Conquer Rome (The Fall of the Roman Empire) [Quenched]

[ender516]

XML - corrected:

http://www.freewebs.com/kabanellas/Conquer_Rome_V1.6a.xml

I've also noticed a lot of overrides on continents... I don't have the slightest idea why I did it at the time, but I don't think that's necessary. It's just a waste of space.
Ender, you're the expert, what do you think?

Example:

Code: Select all

<continent>
   <name>Vicarious + Italia Sub. 4</name>
   <bonus>2</bonus>
   <components>
      <territory>Roma Vicarious</territory>
      <continent>Italia Suburbicaria 4</continent>
   </components>
   <overrides>
      <override>Vicarious + Italia Sub. 2</override>
   </overrides>
</continent>
<continent>
   <name>Vicarious + Italia Sub. 6</name>
   <bonus>3</bonus>
   <components>
      <territory>Roma Vicarious</territory>
      <continent>Italia Suburbicaria 6</continent>
   </components>
   <overrides>
      <override>Vicarious + Italia Sub. 2</override>
      <override>Vicarious + Italia Sub. 4</override>
   </overrides>
</continent>

The overrides need to be in place so that a person can't get the +1, +2, and +3 for holding 6 terts, correct? Removing them would yield a +6 for holding Italia Sub. 6. If you change that, the legend would need to be updated as well, which I think at this would be change for the sake of change.

[player]nolefan5311[/player] seems to be on track here. It is possible that the overrides for the continents with the required counts (like Italia Suburbicaria 6, which overrides the corresponding 4 and 2) would prevent more than one of the Vicarious + <<whatever>> continents from being activated at one time, but the existing code seems okay, so if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

[Kabanellas]

That was the wrong example this is more like it:

Code: Select all

<continent>
   <name>Asiana 2</name>
   <bonus>0</bonus>
   <components>
      <territory>Ephesus</territory>
      <territory>AI</territory>
      <territory>AII</territory>
      <territory>AIII</territory>
      <territory>AIV (Legion)</territory>
      <territory>AV</territory>
   </components>
   <required>2</required>
</continent>
<continent>
   <name>Asiana 4</name>
   <bonus>0</bonus>
   <components>
      <territory>Ephesus</territory>
      <territory>AI</territory>
      <territory>AII</territory>
      <territory>AIII</territory>
      <territory>AIV (Legion)</territory>
      <territory>AV</territory>
   </components>
   <required>4</required>
   <overrides>
      <override>Asiana 2</override>
   </overrides>
</continent>
<continent>
   <name>Asiana 6</name>
   <bonus>0</bonus>
   <components>
      <territory>Ephesus</territory>
      <territory>AI</territory>
      <territory>AII</territory>
      <territory>AIII</territory>
      <territory>AIV (Legion)</territory>
      <territory>AV</territory>
   </components>
   <required>6</required>
   <overrides>
      <override>Asiana 2</override>
      <override>Asiana 4</override>
   </overrides>
</continent>

It's just because those continents don't hold bonus per se. They only work when combined with the respective Vicarious like this

Code: Select all

<continent>
   <name>Vicarious + Asiana 4</name>
   <bonus>2</bonus>
   <components>
      <territory>Ephesus Vicarious</territory>
      <continent>Asiana 4</continent>
   </components>
   <overrides>
      <override>Vicarious + Asiana 2</override>
   </overrides>
</continent>

and here is when the overrides should be activated (as they are)

the other ones seem redundant. But it's like you said ender, if it's working....

[Oneyed]

great map!

Oneyed

[Kabanellas]

thank you

[Oneyed]

I played this map several times. as I wrote it is great map.

but, could we anyway set up starting positions? in some games any players held Capital of Dioces (or more of them) and any players did not. so I think if anybody from start holds Capital of Diocese he has big advantage - he can deploy 3 to capital and take Vicariuos Seat, what gives him big advantage agints player who must at the first fight for Capital of Diocese.

and it was also common that player who helds Capital of Diocese helds another region of Dioces, too. so if he in the first round deploy 3 to Capital of Diocese and take Vicarious Seat, it is realy huge advantage to have 4 for deploy and 1 auto in Vicarious Seat.

Oneyed

[Dukasaur]

It's rare to start without at least one Capital. Depending on the number of players, usually everybody has at least one. But even when I don't have one, I find I can win by taking a Legion first.

I'd hate to see this beautiful map ruined with starting positions.

