Conquer Club

Okay, I'm sure all of us here have experienced the thrill of getting bad dice on the Classic map in some way, shape or form. And we should all realise that the more dice you throw, the more likely the averages will reach statistical perfection. By extension, this means that the classic map needs more dice. And so ManBungalow presents to you World at War.



The more astute members of the foundry community will notice that the region layout is identical to that of the existing classic map (minus the border I forgot in Oceania) and that the continent bonuses have been multiplied by 10 apiece.

Aside from the lack of territory names and landscape features, what are your initial concerns about this map ?
How could I combat the clear advantage given the first person to play in a sequential game on this map (think starting positions maybe) ?

Hmm. I really liked your desert map better... I wish you'd have kept working on that one.

The huge troop amounts would make escalating games really boring, for one thing. Spoils not getting into play for a looooong time... the same problem we have with city mogul: the game is often over before the spoils come into play.

But the biggest obstacle, as I see it, is the classic layout. There have been other tries of variations of the classic map, and they haven't been very succesful. Don't need to take my word for it, I could be wrong, but I think you would have better chances of success with a layout other than the classic.

natty_dread wrote:Hmm. I really liked your desert map better... I wish you'd have kept working on that one.

The huge troop amounts would make escalating games really boring, for one thing. Spoils not getting into play for a looooong time... the same problem we have with city mogul: the game is often over before the spoils come into play.

But the biggest obstacle, as I see it, is the classic layout. There have been other tries of variations of the classic map, and they haven't been very succesful. Don't need to take my word for it, I could be wrong, but I think you would have better chances of success with a layout other than the classic.

Thank you for the feedback Natty.

Unfortunately my PC blew and I lost the .xcf file of the desert map I was working on. That doesn't mean to say that I won't pick it up again at some point, but it's somewhat hampered my attempt.

So before I completely revamp the graphics/design, what is it about the Classic layout which makes it unsuitable for the troop-heavy gameplay ? Perhaps the lack of regions or the ability for games to decay ?

I can foresee some kind of domination by individuals who are able exploit the bonus system here in the last few seconds of freestyle games (not that it would make the map unfeasible, I mean, look at City Mogul and its success)! Not to mention that a good drop may end the game prematurely... perhaps this bonus scheme would work better on a map the size of 2.1, or at least a map with more regions required for the bonuses?

However, please take my suggestions with a pinch of salt - I am no map maker.

If we've got classic why do we need this map?

Plus, since the gameplay is exactly the same as a certain board game, it would need approval from lack.

Industrial Helix wrote:If we've got classic why do we need this map?

Plus, since the gameplay is exactly the same as a certain board game, it would need approval from lack.

I agree. If the map is the same and the bonuses are just multiplied by ten, it would be like playing a game on the classic map with more men.

Rather than giving +5 autodeployed to each territory I'd like to see 1 (maybe 2 for asia, europe and north america) production center/capital per continent and leave the rest of the territories with decays. That will be more accurate to the map title since in war times countries focus their efforts to the production of militar armament and general stuff related to war. And I'd change the classic +1 per 3 territories for a +1 per 2 territories starting at a minimum of 12 territories held.
Good luck bungalow!

You know what I'd kind of like to see---and it fits the idea of "World at War" --- something not unlike the 3 major Super nations of 1984 battling---(though most of their battling went on in Africa and near the equator!---if it was just propaganda to begin with!)


--Andy

The multiplication of bonuses and armies to even out bad dice could be a good general feature to add to the site, so that you could play any map like that.

1) looks like "World Fit War" but im old and my eyes are old
2) looks like classic map with crazy troops

I think it has potential though man. Except I would add your own stamp on it. for instance , forget countrys, its really citys that will war.

use different points than the classic map and make new bonus regions... maybe use the top populated citys only

1. Tokyo, Japan - 28,025,000
2. Mexico City, Mexico - 18,131,000
3. Mumbai, India - 18,042,000
4. Sáo Paulo, Brazil - 17, 711,000
5. New York City, USA - 16,626,000
6. Shanghai, China - 14,173,000
7. Lagos, Nigeria - 13,488,000
8. Los Angeles, USA - 13,129,000
9. Calcutta, India - 12,900,000
10. Buenos Aires, Argentina - 12,431,000

11. Seóul, South Korea - 12,215,000
12. Beijing, China - 12,033,000
13. Karachi, Pakistan - 11,774,000
14. Delhi, India - 11,680,000
15. Dhaka, Bangladesh - 10,979,000
16. Manila, Philippines - 10,818,000
17. Cairo, Egypt - 10,772,000
18. Õsaka, Japan - 10,609,000
19. Rio de Janeiro, Brazil - 10,556,000
20. Tianjin, China - 10,239,000

21. Jakarta, Indonesia - 9,815,000
22. Paris, France - 9,638,000
23. Istanbul, Turkey - 9,413,000
24. Moscow, Russian Fed. - 9,299,000
25. London, United Kingdom - 7,640,000
26. Lima, Peru - 7,443,000
27. Tehrãn, Iran - 7,380,000
28. Bangkok, Thailand - 7,221,000
29. Chicago, USA - 6,945,000
30. Bogotá, Colombia - 6,834,000

