Clandemonium [GP,GX,XML,BETA]

[grifftron]

-




sending u a pm now griff

Thank you sir. Here it is jefjef, anything else you guys see? When are we gonna get out of this idea forum?

Click image to enlarge.

[Mr_Adams]

it's good enough for me! get the XML written!

[grifftron]

it's good enough for me! get the XML written!

Well we aren't even out of the ideas forum yet But we might do the xml by ourselves unless we can find a volunteer to do it for us, of course you would not get a medal as there is only allowed 2 per map but you could get your name on the map

[Chariot of Fire]

Sorry to pour cold water on the layout, but don't you think LoW6, Legion2, BSS7 & Dragoon3 are made "too easy"? They are each adjacent to the drop zone, and once taken they each have adjacent access to both a portal and a castle.

Seems to me whoever gets any of these 4 is already at a distinct advantage, esp in a game with adjacent forts where such a configuration would be a huge head start. You simply keep forting from your drop zone to these adjacent spots and your poor opponent isn't going to know which route you might take nor find a route to get at your drop zone.

Maybe I should keep these little strategies to myself. Hmmm

(Land of LoW - huge advantage. If the holder sits on LoW6 there is no alternative route to his drop zone once through that portal, unlike the other start points).

[Mr_Adams]

Mr_Adams has no experience writing XML, sorry . I know you are no where near finishing, was just saying that I like the map at this point. kind of like "Checkpoint!" just curious, what design program are you using? I have photoshop, but have no idea how to use it. my biggest question is the borders. what tools/settings do you use for these?

[Mr_Adams]

Sorry to pour cold water on the layout, but don't you think LoW6, Legion2, BSS7 & Dragoon3 are made "too easy"? They are each adjacent to the drop zone, and once taken they each have adjacent access to both a portal and a castle.

Seems to me whoever gets any of these 4 is already at a distinct advantage, esp in a game with adjacent forts where such a configuration would be a huge head start. You simply keep forting from your drop zone to these adjacent spots and your poor opponent isn't going to know which route you might take nor find a route to get at your drop zone.

Maybe I should keep these little strategies to myself. Hmmm

(Land of LoW - huge advantage. If the holder sits on LoW6 there is no alternative route to his drop zone once through that portal, unlike the other start points).

make LoW 3&4 into 1, then split 6 into 2 in such away that one attacks 7 and another attacks AOD.
Legion 2 only blocks TOFU, 3 can take 5, then barracks.
BSS is sheep squad? if so, just disconnect from the pen.
Dragoon, simply detach 7 from 3. (maybe a water feature to keep 5&8 detached?)

[grifftron]

Sorry to pour cold water on the layout, but don't you think LoW6, Legion2, BSS7 & Dragoon3 are made "too easy"? They are each adjacent to the drop zone, and once taken they each have adjacent access to both a portal and a castle.

Seems to me whoever gets any of these 4 is already at a distinct advantage, esp in a game with adjacent forts where such a configuration would be a huge head start. You simply keep forting from your drop zone to these adjacent spots and your poor opponent isn't going to know which route you might take nor find a route to get at your drop zone.

Maybe I should keep these little strategies to myself. Hmmm

(Land of LoW - huge advantage. If the holder sits on LoW6 there is no alternative route to his drop zone once through that portal, unlike the other start points).

make LoW 3&4 into 1, then split 6 into 2 in such away that one attacks 7 and another attacks AOD.
Legion 2 only blocks TOFU, 3 can take 5, then barracks.
BSS is sheep squad? if so, just disconnect from the pen.
Dragoon, simply detach 7 from 3. (maybe a water feature to keep 5&8 detached?)

Cold Water? CoF, more like HOLY WATER, you are making this map better by these comments and this is very appreciated by Blitz and I. And thanks for thinking some of that over Mr_Adams, I will look into that more when i get some time and fix some of those boarders so that clan drop points wont be at such advantages. Thanks guys, very constructive thoughts.