[Oneyed]

It's rare to start without at least one Capital. Depending on the number of players, usually everybody has at least one. But even when I don't have one, I find I can win by taking a Legion first.

it is unfortunately not so rare. I saw this 3 times.

I'd hate to see this beautiful map ruined with starting positions.

I did not mean starting positions. I mean only if it is not possible to code that 8 Capitals will be starting positions (so each player will hold one) and the rest of map will be sorted as it is now.

Oneyed

[chapcrap]

It's rare to start without at least one Capital. Depending on the number of players, usually everybody has at least one. But even when I don't have one, I find I can win by taking a Legion first.

I'd hate to see this beautiful map ruined with starting positions.

I don't think he means starting positions like Feudal War. He means distribute the capitals evenly. That's done through starting positions in the XML. I don't think the gameplay would change in any way, it would just make the drop more even every time.

[Oneyed]

It's rare to start without at least one Capital. Depending on the number of players, usually everybody has at least one. But even when I don't have one, I find I can win by taking a Legion first.

I'd hate to see this beautiful map ruined with starting positions.

I don't think he means starting positions like Feudal War. He means distribute the capitals evenly. That's done through starting positions in the XML. I don't think the gameplay would change in any way, it would just make the drop more even every time.

Yes. something as is done in Third Crusade map - each player has Capital/Starting point and the rest of region are distributed random.

Oneyed

[DoomYoshi]

DII and ITII don't look like they connect at first glance.

[Oneyed]

I must again call for make capitals of dioceses as starting points like in the third crusade map. they do not need to start with 6 units, just distribute them so that each player will has the same number of them. or make them as 2 neutrals from start.

look on this map.
http://www.conquerclub.com/game.php?game=11955507

Oneyed

[koontz1973]

I must again call for make capitals of dioceses as starting points like in the third crusade map. they do not need to start with 6 units, just distribute them so that each player will has the same number of them. or make them as 2 neutrals from start.

look on this map.
http://www.conquerclub.com/game.php?game=11955507

Oneyed

Cannot as the game is fog.

[nothinghappens]

What is an Imperial seat? It looks like the map has huge potential but I was struggling to work out how to spawn troops or one way assault capitals and barbarian tribes. Please explain, better.

[ender516]

There are basically two types of troop locations on this game map: the land-based territories and the Roman Government seats in the box at the upper right. The legend at the lower left explains how you cross back and forth between these. The Imperial seats are at the top of the government hierarchy, with labels matching the labels on the Imperial capitals, Roma and Constantinopolis.

[Ika Pakao]

I would like to propose a change of starting positions regarding the capitals. In status quo the capitals are distributed randomly. This can induce huge imbalances considering the initial drop, especially in 1v1 games.

ie. In this game green had 2 capitols, red had 6 capitals and 6 capitals were neutral. The game was decided in a couple of turns, if not upon the drop.



Here is what I suggest. Since Rome is always 1 neutral, I think the other 14 capitals should be divided by the number of players and distributed evenly among them with the remaining capitals starting with 1 neutral army each

The distribution should look like this:



The only downside is that games with 5 and 8 players, will have 4 and 6 neutral capitals respectively. However such situations would be avoided in all other match-ups.

The bottom line is that players would get same number of capitals, which would make drops fair and square; and if there are neutral capitals, they would be easily conquerable with only 1 neutral guarding them.

I hope you will find this motion reasonable and acceptable.

[ManBungalow]

Makes sense to me.

[Kabanellas]

It makes sense to me as well.....

I would consider making all capitals starting positions with unassigned ones starting with only 1 neutral.

Nobodies, can we update this XML ?

[thenobodies80]

Kab, it's your map...you can do what you want with it!

[Kabanellas]

I have a doubt:

We will have 2 different groups of starting positions, the Barbarians (which will have a maximum of 2 per player) and the Capitals.

Can it be done like this:

