Conquer Club

cairnswk wrote:

sailorseal wrote:Can you make a equal distance between all of the ports

what way do you mean

I'm guessing he means that you will have a certain number of armies in between each port, on appropiate regions, to ensure that no port gives one player a distinct advantage by having fewer armies to fight through.

ManBungalow wrote:

cairnswk wrote:

sailorseal wrote:Can you make a equal distance between all of the ports

what way do you mean

I'm guessing he means that you will have a certain number of armies in between each port, on appropiate regions, to ensure that no port gives one player a distinct advantage by having fewer armies to fight through.

i'd like to hear saliorseal's interpretation of this question.

i think that what man bungalow is what sailor meant, but it would be extemely hard with the mountains, and the port royal inset. The only way around this, that i could see would be to move some of the ports

sailorseal wrote:

cairnswk wrote:

sailorseal wrote:Can you make a equal distance between all of the ports

what way do you mean

There are 21 neutrals between Spain and Liverpool but but 18 between Liverpool and Bristol, even it out

Here was a response by sailorseal that seems to have been missed, or were you looking for further clarification cairnswk.
I agree with sailorseal's analysis ... balance is important especially on a map like this.

Keep up the good cartography.
-aequitas08

cairnswk wrote:

ManBungalow wrote:

cairnswk wrote:

sailorseal wrote:Can you make a equal distance between all of the ports

what way do you mean

I'm guessing he means that you will have a certain number of armies in between each port, on appropiate regions, to ensure that no port gives one player a distinct advantage by having fewer armies to fight through.

i'd like to hear saliorseal's interpretation of this question.

Alright well here it is,
ManB explained it perfectly, there should be the exact same count of neutrals inbetween each port
i.e.:

3 territories between X and Z, each has 3
But between X and B there are 4 territories but they have a count of 2, 2, 4 and 1

Cairns has requested vacation status for this (and his other) maps.

[moved]

gimil wrote:Cairns has requested vacation status for this (and his other) maps.

[moved]

MrBenn, could you move this map back to....since this has a Draft stamp, i believe the Foundry pls.

sailorseal wrote:...3 territories between X and Z, each has 3
But between X and B there are 4 territories but they have a count of 2, 2, 4 and 1

Version 13.
Added a few flourishes for the title in the green and brown that was requested by MrBenn (i think). Maybe more to go here.
This version fixes some of those neutrals between the ports.
There are now approx 17 or 18 neutrals between each port within distance, naturally not across the island from one end to the other. Some terts have also been re-arranged and one tert Annotta Bay added to get those neutrals to behave.

Still to configure The bonuses and all the combinations that you want.



[bigimg]http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s282/cairnswk/jamaica/Jamaica_V13L.jpg[/bigimg]

by annotta bay, do u mean annotto bay?

http://www.jamaicatax-online.gov.jm/col ... o_bay.html
http://jis.gov.jm/security/html/2005070 ... BISHED.asp

ian.

iancanton wrote:by annotta bay, do u mean annotto bay?

http://www.jamaicatax-online.gov.jm/col ... o_bay.html
http://jis.gov.jm/security/html/2005070 ... BISHED.asp

ian.

Well no, on the 1901 map i am referencing, it is stated as Annotta Bay.

bout time we got a J map, way to go cairnswk

let me think on the bonus's

To me, it seems whoever starts with london has a unfair advantage. They have all of port royal anf kingston that they can expand into without any other threat, just nuturals. Mabey I am wrong, just my 2 pence.

captainwalrus wrote:To me, it seems whoever starts with london has a unfair advantage. They have all of port royal anf kingston that they can expand into without any other threat, just nuturals. Mabey I am wrong, just my 2 pence.

Well, if you see that as being a challenge, do you have anything to alleviate the problem?

Blitzaholic wrote:bout time we got a J map, way to go cairnswk

let me think on the bonus's

Thanks Blitzaholic, it'd be nice for someone to have input on what they consider viable for bonuses.

Until then, here is Version 14....some small change to hopefully enhance graphics.



[bigimg]http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s282/cairnswk/jamaica/Jamaica_V14L.jpg[/bigimg]

This is a temp file showing 888s.
the xml is written up to this point of the map development.

