[Abandoned] - Maze Craze

[gimil]

By white I think TaCktiX means the white continent is to intense. I agree on this. It seems to jump out at you to much. A different color or something a bit buller like grey or cream might do it.

[TaCktiX]

By white I think TaCktiX means the white continent is to intense. I agree on this. It seems to jump out at you to much. A different color or something a bit buller like grey or cream might do it.

I meant that, and I also meant the borders between white territories. If you're not looking closely, they disappear entirely. Suggest an off-white or a creme or something.

[laci_mae]

Another small edit: The orange text in the legend should be reworded. It's no longer colored shapes.

Best,
LMR

[WidowMakers]

By white I think TaCktiX means the white continent is to intense. I agree on this. It seems to jump out at you to much. A different color or something a bit buller like grey or cream might do it.

I meant that, and I also meant the borders between white territories. If you're not looking closely, they disappear entirely. Suggest an off-white or a creme or something.

OK I will try to get a better cream color.

Another small edit: The orange text in the legend should be reworded. It's no longer colored shapes.

Best,
LMR

I will change to "all of one color"

Did you use a formmula to come up with the bonuses or were they just made up?
If so what?
Also, a couple of things on the small map:
1) You're missing the border between squares C13/C14
2) T17 seems to be the wrong colour

I'm not sure on how best to split up the bonus groups though, not the sort of thing I'm good at

The bonuses are made up. I want input to there values for the community.
And I will fix the 2 issues listed above.

I will make all of the edits and post only the small map. Once we get everything set with that I will change the large map as well.

WM

[mibi]

Don't mazes usually have a start and end? Maybe you should incorporate that and give it a high bonus to hold both. eh?

[WidowMakers]

Don't mazes usually have a start and end? Maybe you should incorporate that and give it a high bonus to hold both. eh?

this might have been brought up already, but...

why not put a "beginning/start" area and an "end/finish area". you could put a mouse at the beginning and cheese at the end or something cheesy like that and make each area like 4 squares, worth maybe 3 or 4 points. this way it resembles a maze more instead of an oddly colored crossword puzzle.

this is an interesting idea. The issue: No more room. The legend already is cramped in the small map. I understand what you mean but the "maze craze" feel of the map will take shape once the players start killing the neutrals and those neutrals respawn to make tougher spaces. And once enough neutrals get respawned into higher numbers the maze shape will take form (from a gameplay perspective)

WM

If someone can figure out how to add the appropriate text and make it fit in the small map, I am all for it. Please give suggestions

WM

[InkL0sed]

Don't mazes usually have a start and end? Maybe you should incorporate that and give it a high bonus to hold both. eh?

this might have been brought up already, but...

why not put a "beginning/start" area and an "end/finish area". you could put a mouse at the beginning and cheese at the end or something cheesy like that and make each area like 4 squares, worth maybe 3 or 4 points. this way it resembles a maze more instead of an oddly colored crossword puzzle.

this is an interesting idea. The issue: No more room. The legend already is cramped in the small map. I understand what you mean but the "maze craze" feel of the map will take shape once the players start killing the neutrals and those neutrals respawn to make tougher spaces. And once enough neutrals get respawned into higher numbers the maze shape will take form (from a gameplay perspective)

WM

If someone can figure out how to add the appropriate text and make it fit in the small map, I am all for it. Please give suggestions

WM

Replace some of the squares with larger territories? That is, merge two or three territories for beginning/ending territories. They could have unique names, so the confusion that would cause with the naming system wouldn't be a problem.

[WidowMakers]

Replace some of the squares with larger territories? That is, merge two or three territories for beginning/ending territories. They could have unique names, so the confusion that would cause with the naming system wouldn't be a problem.

I understand how to name the territories, what I don't know how to do is explain the extra bonuses for holding the start and finish because the legend is full.

WM

[InkL0sed]

I understand how to name the territories, what I don't know how to do is explain the extra bonuses for holding the start and finish because the legend is full.

WM

Oh, I guess I misunderstood the problem; as to how to solve it, I can't think of anything cleverer than squeezing it in at the moment...

[WidowMakers]

OK here is version 8. I added a start and finish spot. Both get +2 bonus and I fit that into the territory.

If this "idea" works for everyone, here is what needs to be discussed next.

TO DO:

1) Starting neutral army value (2-4 armies?)
2) Respawning neutral armies (once conquered, to what number do the borders reset, currently 5)
3) Colors. Colors. Colors. I want to make sure the colors work for everyone and they are readable
4) Sub bonus groups (discuss and determine the proper location of subdivided color groups. I have tried to do a pretty good job, I just would liek a confirmation or suggestion as how to make it better)
5) Bonuses for holding all of 1 color (upper right legend)
6) Bonuses for holding Start or Finish territories.

Thanks
[bigimg]http://img145.imageshack.us/img145/8329/mc08seh5.png[/bigimg]

WM

[laci_mae]

Hi WM,

I like the update. The addition of start & finish really worked out well. As for the neutrals, I'd like to see them be the same value to start and respawn. Maybe others don't like this idea. Regardless, I think a good number is 4. This makes it easier to attack opponents than the walls, but is not insurmountable.