Code: Select all

<?xml version="2.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<map>
<minreinforcement>3</minreinforcement>
<reinforcements>
   <reinforcement>
      <lower>1</lower>
      <upper>119</upper>
      <divisor>300</divisor>
   </reinforcement>
</reinforcements>
<positions max="2">
   <position>
      <territory start="1">Angli</territory>
   </position>
   <position>
      <territory start="1">Saxones</territory>
   </position>
   <position>
      <territory start="1">Franci</territory>
   </position>
   <position>
      <territory start="1">Langobardi</territory>
   </position>
   <position>
      <territory start="1">Ostrogothi</territory>
   </position>
   <position>
      <territory start="1">Visigothi</territory>
   </position>
   <position>
      <territory start="1">Hunni</territory>
   </position>
   <position>
      <territory start="1">Sassanidae</territory>
   </position>
</positions>
<positions>
   <position>
      <territory start="3">Sirmium</territory>
   </position>
   <position>
      <territory start="3">Mediolanum</territory>
   </position>
   <position>
      <territory start="3">Carthago</territory>
   </position>
   <position>
      <territory start="3">Emerita Augusta</territory>
   </position>
   <position>
      <territory start="3">Burdigala</territory>
   </position>
   <position>
      <territory start="3">Treverorum</territory>
   </position>
   <position>
      <territory start="3">Londinium</territory>
   </position>
   <position>
      <territory start="3">Constantinopolis (Imperial Capital)</territory>
   </position>
   <position>
      <territory start="3">Nicomedia</territory>
   </position>
   <position>
      <territory start="3">Ephesus</territory>
   </position>
   <position>
      <territory start="3">Antiochia</territory>
   </position>
   <position>
      <territory start="3">Alexandria</territory>
   </position>
   <position>
      <territory start="3">Serdica</territory>
   </position>
   <position>
      <territory start="3">Thessalonica</territory>
   </position>
</positions>

[Gilligan]

I have a doubt:

We will have 2 different groups of starting positions, the Barbarians (which will have a maximum of 2 per player) and the Capitals.

Can it be done like this:

Code: Select all

<?xml version="2.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<map>
<minreinforcement>3</minreinforcement>
<reinforcements>
   <reinforcement>
      <lower>1</lower>
      <upper>119</upper>
      <divisor>300</divisor>
   </reinforcement>
</reinforcements>
<positions max="2">
   <position>
      <territory start="1">Angli</territory>
   </position>
   <position>
      <territory start="1">Saxones</territory>
   </position>
   <position>
      <territory start="1">Franci</territory>
   </position>
   <position>
      <territory start="1">Langobardi</territory>
   </position>
   <position>
      <territory start="1">Ostrogothi</territory>
   </position>
   <position>
      <territory start="1">Visigothi</territory>
   </position>
   <position>
      <territory start="1">Hunni</territory>
   </position>
   <position>
      <territory start="1">Sassanidae</territory>
   </position>
</positions>
<positions>
   <position>
      <territory start="3">Sirmium</territory>
   </position>
   <position>
      <territory start="3">Mediolanum</territory>
   </position>
   <position>
      <territory start="3">Carthago</territory>
   </position>
   <position>
      <territory start="3">Emerita Augusta</territory>
   </position>
   <position>
      <territory start="3">Burdigala</territory>
   </position>
   <position>
      <territory start="3">Treverorum</territory>
   </position>
   <position>
      <territory start="3">Londinium</territory>
   </position>
   <position>
      <territory start="3">Constantinopolis (Imperial Capital)</territory>
   </position>
   <position>
      <territory start="3">Nicomedia</territory>
   </position>
   <position>
      <territory start="3">Ephesus</territory>
   </position>
   <position>
      <territory start="3">Antiochia</territory>
   </position>
   <position>
      <territory start="3">Alexandria</territory>
   </position>
   <position>
      <territory start="3">Serdica</territory>
   </position>
   <position>
      <territory start="3">Thessalonica</territory>
   </position>
</positions>

No, this cannot be done.

[nolefan5311]

Honestly, I think the map is pretty perfect as it is.

[Kabanellas]

Honestly, I think the map is pretty perfect as it is.

Actually, things will be pretty much the same. I just want to avoid stuff like in a 1v1 game, one player starting with the most capitals while the other not....

The idea would be to distribute Capitals equally between players.

(This was a concern posted by several people...)

[Gilligan]

Honestly, I think the map is pretty perfect as it is.

Actually, things will be pretty much the same. I just want to avoid stuff like in a 1v1 game, one player starting with the most capitals while the other not....

The idea would be to distribute Capitals equally between players.

(This was a concern posted by several people...)

What you could do - is create a position with, say, Hunni and Sirmium. The downside to this is the minimum of two tribes is lowered to one, and you'll get one and only one capital at the start no matter how many number of players.

Another downside, in fog, you can determine which tribe someone has by which capital was started with. That isn't too bad, though, since its not a losing condition on the tribes.

[Ika Pakao]

Maybe it can be a random capital and a random tribe?

[Gilligan]

Maybe it can be a random capital and a random tribe?

That is what kabanellas tried above. Unfortunately you can only have one <positions> tag.