Conquer Club

I know the map is VERY basic but I wanted to post it and get feedback before I spend a lot of time a on real graphical version.

All are neutral except for base camp where all players start from. You can only attack upwards, except at the midway points. First to the top is the winner.

[URL=http://imageshack.us]

Seems sound, but why no sideways attacks(curious)? Also, what are the start points, could someone move to the outside and avoid confrontation till the top?

Also, without any territories, or obsticles or anything, there doesn't seem to be enough strategy involved.

Juan_Bottom wrote:Seems sound, but why no sideways attacks(curious)? Also, what are the start points, could someone move to the outside and avoid confrontation till the top?

Also, without any territories, or obsticles or anything, there doesn't seem to be enough strategy involved.

Excellent point. I added three midway points where you can attack sideways. Definately adds more strategy.

I'm not sure about the game play idea on this map. I assume everyone would start at the bottom, and the rest neutrals? Whoever goes first could have an advantage...or conversely...maybe there isn't any incentive to be first at all?

The gameplay needs some work...and a theme will be needed for the graphics.


--Andy

To make the gameplay fun, I think there should be sideways attacks at all levels except the very first one. That would make gameplay varied and chaotic. Also, I think the mountain is too tall if you go with the "everything attack sideways" idea. Cutting it down and making it larger would allow you to fit a theme onto the map fairly easily (like a rendering of a real mountain).

what if you had 16 (or 24, even better) 'starting' places and everyone starts with 2 places, make the starting places so, that each players has like 1 'inner' place and 1 'outer' place. but never 2 inner or 2 outer ones. (so it's equally divided at the start)

double the amount of terits at least. make every bit sideways.

The whole problem with the gameplay on this map is that whomever attacks upwards first is screwed. You can sit in the base camp and collect your nice auto-deploy, or you can attack neutrals up the mountain and lose guys. If you attack up, other players can just plow through the path you made for an easier victory. There's no incentive to try to reach the top until you have enough guys to do it in one shot, at which point the game becomes entirely luck driven. I don't see a way around this problem.

Autodeploy at midpoints instead of basecamp. Possibly also remove every second basecamp.

Make it a mountain. An actual mountain. Good graphics and some somewhat offset gameplay and you've got a map. I know you said you plan to work on graphics so I think it can work. What I would do is make it less symnetrical when you go to real graphics. Some things need to be symnetrical (sports matches often require this), but in this case when you have a real graphic I think you might be able to idea climbing routes where more scalable sections are. And unclimbable sections. Then I'd be on board for sure.

Have a few places that are killers (avalanche spots). Have an 8 story high with 8 on the bottom then 7 then 6 etc. So 1 person misses out on a slot. And make it so that all places at the bottom can attack all other places 1 space above. Because at the moment it would be crap to be at the side because there's only one route up for them (excluding mid points)

max is gr8 wrote:Have a few places that are killers (avalanche spots). Have an 8 story high with 8 on the bottom then 7 then 6 etc. So 1 person misses out on a slot. And make it so that all places at the bottom can attack all other places 1 space above. Because at the moment it would be crap to be at the side because there's only one route up for them (excluding mid points)

Awful idea. The first person to make an upward attack and expend armies is instantly owned by everyone else.

seamusk wrote:Make it a mountain. An actual mountain. Good graphics and some somewhat offset gameplay and you've got a map. I know you said you plan to work on graphics so I think it can work. What I would do is make it less symnetrical when you go to real graphics. Some things need to be symnetrical (sports matches often require this), but in this case when you have a real graphic I think you might be able to idea climbing routes where more scalable sections are. And unclimbable sections. Then I'd be on board for sure.

seamusk wrote:Make it a mountain. An actual mountain.

A ski mountain would be an easy way to accomplish this, I believe. But we still need to find a way around being the first to attack.

Naptha wrote:

max is gr8 wrote:Have a few places that are killers (avalanche spots). Have an 8 story high with 8 on the bottom then 7 then 6 etc. So 1 person misses out on a slot. And make it so that all places at the bottom can attack all other places 1 space above. Because at the moment it would be crap to be at the side because there's only one route up for them (excluding mid points)

Awful idea. The first person to make an upward attack and expend armies is instantly owned by everyone else.

Make it so the left side can attack the right side and vice versa. You could design it so that it is 3-dimensional, an actual FULL mountain. You could add a lot to this map, avalanches is a good idea. Maybe a river that has higher neutrals but is a quicker path up? Areas thick in bush, steep rock faces etc. This is a cool idea, keep going with it and I'll offer ideas/suggestions when I can.

ZeakCytho wrote:The whole problem with the gameplay on this map is that whomever attacks upwards first is screwed. You can sit in the base camp and collect your nice auto-deploy, or you can attack neutrals up the mountain and lose guys. If you attack up, other players can just plow through the path you made for an easier victory. There's no incentive to try to reach the top until you have enough guys to do it in one shot, at which point the game becomes entirely luck driven. I don't see a way around this problem.

No one really responded to this problem...even having autodeploys at the halfway point, there's no incentive to go beyond wherever the last bonus is unless you can get to the top in one shot. Since everyone who plays will (or, should) be smart enough to know that, every game will progress in the exact same way, with the only real differences being due to dice luck. The graphics of this map are of little concern at the moment - let's solve this problem first, and then worry about whether it should be a ski mountain or a hiking mountain, etc., etc..

Add some horizontal attacks here and there and remove some of the up/down attacks here and there and this becomes more interesting. On any mountain you can't go between just any two points - there will be rocks and fallen trees and bears in your way. I'd like to see trails winding up the mountain - more at the bottom, which intersect and fork making choke points that lead to some gameplay. A simple geometric pattern means you just rely on luck of the dice.

ZeakCytho wrote:No one really responded to this problem...even having autodeploys at the halfway point, there's no incentive to go beyond wherever the last bonus is unless you can get to the top in one shot. Since everyone who plays will (or, should) be smart enough to know that, every game will progress in the exact same way, with the only real differences being due to dice luck. The graphics of this map are of little concern at the moment - let's solve this problem first, and then worry about whether it should be a ski mountain or a hiking mountain, etc., etc..

Perhaps a bonus could be given for each level your on? (obviously if you held 2 territories on 1 level it wouldn't give a double bonus). Not a massive bonus, but just enough to give you the edge over people sitting and accumulating at the bottom.