[Abandoned] - Battlefield

[demon7896]

if you can't contorl the other generals, how do you win?

[drake_259]

i think its a really good idea, but yh cannons is a better name, only thing is i didn't know they were cannons when i 1st looked at them, that was the last thing i thought it was and i dont think they look like them at all even when i read the rules and knew they are

[Kaplowitz]

[bigimg]http://i37.tinypic.com/23ljqzc.jpg[/bigimg]
I just realized I forgot to name the catapults, archers, and knights.... they will each get a letter.

[Kaplowitz]

everything is neutral except for the Knights in the Battlefield.

BF Knights start with 3
NONBF Knights start with n3
Archers start with n5
Catapults start with n7
Walls start with n10 (neutral killer)
Castles start with n1
Kings start with n3

[Androidz]

Even tough i like the graphics on this one you keep makeing it Symmatrical.

And Catapoults can bombard wall what the point of that when its revert to 10 neatruals again?

[Kaplowitz]

Even tough i like the graphics on this one you keep makeing it Symmatrical.

And Catapoults can bombard wall what the point of that when its revert to 10 neatruals again?

So that you can attack the wall, and then go in with your army.

Maybe it should start with 10 and re-spawn to like 5?

[Androidz]

Even tough i like the graphics on this one you keep makeing it Symmatrical.

And Catapoults can bombard wall what the point of that when its revert to 10 neatruals again?

So that you can attack the wall, and then go in with your army.

Maybe it should start with 10 and re-spawn to like 5?

sounds better

[whitestazn88]

it went from a bunch of guitars to awesome... keep up the good work

but like the trench warfare map of mibi's, i don't like that the kings are out of the gameplay area... makes me confused

[Juan_Bottom]

Much better!
But I think I'll sit this discussion out for a bit. I don't really have any ideas/comments one way or the other. Looks like it has to be played before anyone can say if it's on track or not.

If I were to scale my enthusiasm for you, I'd give it a 6.5
Just have to see were this discussion goes, I suppose...

[wcaclimbing]

Is this still being worked on?
Its a great theme, but the most recent post was almost two weeks ago.

[Kaplowitz]

I just got home today from Running Camp...I havent been doing anything for like a week or so.

[Kaplowitz]

[bigimg]http://i36.tinypic.com/2vipaw0.jpg[/bigimg]

everything is neutral except for the Knights in the Battlefield.

BF Knights start with 3
NONBF Knights start with n3
Archers start with n5
Catapults start with n7
Walls start with n10 (neutral killer)
Castles start with n1
Kings start with n3

Changes:
Added letters
Changed some bonuses

To Do:
I have no clue
Quench!

[ZeakCytho]

There are only 24 starting territories - in an 8p game, there's a good chance someone will be eliminated in round 1, especially in a speed assassin game because all BF Knights can attack each other. Is there any way you can increase the number of starters?

[Kaplowitz]

There are only 24 starting territories - in an 8p game, there's a good chance someone will be eliminated in round 1, especially in a speed assassin game because all BF Knights can attack each other. Is there any way you can increase the number of starters?

maybe make all knights starting positions?

[Kaplowitz]

So is there any interest in this?

[InkL0sed]

This actually looks pretty cool. You should advertise it more...

[Kaplowitz]

I want to use photoshop right now!

[previsualconsent]

This looks really good and it does have lots of potential.
The gameplay appears unique but i have not been able to look at the current maps cause there are so many.

this are a bit nitpicky but i don't have a clue about balance or gameplay aspects
1.across is spelled wrong in title
2.I also didn't know where the kings where before i realized they were off the map. kind of confusing
3.You call them cannons once and catapults another time. consistency is nice.
Gameplay
1.At first glance i didn't realize it was made for 8 players. It seems way to small for that like was stated above.
2. maybe some more detail in the battlefield. more intricate workings like a classicly styled map
3. the title is battlefield and the battlefield in this game does not seem like an integral part of the map.
4. More territories in the battlefield would help out a ton. each player only starting with 3 territories with 21 enemy borders would not work out in any 8 player game. I would like this map better with half the stuff. make it for 4 players. or maybe 6. Just because 8 players is an option doesn't mean you have to work a map to suit that.

thats all i have. Potentially good and it looks pretty

[Kaplowitz]

This looks really good and it does have lots of potential.
The gameplay appears unique but i have not been able to look at the current maps cause there are so many.

this are a bit nitpicky but i don't have a clue about balance or gameplay aspects
1.across is spelled wrong in title
2.I also didn't know where the kings where before i realized they were off the map. kind of confusing
3.You call them cannons once and catapults another time. consistency is nice.
Gameplay
1.At first glance i didn't realize it was made for 8 players. It seems way to small for that like was stated above.
2. maybe some more detail in the battlefield. more intricate workings like a classicly styled map
3. the title is battlefield and the battlefield in this game does not seem like an integral part of the map.
4. More territories in the battlefield would help out a ton. each player only starting with 3 territories with 21 enemy borders would not work out in any 8 player game. I would like this map better with half the stuff. make it for 4 players. or maybe 6. Just because 8 players is an option doesn't mean you have to work a map to suit that.

thats all i have. Potentially good and it looks pretty

1) will be fixed
2)Ill think of something for that...
3)they were cannons first... ill change that

1)?
2)?
3)I think its pretty important, you start there. Plus, its gonna be pretty crazy in there
4)Im thinking of having all knights as starting spots rather than just those in the Battlefield.

Thanks for the comments...im running low on those

[TheShiningSun]

Instead of having all the battlefield knights being the starters why not give everyone a king and nothing else so that they have to build their own army then go out and fight, also completely eliminates the chance of being eliminated on the first turn.

[animorpherv1]

It looks really nice! Nothing I can really say in the form of consturctional critisism.

Looking forward to seeing this get Quenched someday.

[Kaplowitz]

BTW: I have an update coming soon (maybe tonight) with the Kings on the map, with everything else.

Instead of having all the battlefield knights being the starters why not give everyone a king and nothing else so that they have to build their own army then go out and fight, also completely eliminates the chance of being eliminated on the first turn.

THis just makes another conquest map, which has been done so many times, and i dont want to do. I figured it would be fun to try something new, kind of like backwords conquest.

[Kaplowitz]

v4
[bigimg]http://i34.tinypic.com/245n6l3.jpg[/bigimg]

everything is neutral except for the Knights.

BF Knights start with 3
NONBF Knights start with 3
Archers start with n5
Catapults start with n7
Walls start with n10 (neutral killer)
Castles start with n1
Kings start with n3


Are there any suggestions/interest for this map?

[ZeakCytho]

Don't you still have the too-few start positions problem?

[Kaplowitz]

Don't you still have the too-few start positions problem?

Well not really, its all Knights now. Everyone starts with 6 territories, and some Knights are hard to get to.