Conquer Club

Map Name: Strategy Lab 101 and 201
Link to Thread:
Mapmaker(s): bamage
Map Size: 101: 36 "territories" spread evenly across 9 "continents", 201: 42 "territories" spread evenly across 7 "continents"
Your aims/design style: All maps on this site, with the exception of Chinese Checkers, have nuances that increase the importance of the initial drop and provide advantages and disadvantages to some players as a result. This is great. However, it has occurred to me in my 861-game, successful CC career, during which I have made it into the top 100 ranking multiple times, that maps that provide no such nuances might offer an interesting opportunity to focus on density- and surface-area based strategies and tactics, in which all impassable touch points need to be created explicitly.

The learning time is further shortened and color-blindness is elegantly handled by the "territory" naming convention. This can be viewed and absorbed immediately by looking at the attached sample maps.

Rules are:
Strategy Lab 101 -
* 3 bonus armies for any "continent" held

Strategy Lab 201 -
* 3 bonus armies for any "continent" held except for the middle "continent" which earns 6 bonus armies


Uniqueness: Positive Differentiator: both of these maps offer the absolute shortest learning times on the site, meaning that a very high percentage of game-play challenge will derive from opponents rather than familiarity (or the lack thereof) of the maps' nuances.
Negative Differentiator: both maps simply will not evoke some of the thrill one feels when marching a battalion across the Horn of Africa or through a wormhole in space.

Relevant Experience: bamage is a hardcore CCer (on sabbatical) with formal real-world training in game theory, economics, finance (so, time value of assets, which is vitally important in CC), and software development.

Strategy Lab 101


Strategy Lab 201

Abstract maps or symmetrical maps of the Chinese Checkers ilk have rarely been well-received by the CC community - in part evidenced by the low volume of games played on maps of this genre.

I get the idea for the equity and balance, although to have a chance of getting through the foundry you'll need to develop a theme to hook the gameplay onto - in the same way that WidowMakers did with his extra large "Hive" map (which will be up for Live Play soon).

Thanks for your feedback. I do think that there is a place for this map in the line up because of what it lacks rather than in spite of what it lacks.

I feel that any kind of theme would distract from the "strategy lab" purity and even the short learning time.

I'm not aware of any symmetrical map that manages to present the assets of Strategy Lab 1. Specifically, the fact that no region is protected in the least from any angle and that - because it is theme-less - the expectation is that this map may be useful for testing a variety of strategies and balances.

I'm not aware of any symmetrical map that manages to present the assets of Strategy Lab 1.

Chinese checkers comes to mind...

Also, generally it's usually a good idea to pay heed to the advice given by the foundry mods & experienced mapmakers... It's not that you're required to obey them 100%, but they know what they're talking about, they've seen map ideas posted and can anticipate what aspects of maps is most likely to run in to problems.

MrBenn has been around for a long time, has lots of experience about maps, and although I myself don't always agree with him I certainly respect his experience & opinions, and at least consider the suggestions he gives...

bamage wrote:Specifically, the fact that no region is protected in the least from any angle and that - because it is theme-less - the expectation is that this map may be useful for testing a variety of strategies and balances.

I totally support this idea. When new players sign-up there could be a welcome message suggesting them to start playing games on the traditional Classic board and these two strategy labs. Graphics could be pimped a bit, but I like the fact of no theme present at all to, as bamage said, avoid distractions.

Thanks, fumandomuerte and natty_dread for your feedback. fumandomuerte, I can tell you read from the beginning of the thread, which I appreciate.

natty_dread... seriously? Maybe re-read from the beginning? In addition to addressing the inevitable comparison to Chinese Checkers and (in "Negatives") MrBenn's theme suggestion, I created the basis of what should be an interesting back-and-forth, not some half-baked insult to MrBenn and the successful Foundry process. It's the departure from the generally accepted paradigms and from all of that awesome experience that you, mr.benn, and other map-makers bring to CC that make these maps worth discussing and perhaps adding to the line-up. I see that open-mindedness in MrBenn's initial reaction, which is encouraging.

I'd be interested to see more feedback, for or against, that targets the point-counterpoint MrBenn and I have proposed.

Yeah sorry if my response sounded a bit harsh, I didn't mean it like that.

I still think some type of theme would not hurt the map, you could do it and still keep the visual style simple enough that the theme would not be distracting.

If you need ideas... I think you should go with the "laboratory" aspect and see what you can come up with. The title, "strategy lab" gives me an image of a top secret military facility, where the top scientist and strategists explore and research new strategies. That could work as a theme.

I like the "top secret lab" idea a lot, natty. Thanks... I'm going to get to work on that.

Hey, no problem! I'm here to help

natty_dread wrote:If you need ideas... I think you should go with the "laboratory" aspect and see what you can come up with. The title, "strategy lab" gives me an image of a top secret military facility, where the top scientist and strategists explore and research new strategies. That could work as a theme.

What I was thinking of as well first.
There used to be a map-in-making with lab/research/technology built into it.

Also isnt 8 Thought quite symmetrical?

Bamage, you can have symmetry, equality and strategy as long as there is a theme I think. Pure symmetry wouldnt excite many people.

4 in a row is another symmetrical map which is highly area based as well.

Edit: Found another symmetrical map in the making.
viewtopic.php?f=468&t=35587

So take something naturally symmetric and make it a map or develop your lab idea.

I'm not sure if symmetric and equal makes a good CC map. If everything is equal, and all bonus regions are equal, there is little strategy as to what to go after, as it is all the same. This makes it luck based.
Possibly adding a special territory in the middle of each "continent" and holding 2 of them gets you 1 or something like that, so players balance which is worth going for, the whole group bonuses, or the small special territory bonuses. While that would be symmetric, all bonus regions will not be equal.
There is a difference between having all bonuses balanced and having them all equal.