31. Hyderabad, India - 6,833,000
32. Chennai, India - 6,639,000
33. Essen, Germany - 6,559,000
34. Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam - 6,424,519
35. Hangzhou, China - 6,389,000
36. Hong Kong, China - 6,097,000
37. Lahore, Pakistan - 6,030,000
38. Shenyang, China - 5,681,000
39. Changchun, China - 5,566,000
40. Bangalore, India - 5,544,000

41. Harbin, China - 5,475,000
42. Chengdu, China - 5,293,000
43. Santiago, Chile - 5,261,000
44. Guangzhou, China - 5,162,000
45. St. Petersburg, Russian Fed. - 5,132,000
46. Kinshasa, DRC - 5,068,000
47. Baghdãd, Iraq - 4,796,000
48. Jinan, China - 4,789,000
49. Wuhan, China - 4,750,000
50. Toronto, Canada - 4,657,000


some food for thought

This is new stuff... almost like CC mogul

army of nobunaga wrote:1) looks like "World Fit War" but im old and my eyes are old
2) looks like classic map with crazy troops

I think it has potential though man. Except I would add your own stamp on it. for instance , forget countrys, its really citys that will war.

use different points than the classic map and make new bonus regions... maybe use the top populated citys only



some food for thought

Why would people stay and starve in the already overpopulated cities?
If it had reach a critical point then surely they would go after the food, water and resources.
Greenland should become pretty attractive (a two mile thick ice sheet the size of Mexico + lots of fish) and Antarctica has 90% of the worlds fresh water.
Humans usually move and spread out if things get really shitty.



some food and water for thought

oh, like it so much. A map to negate bad luck, this is genius. I say dont change it to much from the classic map, give us the same experiance, exept with stradegy taking precidense over luck for once. Dont make it entirely too troopy, like age of realms, though. Make it as close to normal, just with all ussual troops given multiplyed by 10 or something like that. Thats what I think!

well if this is such a great Idea, we should take all 160 maps and create 320 maps, because we can use the "mogul anti-luck technique" on all maps.

It would really be a one in a million exprerience... awesome on freestyle!

army of nobunaga wrote:well if this is such a great Idea, we should take all 160 maps and create 320 maps, because we can use the "mogul anti-luck technique" on all maps.

As I wrote a week ago: make it a map feature, like fog of war etc., to use on all existing maps. That makes duplication of any map unnecessary.

Okay, it's good to see that this has gathered some interest. I'll try to field the concerns, criticisms and general comments that have come up so far in chronological order.
I'd just like to make 100% clear the issue with the scale of the bonuses. Yes, holding Oceania grants +20, that's a big bonus; but the same super-scale applies to each opponent too. They should be able to break the bonus just as easily as with the regular Classic map. It's almost like playing chess with huge pieces -- it's all relative.

obliterationX wrote:I can foresee some kind of domination by individuals who are able exploit the bonus system here in the last few seconds of freestyle games (not that it would make the map unfeasible, I mean, look at City Mogul and its success)!
Not to mention that a good drop may end the game prematurely... perhaps this bonus scheme would work better on a map the size of 2.1, or at least a map with more regions required for the bonuses?.

I think that your concern regarding freestyle game 'abuse' applies to every map playable on site in some way, shape or form. The effects of it should be more noticeable on this map than on any other. Besides, any present freestyle effect should force you to adapt your strategy accordingly.
As for the bonus system, I believe that it will be most effective on a map the size of Classic. In fact, I aim to make the drops more fair on this map than World 2.1 itself by means of starting positions beginning with a set number of troops and auto-deployments. More of that later!

Industrial Helix wrote:If we've got classic why do we need this map?

Plus, since the gameplay is exactly the same as a certain board game, it would need approval from lack.

Of course the region layout can be radically adjusted to suit my fantasy. I just think that the Classic gameplay has always worked well, and alterations such as these will be well accepted in general. I have already outlined the main reasons for producing a map of this style in the first post of this thread.
Seeing how the World Cities idea is allowed, I'm confident that this will be permitted also. I think it's the fact that the regions are stand-alone circles as opposed to countries which allows this.

fumandomuerte wrote:Rather than giving +5 autodeployed to each territory I'd like to see 1 (maybe 2 for asia, europe and north america) production center/capital per continent and leave the rest of the territories with decays. That will be more accurate to the map title since in war times countries focus their efforts to the production of militar armament and general stuff related to war. And I'd change the classic +1 per 3 territories for a +1 per 2 territories starting at a minimum of 12 territories held.
Good luck bungalow!

These are some interesting suggestions which I'll definitely consider. I particularly like the idea of troop decay, as this encourages players to leave 1s and make few aggressive stacks to minimise net losses, thus decreasingly the likelihood of stale games.
Auto-deploy variations dependant on cities/areas could also be fun to play, as they focus attacks over certain areas. However, this could cause the drop of a game to swing the odds too unfairly.

