Conquer Club

Iron Maid wrote:It also looks like Mosa & Lefu border. This isn't the case.

MK6 is to far away from it's spot. Now it looks like MK6 is Max.

And indeed, those drops are hilarious.

Thanks Iron Maid.
I've fixed the Mosa-Lefu non-bordering issue.
In the next version of xml upload, this will be sorted.
And the drops are being worked on.

Nephilim wrote:[Game]7602250 [/Game]

yikes, my partner drops -4 for his batter plus fielders! plus our opponent drops the +4 bowler....maybe a few changes are in order!

that aside, love your work, cairnsy....been waiting for this map for months!

Yes, i dropped a -3 and didn't get to deploy. so we'll possibly change that.
Thanks Nephilim

natty_dread wrote:Just code the batters neutral?

natty_dread wrote:Why not just make the batters neutral?

ManBungalow wrote:

natty_dread wrote:Why not just make the batters neutral?

This too. I was going to suggest it, but it slipped my mind.

OK guys. thanks natty for your suggestion, i was waiting to see what other contributions came in before answering.

I am inclined to go with the option of coding the batters neutral to start.
a. it gives those in the field more incentive to make a decent push to gain a batter since the drop regions are attached.
b. if you gain a batter, and also have a fielder, you're going to gain a negative bonus, which means it's going to need a good number of reinforcements on the batter to counter this negative bonus if you want to stay there.
c. this means that for those who get to stay on the batter position, have an opportunity to gain "4"s or "6"s but they'll need plenty of troops to do it with.

And to start, i'd like to code the batter position with neutral 4, because it means players might get past the first round without someone taking a batter.

So hope this helps, and i'll summarise the change in another post.

ender516 wrote:Just so everyone can see what I asked about in the chat in Game 7602206:

2010-09-10 00:22:17 - ender516: Say, cairnswk, the legend says "Add four runs on same line, bonus increases to +2", but BOB is telling me I have the -1 for Batter 2 and Deep Mid-On and the 2 for same plus Long-On 4.
2010-09-10 00:23:05 - ender516: Should the bonus with four runs override the basic batter/fielder negative bonus?

Yes, i think that would be the way to go with overrides, that still ensures that there is decent reward for taking the "4" bonus, and it doesn't get half-reduced.

And by the way, I got the bowler in the drop, but I have not won.

b00060 wrote:You drop plus 4 and you win, end of story.

I guess there's more of the story to tell.

Yes, there always is.

So to summarise.

1. Bowler auto-deploy reduced from +4 to +2
2. Mosa<->Lefu border fixed in the xml
3. Batter 1 and 2 to start with 4 neutral
4. Batter + Fielder + "4" bonus of 2 overrides the Batter + Fielder negative bonus in the xml.





[bigimg]http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s282/cairnswk/Silly_Mid-On/silly-mid-on-cricket_V26L.png[/bigimg]

Files:
http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s282 ... t_V26S.png
http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s282 ... t_V26L.png
http://h1.ripway.com/cairnswk/cricket_smo_V26.xml

I'll get lackattack to upload these asap.

Even if you reduce the bowler autodeploy, it will still give a drop advantage unless you code it neutral.

natty_dread wrote:Even if you reduce the bowler autodeploy, it will still give a drop advantage unless you code it neutral.

Well, let's see how this firsts lot goes.

You could group all the negatives together and cap it so that you never lose more than 2, for example?

Sorry if I'm repeating things; I haven't read through the entire thread -- just two quick comments after starting a game on this map:

A +4 autodeploy that doesn't start out neutral gives a huge advantage and lets way too much of the game depend on the luck of the drop.

And the description of the "four runs" bonuses in the legend doesn't seem to match what actually happens: The description says that the "bonus increases to +2", which I would understand to mean that the +2 overrides the -1, but what actually happens is that a +2 comes on top of the -1, so the bonus only increases to +1.

joriki wrote:Sorry if I'm repeating things; I haven't read through the entire thread -- just two quick comments after starting a game on this map:

A +4 autodeploy that doesn't start out neutral gives a huge advantage and lets way too much of the game depend on the luck of the drop.

And the description of the "four runs" bonuses in the legend doesn't seem to match what actually happens: The description says that the "bonus increases to +2", which I would understand to mean that the +2 overrides the -1, but what actually happens is that a +2 comes on top of the -1, so the bonus only increases to +1.

Yes, that's what it means

Victor Sullivan wrote:

joriki wrote:Sorry if I'm repeating things; I haven't read through the entire thread -- just two quick comments after starting a game on this map:

A +4 autodeploy that doesn't start out neutral gives a huge advantage and lets way too much of the game depend on the luck of the drop.

And the description of the "four runs" bonuses in the legend doesn't seem to match what actually happens: The description says that the "bonus increases to +2", which I would understand to mean that the +2 overrides the -1, but what actually happens is that a +2 comes on top of the -1, so the bonus only increases to +1.

Yes, that's what it means

The post above by cairnswk indicates that he is changing this so that the +2 will override the -1.

EDIT: link to cairnswk's post fixed.

Cairns, you will find few on this site who are bigger fans of your maps than myself. I love all of your rail maps and Stalingrad is perhaps the most strategically diverse and excellent map available. However, I'm having big problems with this map.

