XML Modifications and Variations

[t-o-m]

just a note tit, that it doesnt matter what the teritories are, a ship, a plane, a cat; none of this matters. just whether its a terit or not.

[zimmah]

TITANESS wrote:Suggestion Idea: ocean counrties

Description: bodies of water are countries and parts of continents. could possibly be different sorts of armies to only go on water (ships).

Why It Should Be Considered: Navies are a large part of wars and (like most other ideas) it will make the game more interesting

Lack Label (Mod Use): ?

suggestion: if you don't know about how XML work, don't make a suggestion.

Perhaps you didn't understand me
I meant ships that could only go on water

make a map or a sketch of a map with ships, and i'll make the XML so that it can do anything you want with as much water as you want. XML-wise it doesn't matter whether it's water, ships, space, underground, in the air, in the middle of nowhere. doesn't matter, XML does not 'see' the image, you have to specify where the borders are and what they can do and what they can't if you want a territory to be in the middle of the ocean then i can make it, and any other person that understands a bit of XML can do the same, it's not that hard. just make a map with ships on it and they can attack each other, they could even bombard the coast if you want them too, they can even bombard the birds out of the sky if you like, i can go on all day about what you can do. but it wouldn't make much sence anyways i guess.

either way, whatever you suggested, it's already possible. so please the next time you suggest something, first come up with a good reason, and make sure it isn't possible already. since the suggestion you made pretty much shows how little you know about the XML, i guess you didn't even take the time to create a rough sketch of a map in the first place now did you? if you want to make a map with ships, do so, it's possible. so go ahead and make one, what are you waiting for? it might even become a fun map.

btw, note there are already some maps (even some playable map) where you can just attack the water and such (like great lakes or whatever the map is called) and there are also maps with ships (like pearl harbor)

and you can also make a map with only ships if you like, or you could make a map on board of the titanic if you like, doesn't matter really. it's all the same in XML

[yeti_c]

Just a query - but can we change minreinforcement to be 0 or more not 1 or more... and then ensure that the gameplay checkers ensure stalemateing cannot occur...

Why?

In my poker map - my bonus structure is such that you always receive 3 armies however... I want that to say for "High Card"... and each hand gives a better bonus...

At the moment - my legend will say "high card=3" but their bonuses will read.
X receives 1 for X territories.
X receives 2 for holding high card.

Which will confuse people - and make things less attractive!!

C.

[t-o-m]

Suggestion Idea: owned territories turn neutral if only 1 army on it.

Description: say player A had territory B. Territory B would be a killer decay (name need changing). a killer decay is a teritory that decays 1 army - or however many a turn - until it reaches 1, when it is at 1army it will revert to neutral. this would be forcing people to deploy on a territory each turn.

Why It Should Be Considered: it would be better gameplay (bit of a cliché) it would force people to deploy on a teritory in order to keep a bonus, thus bringing more straitigy into the game.

Lack Label (Mod Use):

p.s thinking about it it could just be a teritory that reverts to netural only when there is 1 army on it.

[fireedud]

Just a query - but can we change minreinforcement to be 0 or more not 1 or more... and then ensure that the gameplay checkers ensure stalemateing cannot occur...

Why?

In my poker map - my bonus structure is such that you always receive 3 armies however... I want that to say for "High Card"... and each hand gives a better bonus...

At the moment - my legend will say "high card=3" but their bonuses will read.
X receives 1 for X territories.
X receives 2 for holding high card.

Which will confuse people - and make things less attractive!!

C.

Isn't that the reason why people don't like USapocalypse?

[yeti_c]

Just a query - but can we change minreinforcement to be 0 or more not 1 or more... and then ensure that the gameplay checkers ensure stalemateing cannot occur...

Why?

In my poker map - my bonus structure is such that you always receive 3 armies however... I want that to say for "High Card"... and each hand gives a better bonus...

At the moment - my legend will say "high card=3" but their bonuses will read.
X receives 1 for X territories.
X receives 2 for holding high card.

Which will confuse people - and make things less attractive!!

C.

Isn't that the reason why people don't like USapocalypse?

Probably.

C.

[Ruben Cassar]

Suggestion Idea: INCREMENTING NEUTRALS

Description: Neutrals that would increment by x number of units every x number of turns

Why It Should Be Considered: I want to include it in a map. A very important neutral city would get this bonus making it harder to conquer as time goes by and more turns are played.

Lack Label (Mod Use):

[yeti_c]

Suggestion Idea: INCREMENTING NEUTRALS

Description: Neutrals that would increment by x number of units every x number of turns

Why It Should Be Considered: I want to include it in a map. A very important neutral city would get this bonus making it harder to conquer as time goes by and more turns are played.

Lack Label (Mod Use):

This could work - could combine with the <bonus> tag such as

<bonus neutral=true>1</bonus>

Would give the territory a bonus of 1 - and also would give the same bonus to neutrals (unlike the current system)

C.

[cena-rules]

Suggestion Idea: owned territories turn neutral if only 1 army on it.

Description: say player A had territory B. Territory B would be a killer decay (name need changing). a killer decay is a teritory that decays 1 army - or however many a turn - until it reaches 1, when it is at 1army it will revert to neutral. this would be forcing people to deploy on a territory each turn.

Why It Should Be Considered: it would be better gameplay (bit of a cliché) it would force people to deploy on a teritory in order to keep a bonus, thus bringing more straitigy into the game.

Lack Label (Mod Use):

p.s thinking about it it could just be a teritory that reverts to netural only when there is 1 army on it.

i like this idea; is would be interesting for gameplay

[max is gr8]

Suggestion Idea: Trigger Borders

Description: add trigger for borders to be opened

Why It Should Be Considered: E.g. in an airport based map. people can only attack when they own the Aeroplane and the Airport.

