Dartboard

[jason.woolem]

This is just an idea that I have been kicking around in my head recently about trying to come up with a dartboard map, and not really sure on what I would go with it. Specifically, where the neutral armies would be deployed and how you would be able to do the bonuses for the specific areas. Any ideas. This is just an idea that I already have a little bit of a map down for and I am trying to figure out some of the essentials for before I actually do anything else. Any ideas would be greatly appreciated right now.

[oaktown]

the one thing I tell everybody when they are starting their first map is that unless you already know your way around the graphics software you should focus on how you want the map to be laid out before we knock yourself out on the graphics. People will tell you it looks like crap, and you have to ignore them at first - it's easier to make something pretty out of a well designed map than to make a playable map out of a visually attractive disaster.

[whitestazn88]

i think oak makes a good point. if the gameplay is solid i'll be more interested than if it just looks good

[edbeard]

a few people have tried a dartboard map and have failed.

If I was going to do a dartboard map, here's how I would make the gameplay.


Take a look at this picture of a dartboard to help follow what I'm saying.



First let me describe how the dartboard works. The outer ring of alternating green and red is a double hit of that particular number. The inner ring of alternating green and red is triple of that particular number. The white and black are single hits. The green part of the bullseye counts for a single bull. The red part of the bullseye counts for a double bull.

In a game of cricket, you have to get three hits of all the following numbers: 20, 19, 18, 17, 16, 15, Bullseye.

Here's my take on Conquer Club Darts

Rules:

1. players start only on the white and black parts of the board. This makes 40 starting positions (inner and outer of each number).

2. both bullseye territories and all the double and triples start neutral (redundant with rule 1).

3. movement between numbers occurs only via the doubles, triples, and bullseye. EG1: you can't attack from inner 20 to inner 1. EG2: outer bulleye connects with every inner single.

4. movement inside numbers occurs as normal. EG: inner 17 connects with triple 17. triple 17 also connects with outer 17. outer 17 also connects with double 17.

5. Bonuses occur when you hold three of a particular number (remember there are double and triple territories so this means there are 7 of each possible number). This way no one starts with a bonus, but bonuses are quite easy to acquire. Maybe additional bonuses for holding 6 or 7 of a particular number.

6. Objective would be to hold three of each of the cricket numbers: 20, 19, 18, 17, 16, 15, Bullseye. That's a lot of territories to hold. It's possible to do with 8 territories though. All the trebles of those numbers and the two bullseye territories.

[Friskies]

Point 5: I'd rather you added a precision. I thought about it a while in order to understand about your 7 for each number. You mean for instance: Triple, Outer+Double or eventually Inner+Double. All in all, that makes 7 possible combinations out of 11 (when ones doesn't have any territory, this doesn't count).
I'd suggest to push this number at least to 4: Triple+Inner, Triple+Outer or eventually Double+Outer+Inner. In the end: 4 combinations out of 11. Notice that 5 leaves only 2 combinations.

This way of getting bonus is really interesting. However I would suggest another way of winning.
I'm thinking about the following rule: score exactly 301 points (I think it's the women international rule for darts). 501 points seems too high a score. In fact, I wonder if this is possible. It would mean conquering not the whole map but some particular territories, as is the goal in darts.

[edbeard]

Point 5: I'd rather you added a precision. I thought about it a while in order to understand about your 7 for each number. You mean for instance: Triple, Outer+Double or eventually Inner+Double. All in all, that makes 7 possible combinations out of 11 (when ones doesn't have any territory, this doesn't count).
I'd suggest to push this number at least to 4: Triple+Inner, Triple+Outer or eventually Double+Outer+Inner. In the end: 4 combinations out of 11. Notice that 5 leaves only 2 combinations.

I almost have no idea what you're talking about here.

Each number on the dartboard has places that either count as a single, double or triple. Since there is one ring of double and one ring of triple, this adds up to 5 (3+2). Since the single portion of each number is split by the triple ring, there are two single territories per number. This add 2 to our 5 giving us a total of 7 per number.

If you want a darts map, you should base it on a darts game. Cricket requires hitting 3 of each the designated numbers. In cricket, if you hit a triple 20, you've closed 20's. Having a bonus for only holding the triple makes sense.

This way of getting bonus is really interesting. However I would suggest another way of winning.
I'm thinking about the following rule: score exactly 301 points (I think it's the women international rule for darts). 501 points seems too high a score. In fact, I wonder if this is possible. It would mean conquering not the whole map but some particular territories, as is the goal in darts.

There are too many possible ways to get 301 points.


I'm not making the map though so someone else can figure it out.

[jason.woolem]

So, overall, I like all of the ideas that have been thrown at me.

As to the graphic side, I am actually studying in school to become a graphic designer, so the map design is no problem, and I have no problem tweaking the map as it goes along.

As to the points that have been raised so far. I think personally, the Cricket idea is a very good idea. Although the only thing is I don't know if three is enough to hold all of the numbers. Personally, I like holding 4 of them, because that way it is more than half. But I think that I am really only thinking of this in the two player aspect, and I defiantly think that with more players, 3 is going to probably work out to be the right number.

