Moderator: Cartographers
We ran into similar concerns with Research and Conquer once we took nukes into account. Luckily we were able to figure out a work around, though it wasn't optimal, since there were multiple territories within the separated areas (in this case the research section). Unfortunately I don't think there's any way to figure out a work around for this map that won't damage the gameplay more than it will fix it. Sometimes you just can't accommodate all the different gameplay settings and most maps have their optimal settings and their bad settings. Nukes on this map clearly could mess with gameplay substantially, but that's part of the fun of nukes, they add a large variable to the game and can seriously mess with the outcome of a game. I'd be pretty annoyed if someone nuked my starting spot, but at the same time, I'd think it was great fun to nuke someone else's starting spot too.dolomite13 wrote:Just a quick thought about game-play.
When someone uses the forbidden lands to take out your kingdom space (think of it as closing your portal back to your home kingdom) you will loose your favored territory and adjacent to favored bonuses. So you go from a potential of +19 if you held every basic land territory down to a potential +10 (as all basic lands are now "not adjacent to favored") and you will also lose your +3 autodeploy. By this point you are probably already in trouble but this could also happen via "nukes" and because you cannot retake a kingdom this will severely cripple you if it happens early. My second game-play concern is about forbidden lands and nukes taking out special features on the right side. It will be possible to lose your special feature(s) which amount to some tactics such as dwellers movement options and up to +8 bonuses.
Anyway ... I'm just rambling because I'm bored at work ... I don't plan to change how the map is currently designed unless it seems like losing your kingdom/feature to a nuke early on absolutely spells defeat. As the map moves into beta I would love to hear peoples thoughts about it.
Agreed-=- Tanarri -=- wrote:We ran into similar concerns with Research and Conquer once we took nukes into account. Luckily we were able to figure out a work around, though it wasn't optimal, since there were multiple territories within the separated areas (in this case the research section). Unfortunately I don't think there's any way to figure out a work around for this map that won't damage the gameplay more than it will fix it. Sometimes you just can't accommodate all the different gameplay settings and most maps have their optimal settings and their bad settings. Nukes on this map clearly could mess with gameplay substantially, but that's part of the fun of nukes, they add a large variable to the game and can seriously mess with the outcome of a game. I'd be pretty annoyed if someone nuked my starting spot, but at the same time, I'd think it was great fun to nuke someone else's starting spot too.dolomite13 wrote:Just a quick thought about game-play.
When someone uses the forbidden lands to take out your kingdom space (think of it as closing your portal back to your home kingdom) you will loose your favored territory and adjacent to favored bonuses. So you go from a potential of +19 if you held every basic land territory down to a potential +10 (as all basic lands are now "not adjacent to favored") and you will also lose your +3 autodeploy. By this point you are probably already in trouble but this could also happen via "nukes" and because you cannot retake a kingdom this will severely cripple you if it happens early. My second game-play concern is about forbidden lands and nukes taking out special features on the right side. It will be possible to lose your special feature(s) which amount to some tactics such as dwellers movement options and up to +8 bonuses.
Anyway ... I'm just rambling because I'm bored at work ... I don't plan to change how the map is currently designed unless it seems like losing your kingdom/feature to a nuke early on absolutely spells defeat. As the map moves into beta I would love to hear peoples thoughts about it.
I think the great thing with this map is that it just forces someone to focus on their special territory places instead or, if they lose a special territory space, to focus more on their personal continent bonus instead. Either way there'll still be options open to someone who loses a bonus type and it will change how the game plays out since they won't be going after the same territories they would have otherwise, which could be seen as a feature
Personally I say just keep it as it is. Really, anyone selecting nuclear spoils knows what they're getting themselves into, so I don't think you should need to adjust the gameplay for the map at all to minimize the impact.
As far as Forbidden Lands being able to take out special abilities, I think I mentioned that at some other point but I like the explanation you came up with. I'd like to see it stay the way it is for now and see how the gameplay works out through Beta. If it really distrupts the game, then it can always be changed. I think players could choose to place a few extra troops in their special ability areas if they want to minimize the risk of someone using Forbidden Lands to remove their special abilities.