I see that there's already been some discussion about the Bowler region. I'm not to hung up on the various -1 bonuses, as it's an inherent danger that can be dealt with, similar to the possible starts in USApocalypse.

However, this +4 is deadly. If you're considering changing the Bowler to a neutral region, I really hope you decide to implement that. As it stands now, the only way I can think to counter the possible damage a +4 auto drop on the other team would be to play this map exclusively with adjacent reinforcements, which makes from slower troop movement. However, the downfall to this is slower developing strategies.

Slight map error maybe ?

In the south african fan section the map implies that Lefu should be able to attack Mosa as there is a small section of shared territory - in reality you have to go through Tau to get to Mosa.


PS the +4 auto for the bowler is too much in my opinion - particularly in any two-player game. How about just +1

briggs1209 wrote:Slight map error maybe ?

In the south african fan section the map implies that Lefu should be able to attack Mosa as there is a small section of shared territory - in reality you have to go through Tau to get to Mosa.


PS the +4 auto for the bowler is too much in my opinion - particularly in any two-player game. How about just +1

Again, see the earlier post by cairnswk, where he fixes the Mosa/Lefu border and reduces the bowler autodeploy to +2. This will happen once lackattack uploads the new files.

Thanks ender516 for batting for the team...

Below is for those who won't read previous posts.....this has been forwarded to lackattack for adjustment.

show

This has now been updated by lackattack.

Just stopping by to say that I think both the -1 deployment and the Bowler bonus could use some tweaking.

I've only played a couple of 1v1s here, but both times, one of the two players started out with a -4 to their deployment. The other player did not have any subtractions to their deployment. That's game over right there, regardless of dice.

Bowler could use some tweaks as well, but the -1s are the biggest issue for me.




EDIT: I see that some adjustments have already been made.

Commander62890 wrote:I've only played a couple of 1v1s here, but both times, one of the two players started out with a -4 to their deployment. The other player did not have any subtractions to their deployment. That's game over right there, regardless of dice.

this one's been solved nicely.

Master Fenrir wrote:this +4 is deadly. If you're considering changing the Bowler to a neutral region, I really hope you decide to implement that.

i've analysed all 22 1v1 games started since the bowler autodeploy was reduced to +2 that have been completed. removing those involving the 3 ranks that have scores lower than complete noobs, we are left with 15 games. of these 15 games, player 1 won 12 (80%), while the person who received the bowler bonus in round 1 won 5 times out of 7 (71%).

this shows that, although having the bowler from the drop is a factor, who goes first is even more important. player 1 currently receives 8 troops for 24 regions, plus possibly +2 autodeploy for the bowler (roughly 33% chance).

we can kill two birds with one stone by setting the bowler as a starting neutral (perhaps a neutral-2). this means player 1 starts with only 7 troops for 23 regions in 1v1 (instead of 8 for 24), making it more difficult to knock down player 2's deployment immediately, while forcing someone who wants the bowler autodeploy to make an effort to conquer it.

ian.

i love your maps.. love your attitude..
but this map is a 5 unique win and hope I never hit in a random.

too linear with too many bonuses...

meaning...; in general on only a attacks b and b attacks c... and c attacks d. ... and too many bonuses for people landing in the right spot.


I think you did a map called actium (im not sure , but the point will stand) that map gets a lot of player flack as a map that well.. isnt much fun. .. But to me.. even that map is far better than this one.

Not to rub your work or make you mad. I appreciate the effort, it looks great... but to me its all about luck, not playability. If my opinion changes ill be the first in line to tell you how great you are and cricket is... but as of now, 1 star out of 10.


edit.. as i play this more... it should be called "Choke Point Silly!"

thanks aon for your feeedback, and no offence taken
perhaps more games will reveal better results

You really are a class act dude.

Ill play it more and If I change my opinion Ill be the first to come back and apologize.


I have 2 quads games waiting.. It might have better results than these 1vs1.

In the 1vs1, I just couldnt get to his bonus round 1 and it was over.. round 2 the guy had a 22 army bonus waiting for himself round 3 :S



cheers and thanx for the work

*mumble mumble* *eat crow* The gameplay is actually pretty tight unless you play 1vs1. Honestly.. hate to admit it, this will be one of my 8 man esc standbys.. *mumble more crow mumble*

thanx for the work on the map.

army of nobunaga wrote:*mumble mumble* *eat crow* The gameplay is actually pretty tight unless you play 1vs1. Honestly.. hate to admit it, this will be one of my 8 man esc standbys.. *mumble more crow mumble*

thanx for the work on the map.

Thanx for playing some more games to give yourself a better appreciation of the map. Glad to hear that you like it.

I was just wondering, are you supposed to be able to drop mk6?
It just seems to be a bit weird considering all the other 6's are neutral, but if you wanted it like that, I guess It's ok

Leehar wrote:I was just wondering, are you supposed to be able to drop mk6?
It just seems to be a bit weird considering all the other 6's are neutral, but if you wanted it like that, I guess It's ok

Gees, nobody picked that up before. Thanks Leehar.
http://h1.ripway.com/cairnswk/cricket_smo_V27.xml