MÉXICO [BETA] p1/18 --Sep 11th--

[rdsrds2120]

I agree. Also, I'd like to ask others, just in case it's only me -
I was playing on this, and does anyone else think there isn't much of a contrast Golfo and Valle de Anahuac and the red color of the troops? I honestly had a hard time looking at it. Maybe a softer color?
Has this already been addressed?

[Bruceswar]

Here is what I think. Leave all the ports neutral but make then only a 1 instead of 2. I was playing this map for the first time and team 2 got the Sur bonus pretty easy. I thought about break via a port(s) but the 4 plus the men there on the actually territory made it too much. So thus no ports were taken. If it was 1 on each instead of 2, then I think the ports would be of more use to most people.

[Commander62890]

I like.




In that case, though, I would think that holding 2 ports should give a bonus... either +1 or +2


Though, it could make for some rather interesting gameplay if it was hold 1 port for +1. That might really induce people to hit those neutrals!


Seriously, I think having 1 neutral on each port, and holding 1 port for +1 might be pretty cool.

[iancanton]

i'm another advocate for option c.

This is a tough decision, but I really think that C will result in players not going for the bonus, for the most part.

in 1v1, most of the bonus zones will contain at least one neutral region, so the ports won't be too different from the other bonuses in that sense.

If it was 1 on each instead of 2, then I think the ports would be of more use to most people.

this could ruin the game for the second player in 1v1 unlimited forts. however, u could argue that 1v1 unlimited is heavily stacked against him anyway.

ian.

[MrBenn]

After a bit of thought, I've decided to drop the ports to neutral 1s, and see how things go. Hopefully this will bring the ports into play a little bit more easily; I'll consider amending the bonus to holding two ports for a +1 bonus, but for now I'll see how things go with lower neutrals.

http://www.fileden.com/files/2009/1/9/2259283/Mexico4.xml

[Commander62890]

After a bit of thought, I've decided to drop the ports to neutral 1s, and see how things go. Hopefully this will bring the ports into play a little bit more easily; I'll consider amending the bonus to holding two ports for a +1 bonus, but for now I'll see how things go with lower neutrals.

http://www.fileden.com/files/2009/1/9/2259283/Mexico4.xml

Do you recommend I try this out with a dubs or a trips game? I mean, which gametype would involve more use of the ports?


To be honest, I still don't think ports will be utilized... a 3-neutral bonus for +2 isn't bad, but the fact that they're so easily accessed means they'll be easily broken. I can't be 100% sure, but I don't think a good team will be hitting 3 neutrals on a medium-sized map for a bonus that can be broken easily. I really don't see it. The key here is that the map is too small for neutrals to be of value unless they are easily protected and/or provide a big bonus.


The ports are not easily protected. A team will be wasting their armies by hitting those neutrals, because the other team will immediately break the bonus.


If you're not trying to make a map that's good for team games, then by all means, tell me to shut it!


You can leave it this way to test it out, but I doubt you'll see the results you're looking for in team games.
You need to either make the ports NOT neutral, or keep them at 1 neutral and augment the bonus system.
And it needs to be a big augmentation... Seriously, holding 1 port for +2 or +3 is not out of the question here.

[Bruceswar]

Actually I think the ports will be used to break the southern bonuses more than anything. It makes them much more useful!

[Commander62890]

Have you tried it yet, Bruce? I made a game, but the neutrals were still 2...


You're right, taking 1,1 neutrals would let you border Sur, which is cool. But I really think we should be looking at making the ports more valuable than that, no?
1,1 against a neutral isn't exactly a picnic when everyone only has a 3 deployment...


There's so many CC maps with neutrals that are never used in team games... IMO it would be great if this map had a port aspect that was crucial to team play.


It's up to Mr. Benn, of course, so if he wants to leave it the way it is, so be it. I certainly don't hear many complaints. I'm just trying give my perspective from a team game point of view... take it or leave it.

It's just that I KNOW that leaving neutrals as 1 and bonuses the way they are is a guarantee that the ports won't be too important in team games. Your call, Mr. Benn.

[MrBenn]

I don't think the update has gone live... I'm waiting to get confirmation from lack before starting a new batch of games.

Commander62890 , I really do value your input

[MrBenn]

The update has gone live... let's see how things go now!