As far as moving only between numbers via the Bullseye, Doubles, and Triples, I think that it is a very fair move, because it then forces you to try and get the triples, which is essentially what you want. But I think that the Neutral Armies that start on each of the Double, Triples, and Bullseyes have to be significantly higher than the normal starting number of 3. Probably putting 6 on the Doubles, 9 on the Triples. 10 on the Outer Bullseye and 20 on the Inner Bullseye. Although I would be more than happy to tweak the numbers around.

[stickamus]

I think that if the map come of get's to be used it would be a great map to battle on

[Friskies]

So many neutral armies to defeat! I guess you should think about another bonus like and additional bonus for 2 opposite numbers' territories (for instance 20&3 or 14&10).
I was also thinking about the XML part when you suggested 7 possibilities to conquer a continent...
Reaching 301 points or 501 points is complicated to realise, but it offers many possible combinations and then strategies. On the other hand, having the sole objective to conquer triple 20, 19 and so on, means everyone will have the same goal. I believe we should not overlook this point.

[stickamus]

you are right this will be a difficult part to do

[jason.woolem]

I was trying to look at the math and possibility of trying to figure out what is the total amount of points that are on the board, and if the Outer Bullseye is played as a 25 and the Inner Bullseye as a 50 is 1545, almost forgot about counting the Singles twice. It is defiantly possible to do a 501 game based on that, but I think that 301 would still provide enough of a challenge, but then how to keep track and tell how each player is doing, do you think there is a way that we can code that to state how many points each player has?

[stickamus]

so will this map have alot of armies involved

[GrimReaper.]

I like the idea

[jason.woolem]

I am still not sure on the aspect if there will be a lot of armies involved. I mean, I think that starting all of the Singles off on a number of 3 starting armies is fine, but I wanted to try and get the opinions on everyone else with the alternate starting numbers on the other spaces. My thought was:

Doubles - 6
Triples - 9
Single Bullseye - 10
Double Bullseye - 20

I still like the idea of the bonuses on holding all of one particular area, with the Both Singles, the Double, and the Triple. I didn't know if anyone else had any ideas on that, and also, when you play 301 or 501, you have to exactly get to 301. How do you think we should handle that, because if you go over, you bust, and then you go back to the total you were previously at? And do you think there is a way to post the total that you are currently at as well?

[stickamus]

good idea what about the card how many armies would you get for them when traded in

[jason.woolem]

Well, let's see. You would still have the Red, Blue, Green cards.

Quick question, while I try and figure that out. Isn't it basically set with the a set of Red id 4, Green is 6, Blue is 8, and Mixed is 10, or do people change that around based on the maps.

[stickamus]

good question ask optimus prime he should know

[Friskies]

You should not base your map on a precise style of game (here a flat cards). But you can have reinforcement of 5 armies for each couple of territories owned if you want. And this for each type of game, because no cards would be far too difficult in comparison.

The problem with the 301 (exactly or more?) points to achieve, is that I'm not sure it could be done with the actual XML codes availables. I really wanted to have a recent DTD. With a value set as attribute to each territory, we could obtain what we want. I'll ask for that.
In fact, I don't believe that reaching 301 or 501 exactly is a good idea in a game whose goal is to conquer territories, not loose some of them in order to reach the good amount.

[stickamus]

let me guess have you create a map before or are you just good at designing maps

[jason.woolem]

That's what I was thinking. I was defiantly thinking that it would be best to try and just hit 301 or greater.

As far as the reinforcements, I still need to think that one out, but if anyone has any ideas, or any ideas on the bonuses themselves, I would appreciate hearing them.

There is going to be a total of 82 Territories and 21 Continents.

[Friskies]

let me guess have you create a map before or are you just good at designing maps

Not created a map yet. That's why I still have some ideas
And I have a professional background there.

Let's sum it up:
82 territories, 40 on which to begin (meaning at mose non neutral 120 armies).
130 neutral armies on the 42 remaining territories.
21 continents (I guess the last is the bull)
For 20 continents: each is 4 territories wide, each can attack/be attacked via 5 ways, with 2 equivalent neighbouring continents and one that is only 2 territories wide)
The last continent can attack/be attacked via 20 ways, with the previous 20 territories.

I was told there was a formula which give the bonus to give for a territory owned. I'll look for it. But at first sight, I guess the bonus on the bull will be huge, even on the other territories. A bonus of 1 army for each couple of territ' would be sufficient if we don't have to conquer the whole map.

[Friskies]

According to the formulas I have found, we should give 2 to 3 bonus armies for the 20 territories, and 3 to 6 bonus armies to the bull.
However, these formulas don't take into account the shape, the overall number of territories or continent or else. We can have some freedom on this subject.

[jason.woolem]

Hm. I like this already. I think that it would work out, and I do like the thought that everyone is putting into this. I appreciate everyone's work. Hopefully I can get some time next week to get the map made, because I am heading out of town on Wednesday for a convention.

[nazlfrag]

Why not give them neutrals equal to their score? This would mean the higher numbers needed to win are blocked until later in the game, and will provide an artificial continenting system where players grow first around the smaller numbers before moving to the winning numbers.

[Friskies]

How can you hope to conquer a territory defended by 60 armies? Even 20 armies (without the multiplication by 2 or 3) seems too far from 1. Just the bowl with 20 neutral armies is too much I think.
Moreover, I don't know if it will be possible to have a limited score as a goal yet. Hence if we have to conquer territories independently from their score, there's no point in following this rule because there is a too great difference between 20 and 1.