Conquer Club

shocked439 wrote: Less troops to start with means you'll have to be smarter with them. Strategies will switch to working from the outfield to build bonuses instead of going balls out for homers.

Excellent idea. Best by far so far!

The consensus seems to be a limit of 1 starting position and I tend to agree. I'll leave the starting values as they are, so that players have enough troops to establish their beachhead.

For +2 with +2 per base, should we include Home Plate? Thematically I'm not sure if it makes sense or not.

carlpgoodrich wrote:I also agree the home runs need to be tweaked. I like the +2 with +2 extra per base idea, although I still think the neutral value could be raised to 8 or 9. I think the goal should be to make sure people don't go for the home runs on their first turn.

I'll make it 8. Any more and it would hardly be worth it.

InnyaFacce wrote:I also think that the Bases should be set higher
to also avoid 1 turn games played in Freestyle mode

I think limiting players to one pitcher should take care of this as well.

shocked439 wrote:

Evil DIMwit wrote:Oh, heck yes. What do you say, limit of one or of two?

I would think limiting it to one would make the map more difficult and more fun to play. Less troops to start with means you'll have to be smarter with them. Strategies will switch to working from the outfield to build bonuses instead of going balls out for homers. It's an improvement on this one for sure which ever way you go.

going for hommers are a terreble idea in general.

40kguy wrote:

shocked439 wrote:

Evil DIMwit wrote:Oh, heck yes. What do you say, limit of one or of two?

I would think limiting it to one would make the map more difficult and more fun to play. Less troops to start with means you'll have to be smarter with them. Strategies will switch to working from the outfield to build bonuses instead of going balls out for homers. It's an improvement on this one for sure which ever way you go.

going for hommers are a terreble idea in general.

if by in general you mean in unlimited reinforced team freestyle then yes you are right.

shocked439 wrote:

40kguy wrote:

shocked439 wrote:

Evil DIMwit wrote:Oh, heck yes. What do you say, limit of one or of two?

I would think limiting it to one would make the map more difficult and more fun to play. Less troops to start with means you'll have to be smarter with them. Strategies will switch to working from the outfield to build bonuses instead of going balls out for homers. It's an improvement on this one for sure which ever way you go.

going for hommers are a terreble idea in general.

if by in general you mean in unlimited reinforced team freestyle then yes you are right.

sequential is also a bad idea.

The XML has been updated to reflect the new home run bonus structure and the start position maximum of one.

http://rassyndrome.webs.com/CC/Baseball.xml

Natty, can you make the corresponding alterations to the legend?

Can I get a summary of the changes that need to be made?

I haven't read through this entire post, so this issue may have already been addressed. However, I am playing a game on the map and have only 1 tert left, a home run ball. All of the pitchers have been bombarded and there is no way of attacking Babe who can attack the home run ball. So, I'm kind of stranded. Thoughts?

http://www.conquerclub.com/game.php?game=8794375

Thanks for the map, it's pretty sweet.

Epitaph1 wrote:I haven't read through this entire post, so this issue may have already been addressed. However, I am playing a game on the map and have only 1 tert left, a home run ball. All of the pitchers have been bombarded and there is no way of attacking Babe who can attack the home run ball. So, I'm kind of stranded. Thoughts?

http://www.conquerclub.com/game.php?game=8794375

Thanks for the map, it's pretty sweet.

What about adding a "Closer" territory? It would make sense with gameplay, as you can't continue a baseball game without a pitcher. Once all the starters are gone, you bring in your closer.

Closer begins neutral
Closer can be attacked by Mound
Closer can attack Babe

You could name it "Trevor".

I think its fine the way it is. Yes it is annoying to get stuck in the home run ball, but in team games its actually a good thing (better than being eliminated). If there must be a losing condition, then just make it the pitchers, no need for additional "closers."

I suppose it wouldn't hurt to let the Mound assault Babe.

Natty: Basically the only change is that the home run balls are labeled "+2, with additional +2 per base held (not counting Home Plate)" or some snappier version thereof.

carlpgoodrich wrote:I think its fine the way it is. Yes it is annoying to get stuck in the home run ball, but in team games its actually a good thing (better than being eliminated). If there must be a losing condition, then just make it the pitchers, no need for additional "closers."

Problem is, it's more than annoying - it results in games that cannot end.

Mound attacking Babe would resolve the issue though.