[MrBenn]

I'm not sure if there was any serious thoughts into making the ports start neutral - I;d sort of assumed it would be a sensible thing to do... Having said that, I would definitely prefer keeping them in normal play

The options I see are:

a) Leave it as it was before (with no designated neutrals). The downside of this, is that it leaves 37 starting terrs, meaning 2/3p games start with 12 terrs and an extra advantage to whoever starts

b) Make one port on each ocean start neutral (2 neutral armies), and leave the bonus as it is. (although this still means there's a 33% chance of dropping one of the bonuses.

c) Make one port on each ocean start neutral, but change the bonus to +2 for holding all the ports on the same sea

My favourite is probably option C, with the two central ports starting neutral.

After a bit of thought, I've decided to drop the ports to neutral 1s, and see how things go. Hopefully this will bring the ports into play a little bit more easily; I'll consider amending the bonus to holding two ports for a +1 bonus, but for now I'll see how things go with lower neutrals.

http://www.fileden.com/files/2009/1/9/2259283/Mexico4.xml

What I want to know is whether the ports come into play enough at the moment, and whether or not I should amend the port bonuses to those as proposed in option C above...

[Aaron234]

I like the map.Its not one of my favorites but its definitely not one of those maps you can play lazy on. i had one dislike with this board. Occiente is a place i found my self stuck in.I got locked in by 2 players and could not get out. The map keeps you on your toes and i would not change anything.

[Blitzaholic]

Hi Mr.Benn, I think this would be a unique idea, worth trying, adds another option as well.

c) Make one port on each ocean start neutral, but change the bonus to +2 for holding all the ports on the same sea

[Sethiroth]

Im not sure if I like the + 2 bonus for the spot that only has 2spots to get into it I think it should just be +1 bonus just an idea

[jricart]

Im not sure if I like the + 2 bonus for the spot that only has 2spots to get into it I think it should just be +1 bonus just an idea

I agree!

Overall, the map looks great and game play is really nice!

[natty dread]

I finally got around to playing this map. I have to say I rather like it. Simple, but not too simple. Good work.

[Victor Sullivan]

I agree with natty - good work! I like going for the ports instead of the bonus areas for lolz. It actually won me the game once cuz no one was paying attention lol. I wish they'd be used more, but I think you've done the best you possibly can with them, so bravo for that. Methinks your beta (ß?) period will be over soon

-Sully

[thenobodies80]

Quenching

---The Beta period has concluded for the Mexico Map. All objections have had their time. The Foundry and I hereby brand this map with the Foundry Brand. Let it be known that this map is now ready to be released into live play.

Congratulations MrBenn and fumandomuerte, your shiny new medal are well-earned


Conquer Club, enjoy!

--thenobodies80

[MrBenn]

Quenching

---The Beta period has concluded for the Mexico Map. All objections have had their time. The Foundry and I hereby brand this map with the Foundry Brand. Let it be known that this map is now ready to be released into live play.

Congratulations MrBenn and fumandomuerte, your shiny new medal are well-earned


Conquer Club, enjoy!

--thenobodies80

Thank you my friend!

[Victor Sullivan]

Congrats, MrBenn!

[fumandomuerte]

Thanks to Mr. Benn for re-taking the map! He made an amazing job in my humble opinion

[drunkmunky]

Hi everyone, not sure if this is something that's come up before but unless I'm reading the map wrong, I think I've found a bug. (really more likely I'm reading it wrong cos it's my first time on the map). And as it's a map bug I wasn't sure if this post should go into this thread or separately into the bug forum under a new topic.

Game 8941584

In this game, I control DF in the centre Val de Anehuac or whatever it is. I ended my assault phase and should've been capable of forting to either Morelos or Edo Mex. as both are controlled by my team mates. I wasn't given the option to fort to Morelos and thus has to fort to Edo Mex. Granted, this is where I was going to fort anyway, but something I thought could possibly be an issue.

[isaiah40]

Hi everyone, not sure if this is something that's come up before but unless I'm reading the map wrong, I think I've found a bug. (really more likely I'm reading it wrong cos it's my first time on the map). And as it's a map bug I wasn't sure if this post should go into this thread or separately into the bug forum under a new topic.

Game 8941584

In this game, I control DF in the centre Val de Anehuac or whatever it is. I ended my assault phase and should've been capable of forting to either Morelos or Edo Mex. as both are controlled by my team mates. I wasn't given the option to fort to Morelos and thus has to fort to Edo Mex. Granted, this is where I was going to fort anyway, but something I thought could possibly be an issue.

Nah, your teammate doesn't own Morelos, only Edo. Mex.

[AndyDufresne]

I've finally got around to playing some games on this map---mostly 1vs1. It's not best for that setting, but I think the games have been fun at least.


--Andy

[drunkmunky]

Christ, I thought this was a quads game...

Oh well, shouldn't be playing in the midst of a heavy hangover...bugger (^_^)