The Third Crusade [Quenched] Revamping

[captainwalrus]

Don't bug anyone for stamps. If you PM some foundery regulars and ask them to look at it, then you will get good feedback and more support. If you PM MrBenn and ask him to look at it, then he might give you a stamp, don't beg, that looks bad.

(note: this isn't being a Hypocrite cuase I only begged for some stamps for a map that wasn't mine)

[Blitzaholic]

looking good

[Kabanellas]

Thanks!

[Nephilim]

this looks great. i have one question that probably has been asked already......don't london, paris, and cairo have a pretty huge advantage since they are so much closer to jerusalem than the rest?

[Kabanellas]

not really

All starting positions have a fairly good position over at least one of the needed victory points.

London, Castile and Paris are connected to the Near East. So does Ratisbon which is also close to The Vatican. Cairo and Amasia are close to the Near East. Tunis, in centre of the map is well positioned over The Vatican and Granada and at one step from the Near East. Constantinople, also in the centre, has a good position over both the East and the West victory points.

[captainwalrus]

Why is there no starting possition actually in constantanopal? It seems like that would make more scence. Also, there are some starting possitions that are still at a disadvantage.
The French are in the best posstion. They can quickly take tyre and get a +2 bonus, and it is close to jerusalem.
Then come the Germans, they are one away from a +2 bonus, and a +1 autodeploy, and 2 away from the Vatican.
After that, they are fairly equal, and I guess it could be balanced out because of the rest of the drop, but perhaps 6 nuturals on tyre and 5 on vennice.

[Kabanellas]

Andrew and me, we’ve been debating a lot about those starting neutrals, and at this point we think that this is the best layout. As for Constantinople, I didn’t make it a starting point, because I want to give that city a +1 a/d, in a tribute to its importance in the region. Being so it wouldn’t be fair to start with that advantage.

[nikola_milicki]

beautiful maps guys! great work! both maps (the dawn of ages) have very interesting game play/bonuses and look beautiful, luv the colors!

[Teflon Kris]

Excellent map and pretty much ready for the gameplay stamp.

I'm just very slightly concerned about the London starting point.

With 3 troops to start it is more vulnerable than the other positions if someone rushes in.

The England & Wales bonus is maybe a bit easy to gain & the one-way attack to Cyprus for another bonus makes it a very attractive position.

Various ideas come to mind - setting Wales as a 4 neutral, adding an extra territory, setting London as 4. I'm wondering if 4 on the Channel and 4 on Wales might suffice?

What are your thoughts on this one?

Everything else looks fine, you have addressed the small 2-territory bonuses and have plenty of options and potential bonuses for players to aim for.

Great map

[MrBenn]

What will it take to reach the next step?

The gameplay stamp.... I know that ian's been keeping an eye on this map, and probably has a better grasp of how things are likely to pan out. Once we're broadly happy with the mechanics, then we look at polishing (and that's all it looks like it should be) the graphics.

Here are some of my random thoughts/observations:

Am I right in thinking that the yellow circles (indicating starting positions) don't actually represent anything else?

Some of the borders are a bit unclear - particularly around the Israel inset... It might be worth adding feint territory lines onto the main map to highlight the fact that Melitene borders Tarsus and Edessa.

I recall reading something about the territories with hatched markings, but cannot see anything explaining what those areas are on the legend - that probably needs something

[AndrewB]

I'm just very slightly concerned about the London starting point.

With 3 troops to start it is more vulnerable than the other positions if someone rushes in.

The England & Wales bonus is maybe a bit easy to gain & the one-way attack to Cyprus for another bonus makes it a very attractive position.

London is protected by 3 neutrals in EC. It is not that easy to get. Extra 3 territory is almost same as extra 3 armies in the deployment region (compare to castille for example). I think it is way easier to get Castille in the current layout then London on the first go.

Various ideas come to mind - setting Wales as a 4 neutral,

I am not sure how it that going to help to resolve the problem you have mentioned?

adding an extra territory,

Getting one extra neighbor, who can attack London on the first go just adds to the problem, not resolves it.

setting London as 4.

That extra one can benefit the London holder too much, as he can use it to attack crete and further.

I'm wondering if 4 on the Channel and 4 on Wales might suffice?

I think that adding one extra neutral on EC might address your concern.