Ok... are we going to do this mound->batter thing? Will I add that to the legend too?

Well, we have a few couple of options at this point.
- Mound attacks batter
- Yogi or Home Plate attacks batter, which means that not only are the home run balls accessible from the field, but you don't need to go through 15 neutrals to get to them

I'd like to see which people prefer.

Evil DIMwit wrote:- Yogi or Home Plate attacks batter, which means that not only are the home run balls accessible from the field, but you don't need to go through 15 neutrals to get to them

I prefer this.

I would prefer the mound. If the game is at a point where one player is stranded on the homeruns and the other has control of the field, then the other player can surely afford to go through the mound to get the home runs.

Also, the mound assaulting the batter makes more sense, thematically...

You could make a losing condition, so if the only territory a player holds is the home run, they lose. This is from someone who's never created a map, so I don't know how ugly that would be.

Otherwise I'd vote Mound to Batter.

drunkmonkey wrote:You could make a losing condition, so if the only territory a player holds is the home run, they lose. This is from someone who's never created a map, so I don't know how ugly that would be.

But it would affect team games too.... Mound assaulting batter solves the problem without downsides.

Having the mound assault the batter ruins the concept of the mound and pitcher being different. The flow of the gameplay is pitcher to batter, batter to balls, balls to field. If getting "stuck" on the homeruns is such a problem, then insert a losing condition. I don't think this is a big enough problem to completely change the gameplay. (ok, it wouldn't COMPLETELY change the gameplay, but it would be significant.)

Evil DIMwit wrote:The XML has been updated to reflect the new home run bonus structure and the start position maximum of one.

http://rassyndrome.webs.com/CC/Baseball.xml

Natty, can you make the corresponding alterations to the legend?

Once the images have been updated we can send them to the turtle

Simply getting stuck to homeruns is not the problem... the problem is when there's 2 players left, one player only has home runs, and the other player has no pitchers. In that situation, the game can not end and will go on forever without a winner.

A losing condition, on the other hand, would be detrimental to team games. In team games, it would suck to have your teammate killed just because he lost other territories than the home runs, because he could still have contributed to the team even if he only had home runs. So the losing condition would lessen the value of home runs in team games and eliminate a strategic pathway.

Creating another assault route to the batter is a better choice in this situation, I think.

nevermind that, just saw this map and I think it's awesome. Unique with smooth graphics and a fresh idea. Well done!

natty_dread wrote:Simply getting stuck to homeruns is not the problem... the problem is when there's 2 players left, one player only has home runs, and the other player has no pitchers. In that situation, the game can not end and will go on forever without a winner.

A losing condition, on the other hand, would be detrimental to team games. In team games, it would suck to have your teammate killed just because he lost other territories than the home runs, because he could still have contributed to the team even if he only had home runs. So the losing condition would lessen the value of home runs in team games and eliminate a strategic pathway.

Creating another assault route to the batter is a better choice in this situation, I think.

I dont think being stuck on a home run ball is a problem even with two players left unless the other player is a jerk and malicously continues on the game which i dont see players doing. I do believe i have played the most games on this map and have seen many stragtegies and i feel like the game play is even. The map has many options to it despite things being reduced to neutrals and so on. The map is great, great job.

RedRover23B wrote:I dont think being stuck on a home run ball is a problem even with two players left unless the other player is a jerk and malicously continues on the game which i dont see players doing.

No, you don't get it. If one player is stuck on home runs, and the other player doesn't have any pitchers, then the game can not end, regardless of the intentions of the players. In that situation, neither player can eliminate the other, so the game goes on forever.

natty_dread wrote:

RedRover23B wrote:I dont think being stuck on a home run ball is a problem even with two players left unless the other player is a jerk and malicously continues on the game which i dont see players doing.

No, you don't get it. If one player is stuck on home runs, and the other player doesn't have any pitchers, then the game can not end, regardless of the intentions of the players. In that situation, neither player can eliminate the other, so the game goes on forever.

An alternate route to the batter would be best for all the reasons you mentioned. One of the drawbacks of middle ages is the losing condition this map would best be served to avoid that. I like the mound assaulting the batter idea. It's too bad you couldn't create an assault condition something like hold center field a middle infielder, and the catcher to assault the batter it'd be like a relay for a play at the plate.
But that would unnecessarily complicate things, so making the mound able to also assault the batter seems like a great option