Could always try using conditional borders to allow you to take a kingdom from it's start territory ONLY if you hold no kingdom, if it worries you that much (bombardment from the forbidden lands still hurts due to one turn loss of bonus/need to recapture, but early nuke isn't death), special features are much more tricky on that front.dolomite13 wrote:Agreed-=- Tanarri -=- wrote:We ran into similar concerns with Research and Conquer once we took nukes into account. Luckily we were able to figure out a work around, though it wasn't optimal, since there were multiple territories within the separated areas (in this case the research section). Unfortunately I don't think there's any way to figure out a work around for this map that won't damage the gameplay more than it will fix it. Sometimes you just can't accommodate all the different gameplay settings and most maps have their optimal settings and their bad settings. Nukes on this map clearly could mess with gameplay substantially, but that's part of the fun of nukes, they add a large variable to the game and can seriously mess with the outcome of a game. I'd be pretty annoyed if someone nuked my starting spot, but at the same time, I'd think it was great fun to nuke someone else's starting spot too.dolomite13 wrote:Just a quick thought about game-play.
When someone uses the forbidden lands to take out your kingdom space (think of it as closing your portal back to your home kingdom) you will loose your favored territory and adjacent to favored bonuses. So you go from a potential of +19 if you held every basic land territory down to a potential +10 (as all basic lands are now "not adjacent to favored") and you will also lose your +3 autodeploy. By this point you are probably already in trouble but this could also happen via "nukes" and because you cannot retake a kingdom this will severely cripple you if it happens early. My second game-play concern is about forbidden lands and nukes taking out special features on the right side. It will be possible to lose your special feature(s) which amount to some tactics such as dwellers movement options and up to +8 bonuses.
Anyway ... I'm just rambling because I'm bored at work ... I don't plan to change how the map is currently designed unless it seems like losing your kingdom/feature to a nuke early on absolutely spells defeat. As the map moves into beta I would love to hear peoples thoughts about it.
I think the great thing with this map is that it just forces someone to focus on their special territory places instead or, if they lose a special territory space, to focus more on their personal continent bonus instead. Either way there'll still be options open to someone who loses a bonus type and it will change how the game plays out since they won't be going after the same territories they would have otherwise, which could be seen as a feature
Personally I say just keep it as it is. Really, anyone selecting nuclear spoils knows what they're getting themselves into, so I don't think you should need to adjust the gameplay for the map at all to minimize the impact.
As far as Forbidden Lands being able to take out special abilities, I think I mentioned that at some other point but I like the explanation you came up with. I'd like to see it stay the way it is for now and see how the gameplay works out through Beta. If it really distrupts the game, then it can always be changed. I think players could choose to place a few extra troops in their special ability areas if they want to minimize the risk of someone using Forbidden Lands to remove their special abilities.![]()
=D13=
I considered this however lets say you were the Gnomes and you lost your kingdom to a nuke or the forbidden lands bombardment and lets say you had conquered V1. You could then assault the Dragonkin kingdom which would in effect make you the Dragonkin. Which is just plain weird. I know the map is a fantasy based map with magic that can whipe out the racial features of your kingdom altogether but becoming another race and supplanting them entirely seems going a bit far. I think I would rather just live with nukes being something that hurts a map like this and continue to champion adding a way to select certain territories that either do not get a card or can be set as immune from nukes/bombards.EricPhail wrote:Could always try using conditional borders to allow you to take a kingdom from it's start territory ONLY if you hold no kingdom, if it worries you that much (bombardment from the forbidden lands still hurts due to one turn loss of bonus/need to recapture, but early nuke isn't death), special features are much more tricky on that front.
