Conquer Club

Kabanellas wrote:-Should we ditch the Castle+Knight bonus?
or
-Should we place it under the Knight legend?

Now that I think about it, the Castle+Knight bonus basically mimics the Duke's bonus. Hmmm, I think perhaps ditching it as a distinct bonus... but maybe include some added small benefit elsewhere, to keep the players fueled with armies...

Ideally, what would be nice is if the legend was divided into 4 sections- terrain, units, the council, and notes...

I've simplified the legend a bit. And simplified the Castle + Knight bonus. I've chosen to maintain them in this version to make Castles have some extra power and importance (it also makes sense to me that Feudal Castles and Knights combined together yield some bonus)

I will not put any obstacles to ditch this bonus though.

[bigimg]http://i998.photobucket.com/albums/af105/Kabanellas/KCourt_V16_small_img.png[/bigimg]

concerning the King's killers neutral legend issue. I'm posting a version with 2 ways of doing it:

-the info could be placed near the king
-or could be placed in a more prominent place in the notes legend board

-or it could appear in both places

[bigimg]http://i998.photobucket.com/albums/af105/Kabanellas/KCourt_V17_small_img.png[/bigimg]

I like how the instruction is emphasized in the notes. However, it might be good to keep it in both places?

In both places, however, there needs to be some way to specify that it reverts after being held for 1 round (actually, it would be nice to be explicit and say that it revert after being held for 1 round by 1 player).

Or, alternatively, maybe just say, "killer neutral".

I think, for the sake of many maps in development and to come, we need to start using shorthand terms like "killer neutral" and then explain these, with details like reverting after being held for 1 round by 1 player, clearly in the Instructions for the site. With map size limited as it is, it is ridiculous to have to explain things like holding an objective through one round on each map when every map with an objective works the same way. (The next time I see someone post asking why he didn't win when he took the objective, I am not sure if I will scream or weep.)

ender516 wrote:I think, for the sake of many maps in development and to come, we need to start using shorthand terms like "killer neutral" and then explain these, with details like reverting after being held for 1 round by 1 player, clearly in the Instructions for the site. With map size limited as it is, it is ridiculous to have to explain things like holding an objective through one round on each map when every map with an objective works the same way. (The next time I see someone post asking why he didn't win when he took the objective, I am not sure if I will scream or weep.)

I am in complete agreement. Somehow, some way, "killer neutral", "objective", et. al., will have to make their way into the CC community's vocabulary, and it isn't going to happen unless they start appearing on maps.

In fact, the current trend of saying "Will revert to neutral (x) after 1 round" is actually not true... and in cases where a killer neutral is a crossroads to other places, it often doesn't revert to neutral even once the entire game. I've had tons of teammates ask me in frustration why a killer neutral hasn't gone neutral, and I've had to explain the odd quirks of multiple players taking it in the same round.

Yet, to put the full and complete explanation of killer neutral on a map legend is ridiculous.

"Reverts to {0} neutrals at the beginning of the holding player's turn."

Yeah, it does sound kinda clumsy.

Don't any current maps specify "Killer neutral" ? I have seen 'reverts to neutral' (without the extra info which does confuse).

Killer Neutral is specific to Conquerclub so I don't see why we have to give full instructions on any CC-specific features when they
should be clearly in the rules for players to refer to.

I've been seeing it around in that same way... Actually in my Third Crusade map I have the killer neutral in the E.C. (English Channel) explained just like this - and never raised any issues:

"reverts to 3 neutral"

Maybe that is the key: less is more. If you don't know when it will revert, you look it up.

so, should I keep in both places the King 'revert' info? Or just one ? Which one?

Kabanellas wrote:so, should I keep in both places the King 'revert' info? Or just one ? Which one?

Just the one near the King. Instructions for a unit is expected to be somewhere near it.

2 things - 1. Why does the horseman have a longer range than the archer? 2. How do you attack nobles A-H? I may have just missed something.

Victor Sullivan wrote:2 things - 1. Why does the horseman have a longer range than the archer? 2. How do you attack nobles A-H? I may have just missed something.

I can't answer no. 1, but the legend (top left) says a Castle can assault and is assaulted by its Noble. Each Castle has a letter corresponding to a Noble.

Victor Sullivan wrote:2 things - 1. Why does the horseman have a longer range than the archer? 2. How do you attack nobles A-H? I may have just missed something.

The Knights have very high mobility so they can cover a large distance from their home-base. Ender answered question 2

You should update your first post with the latest version of the map... and I agree with chipv, it makes sense to keep the one nearest the King.

I will do it today Marshal

Last update

Version 16

[bigimg]http://i998.photobucket.com/albums/af105/Kabanellas/KCourt_V16a_small_img.png[/bigimg]

"Last update"? Aren't you the optimist!

Seriously, though, I think your gameplay is very well developed.

ender516 wrote:"Last update"? Aren't you the optimist!

Seriously, though, I think your gameplay is very well developed.

you're right, should have wrote 'latest' ..... and thanks ender!!!

Do we really need catapults and trebuchets? They do almost the same thing.

Hey, at least there are no ballistae

Evil DIMwit wrote:Do we really need catapults and trebuchets? They do almost the same thing.

Trebuchet is the upgraded version of the catapult. It makes part of the catapult line production, being the only region that catapults can assault.

They differs from catapults in 3 relevant aspects:

-are neutral killers
-don't yield any kind of bonus
-are capable of bombarding neighbouring castles

I recognize that there is a difference, but are the differing functions of the two machine so vital to the gameplay that it justified having a whole extra piece taking up space and complexity in the player's head?

We’ve discussed it a lot previously (Chip, Marshal and I). But in end there’s no better way to give a bombard function against other castles via catapults without making them connect to a different region/unit type.

-we wanted catapults to yield a autodeploy bonus, making part of a production line mostly capable of bombarding only

-we needed them to get near neighbouring castles in order to bombard them

-we wanted that region/unit capable of bombarding castles to be a neutral killer

In this line of thought we needed to create a similar unit, close to the catapult in its essence, but different in the details and attributes. A unit where all catapult production could be directed and used, in the ultimate way that one wants to use that kind of production which is - bombarding the enemy Castle.