Conquer Club

thanks for the congratz guys

if all were gonna say is congratz, then lets quench this thing!!

Dim, as an avid fan of magic, the main reason that i like magic more than might, is that in magic all the ports cannot attack each other. This causes for more of a stategy and not just waiting for people to kill each other. when 1/3 of the ports can attack each other instead of all, it take a little bit of the luck of the dice out of the game and lets players who lose a 21 v 3, which happens a lot on magic, rebound and keep fighting. Blocking the ports advantages skill and removes luck.

what about making g'th a port, but blocking it off so that the duht, ieme, qasr, and voigth can attack u'rl, while eon, ikalu, vesk, and sler can attack g'th. This would make for really interesting game play and allow players to attack it from more than one area, and more than one direction?

dont see anything wrong with any of them and i anylized them carefully

spaceghst44 wrote:Dim, as an avid fan of magic, the main reason that i like magic more than might, is that in magic all the ports cannot attack each other. This causes for more of a stategy and not just waiting for people to kill each other. when 1/3 of the ports can attack each other instead of all, it take a little bit of the luck of the dice out of the game and lets players who lose a 21 v 3, which happens a lot on magic, rebound and keep fighting. Blocking the ports advantages skill and removes luck.

Seconding this! The "all ports attack each other" on Might means that it's all a big race, and you have to avoid the docks, whereas on Magic you can actually build towards some docks as a strategy.

awesome, can't wait to play

I like it

As I understand it, to get the +2 bonus for holding a power rune only requires one of the two runes in a particular realm, correct? Only double checking since this is a change from the current set up on magic.

Thanks!

Torter_of_Worlds wrote:As I understand it, to get the +2 bonus for holding a power rune only requires one of the two runes in a particular realm, correct? Only double checking since this is a change from the current set up on magic.

Thanks!

yep each rune gives +2

jwithington wrote:

spaceghst44 wrote:Dim, as an avid fan of magic, the main reason that i like magic more than might, is that in magic all the ports cannot attack each other. This causes for more of a stategy and not just waiting for people to kill each other. when 1/3 of the ports can attack each other instead of all, it take a little bit of the luck of the dice out of the game and lets players who lose a 21 v 3, which happens a lot on magic, rebound and keep fighting. Blocking the ports advantages skill and removes luck.

Seconding this! The "all ports attack each other" on Might means that it's all a big race, and you have to avoid the docks, whereas on Magic you can actually build towards some docks as a strategy.

1. there's no logic to block the docks. for example in magic there was the ice bridge.
2. the theme is survival in a world of mayhem. it's every race for itself in an open battle.
3. there still is incentive to expand inside the continents because now there are extra bonuses for owning a whole continent. but this is not valid for all castles as each has a different layout and strategy. some are easier to hide in (with the use of bombardments) others are harder to occupy (because of decay) or they simply offer a bonus for owning it whole or parts of it.

i understand the second annswer, it is a world of mayhem. but the first, if there is no logic to block the docks, then why do it in magic? as for the third, you are right there is a incentive to build inside your terr, but there is also an incentive for people in figye and xi to attack themselves first, the person in borun will be sandwhiched between an attacking ghyr and aoria and mua will just build, because people do fear the docks, while they are attacking one person from one dock, someone comes in behind them and attacks them, while someone comes in behind them, and someone coems in behind them.

spaceghst44 wrote:i understand the second annswer, it is a world of mayhem. but the first, if there is no logic to block the docks, then why do it in magic? as for the third, you are right there is a incentive to build inside your terr, but there is also an incentive for people in figye and xi to attack themselves first, the person in borun will be sandwhiched between an attacking ghyr and aoria and mua will just build, because people do fear the docks, while they are attacking one person from one dock, someone comes in behind them and attacks them, while someone comes in behind them, and someone coems in behind them.

when i say there's no logic i mean there's no realistic reason. in magic there was the ice so i had a reason to make the icebridge, now i can't build a bridge out of nothing. it would have no logical explanation.

as for the attacking, it depends a lot on what type of game you play, or where you suppose certain people are, or simply whether you are the aggressive type or the lethargic builder that waits for a final blow while it allows others to kill themselves. just like on classic map. if you hold africa it's obvious your next move will be on south america but on the other hand perhaps laying low would be better or perhaps you need to go to australia for the target.

point is in a standard game you don't necessarily want to trash your armies on a suicide move from fygie to xi because any other player could come through the docks and take you out.

yes the ice bridge in magic offered a different approach but it also had it's disadvantages. for example in an assassin game if you are i aoria and your target is in mua and the guy in ghyr is a deadbeat then the guy in mua can expand easily and take ghyr and you are very far and can't do much.

DiM wrote:

spaceghst44 wrote:i understand the second annswer, it is a world of mayhem. but the first, if there is no logic to block the docks, then why do it in magic? as for the third, you are right there is a incentive to build inside your terr, but there is also an incentive for people in figye and xi to attack themselves first, the person in borun will be sandwhiched between an attacking ghyr and aoria and mua will just build, because people do fear the docks, while they are attacking one person from one dock, someone comes in behind them and attacks them, while someone comes in behind them, and someone coems in behind them.

when i say there's no logic i mean there's no realistic reason. in magic there was the ice so i had a reason to make the icebridge, now i can't build a bridge out of nothing. it would have no logical explanation.

as for the attacking, it depends a lot on what type of game you play, or where you suppose certain people are, or simply whether you are the aggressive type or the lethargic builder that waits for a final blow while it allows others to kill themselves. just like on classic map. if you hold africa it's obvious your next move will be on south america but on the other hand perhaps laying low would be better or perhaps you need to go to australia for the target.

point is in a standard game you don't necessarily want to trash your armies on a suicide move from fygie to xi because any other player could come through the docks and take you out.

yes the ice bridge in magic offered a different approach but it also had it's disadvantages. for example in an assassin game if you are i aoria and your target is in mua and the guy in ghyr is a deadbeat then the guy in mua can expand easily and take ghyr and you are very far and can't do much.

