Moderator: Cartographers
Probably more a spinoff of the route 66 one the way you describe it, wouldn't you think?Mikoyabuse11 wrote:Finally a bonus structure based on holding X number of consecutive territories along long parallel regions would be a fun variation of the Rail map format while still being really easy to figure out and accessible on the first play.

I haven't yet played NWP or Route 66, but you're right, Route66 does seem like the closest comparison, I guess it'd be as if Route66 map had 6-8 parallel routes. And yeah, i too don't like AOR. A more conventional bonus structure would of course work as well, routes can be divided into upper, mid and lower, or divided by the number of days they typically take to climb and delineated by camp locations.ZaBeast wrote:Probably more a spinoff of the route 66 one the way you describe it, wouldn't you think?Mikoyabuse11 wrote:Finally a bonus structure based on holding X number of consecutive territories along long parallel regions would be a fun variation of the Rail map format while still being really easy to figure out and accessible on the first play.
If you can add traverses to not make it too much a race to the top it might be decent. I'm not really a fan of conquest maps where the bonuses snowball too much (AOR for instance). Alternatively you could make it a NWP-style map with some routes neutral, but starting position along the way. I like staggered bonuses, so if you could have a bonus for the most common resting positions across the different routes or something like that it could be nice
Yeah, i like the idea of holding one complete route and winning by "summiting" El Cap as well. In my OP I suggested having only this victory condition as an option for one specific, central route because depending on how the map layout ends up, victory by any route might be too much? Also it could make the left and rightmost edge routes more powerful because they are more easily defended from just one side. Having a victory route in the middle of the map might balance the slight advantage of a safer map edge with distance from the victory objective if that makes sense.HitRed wrote:I'm thinking victory condition. First one to hold any complete route. Routes might overlap in areas creating conflict.
I'm personally not as big of a fan of the attacking into the map style and using set spawns. It makes me think of Baseball which is a beautiful and creative implementation of the game of baseball into a risk map format, but at the end of the day the actual game play ends up sucking because it too often results in one team getting a foothold on the field, and then repeatedly counter sweeping opponents off as they attempt to get onto the field. I personally prefer the more more classic risk random spawn style.HitRed wrote:Consider base camp + 2 auto deploy attacking into the map AND attacking one way into a "supply area". A small chart on the side. Each gets there own. Short term thinkers would attack into the map and long term thinks would build up to take the supply area +3 bonus starting Neutal 8. I never climbed but preplanning must be critical.
HitRed