Conquer Club

v4

[bigimg]http://img844.imageshack.us/img844/4580/anta04.png[/bigimg]

With alternate legend arrangement, and minimap:

[bigimg]http://img337.imageshack.us/img337/2582/anta05.png[/bigimg]

The second one looks better. "Penguin habitat"? Really? Lol.

You think you could have fun names for the bases? Like "Alpha Base" or whatever

more good news: all army numbers will fit on small version, perhaps a few small tweaks will be needed but nothing major.

[bigimg]http://img821.imageshack.us/img821/9977/antatest.png[/bigimg]

Aren't penguins generally more coastal?

It's not clear what you mean by "Territory bonus is 1 troop for every 4". What's the minimum? Does it just replace the standard 1-per-3 bonus?

Also, the minimap kind of makes it look like AP4 connects to AP6.

Evil DIMwit wrote:Aren't penguins generally more coastal?

It's not clear what you mean by "Territory bonus is 1 troop for every 4". What's the minimum? Does it just replace the standard 1-per-3 bonus?

Also, the minimap kind of makes it look like AP4 connects to AP6.

I talked about it with Isaiah, and we're getting rid of the territory bonus thing, we're just making it normal 1 for 3.

The penguins are there as an impassable, and they wouldn't be very useful on the coast.

As for the minimap, yeah, maybe that line isn't too necessary.

We've also been discussing implementing some "safe zone" territories which won't have the -1 decay like normal territories.

natty_dread wrote:We've also been discussing implementing some "safe zone" territories which won't have the -1 decay like normal territories.

That seems like a good idea, as long as you don't have too many. I think for the most part the safe zones should be coastal. This would make sense, since you start in the middle, and it's probably warmer at the coast.

Ah. In that case, are you sure 2 autodeploy is going to be enough? Players have only 5 troops per turn to work with until they get a base or a land bonus, and the latter are quite hard to hold. It doesn't help that some start positions (e.g. C) are much closer to the nearest base than others (e.g. D)

Evil DIMwit wrote:Ah. In that case, are you sure 2 autodeploy is going to be enough? Players have only 5 troops per turn to work with until they get a base or a land bonus, and the latter are quite hard to hold. It doesn't help that some start positions (e.g. C) are much closer to the nearest base than others (e.g. D)

True. You might be able to strategically place the safe zones so that D and others aren't disadvantaged to other starting positions.

holy shit. this is amazing man... you are really outdoing yourself here.

Just noticed something here - Why is the mini map separated in the middle?

To fit the text better

Evil DIMwit wrote:Ah. In that case, are you sure 2 autodeploy is going to be enough? Players have only 5 troops per turn to work with until they get a base or a land bonus, and the latter are quite hard to hold. It doesn't help that some start positions (e.g. C) are much closer to the nearest base than others (e.g. D)

Ok me & Isaiah have now agreed about the changes to the next version, and the implementation of safe zones and whatnot... so we're not touching the autodeploys yet, but I'd like it if you could, after the next version is posted, give your opinion on how the autodeploys & other bonuses can be tweaked, so we can work it from there...

I'll try to have the update posted tomorrow or so.


Ps. Isaiah is currently really busy with rl stuff, so he hasn't had much time to stop by at the thread to answer gameplay questions... I'll try to answer with the best of my knowledge, but if there's any issues any of you feel have been left un-addressed please let me know and I'll see that it will be in the memo of our next conference.

Ok here's the update with safe zones that are free of decay. To clarify, bases and airstrips are also free of decay. Not sure about the islands yet - in fact I don't really know what we're going to do with them...

v6:

[bigimg]http://img842.imageshack.us/img842/6548/anta06.png[/bigimg]

Not sure how I feel about the checkerboard pattern for the safe zones, but I suppose that's more of a Graphics thing. What was your thinking behind placing the safe zones where they are? As for the islands, maybe give them an auto-deploy 1 or something? Make them worth going for a little bit more, though you do have to go thru Peter I Islands to get to B11...

-Sully

Victor Sullivan wrote:Not sure how I feel about the checkerboard pattern for the safe zones, but I suppose that's more of a Graphics thing. What was your thinking behind placing the safe zones where they are? As for the islands, maybe give them an auto-deploy 1 or something? Make them worth going for a little bit more, though you do have to go thru Peter I Islands to get to B11...

-Sully

Well I have a few extra minutes tonight so here goes this reply!!

Yes the checkered board effect is there to let you all know where the safe zones are for now and will probably be changed come the graphics phase.

As for the placement of the safe zones I was going for a territory that no one could stack their men on to defend their bonus, yet give them the ability to regain their bonus fairly easily. At least that is my goal, so if anyone has any ideas to tweak it a little more, please let me know.

For the island I was actually thinking along those lines, at the same time I was also thinking of just leaving them as having no bonus or auto deploy.

Yes the checkered board effect is there to let you all know where the safe zones are for now and will probably be changed come the graphics phase.

Yep, this was just something I was trying out as a technique (not even a very good one) & I'll do something better in GFX.

For the island I was actually thinking along those lines, at the same time I was also thinking of just leaving them as having no bonus or auto deploy.

Honestly, I'd rather not introduce any more new bonuses or autodeploys to the map... mainly because there's absolutely no more room in the legend

natty_dread wrote:

For the island I was actually thinking along those lines, at the same time I was also thinking of just leaving them as having no bonus or auto deploy.

Honestly, I'd rather not introduce any more new bonuses or autodeploys to the map... mainly because there's absolutely no more room in the legend

And they're already strategic territories to control like the blue ice shelves. You could prolly just let them be.

-SUllY

Ok next on the list is the issue of the starting autodeploys, some think them too small...

natty_dread wrote:Ok next on the list is the issue of the starting autodeploys, some think them too small...

You disagree?

Evil DIMwit wrote:

natty_dread wrote:Ok next on the list is the issue of the starting autodeploys, some think them too small...

You disagree?

Well I don't really know, I haven't had time to think about it...

If you think they should be higher, what amount would you suggest? (sorry if you've already answered this, can't be arsed to scroll back... )

...damn, sorry, I forgot but I already discussed this with Isaiah...

He had an idea that instead of increasing autodeploys, we could increase the minimum territory bonus to 4 (instead of 3). How do you think that would work?

Hard do say. Do you think it'd work?

I don't know. Maybe this map would be quite playable with troops as a scarce resource. But I think it would go very slowly and therefore be boring.

How about making the minimum territory bonus 4, and increasing the starting point autodeploy to 3? That'd give a total of 7 troops per turn.


btw there was one safe zone missing:

[bigimg]http://img202.imageshack.us/img202/6190/anta06a.png[/bigimg]