-griff

[jefjef]

This has easily progressed far enough to be in the Gameplay workshop.

I would like to see balance as far as drop points and castles go.

See zero probs with No mans and the portals. Maybe have the castle's a bit more visible.

You could change No mans land to Mermaid Island.

[Blitzaholic]

Sorry to pour cold water on the layout, but don't you think LoW6, Legion2, BSS7 & Dragoon3 are made "too easy"? They are each adjacent to the drop zone, and once taken they each have adjacent access to both a portal and a castle.

Seems to me whoever gets any of these 4 is already at a distinct advantage, esp in a game with adjacent forts where such a configuration would be a huge head start. You simply keep forting from your drop zone to these adjacent spots and your poor opponent isn't going to know which route you might take nor find a route to get at your drop zone.

Maybe I should keep these little strategies to myself. Hmmm

(Land of LoW - huge advantage. If the holder sits on LoW6 there is no alternative route to his drop zone once through that portal, unlike the other start points).

make LoW 3&4 into 1, then split 6 into 2 in such away that one attacks 7 and another attacks AOD.
Legion 2 only blocks TOFU, 3 can take 5, then barracks.
BSS is sheep squad? if so, just disconnect from the pen.
Dragoon, simply detach 7 from 3. (maybe a water feature to keep 5&8 detached?)

Cold Water? CoF, more like HOLY WATER, you are making this map better by these comments and this is very appreciated by Blitz and I. And thanks for thinking some of that over Mr_Adams, I will look into that more when i get some time and fix some of those boarders so that clan drop points wont be at such advantages. Thanks guys, very constructive thoughts.

-griff

I agree with CoF and Griff here, thx guys

[Blitzaholic]

it's good enough for me! get the XML written!

thx , however, we are waiting for it to be moved to game play workshop.

This has easily progressed far enough to be in the Gameplay workshop.

I would like to see balance as far as drop points and castles go.

See zero probs with No mans and the portals. Maybe have the castle's a bit more visible.

You could change No mans land to Mermaid Island.

ok, thx jefjef



hopefully it gets moved to workshop soon, I pm'd mrbenn and redbaron both, so , hopefully one of them can move it there soon.

[natty dread]

Maps are moved every two weeks, in the new system. The last design brief evaluation was a couple days ago so you'll need to wait a few days...

[Industrial Helix]

Ok, I don't see how this map is going to really play any differently than Feudal or Pelopennesian War. Yeah, it's got the Pinnicle in the middle which makes it like WWII Poland.... but its incredible hard to reach and I think will rarely ever come into play.

I really think a different gameplay needs to be considered.

[grifftron]

Ok, I don't see how this map is going to really play any differently than Feudal or Pelopennesian War. Yeah, it's got the Pinnicle in the middle which makes it like WWII Poland.... but its incredible hard to reach and I think will rarely ever come into play.

I really think a different gameplay needs to be considered.

Hmm.. we will see what others think too about this I.H

Maybe if we lower some of the neutrals that would help get to the pinnacle, but at the same time we want to make it hard to get there too because of the ability of attacking all drop points...

Thanks for the comment I.H

[Chariot of Fire]

griff, I was actually pondering this very same thought earlier, i.e. are the neutrals too high in value to deter a foray. I think they are to be honest, and what will eventually prevail (for the winner) is simply a case of having had better dice than better strategy. If neuts are too high in value it becomes a stacking game from the outset (no skill there, agreed) until such time as one player beats a 9 with his 12 whilst the oppo roll 4-8 against their neut 9 (leaving a 4 up against a neut 5). Pretty bad news, and already the game is going to reward the team/player that got the lucky dice to get on a portal or castle (esp a portal, for who will attack a neut portal to then be able to attack an oppo's held portal?).

So....just an opinion, but for more exciting and dynamic play that isn't too dice-dependant I'd recommend lowering the value of the neuts so that they don't become the factor in ruining someone's game due to shoddy dice.