The London start advantage is pretty severe, it suffers from hardly ANY interaction from opposing ships. The ships need to moved around, so that one starts with a landing either in Kingston or directly beside it. You can't really move just one ship, they should be equidistant from the nearest one on either side, to reduce drop advantages.

Echospree wrote:The London start advantage is pretty severe, it suffers from hardly ANY interaction from opposing ships. The ships need to moved around, so that one starts with a landing either in Kingston or directly beside it. You can't really move just one ship, they should be equidistant from the nearest one on either side, to reduce drop advantages.

So what changes do you propose?
if you examine the plan for the neutrals above, you'll see that while almost all distances between ships vary a great deal, these neutrals have been adjusted to around 17 or 18 between each ship so that no-one has any distinct advantage on the drop. Everyone is going to have to battle through 5 neutrals to start.
Also, do recognise that this game is not just about kicking each other, but about gathering resources to produce an enhanced army.
So if we can construct a bonus scheme around these resources and possibly move them around on the map, then there will be adequate incentive for all to assault in the correct direction.

Latest Version 14 for info.



[bigimg]http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s282/cairnswk/jamaica/Jamaica_V14L.jpg[/bigimg]

It seems that either everyone is on holidays in the north, or people are no longer interested in this map, however, i'll continue to push along in the hope....!

Version 15.
1. Separated the resources and foods to either side of the title.
2. Re-arranged the bonuses to something more considerate, but i would like some feedback on these please.



[bigimg]http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s282/cairnswk/jamaica/Jamaica_V15L.jpg[/bigimg]

Echospree wrote:The London start advantage is pretty severe, it suffers from hardly ANY interaction from opposing ships.

cairnswk wrote:if you examine the plan for the neutrals above, you'll see that while almost all distances between ships vary a great deal, these neutrals have been adjusted to around 17 or 18 between each ship so that no-one has any distinct advantage on the drop. Everyone is going to have to battle through 5 neutrals to start.

while there's a roughly equal number of neutrals between each ship, it remains more difficult for france or blackbeard to attack london than to take a different course of action. london will therefore have the kingston area pretty much to himself in most multiplayer games. increasing pr docks' neutrals to 6 or 7 will handicap london somewhat, while still leaving a slight advantage for him in multiplayer. on the other hand, 7 neutrals probably tips the balance too far in 1v1 if france is held by london's opponent. 6 could be the way to go.

ian.

iancanton wrote:....
while there's a roughly equal number of neutrals between each ship, it remains more difficult for france or blackbeard to attack london than to take a different course of action. london will therefore have the kingston area pretty much to himself in most multiplayer games. increasing pr docks' neutrals to 6 or 7 will handicap london somewhat, while still leaving a slight advantage for him in multiplayer. on the other hand, 7 neutrals probably tips the balance too far in 1v1 if france is held by london's opponent. 6 could be the way to go.

ian.

Ian, you wish for 6 neutrals on London only?

PS: do we need to re-introduce some sea routes to make attacks possible on Port Royal?

6 neutrals on pr docks, but only 5 on the other docks. i have my doubts about sea routes since, in a quads game, team 1 can load up player 4, then blast through two docks to capture any enemy ship that has made an attempt (successful or otherwise) to land at a dock. just now, there are enough neutrals between any two docks to make such a strategy somewhat double-edged - a good thing.

ian.

iancanton wrote:6 neutrals on pr docks, but only 5 on the other docks.

Done, next version.

i have my doubts about sea routes since, in a quads game, team 1 can load up player 4, then blast through two docks to capture any enemy ship that has made an attempt (successful or otherwise) to land at a dock. just now, there are enough neutrals between any two docks to make such a strategy somewhat double-edged - a good thing.
ian.

OK, thanks. Care to comment on the other bonuses please.

I had a few comments, but it seems the newest version is on the last page, and the first page image hasn't been updated, so oops, they don't apply! lol. I am curious as to where the pirate was...

I love this map and its idea with resources and such. I think it was a good idea to remove the Baccy as it was hard to see it sometimes.

Do you think the All Maroons should be higher? Maybe +4?