I think spoil exempt (or at least nuke exempt) locations would be ideal, but it is a XML update and frankly I have little hope of this update being implemented within the next few years, since there's still plenty XML updates which would be a lot easier to code (as in shouldn't take more than an hour or two each for at least two of them, and that's being really generous) that have been sitting on the suggestion list for around 6 years and are generally more sought after than spoil exemptions.EricPhail wrote:Yeah, saw that issue but... mentioned it anyway in case it hadn't been brought up
tbh, I agree on just pushing for spoil exempt locations
Makes me wish I was a PHP coder instead of a Javascript(Jquery)/Html(4/5)/CSS(2/3)/ASP.net/XML/XSLT/UI/UX designer-developer guy-=- Tanarri -=- wrote:I think spoil exempt (or at least nuke exempt) locations would be ideal, but it is a XML update and frankly I have little hope of this update being implemented within the next few years, since there's still plenty XML updates which would be a lot easier to code (as in shouldn't take more than an hour or two each for at least two of them, and that's being really generous) that have been sitting on the suggestion list for around 6 years and are generally more sought after than spoil exemptions.EricPhail wrote:Yeah, saw that issue but... mentioned it anyway in case it hadn't been brought up
tbh, I agree on just pushing for spoil exempt locations
If you know all of those languages, the code for Decay to Neutral at the very least would be easy for you to take care of. Really, all it should be is the same code as autodeploy only with an added bit to change the player to neutral if it hits 0 or less. Guess we'll just have to wait for them to decide to put the minor amount of time into it and other like updates... hopefully the new site owners will put it at a higher priority than Lack had it at.dolomite13 wrote:Makes me wish I was a PHP coder instead of a Javascript(Jquery)/Html(4/5)/CSS(2/3)/ASP.net/XML/XSLT/UI/UX designer-developer guy-=- Tanarri -=- wrote:I think spoil exempt (or at least nuke exempt) locations would be ideal, but it is a XML update and frankly I have little hope of this update being implemented within the next few years, since there's still plenty XML updates which would be a lot easier to code (as in shouldn't take more than an hour or two each for at least two of them, and that's being really generous) that have been sitting on the suggestion list for around 6 years and are generally more sought after than spoil exemptions.EricPhail wrote:Yeah, saw that issue but... mentioned it anyway in case it hadn't been brought up
tbh, I agree on just pushing for spoil exempt locations![]()
=D13=
Taking a brief work break at 3:30 in the morning and thought I'd check in with Gilligan here to see how the XML is coming along, since 4 weeks of the estimated month of XML has passed by and I'm super excited to get a chance to play the mapdolomite13 wrote:Probably a month ... not really sure... it is extremely complicated.-=- Tanarri -=- wrote:Gilligan, any idea how long the XML should take for this? It seems like it would probably be a pretty complicated XML file.
=D13=
Thanks for update dolomite, if you find yourself running into any issues with the XML, let me know. I've never programmed in XML before, but I've looked through the Research and Conquer XML in the past and the various how-to guides on the site and I believe I have a grasp of how it works. I've also got a decent grasp of general concepts behind programming and am really good at sorting through the logic end of programming. I don't have the time to do the actual XML myself, but may be able to help sort out how to program a particular feature if you run into problems.dolomite13 wrote:Just wanted to check in with a quick status update.
Gilligan has been super busy so I will be trying my hand at the complicated bits of this xml. I expect to have something soon.
=D13=
Good to hear it's coming along nicelydolomite13 wrote:Quick Update - the xml is coming along nicely ... slowly ... but nicely ... it would probably be done by now if my wife and I didn't decide to binge watch "Breaking Bad" on netflix every evening last week.
I have all of the basic bonuses and conditional borders finished. I am now moving onto favored/adjacent to favored/not favored which I expect will take several days.
=D13=
I have 7 kingdoms left to go and then I can set the bonuses for Fanatics and for Barbarians and it will be ready.-=- Tanarri -=- wrote:Good to hear it's coming along nicelydolomite13 wrote:Quick Update - the xml is coming along nicely ... slowly ... but nicely ... it would probably be done by now if my wife and I didn't decide to binge watch "Breaking Bad" on netflix every evening last week.
I have all of the basic bonuses and conditional borders finished. I am now moving onto favored/adjacent to favored/not favored which I expect will take several days.
=D13=How much is left to do after the favored territories part is completed?
That soon? That's awesome!dolomite13 wrote:I have 7 kingdoms left to go and then I can set the bonuses for Fanatics and for Barbarians and it will be ready.-=- Tanarri -=- wrote:Good to hear it's coming along nicelydolomite13 wrote:Quick Update - the xml is coming along nicely ... slowly ... but nicely ... it would probably be done by now if my wife and I didn't decide to binge watch "Breaking Bad" on netflix every evening last week.
I have all of the basic bonuses and conditional borders finished. I am now moving onto favored/adjacent to favored/not favored which I expect will take several days.
=D13=How much is left to do after the favored territories part is completed?
I might be able to get this done this evening but more likely sometime tomorrow.
=D13=
Congrats dolomite on getting the XML completed, hopefully everything checks out when you run it through the checkerdolomite13 wrote:XML might actually be finished I need to double check a bunch of stuff just to make sure.
But weighing in at 2537 lines I'm guessing its near the top the list for size.
I will post it for checking tomorrow as well as an image update (V2 needs to have some space cleared for troops).
Time for bed.
=D13=