There could be a logical explination, like a magical barrier spawned from sanct or a death spikes from below the sea.

My point about the tactics is that from the drop there are a lot of advantages and disadvantages in Might, where as it is more equal in Magic and more fun in my mind BECAUSE of the ice bridge. I love it, it is my favorite map, great job on building, thinking, creating it. I play the magic map at least 10-20 times a day, look at my stats, basically the only map I play and I would love something even better.

I love the idea of controlling sanct for a bonus and the blood seas around it. What about a magical barrier that is destroyed once someone controls sanct? or becomes that persons barrier and only his armies could move through it.

Your map and you have the final say, I am a firm believer in the miricale of the aggregrate and that the map will be perfect. just wanted to add my opinion. can't wait to play it

Idea: Boats in water with neutrals. At least one boat must be attacked to connect one dock to another. Depending on the path...possibly two, maybe 3. Army loss per turn. -1, -2, I don't know. Just an idea.

The clays are thrown. Shoot them down.

Disclaimer: I fully appreciate how logistically screwed up this could make the map (from a playability standpoint as well as design...) - hence...IDEA!

Also - I like the map as it is

I like this map a lot; one reason is it's significantly different from both might and magic. I would resist trying to make it more like either of them. Regarding the ports: Might plays quickly in part because there's no autodeploy. This map is a nice compromise; I think the effect of autodeploy and easier-to-get resource bonuses offset the advantages of ports (which aren't as valuable either--no resource bonuses for cities), and the blood waters throw in a new wrinkle. The idea of boats is interesting...the idea that you can attack a boat from a dock and reach any dock from a boat is actually implied in the current concept; it's just that the boats are omitted!

This map has so much that is new, I recommend waiting until the 4th map to implement the boat or other new idea...

oooooh i just had a cool idea.... but it would require changing a big portion of the map..... the water part...


oh well onto my idea, i just had an idea that instead of water, you could have it that the water all evaporated and only sand is left


so basically changing the water to sand

Erland wrote:I like this map a lot; one reason is it's significantly different from both might and magic. I would resist trying to make it more like either of them. Regarding the ports: Might plays quickly in part because there's no autodeploy. This map is a nice compromise; I think the effect of autodeploy and easier-to-get resource bonuses offset the advantages of ports (which aren't as valuable either--no resource bonuses for cities), and the blood waters throw in a new wrinkle. The idea of boats is interesting...the idea that you can attack a boat from a dock and reach any dock from a boat is actually implied in the current concept; it's just that the boats are omitted!

This map has so much that is new, I recommend waiting until the 4th map to implement the boat or other new idea...

i agree with what erland said. i think the map is very different from the other chapters. whilst trying to make it more like the others means the success is guaranteed because those have been tested and liked, i am not the kind to do that so i'd rather take my chance with something new. my bet is that it's going to play differently.

bryguy wrote:oooooh i just had a cool idea.... but it would require changing a big portion of the map..... the water part...


oh well onto my idea, i just had an idea that instead of water, you could have it that the water all evaporated and only sand is left


so basically changing the water to sand

changing water to sand, hmmm. wouldn't that mean a whole lot of new terits? wouldn't that mean no impassable borders? basically the map would become too open

DiM wrote:

bryguy wrote:oooooh i just had a cool idea.... but it would require changing a big portion of the map..... the water part...


oh well onto my idea, i just had an idea that instead of water, you could have it that the water all evaporated and only sand is left


so basically changing the water to sand

changing water to sand, hmmm. wouldn't that mean a whole lot of new terits? wouldn't that mean no impassable borders? basically the map would become too open

the sand could become impassable, like a valley of death, and instead of ports, you now have bridges.

honestly, I can't wait to play it.

congrats on the graphics seal.

When do we get to test it out?

spaceghst44 wrote:

DiM wrote:

bryguy wrote:oooooh i just had a cool idea.... but it would require changing a big portion of the map..... the water part...


oh well onto my idea, i just had an idea that instead of water, you could have it that the water all evaporated and only sand is left


so basically changing the water to sand

changing water to sand, hmmm. wouldn't that mean a whole lot of new terits? wouldn't that mean no impassable borders? basically the map would become too open

the sand could become impassable, like a valley of death, and instead of ports, you now have bridges.

or you could make it a bottomless pit of death...

Kaplowitz wrote:

spaceghst44 wrote:

DiM wrote:changing water to sand, hmmm. wouldn't that mean a whole lot of new terits? wouldn't that mean no impassable borders? basically the map would become too open

the sand could become impassable, like a valley of death, and instead of ports, you now have bridges.

or you could make it a bottomless pit of death...

or you could have giant canyons in some parts (pit of death if u will) and sand in others, and the sand could have like -4 on the sand territories.

also with an occasional bridge across the canyon (or pit of death)

v12

made orcs and pit fiends also lose -1 for non important terits (thanks Torter_of_Worlds)

[bigimg]http://i178.photobucket.com/albums/w250/DiM-topia/AgeofRealms-AgeofMayhem-large1co-9.jpg[/bigimg]

Hey no problem! I think you've done an awesome job as it is.