to each player then, because we've reached the chosen maximum, the other 12 towns are not allocated and therefore start neutral; it also randomly distributes 3 regions to each player and the other 4 start neutral; brno and the two capitals also start neutral. in 2v2, the game engine allocates 5 towns to each player, then the other 2 towns start neutral; it also randomly distributes 2 regions to each player and the other 2 start neutral; brno and the two capitals also start neutral.

to be clear, there are not 8 start positions per player here. there are 5 start positions per player because it must be less than the number needed for the town bonus. each player starts with 5 coded start positions and 3 uncoded random regions.

ian.

[Oneyed]

to be clear, there are not 8 start positions per player here. there are 5 start positions per player because it must be less than the number needed for the town bonus. each player starts with 5 coded start positions and 3 uncoded random regions.

ian.

ian, I think this map would goes without Town bonus as we spoke... it was your idea, so do you think without Town bonus the gameplay is done?

Oneyed

[iancanton]

Without the town bonus the map is ready for the gameplay stamp.

if u agree, then nolefan is ready to stamp the map without the town bonus, so that u can work on graphics.

I can apply it now, and if you really want the town bonus we can continue working on it. If it doesn't work out, you can always fall back to the stamped version without the town bonus. Honestly, I do like the idea of the town bonus but we need to figure out a better probability

after u have the gameplay stamp from nolefan, u may, if u wish, choose to develop a version with a town bonus to see if it works; alternatively, u can choose the simpler route of the map with no town bonus, which allows u to concentrate immediately on making the map look good.

ian.

[Oneyed]

ok, guys. let´s go without Town bonus...

Oneyed

[nolefan5311]

If anyone has any other comments on gameplay, now is the time to speak up! If there are no other concerns within the next couple of days, this map will receive the Gameplay Stamp!

[Jippd]

I think it looks good. Just a side thought but you could possibly think about adding a bonus for holding all roads along the highway including the capitals for a +1 or +2 maybe? Just to add another dimension to the map

[isaiah40]

Let's get this moved on up!!

[Flapcake]

Congratulation Oneyed Lets gets the graphics tuned up for the blue stamp

[Jippd]

What do the graphics people thing is wrong with the map as it stands?

[Oneyed]

thanks for stamp and for congratulations

Oneyed

[Flapcake]

What do the graphics people thing is wrong with the map as it stands?

That depend on the eyes that looks, maby you dont see any thing wrong, maby I dont and ohters, some do for sure and ohters just dont like it no matter what, thats what makes us different and by that we also got different opinions.

You dont go strait from draft to beta, the graphics need to have an overlook to recive the blue stamp, its the same process for all.

I think its a nice map, but this is how its done.

[Jippd]

What do the graphics people thing is wrong with the map as it stands?

That depend on the eyes that looks, maby you dont see any thing wrong, maby I dont and ohters, some do for sure and ohters just dont like it no matter what, thats what makes us different and by that we also got different opinions.

You dont go strait from draft to beta, the graphics need to have an overlook to recive the blue stamp, its the same process for all.

I think its a nice map, but this is how its done.

I know I was trying to get the ball rolling on what is wrong so I could help offer suggestions.

[koontz1973]

oneyed, after a quick look at this, not much really needs to be done to give this a great polished look. Some of the things that need some attention are...

Your army circles have flat tops/bottoms and sides. Give them a slight feathering to get them more circular.
Your grey cities are just bland. Can you give them some slight noise and blur to give them some depth.
Around the edges where you have overlapping lines, they become darker. Look at the cities again. You can clearly see the darker parts where you have drawn twice in one point. Same goes for a few other places.
Some of the city/town names on the map (non playing part) are very easy to read while others are impossible to read. Can we get them all readable or get rid of the ones you cannot read.

Other than that, your good to go for the small map.

Maybe.

[RedBaron0]

First thing to look at I think is the text of the territories overlaping the borders, it blends a tad and the text would do well with either a soft glow or a little erasing of the border beneath the text.

A different symbol or 'spot' for the kraj to help differentiate between the cities and the kraj.

[Oneyed]

Your army circles have flat tops/bottoms and sides. Give them a slight feathering to get them more circular.

they were done as circles - I used tools for circles. I also see what you, but I can not see another possibility how to make them better...

Your grey cities are just bland. Can you give them some slight noise and blur to give them some depth.

the map is done as board map. the complex graphic is out here, I think.

Around the edges where you have overlapping lines, they become darker. Look at the cities again. You can clearly see the darker parts where you have drawn twice in one point. Same goes for a few other places.

again, this is a board map. when you look at some maps you can see that meridians and parallels "go" throught cities, names, symbols. if there will be more demurs on this I can do some edits.

Some of the city/town names on the map (non playing part) are very easy to read while others are impossible to read. Can we get them all readable or get rid of the ones you cannot read.

several names are overlaping a litle by railways or roads, but these are not important and again - this could be "real" map, where these things happen

Other than that, your good to go for the small map.

will do . thanks for help.

First thing to look at I think is the text of the territories overlaping the borders, it blends a tad and the text would do well with either a soft glow or a little erasing of the border beneath the text.

yes, there is this problem with some names. I would a little erasing border - as I answered to koontz - this could be a board map, so complex graphic things would be out here.

A different symbol or 'spot' for the kraj to help differentiate between the cities and the kraj.

you mean symbol for SČK, ZSK and so on? maybe simple line above them?

thanks for your input and help.

Oneyed

[pamoa]

you have a very good looking map nice job
but I don't see the utility of the highway
apart between Benesov and Brno
it only connect town in bordering kraj which already are connected
or it is the only connection to capitals then it should be said so
any way your connection system is very unclear
and players without BOB may have big surprise