[Kabanellas]

What will it take to reach the next step?

The gameplay stamp.... I know that ian's been keeping an eye on this map, and probably has a better grasp of how things are likely to pan out. Once we're broadly happy with the mechanics, then we look at polishing (and that's all it looks like it should be) the graphics.

Here are some of my random thoughts/observations:

Am I right in thinking that the yellow circles (indicating starting positions) don't actually represent anything else?

Some of the borders are a bit unclear - particularly around the Israel inset... It might be worth adding feint territory lines onto the main map to highlight the fact that Melitene borders Tarsus and Edessa.

I recall reading something about the territories with hatched markings, but cannot see anything explaining what those areas are on the legend - that probably needs something

Thanks MrBenn!

-the yellow circles with the dotted line around them - They represent the starting points, but they also represent one of the needed Victory Points.
-feint territory lines- I could try to insert them there... though I don’t really think that they are needed.
-As for the hatched regions, they are referred to in the legend:
i.e. 1 Kingdom of England + 1 with Normandy (I think that people will immediately associate the hatched regions with the motherland regions).... but even so I'll try to figure out a way to make them more noticeable in the legend


DJ Teflon, thanks for the support! Andrew pretty much answered there... But maybe we could raise those EC neutrals from 3 to 4.

[captainwalrus]

Graphics, I like the smaller version more, since it is lighter. The thick borders make it sort of dark and forboding, but the smaller lighter borders on the smaller one makes it come across as sharp and precise, which I like. You can fool around with them after you get the gameplay stamp, though.

[ender516]

-As for the hatched regions, they are referred to in the legend:
i.e. 1 Kingdom of England + 1 with Normandy (I think that people will immediately associate the hatched regions with the motherland regions).... but even so I'll try to figure out a way to make them more noticeable in the legend

Adding a hatched circle to the legend would remove all doubt (forgive my text art for the circles)
O 1 Kingdom of England + 1 with O Normandy

but there isn't room in the last line unless you reword as:
O 6 The Byzantine Empire +1 with each of O Cherson, Trebizond, and Cyprus

[Kabanellas]

yes I was planing on doing something like that....

[Kabanellas]

here it is Version 15 with changes asked by the foundry

-added borders in the regions inside the inset map
-added hatched circles in the legend
-changed E.C. neutrals from 3 to 4

[bigimg]http://i998.photobucket.com/albums/af105/Kabanellas/Third_Crusade_V15.jpg[/bigimg]

[thenobodies80]

Poll Result

Bonus values appearing in regions - what do you prefer?:

A) Leave it as it is.Bonus values appear represented in the regions, favouring an easier perception of bonus distribution in the map...12...60%

B) Take them out, favouring a cleaner look in the map...8...40%

Total votes : 20

[RjBeals]

Looks great to me.
Graphics are awesome
I love the colors
Love the gold/black border
images behind water look cool
Very clean borders / attack lines
Did you use Illustrator for the borders and import into photoshop?

It took me a minute to figure out the bonus amouts, shadowed on the lands.
The legend "picture frame" looks a little out of place to me.
Has anyone said anything about Sicily being connected to italy? You might want a dotted line there. I see they are bordered, but it may confuse someone.

Great job - Should be forged real soon.

[Kabanellas]

Thanks a lot!!

I've used Adobe - Fireworks actually, for all the graphic work

P.S. - no, no one has made a problem out of Sicily connection to Apulia. I think it's pretty much understandable.

[AndrewB]

I still think that neutrals are needed in Almohads, Seljuks and France. Huge bonus, when u only need to hold another 3 (on top of your home land) with big number of territories to start with.

Neutral 2 in 1 on the country in each of those bonuses should fix that...

[Teflon Kris]

I maybe didn't explain my earlier point about London

It is paradoxical. On the one hand it is a nice place to start for the easy bonus (by just taking Wales (corner teritory) and leaving defence on London - then moving on to Cyprus).

On the other hand, it was a target (for the above reasons and the fact that it starts with 3). I think the 4 you now have on the EC should deter a first round attack on London (so the player starting there hasn't lost it before his/her turn).

So, the idea about the 4 on Wales was to make the easy bonus a touch harder (so the player there may need to wait to round 2 to take).