[Blitzaholic]

griff, I was actually pondering this very same thought earlier, i.e. are the neutrals too high in value to deter a foray. I think they are to be honest, and what will eventually prevail (for the winner) is simply a case of having had better dice than better strategy. If neuts are too high in value it becomes a stacking game from the outset (no skill there, agreed) until such time as one player beats a 9 with his 12 whilst the oppo roll 4-8 against their neut 9 (leaving a 4 up against a neut 5). Pretty bad news, and already the game is going to reward the team/player that got the lucky dice to get on a portal or castle (esp a portal, for who will attack a neut portal to then be able to attack an oppo's held portal?).

So....just an opinion, but for more exciting and dynamic play that isn't too dice-dependant I'd recommend lowering the value of the neuts so that they don't become the factor in ruining someone's game due to shoddy dice.

what if we made pinnacle 7, it was 12, then dropped to 10, do you think 7 would be better?

After you have submitted your design brief in the Official Design Brief Submissions thread, a group of Foundry moderators will review your application in line with their review schedule (roughly every two weeks). The reviewers will make make suggestions and recommendations for the development of the map idea, with successful design concepts being moved into the Gameplay Workshop.

Last review was done on the 8th-9th, should be this weekend sometime when your map will be checked, but I can't say for sure.

thx redbaron, we will wait patiently.

[Chariot of Fire]

I think you have to play it out in your head for 5-6 rounds and see what would likely develop. When you realise that your first foray towards either a castle or portal can be countered by the oppo it will (9 times out of 10) make you sit and wait, counting their 'territory take'. Now in this game's rules there are no benefits to taking 'home' territories (akin to kingdom terrs in Feudal) so there's no incentive to tackle all those neut 2s that surround one's Drop Zone. This is wrong, for there should be a purpose to want to take them, or they'll remain neut 2s forever (I hope I'm right here, as I'm going on memory for I have no copy of the map at hand). This will thus become a 'build' game and also one that cannot be played in anything but fog. I think this is a shame and it should have playability in both sun and fog and also reward proactive play that gives small bonuses to players who have hit a certain number of neut terrs.

The highest value of anything on here should be 6 tops (5 preferable). When you have Pinnacle at such a high neut setting who will risk attacking it? I'll tell you who - the player for whom there is no risk because he knows he's so far ahead he can take a 7 and still hold it next turn.

What makes this map unique (despite all the naysayers who believe it's Feudal in another guise) is Pinnacle and its ability to attack externally. This should become a focal point and one of dynamism and exchange; not a golden calf for the player/team that can afford (after lots of stacking) to take and hold a neut 7.

So....my own tuppence worth....lower the neuts considerably and encourage a more dynamic attacking game rather than one which rewards stacking/waiting and the inevitability of a lot of stalemates. Hope you can see this, coz I've played a few rounds of it in my head and I can't see the incentive in being first to attack a key point (e.g. I've got 30 and my neighbour's got 30 - am I seriously going to take the castle that divides us? As it stands it lends towards a draw rather than a tactical victory, or any victory that does occur would simply be down to dice which I would find to be a deterrent after one game.

[jefjef]

For every 2 terts you get a bonus +1. Plenty of incentive to kill neutrals.

Maybe soften the portals. Like 4

[Blitzaholic]

For every 2 terts you get a bonus +1. Plenty of incentive to kill neutrals.

Maybe soften the portals. Like 4

jefjef is correct, you do get +1 CoF for taking a homeland of 2 neutrals from your starting point.


griff go ahead and drop pinnacle to 7 for now and let me look at that please and then I can visualize 4 to 5 rounds ahead and see what I can come up with from there.

[Chariot of Fire]

My apologies, for some reason I'd not seen that bonus scheme (I'd only seen the terr bonuses for NML). OK, so that plays better already.

