Re: 1v1: Promontory Summit [10.3.14] BETA

[Gilligan]

How lucky you are to get to do Beta testing.
I'm the bloody mapmaker and i don't even get a look in
since Foxglove, IcePack, patrickaa317, and JaneAustin are the Beta team. Huh! how does that work?
Something definetely wrong there, 1st stage or not.

About the spikes, they are the essence of the game, and you'll not presuade me otherwise.
About the bonuses, they are off the main path since you have to conquer them and you can make a choice whether to or not.
What i'd like to know is...is the map worthy of 1v1 and the race status?

I sent a PM to blake a day or two ago to add you to the group so you can test it as well.

[cairnswk]

...
I sent a PM to blake a day or two ago to add you to the group so you can test it as well.

Thank-you Gilligan

[agentcom]

The map is highly prone to early dice. Early good dice and you can build up bonuses quickly and get even more bonuses. IF you wanted to solve this, you might want to space out the initial bonuses a little more (make them farther away). This would mean that for someone to gain a big advantage, they'd have to have more than 1 round of good dice.

For trench the "problem" is more interesting. You have to decide whether to go for the +2 right away or not because you're up against the killer neutral. This actually makes trench perhaps a little bit more "fair" or at least a little more strategic. But there's a separate potential problem for trench and that is the different spacing of the bombard region. Bottom player potentially has an advantage as his potential bonus is bigger prior to that region and may be able to just sit back and bombard the top player while using other autodeploys to keep increasing bonus before he reaches his killer neutral.

On the other hand, this map is supposed to be a "race" and in that sense, a quick start makes sense to provide one with a lead. I think you've done an impressive job at attempting some balance on this map while still making the two sides of the race a little bit different, unlike say St. Pats. I'm not sure if these things can be considered real "problems" in that regard. I think you may just have to put it out in full beta and look at (a) whether top or bottom has a decisive advantage in certain game types and (b) what the general feedback is.

I'd say if you see something like a particular setting leads to a win for bottom player 65% of the time or something like that, you know you gotta go back through and "rebalance" it. You'd want to do this for all games and then also for some specific settings like trench.

[cairnswk]

Nice feedback
Thanks agentcom

[cairnswk]

Thoughts from a Speed Game Limited, Parachute - but parachute is redundant since it is a straigth line (thanks Gilligan)

i think the first part of this game really reflects the building of this line...fast across the plains and slow in the mountains
I thought the bombard position could be located away from the start position, like Reno or Sidney

Gilligan: but perhaps it would be better to have it on a 1 auto instead of a 2 auto
Gilligan: what if you have start point bombard the bridge still, but have Prom Summit bombard the start point
Gilligan: it would give you a way to prevent the other player from losing your game
Gilligan: that way your fate isn't sealed upon your player, you have a hand in it
Gilligan: but anyway i will make a post monday.

Any feedback from this?

[Gilligan]

Thoughts from a Speed Game Limited, Parachute - but parachute is redundant since it is a straigth line (thanks Gilligan)

i think the first part of this game really reflects the building of this line...fast across the plains and slow in the mountains
I thought the bombard position could be located away from the start position, like Reno or Sidney

Gilligan: but perhaps it would be better to have it on a 1 auto instead of a 2 auto
Gilligan: what if you have start point bombard the bridge still, but have Prom Summit bombard the start point
Gilligan: it would give you a way to prevent the other player from losing your game
Gilligan: that way your fate isn't sealed upon your player, you have a hand in it
Gilligan: but anyway i will make a post monday.

Any feedback from this?

well, parachute would be okay with nukes or zombies. but we also agreed that zombie would be a game type to restrict on this map.

[koontz1973]

well, parachute would be okay with nukes or zombies. but we also agreed that zombie would be a game type to restrict on this map.

Why restrict this to non zombie games?

[Gilligan]

well, parachute would be okay with nukes or zombies. but we also agreed that zombie would be a game type to restrict on this map.

Why restrict this to non zombie games?

Because it could make for never-ending games as nearly the whole map is autodeploy.

[koontz1973]

well, parachute would be okay with nukes or zombies. but we also agreed that zombie would be a game type to restrict on this map.

Why restrict this to non zombie games?

Because it could make for never-ending games as nearly the whole map is autodeploy.

I honestly do not see that as a problem. The auto before will take the next one in time. Might slow games to a crawl but that would be the risk players take when playing the map.

[watsy]

I feel that this map shows great promise but my one and only suggestion is that it is played with a round limit in play to prevent this being a never ending story

[cairnswk]

I feel that this map shows great promise but my one and only suggestion is that it is played with a round limit in play to prevent this being a never ending story

I think that is best left as a player option...and if players go to the never-ending story...surely there must be a stage when one player will get complete advantage over the other.

I also noticed that in one test game, it is indeed taking a while to get start from Sacremento.
This in fact, was not uncommon because of the need to gather supplies and get labour together.
While it is tedious, and i am particlarly finding it that way...yes i have captured Newcastle but getting those Govt. grants is proving very difficult...it is part of the gameplay and the decision made as per roll of dice.
Some players will not like it...but then some players will have always better luck than others, and there is nothing one can do to re-balance in that stake.

[watsy]

I feel that this map shows great promise but my one and only suggestion is that it is played with a round limit in play to prevent this being a never ending story

I think that is best left as a player option...and if players go to the never-ending story...surely there must be a stage when one player will get complete advantage over the other.