Lack Label (Mod Use):

[t-o-m]

Suggestion Idea: Trigger Borders

Description: add trigger for borders to be opened

Why It Should Be Considered: E.g. in an airport based map. people can only attack when they own the Aeroplane and the Airport.

Lack Label (Mod Use):

are you just suggesting things for no reason?
or are you planning on making a map around that?

[Kaplowitz]

Suggestion Idea: INCREMENTING NEUTRALS

Description: Neutrals that would increment by x number of units every x number of turns

Why It Should Be Considered: I want to include it in a map. A very important neutral city would get this bonus making it harder to conquer as time goes by and more turns are played.

Lack Label (Mod Use):

Id like to see this also as neutral killer. Each time you conquer the territory, it re-spawns higher.

[bryguy]

Suggestion Idea: INCREMENTING NEUTRALS

Description: Neutrals that would increment by x number of units every x number of turns

Why It Should Be Considered: I want to include it in a map. A very important neutral city would get this bonus making it harder to conquer as time goes by and more turns are played.

Lack Label (Mod Use):

Id like to see this also as neutral killer. Each time you conquer the territory, it re-spawns higher.

this would be cool to have for both

[War Dog]

Modern warfare

suggestion: to mimic naval warfare

Description: you can mimic all types of war fare such as naval combat.
Naval: a range of warships would be avaible aircraft carriers would be wirth 10(they would carry nine planes to attack at long range...) Battle ships, destroyers, and pt boats would be worth something less. Subs would be invisible to the enemy but they could drop charges costing them on army in order to destroy subs. however sibs could not attack land because they would be to powerful.(the planes on the carries could be changed so the boats could only attack terriortys adjacent to the ocean.)

why should it be considered: this would give our players a whole new way to wage war and and stratigize

Lacks mode label:

[t-o-m]

Modern warfare

suggestion: to mimic naval warfare

Description: you can mimic all types of war fare such as naval combat.
Naval: a range of warships would be avaible aircraft carriers would be wirth 10(they would carry nine planes to attack at long range...) Battle ships, destroyers, and pt boats would be worth something less. Subs would be invisible to the enemy but they could drop charges costing them on army in order to destroy subs. however sibs could not attack land because they would be to powerful.(the planes on the carries could be changed so the boats could only attack terriortys adjacent to the ocean.)

why should it be considered: this would give our players a whole new way to wage war and and stratigize

you do know that the XML doesnt know that the territory is plane, boat, sub w/e?
you could do all of those 1-way attacks and things, but the decay of -1 per turn if one play holds X territory is not currently possible in our current xml

[War Dog]

i meant that parts of the oceans could be terriortys

[t-o-m]

i meant that parts of the oceans could be terriortys

you still dont get this

THE XML DOESNT GIVE ONE ABOUT WHAT THE MAP IS, for all it knows it could be a map of cow dung. You can make a map of sea terits anyway, theres one thats just been quenched!

[max is gr8]

Suggestion Idea: Trigger Borders

Description: add trigger for borders to be opened

Why It Should Be Considered: E.g. in an airport based map. people can only attack when they own the Aeroplane and the Airport.

Lack Label (Mod Use):

are you just suggesting things for no reason?
or are you planning on making a map around that?

I plan on making a map around it. If it is enacted I will start making it.

[max is gr8]

Also when I see a map that requires something I ask for it, so I can say this would be good if this thing gets done.

[max is gr8]

I'm considering getting a contents thread going for this (So we can easily scan what has been suggested). Is it needed

Sorry for the triple post

[t-o-m]

Double Coordinates

1t off i appologise if this has been suggested already, i havnt checked the 40 odd pages

Consice Idea:
in the xml you have 2 sets of coordinates, and 2 army numbers show up on the map.
e.g on a map that has one region blown up it is sometimes annoying going to check the other territory's army count which is annoying to try to find on the map. so this would have 2 sets of coordinates so it would show up on both the map, and the enlarged bit.
when i say blown up bit i mean like on the iraq map, and the mexico map.

Lack Label (mod use):

[MrBenn]

Suggestion Idea: Conditional Autodeploy

Description: If you hold a group of territories, then get a bonus autodeployed onto a particular territory.

Why it should be considered:
1. This is a logical expansion/variant of the current autodeploy.
2. Would add some realism - you'd need to hold a 'source' territory to get your reinforcements...
3. You would be able to have things like a 'Training Camp' which would autodeploy when you hold a 'Recruiting Officer' and a 'Village', for example.
4. You could have a 'Parachutist Regiment' that would autodeploy if you hold the 'Transport Aircraft'
5. Or gameplay could be formulated with the bonusses being deployed only onto central capital cities - or only to remote frontiers...
6. I'm convinced that this has been suggested before

[WidowMakers]

I'm considering getting a contents thread going for this (So we can easily scan what has been suggested). Is it needed

Sorry for the triple post

I think this is required. That way we all can see what has been requested. Is there a way to either start a new thread or have the owner of this thread keep track.

max has agreed to do it. Can he take over this thread?

WM

[fireedud]

Suggestion Idea: Minimum Armies

Description: To have a minimum number of armies received, no matter what.

Why It Should Be Considered: It will help maps like famine and Conquer man with the negative bonus bug. It is also different from the minimum reinforcement tag because that only affects armies received from territories.

Lack Label (Mod Use):

[WidowMakers]

Suggestion Idea: Minimum Armies

Description: To have a minimum number of armies received, no matter what.

Why It Should Be Considered: It will help maps like famine and Conquer man with the negative bonus bug. It is also different from the minimum reinforcement tag because that only affects armies received from territories.

Lack Label (Mod Use):

That is already done. The minimum is 1. And you can adjust the number of standard bonus armies per territory as well.

WM