Next question - what would be your objective from your drop zone? To get to Pinnacle you have to go thru 6 neut + 6 neut just to get into NML. If your opponent opts to take a castle instead (which is rewarded with an auto +3) would he not benefit greater? 9 neuts for a +3 bonus or 12 neuts for 0 bonus, plus I've left my opponent the opportunity to simply hit 6 on his portal and freely attack my portals (of which I have two, having hit 6 + 6 neuts).

Just playing devil's advocate here guys, but as I see it the incentive would be to go for a castle first and wait for some other schmuck to hit a portal. Once he's on that portal he has no reward whatsoever, so I'll just bide my time (collecting +3) until he hits another portal. So he'll have gone -12 (in terms of neuts hit) just to reach a spot that I can get to via 6 neuts. Is this fair/feasible/workable?

[Blitzaholic]

My apologies, for some reason I'd not seen that bonus scheme (I'd only seen the terr bonuses for NML). OK, so that plays better already.

Next question - what would be your objective from your drop zone? To get to Pinnacle you have to go thru 6 neut + 6 neut just to get into NML. If your opponent opts to take a castle instead (which is rewarded with an auto +3) would he not benefit greater? 9 neuts for a +3 bonus or 12 neuts for 0 bonus, plus I've left my opponent the opportunity to simply hit 6 on his portal and freely attack my portals (of which I have two, having hit 6 + 6 neuts).

Just playing devil's advocate here guys, but as I see it the incentive would be to go for a castle first and wait for some other schmuck to hit a portal. Once he's on that portal he has no reward whatsoever, so I'll just bide my time (collecting +3) until he hits another portal. So he'll have gone -12 (in terms of neuts hit) just to reach a spot that I can get to via 6 neuts. Is this fair/feasible/workable?

the 9 neutral castles are a little big for a territory, perhaps we can use the same space to add 2 extra lands (one land on each side of the clan castles) with 2 neutrals on each side of them and leaving the clan 9 castles there but adding 2 more lands for balance, this would give each clan homeland area 11 lands. We also could lower Pinnacle to 7 and see if that helps.

[MrBenn]

Map Name: Clandemonium
Your aims/design style: Something like a feudal epic style as that seems popular, however, there is a no mans land added with a pinnacle component to give more options for players to ponder about, and portals to make the game play action more intense and cerebral. I am in charge of the map ideas, names, clans and game play, grifftron is doing the art and graphics. Clans are a big part of the CC community and should be represented on at least one map, our inbox's have been flooded with excitement and anticipation from the masses of players. We hope to make this a big hit and very popular.
Uniqueness: This will be CC's 1st Clan map ever
Relevant Experience: First time mapmaker, although, posted many ideas to support other past maps that have been stamped and approved

There are a couple of issues that I have with this map at the moment - the updates seem to be coming fast and furiously, which is an encouraging sign of enthusiasm, although there have been several good suggestions that have been brushed aside almost on a whim. I thought the suggestion of including 10 clans, with 10 possible start locations was a very good one, and would provide something additional to the mix. Several pages back, I posted about needing to focus on gameplay rather than names/appearance.

I think the concept as it stands is alright, but the clan-based theme still feels a little gimmicky. You could have an excellent opportunity to convey something of clan involvement within a map, but the clan-affiliation link feels very weak. What I'd like to see within your design-brief, is a clear indication of how you intend to capture the essence of clan membership within the map. While the map is almost ready to move to the Gameplay Workshop, I'd urge you to take a step back and think about how to make the project appeal to a wider audience than the 8 named clans. I want the map to work, but I don't want it to simply be a gimmick.

On a personal note (and slightly off-topic), I find it very difficult to keep up with the discussion when there are massive chunks of repetition embedded within quotes; it also makes it easy to miss the small gems that people may be dropping into the conversation

To proceed from here, I would suggest slowing down the speed/frequency of small graphical updates. When it comes to rebutting ideas, something along the line of "thanks but no thanks" generally doesn't cut the mustard - every suggestion is worthy of consideration right up to the final stages development! The conept is beginning to settle down and take a solid shape - before moving forward, I'd like to take a little bit more time to gauge whether the current set-up is the right one or not, and to ascertain whether or not the clan-theme works sufficiently well.