Maybe to even London out a little get rid of the Bumbo on the Morgan line?

I really like the needing 2 food for a bonus, but maybe 2 food and ships gives +2 bonus?

Do you need the Ports in the legend? I don't think of a port as a "resource".

Having all the slaves seems extremely difficult and giving a bonus to holding them all seems like its more of a win-more resource (IE, the person who gets that bonus is probably going to win anyways to have spread out and be able to hold all the slaves). Especially since each slave and sugar gets +1 anyways.

It seems that Calico Jack has a raw deal and not easily get any bonuses...maybe put a Bumbo or a Gold Cob on the Black River?

Sorry if this is nit-picky, but on the big map its called Kingston Port Royal, but on the zoomed-map its called Port Royal & Kingston...maybe change that to be consistent? Not that its confusing, I just think nit-picky it'd be nicer that way.

I'm glad you brought this map outta vacation and hope you can use my suggestions. Thanks Cairns!

cairnswk wrote:

Blitzaholic wrote:bout time we got a J map, way to go cairnswk

let me think on the bonus's

Thanks Blitzaholic, it'd be nice for someone to have input on what they consider viable for bonuses.

Until then, here is Version 14....some small change to hopefully enhance graphics.



[bigimg]http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s282/cairnswk/jamaica/Jamaica_V14L.jpg[/bigimg]

ok, I have had a chance to review this. I really like the additions of this from when you 1st started, I think this was at around 20 something territories and now looks to have 40 plus territories, which Is much better.

as far as the bonus's go, it seems like they all work except 3 in my opinion, you currently have 2 foods + 1 ship = to a bonus of + 1, I would encourage you to think about just 2 foods being = to + 1 bonus as the ships have a + 3 as it is, same as bumbo, just have 2 bumbo's maybe for + 1 for bonus, and finally 2 gold cobs = + 1 for bonus.

of course these are just suggestions, you do what you think is best.

Dexsting wrote:I had a few comments, but it seems the newest version is on the last page, and the first page image hasn't been updated, so oops, they don't apply! lol. I am curious as to where the pirate was...
I love this map and its idea with resources and such.

Excellent thanks

I think it was a good idea to remove the Baccy as it was hard to see it sometimes.

Yes that became redundant as a most unused-resource.

Do you think the All Maroons should be higher? Maybe +4?

they could be, but please convince me.

Maybe to even London out a little get rid of the Bumbo on the Morgan line?

OK, i could do that but...
the territory Morgan Line has Bumbo (rum) on it because this is where Captain Henry Morgan had his rum wahehouses.
So i think it is quite apt given the flavour of the map. But i could be convinced otherwise with a good reason...

I really like the needing 2 food for a bonus, but maybe 2 food and ships gives +2 bonus?

Done, next version.

Do you need the Ports in the legend? I don't think of a port as a "resource".

Proably not, unless we want to attack a bonus to them (come to think of that)?

Having all the slaves seems extremely difficult and giving a bonus to holding them all seems like its more of a win-more resource (IE, the person who gets that bonus is probably going to win anyways to have spread out and be able to hold all the slaves). Especially since each slave and sugar gets +1 anyways.

OK, good reasoning. Removed next version.

It seems that Calico Jack has a raw deal and not easily get any bonuses...maybe put a Bumbo or a Gold Cob on the Black River?

Not of the ports have any resources (unless as asked above you want to give them all a bonus such as a gold cob). C. Jack has only to attack Bluefields and Savannah le Mar and he has a bonus of +1 for sugar and slaves.
Henry Morgan is proably going to have a harder deal unless there is a a bonus for +1 for gold cobs.
They can then both battle over the slaves the and sugar.

Sorry if this is nit-picky, but on the big map its called Kingston Port Royal, but on the zoomed-map its called Port Royal & Kingston...maybe change that to be consistent? Not that its confusing, I just think nit-picky it'd be nicer that way.

Sorry, but i read left to right and that is how i read the big map also, Port Royal first and then Kingston. So the parallel is the same on the title for the insert small map. Does that make sense?

I'm glad you brought this map outta vacation and hope you can use my suggestions. Thanks Cairns!

Cheers. And thanks for your positive input.