Moderator: Cartographers
The likelihood of people grabbing bonuses at all on a map this size is already relatively small. And the issue isn't only with the 2 region bonus...there is a 5.5% chance someone drops one of the 3 region bonuses as well. Ideally, we code 1 region in each of the 2 and 3 region bonus zones to start neutral, but then we're dealing with the issue of a map that distributes 19 territories to begin the game, meaning in 7 and 8 player games, each players gets 2 territories (with 10 and 8 neutrals, respectively). This is more worrisome, to me, then someone only getting a +1 for a 3 region bonus zone.thenobodies80 wrote:Sorry but what does that change solves? changing the bonus you did nothing else that make the values ridicolous...no one will go for a bonus anymore in bigger games.
Sorry but i don't think this is a solution, maybe the easier way to go to have longer games, but definitively not a solution. You still have a map on which a player could start with an advantage.
A question did you run the prob tools and looked at the percentages? I have too, but as said I don't think they are bad without sp with 3 regions bonuses.
The only issue without sp is to not make possible to start with the 2 region bonus.
Gimme some hours....it's not hard to balance the drop without change the bonuses, I'll post my proposal this evening, then if you want to lower the bonuses anyway...then it's you map and I'll send the update. But i'm sure we can balance the drop without making the value of a 3 region+3 borders only +1. Com'on, you know that's a nonsense!
I'm tired, but if i'm not wrong, with starting position, as it is now, the percentage is much much higher than that number.nolefan5311 wrote:there is a 5.5% chance someone drops one of the 3 region bonuses as well
Instead you should because in your first turn you won't receive only a +1 bonus but you will have also a different percentage with your dice outcome, in theory you will be able to attack 7vs3 instead of 6vs3, that means 0.85 instead of 0.76, or again be able to do a double 5vs3 (that should be around 0.60-0.65)nolefan5311 wrote:This is more worrisome, to me, then someone only getting a +1 for a 3 region bonus zone.



Could you please rephrase the question?koontz1973 wrote:Right now, my main concern is this, will the coded neutral mean that the extra troop in 2 and 3 player games mean more bonuses dropped?
I've always been in favour of this. If it was for me we would have maps developed for specific type of games and number of players. for types of games we have to wait but for limit the number of players, it think it can be done, but don't take it as an official answer for now.koontz1973 wrote:Final thought to leave you with, if the large game is such a problem with this small map, can we limit the amount of players on the map? Either 6 like AOR or just a straight forward 1v1 map only.
OKthenobodies80 wrote:Could you please rephrase the question?koontz1973 wrote:Right now, my main concern is this, will the coded neutral mean that the extra troop in 2 and 3 player games mean more bonuses dropped?![]()

An update was made, it just seems to of not been uploaded yet. Will poke the sleeping bear to see it gets done. Glad you like it.bristow47 wrote:Love the map - it's almost whimsical. My only problem is that it's really hard to see the opponent as green font


The files have been sent!koontz1973 wrote:I am allright leaving the xml as is for now to get a good comparison. But can you do these map files so players can see the green better.
http://img202.imageshack.us/img202/2365/madridnew.png
http://img526.imageshack.us/img526/7128/madridsmall.png
OK, will see what I can do, but not right away. Like Mags map, will wait for a while to see if any other things crop up.ManBungalow wrote:Okay, but they still look kinda jittery; not nice and rounded like the other animals.
Thanks, green looks easier to see.thenobodies80 wrote:Updated!