[Blitzaholic]

Map Name: Clandemonium
Your aims/design style: Something like a feudal epic style as that seems popular, however, there is a no mans land added with a pinnacle component to give more options for players to ponder about, and portals to make the game play action more intense and cerebral. I am in charge of the map ideas, names, clans and game play, grifftron is doing the art and graphics. Clans are a big part of the CC community and should be represented on at least one map, our inbox's have been flooded with excitement and anticipation from the masses of players. We hope to make this a big hit and very popular.
Uniqueness: This will be CC's 1st Clan map ever
Relevant Experience: First time mapmaker, although, posted many ideas to support other past maps that have been stamped and approved

There are a couple of issues that I have with this map at the moment - the updates seem to be coming fast and furiously, which is an encouraging sign of enthusiasm, although there have been several good suggestions that have been brushed aside almost on a whim. I thought the suggestion of including 10 clans, with 10 possible start locations was a very good one, and would provide something additional to the mix. Several pages back, I posted about needing to focus on gameplay rather than names/appearance.

I think the concept as it stands is alright, but the clan-based theme still feels a little gimmicky. You could have an excellent opportunity to convey something of clan involvement within a map, but the clan-affiliation link feels very weak. What I'd like to see within your design-brief, is a clear indication of how you intend to capture the essence of clan membership within the map. While the map is almost ready to move to the Gameplay Workshop, I'd urge you to take a step back and think about how to make the project appeal to a wider audience than the 8 named clans. I want the map to work, but I don't want it to simply be a gimmick.

On a personal note (and slightly off-topic), I find it very difficult to keep up with the discussion when there are massive chunks of repetition embedded within quotes; it also makes it easy to miss the small gems that people may be dropping into the conversation

To proceed from here, I would suggest slowing down the speed/frequency of small graphical updates. When it comes to rebutting ideas, something along the line of "thanks but no thanks" generally doesn't cut the mustard - every suggestion is worthy of consideration right up to the final stages development! The conept is beginning to settle down and take a solid shape - before moving forward, I'd like to take a little bit more time to gauge whether the current set-up is the right one or not, and to ascertain whether or not the clan-theme works sufficiently well.

ok, thx mrbenn, I will look into this, but, you do realize there is 16 clan names on this map, not 8.
this makes it more appealing .

[MrBenn]

On a personal note (and slightly off-topic), I find it very difficult to keep up with the discussion when there are massive chunks of repetition embedded within quotes; it also makes it easy to miss the small gems that people may be dropping into the conversation

[Blitzaholic]

There are a couple of issues that I have with this map at the moment - the updates seem to be coming fast and furiously, which is an encouraging sign of enthusiasm, although there have been several good suggestions that have been brushed aside almost on a whim.

The updates are fast because we are eager and anxious mrbenn.

I thought the suggestion of including 10 clans, with 10 possible start locations was a very good one, and would provide something additional to the mix. Several pages back, I posted about needing to focus on gameplay rather than names/appearance.

We have made efforts to focus more on game play and we have made many changes. We welcome suggestions. We can focus even more on game play once it is moved to the game play workshop? Once moved there, this is where the game play gets more discussion, correct? Also, other experienced map makers visit there, once we are moved there, I could make a poll of 8 or 10 starting points, and we do have 16 clan names on the map, if we add 2 more starting points for, that would be 18 clan names making it more appealing, again, I could make a poll in the workshop when the time comes. Thx for your time.

[jefjef]

You may want to include impassables or large neutral dividing tert like at 10 that would put only 1 castle and 1 starting point in the same region. That would force portal usage.

Have ya considered that castles can bombard each other? Or No mans land terts? Endless possibilities. Lots of strategies.

Perhaps look at mainland portal at 6 and the no mans portals at 2. That would be interesting.