Conquer Club

Suggestion Idea: Starting Bonus Override/Shuffle

Description: Add a <shuffle> tag to that allows a mapmaker to ensure that nobody starts the first round with any bonuses from a pre-defined list . This would be an optional tag, as some maps rely on starting bonuses. In my mind it would be the same as the <objective> shuffle, that ensures nobody starts with an objective. (It would have to be set so that it only looks at continents, and not auto-deploys - these can be tweaked with starting neutrals)

Why It Should Be Considered: The starting positions tags can be useful to define specific start locations, but is more beneficial for conquest gameplay. For maps that have lots of small bonuses (ie my Wales map)

The following code, for example, could be used to ensure that nobody started with Oceania or South America. In this case, somebody would still be able to get Africa on the drop...



Lack Label (Mod Use):

MrBenn wrote:Suggestion Idea: Starting Bonus Override/Shuffle

Description: Add a <shuffle> tag to that allows a mapmaker to ensure that nobody starts the first round with any bonuses from a pre-defined list . This would be an optional tag, as some maps rely on starting bonuses. In my mind it would be the same as the <objective> shuffle, that ensures nobody starts with an objective. (It would have to be set so that it only looks at continents, and not auto-deploys - these can be tweaked with starting neutrals)

Why It Should Be Considered: The starting positions tags can be useful to define specific start locations, but is more beneficial for conquest gameplay. For maps that have lots of small bonuses (ie my Wales map)

The following code, for example, could be used to ensure that nobody started with Oceania or South America. In this case, somebody would still be able to get Africa on the drop...

Code: Select all

    <?xml version="1.0"?>
    <map>
       <title>Classic</title>
       <smallwidth>600</smallwidth>
       <smallheight>325</smallheight>
       <largewidth>800</largewidth>
       <largeheight>433</largeheight>
       <filetype>jpg</filetype>
       <objectives/>

       <shuffle> 
            <components>
                 <continent>Oceania</continent>
                 <continent>South America</continent>
            </components>
       </shuffle>

       <continents/>
       <territories/>
    </map>

Lack Label (Mod Use):

In fact it should be the default fort all maps, and use the tag to allow starting bonuses instead of forbidding them. Don't you think?

No - because that wouldn't be backward compatible.

C.

I thought it would be good for the mapmaker to specifically exclude certain bonuses... The advantage of starting with Oceania, for example, is greater than the advantage of starting with Europe (or their equivalents).

It could also be used in conjunction with continent collections, to ensure that people didn't start with particular combinations of bonuses (ie, it could be used to limit the number of plane-bonuses held on the drop in Pearl Harbour)?

Another idea could be is it can shuffle with x of 4 territs. E.g



EDIT: over does not mean = or < just means <

The Wyvern wrote:Suggestion Idea:
Gates

Description
Gates are basically the opposite of Bombardment connections. Gate territories are only connected through fortification.
A player who possesses both territories that are Gate connected can move their armies through. Players cannot attack each other through Gate connections.

Why It Should Be Considered:
This function would be key for players that have half of their forces on another side of a map, and as a gimick for certain maps.
This should be easy to create since it is the opposite of Bombardment.

This XML would be very flexible and usable in many situations. But I would especially love to see it used in this map...

yeti_c wrote:

e_i_pi wrote:Suggestion Idea: Visibility of territories

Description: Allow a territory to be visible from another territory, but not have an attack route.

Why It Should Be Considered: Would allow mapmakers to create maps with territories such as lookout posts, scouts, cliff-tops, etc. Would only really have any sort of effect on FoW maps. At the moment, on a map such as Waterloo it is crucial to own cannons in order to have an overview of what's going on. Would be great if there could be territories like that which are important, but cannot necessarily attack the territories that they can see.

Lack Label:

Yeah - this one's been mentioned before - but it doesn't stop it being an awesome idea.

C.

This is an amazing idea!

Suggestion Idea:
Modify Card Matrix

Description:
Allow the Card Matrix to be modified for each map in the XML.
Example


The Escalating tag is the starting set value.
The Jump value is the amount the escalating card sets jump by each set... with the last number being the number the continue to jump by ad infinitum.
This example = 4,6,8,10,12,14,16,18,20,25 -> 30,35,40,45...