I also noticed that in one test game, it is indeed taking a while to get start from Sacremento.
This in fact, was not uncommon because of the need to gather supplies and get labour together.
While it is tedious, and i am particlarly finding it that way...yes i have captured Newcastle but getting those Govt. grants is proving very difficult...it is part of the gameplay and the decision made as per roll of dice.
Some players will not like it...but then some players will have always better luck than others, and there is nothing one can do to re-balance in that stake.

players choice agree but my choice will be round limit of 30 and i will be playing it wish me luck

[agentcom]

well, parachute would be okay with nukes or zombies. but we also agreed that zombie would be a game type to restrict on this map.

Why restrict this to non zombie games?

Because it could make for never-ending games as nearly the whole map is autodeploy.

I honestly do not see that as a problem. The auto before will take the next one in time. Might slow games to a crawl but that would be the risk players take when playing the map.

I agree. Zombies will introduce and element of randomness and luck that I think would be particularly fun on this map. Same reason people play doodle nukes, you can get really lucky or really screwed on such a small map.

With zombie spoils on this map, you'd want to really be careful plotting your advances and maybe not even advancing at all at first.

Oooohhhh .... I just thought of how crazy this would be with zombie trench!

I would NOT suggest limiting this to non-zombie games

[cairnswk]

So do players testing this map think it is relatively balanced ?
or do we need to adjust some neutrals ?

[koontz1973]

So do players testing this map think it is relatively balanced ?
or do we need to adjust some neutrals ?

Get it into play first on the main site before any changes are made. So few games can never be an advert for change.

[watsy]

So do players testing this map think it is relatively balanced ?
or do we need to adjust some neutrals ?

I think it is fine

[cairnswk]

So do players testing this map think it is relatively balanced ?
or do we need to adjust some neutrals ?

I think it is fine

how many games on this map have you had watsy?

[watsy]

So do players testing this map think it is relatively balanced ?
or do we need to adjust some neutrals ?

I think it is fine

how many games on this map have you had watsy?

Only 6 play fine to me

[watsy]

So do players testing this map think it is relatively balanced ?
or do we need to adjust some neutrals ?

I think it is fine

how many games on this map have you had watsy?

Only 6 play fine to me

Just set up another 3 any takers

[cairnswk]

OK, it has been found in Chained games there is more than eventual possibility of stalemating.
to fix this, it is proposed that...

1. the assault from each Prom Summit to all four spikes...
be turned into...
2. a progressive assault with normal style borders from each Prom Summit to next Spike and so on...
so that each player has opportunity to fort normally to each spike they gain.

So, the assaults will be one-way from Summit, but both ways within the spikes.
Summit CP -> 1st Gold Spike <-> Silver Spike <-> 2nd Gold Spike <-> Silver & Gold Spike
Summit UP -> Silver & Gold Spike <-> 2nd Gold Spike <-> Silver Spike <-> 1st Gold Spike

The one-way assault should stay to prevent the opponent from taking your Summit.

Any thoughts on this?

[denominator]

OK, it has been found in Chained games there is more than eventual possibility of stalemating.
to fix this, it is proposed that...

1. the assault from each Prom Summit to all four spikes...
be turned into...
2. a progressive assault with normal style borders from each Prom Summit to next Spike and so on...
so that each player has opportunity to fort normally to each spike they gain.

So, the assaults will be one-way from Summit, but both ways within the spikes.
Summit CP -> 1st Gold Spike <-> Silver Spike <-> 2nd Gold Spike <-> Silver & Gold Spike
Summit UP -> Silver & Gold Spike <-> 2nd Gold Spike <-> Silver Spike <-> 1st Gold Spike

The one-way assault should stay to prevent the opponent from taking your Summit.

Any thoughts on this?

This will prevent stalemating in most games, but in trench games will increase the likelihood of stalemating.

[cairnswk]

OK, it has been found in Chained games there is more than eventual possibility of stalemating.
to fix this, it is proposed that...

1. the assault from each Prom Summit to all four spikes...
be turned into...
2. a progressive assault with normal style borders from each Prom Summit to next Spike and so on...
so that each player has opportunity to fort normally to each spike they gain.

So, the assaults will be one-way from Summit, but both ways within the spikes.
Summit CP -> 1st Gold Spike <-> Silver Spike <-> 2nd Gold Spike <-> Silver & Gold Spike
Summit UP -> Silver & Gold Spike <-> 2nd Gold Spike <-> Silver Spike <-> 1st Gold Spike

The one-way assault should stay to prevent the opponent from taking your Summit.

Any thoughts on this?

This will prevent stalemating in most games, but in trench games will increase the likelihood of stalemating.

Do you thus have solution to offer?

[Gilligan]

Is it crazy for me to think that we could restrict trench from this map?

If that's the only setting that's holding up a good proposal, get rid of it...considering most of the map is a straight line anyway, it's pretty redundant. It could also lead to very dice-heavy games, lost early on yet you have to wait 20 turns to get the objective.

[codierose]

been waiting for this map in beta but cant find it. was it released [6.11.13]

[isaiah40]

been waiting for this map in beta but cant find it. was it released [6.11.13]

No it wasn't released yet. It is however on the beta site where a few players are testing maps, and considering that since it seems to have a serious gameplay issue, it won't be released into beta until the problem is taken care of. So you may be waiting a bit before you get to play it.