AndyDufresne wrote:You know what I'd kind of like to see---and it fits the idea of "World at War" --- something not unlike the 3 major Super nations of 1984 battling---(though most of their battling went on in Africa and near the equator!---if it was just propaganda to begin with!)

You know, the funny thing about that is that the graphics I used for this draft were originally part of a 1984 map based on Orwell's famous novel. However, I scrapped the idea, never posted a draft on site and recycled the graphics. Propaganda warfare is an original idea which I'd definitely like to see explored at some point in the future. I don't think it's the way I want to go with this map though.

jasnostj wrote:The multiplication of bonuses and armies to even out bad dice could be a good general feature to add to the site, so that you could play any map like that.

That's a fair point, but I can't imagine it happening anytime soon. Besides, it will be a more exciting novelty if based on a single map!

army of nobunaga wrote:I think it has potential though man. Except I would add your own stamp on it. for instance , forget countrys, its really citys that will war.

use different points than the classic map and make new bonus regions... maybe use the top populated citys only

As stated above, I'd like to stick to the Classic layout if possible. All the same, you propose an interesting adjustment. It almost ties in with fumandomuerte's suggestions of certain cities/areas being stronger than others. This is something which I'd like to experiment with.

jleonnn wrote:This is new stuff... almost like CC mogul

That's great, I was trying for an original map -- even if I did steal the region layout, the gameplay should be something new.

snufkin wrote:Why would people stay and starve in the already overpopulated cities?
If it had reach a critical point then surely they would go after the food, water and resources.
Greenland should become pretty attractive (a two mile thick ice sheet the size of Mexico + lots of fish) and Antarctica has 90% of the worlds fresh water.
Humans usually move and spread out if things get really shitty.

As stated in my response to army of nobunaga, I'm hopefully going to try tweaking the gameplay and posting results here when I do so. Sure, over-populated cities could have troop-decays. Stay tuned and be sure to tell me what you think when I make an update.

jd94 wrote:oh, like it so much. A map to negate bad luck, this is genius. I say dont change it to much from the classic map, give us the same experiance, exept with stradegy taking precidense over luck for once. Dont make it entirely too troopy, like age of realms, though. Make it as close to normal, just with all ussual troops given multiplyed by 10 or something like that. Thats what I think!

Thanks for the input, it seems we're thinking on the same brain-wave here. Still, I'd like this to have some variation from the regular classic map.

army of nobunaga wrote:well if this is such a great Idea, we should take all 160 maps and create 320 maps, because we can use the "mogul anti-luck technique" on all maps.

I've already responded to this thought when jasnostj posted it above. I'd like this map to be something unique and really fun to play. If troop numbers were multiplied ten-fold site-wide you would have to account for the effects of the attackers' advantage. Perhaps you should make a suggestion for the dice provider where ten 'random' dice are thrown and averaged to create each figure you see?

jleonnn wrote:It would really be a one in a million exprerience... awesome on freestyle!

ManBungalow wrote:

army of nobunaga wrote:well if this is such a great Idea, we should take all 160 maps and create 320 maps, because we can use the "mogul anti-luck technique" on all maps.

I've already responded to this thought when jasnostj posted it above. I'd like this map to be something unique and really fun to play. If troop numbers were multiplied ten-fold site-wide you would have to account for the effects of the attackers' advantage. Perhaps you should make a suggestion for the dice provider where ten 'random' dice are thrown and averaged to create each figure you see?

jleonnn wrote:It would really be a one in a million exprerience... awesome on freestyle!

Sorry to burst your bubble, but im not as you know this, but how is a classic map unique... how is a classic map mixed with mongul unique?


lol

actually wait... Ill take the madagascar map... and add in the age of merchant symbols... it will be a completely new fun unique map... jsut wait guys.

army of nobunaga wrote:actually wait... Ill take the madagascar map... and add in the age of merchant symbols... it will be a completely new fun unique map... jsut wait guys.

I am fond of sarcasm, using it more often myself than I should, but I think you are being too harsh here. This post is obviously generating respons, because it is an interesting idea. Combinations of existing concepts, if they make sense, can be very exciting. Many great innovations were conceived in that way.

ManBungalow wrote:

jasnostj wrote:The multiplication of bonuses and armies to even out bad dice could be a good general feature to add to the site, so that you could play any map like that.

That's a fair point, but I can't imagine it happening anytime soon.

Why don't you try? I have no idea how it works. Is there a forum for general features? Fog of war was added not so long ago. Where was that cooked up? I think this would be a great new feature.

ManBungalow wrote:Besides, it will be a more exciting novelty if based on a single map!

Maybe, maybe not. If I would have to switch from my favorite maps back to a classic one, just to play this new feature, I might not do it too often. Instead, I would be dying to apply it to my favourite map(s).

Maybe a hand in hand, double bet approach is possible to improve your chances of success.