Best,
LMR

[WidowMakers]

Hi WM,

I like the update. The addition of start & finish really worked out well. As for the neutrals, I'd like to see them be the same value to start and respawn. Maybe others don't like this idea. Regardless, I think a good number is 4. This makes it easier to attack opponents than the walls, but is not insurmountable.

Best,
LMR

Thanks for the comments. In regards to the neutrals, I want them to be easier to hit and conquer initially. I tallows the board to be more chaotic and random at the beginning. But after enough are taken, the board takes on the MAZE feel because all borders are so strong you only attack them when it is ABSOLUTELY necessary.

Plus they need to respawn stronger otherwise every bonus group has WAY too many borders with weak (only 4 or 5) neutrals.

The more I think about it I would like the borders to start out 2 to allow the map to really be crazy and them respawn to 6-7 to help define the borders better once respawning takes place.

PLUS REMEMBER. A border territory will only respawn at the beginning of a players turn. So if player 1 takes D2 from D1 and leaves 1 army in it, they would lose that 1 army at the start of their next turn. But if player 2 then attacks and takes D2 from D3, player 1 no longer has any armies in there to lose at the start.

My proposal now is start 2-3 and respawn 6-7

WM

[yeti_c]

2-7 sounds good to me...

C.

[BENJIKAT IS DEAD]

I would like to see it as an even crazier one-shot deal:

start at 1, turn to 8

[InkL0sed]

I'd be good with 2-7 or 1-8, either way...

[laci_mae]

That's why you're the mapmaker, and I'm just passing through. I think all of the thought you've put into gameplay will carry the map through to the forge. Chain and adjacent games will be very interesting.

Possibly 2 and 8?

Best,
LMR

[bbqpenguin]

i'm liking 2 or 3-8 neutrals. or, would it be possible to go 2-5-8? i dunno if that's reasonably doable or not, but maybe worth looking into. hell, if it were possible, then why not 2-5-8-12-15-18...you get the idea. make those long games REALLY mazey i really like that you took my idea and added the start/finish area. i'd like to see a combination bonus for owning both, say 2 of each individually and maybe 7 or 8 for both. of course, there's still the problem of how you'd explain that in the limited legend space- it might just be more trouble than it's worth

[Emperor_Metalman]

will the start and finish areas start neutral.

[oaktown]

well, I'm going to have a hell of a time with the colors on this one, but I'm not sure what can be done.

Might be worth considering another font for the A-W labels, as the "I" and "J" are sure to lead to some misdeployments.

[yeti_c]

well, I'm going to have a hell of a time with the colors on this one, but I'm not sure what can be done.

Might be worth considering another font for the A-W labels, as the "I" and "J" are sure to lead to some misdeployments.

Alternatively - do what they do for number plates - and don't use I

C.

[WidowMakers]

well, I'm going to have a hell of a time with the colors on this one, but I'm not sure what can be done.

Might be worth considering another font for the A-W labels, as the "I" and "J" are sure to lead to some misdeployments.

Alternatively - do what they do for number plates - and don't use I

C.

Good idea. I will keep the font and dump "I" from the column letters.

I think I am liking 2 and 8 neutrals for the border territories. It will allow for a game to be very chaotic in the beginning but eventually form into the maze at the end.

Still looking for input on

-Colors
-Bonuses
-Subgroup bonuses/breakups

WM

[Sam Pootang]

2) Respawning neutral armies (once conquered, to what number do the borders reset, currently 5)

Hi, i think that the amount of neutrals should go up each time they have been attacked. I think they should start at 2 and then work there way up to 7 or 8. So each time they increase by an extra one which is for the best because if the game is in round 40+ a neutral army of 3 or 4 wouldn't be much resistance.

And i am loving the latest version.

[InkL0sed]

2) Respawning neutral armies (once conquered, to what number do the borders reset, currently 5)

Hi, i think that the amount of neutrals should go up each time they have been attacked. I think they should start at 2 and then work there way up to 7 or 8. So each time they increase by an extra one which is for the best because if the game is in round 40+ a neutral army of 3 or 4 wouldn't be much resistance.

And i am loving the latest version.

I don't think that's possible. It would be cool though.

[yeti_c]

2) Respawning neutral armies (once conquered, to what number do the borders reset, currently 5)

Hi, i think that the amount of neutrals should go up each time they have been attacked. I think they should start at 2 and then work there way up to 7 or 8. So each time they increase by an extra one which is for the best because if the game is in round 40+ a neutral army of 3 or 4 wouldn't be much resistance.

And i am loving the latest version.

I don't think that's possible. It would be cool though.

Currently neither is impossible - this map requires a change to the XML parser...

However - I can't see the rising respawn being as useful as the fixed respawn.

C.

[InkL0sed]

Oh? I thought killer neutrals were already a feature