If I've counted right - the idea of having the 3 neutrals stated above would reduce the starting territories to 53 + 8 - 21 each in 1 v 1 and 3-player; 17 each in 4-player; 11 each in 5-player; 9 each in 6-player; 8 each in 7-player & 7 each in 8-player.

This isn't ideal in 1 v 1 but then again, it's difficult to have ideal numbers for all game types when you have starting positions (which are shared differently) and, 1 v 1 on big maps is always going to be a big advantage to player 1 (as they effectively have a nice bonus through territories and can hit player 2's bonus) - 21 each is only slightly more advantageous than 22 or 20.

Looking at these numbers again, it justifies your idea to add the neutrals. Take the 4-player game scenario - the player starting on Paris with another territory in France would only have 2 spots to take with 6 on Paris and 5 for 17 terits. It wouldn't be a disaster without the neutral as there are 3 territories that can be attacked (assuming opponents are actually interested in breaking bonuses - many players aren't). However, better gameplay with the neutral as it averts this situation which would put opponents on the backfoot.

I'm sure I can smell ink

[Kabanellas]

DJ

just a small correction on numbers there... we have 57 regions at the moment to be distributed by players (less if we add those neutrals proposed by Andrew). So in a 3 player game (or 2 for what its worth) each one will receive 19 regions + his/hers Starting point, 20 regions - 6 troops

[iancanton]

I still think that neutrals are needed in Almohads, Seljuks and France. Huge bonus, when u only need to hold another 3 (on top of your home land) with big number of territories to start with.

exactly the same actually applies to the +4 for saladin. the +2 for 2 and +4 for 3 muslim crescents are more of a concern because none of these 3 crescents, which are also starting points, can start neutral in 2-player or 4-player games, which means someone is much more likely to hold 3 crescents than the almohad, seljuk, france or saladin bonuses. we can use the same solution of a neutral on one of saladin's regions only if we move the cairo crescent to alexandria. deleting the +2 bonus for holding 2 muslim crescents will also be very helpful.

saladin still looks too powerful at +4, while damascus is not worth trying to hold for an extra +3. maybe +3 for saladin plus an extra +5 for if all damascus regions are also held?

the holy roman empire, with all 7 regions being border regions, looks impossible to hold. i suggest increasing the bonus to +7. does the neutral on apulia protect the vatican too much? does moving it to sicily help?

jerusalem city needs to be a more distinct colour from the surrounding kingdom, since it isn't part of it. a more random shape than a circle might help too.

If I've counted right - the idea of having the 3 neutrals stated above would reduce the starting territories to 53 + 8 - 21 each in 1 v 1 and 3-player; 17 each in 4-player; 11 each in 5-player; 9 each in 6-player; 8 each in 7-player & 7 each in 8-player.

the number of starting regions is, i believe, 52 plus 8 start positions if saladin has a neutral. this is 17+4=21 each in 1v1 and 13+2=15 each in 2v2. these are both bad numbers for the player or team that plays second, but an extra neutral region in poland will solve this easily.

the neutrals whose only purpose is to avoid nasty drops can be 1 or 2 troops each (not 3). they need to be at least 2 less than the neutrals that have a gameplay function, such as the 4 on venice.

I'm sure I can smell ink

very close, though not just yet! however, to avoid doubt, i'm happy to state that the connections and borders that we have now are posing no difficulties for gameplay and we're debating only the number and type of troops that start on various regions and the size of some bonuses, as well as the location of a muslim crescent. apart from the crescent, i think these involve purely changes in the legend and xml, without affecting the graphics.

ian.

[AndrewB]

In London we have a classical Risk duality

You don't want someone to be able to break him, yet you do want someone to break him.

I believe that increasing Wales neutrals will deter London player from owning it, as you need to spent 4 turns to recover the troops you spent on owning it.

So it is very difficult to find that balance...

And if someone does try to get to London in first turn, it can be done from Paris only. And I believe in the multi-player game it will be quite difficult to do.

Furthermore, even if someone does attempt on taking London from Paris, he will be left completely unprotected back in Paris...

[00iCon]

jerusalem city needs to be a more distinct colour from the surrounding kingdom, since it isn't part of it. a more random shape than a circle might help too.

Pehaps Jerusalem with the same morone( ) colour as The Vatican, since they're both victory points serving the same purpose.

I like London just the way it is. The only way we can really find out is a BETA TEST!