Why It Should Be Considered: Gives the ability to change the card levels for maps - For instance in CC City Mogul the cards could've been multiplied by 5 as well as just the bonuses etc.

Lack Label (Mod Use):

Suggestion Idea: Maybe a way to make a "Random Attack Pattern" for certain territories.

Description: So each turn a territory can attack a different, random place. Like use doodle earth for a example. Think of how Egypt can attack Congo, Sahara dessert, Arabia and Europe. Maybe one turn it can only attack Egypt? or Europe and Sahara? The sky is the limit!

Why It Should Be Considered: This would enhance game play on many new maps. It could be use to create a new element that players would have to factor into their strategy. This could be used to make simple maps more interesting.

Lack Label (Mod Use):

TaCktiX wrote:Suggestion Idea: Conditional Neutrality

Description: If certain territories are owned, then certain other territories become neutral. This also can be extended to killer neutral.

Why it should be considered:
1. Mapmakers could replicate the effects of a bomb or artillery shell without worrying about bombardment getting crap dice.
2. Fantasy-themed maps would be able to add in "walls" that players can "fortify" by owning a castle or something simliar.

Lack Label (Mod Use):

Yes please!

This would also be good for maps where the objective is to conquer a certain region of the map - allowing opponents the chance to temporarily 'block' the win by neutralizing a map defined territory.

Additionally, it would be useful on maps with limited limited access between continents - where owning all of those access points would result in a negative consequence for that player.

Both those examples would be valuable in the Human Body map I am working on.

I have two question
1.If possible to create Random bonuses territory.
2.If possible to create that only one player can attack some specific territory
Example
Player 1 can only attack Kamchatka,all others can not attack these territory
Player 2 can only attack Afganistan,all others can not attack these territory

its these possible?

Its been a month with no responses. Any life here?

There are a load of good suggestions in here - the best of them are on lacks neverending 'to do' list...

Don't know if this has been suggested before, however this would have helped me set up the starting drops in a map I am working on so I thought I would suggest it.

Suggestion Idea: Positions/Position Tag Starting Drop Override

Description: Add an "exclude" element for the <positions> tag that allows a mapmaker to ensure that leftover positions assigned by the <position> tag will be set up as a specified number of neutral armies, overriding their start element and not added to the general pool of starting forces drops in games where the number of players doesn't divide evenly.

Why It Should Be Considered: Mapmakers could use the position tag to ensure specific starting positions and exclude this positions from any random drops not specified by the position tags.

Example: The following code, for example, could be used to ensure that nobody started the extra wizards but still would allow the engine to drop randomly on the monsters indicated with a black circle.





I have 8 wizards I have assigned to absolute start positions.
I have 16 monsters that I have not assigned neutrals to so they will be divided among the players.

In a 2 player game
- both players would have 4 wizards each.
- both players would have 8 monsters each.

In a 3 player game
- all players would have 3 wizards each with 2 remainder set to the override 3 neutrals.
- all players would have 6 monsters each with 2 remainder set to 3 neutrals.

In a 4 player game
- all players would have 2 wizards each.
- all players would have 4 monsters each.

In a 5 player game
- all players would have 1 wizard each with 3 remainder set to the override 3 neutrals.
- all players would have 3 monsters each with 1 remainder set to 3 neutrals.

In a 6 player game
- all players would have 1 wizard each with 2 remainder set to the override 3 neutrals.
- all players would have 2 monsters each with 4 remainder set to 3 neutrals.

In a 7 player game
- all players would have 1 wizard each with 1 remainder set to the override 3 neutrals.
- all players would have 2 monsters each with 2 remainder are dealt out as normal territories.

In a 8 player game
- all players would have 1 wizards each.
- all players would have 2 monsters each.

Lack Label (Mod Use):

--D

dolomite13 wrote:Don't know if this has been suggested before, however this would have helped me set up the starting drops in a map I am working on so I thought I would suggest it.

Suggestion Idea: Positions/Position Tag Starting Drop Override

Description: Add an "exclude" element for the <positions> tag that allows a mapmaker to ensure that leftover positions assigned by the <position> tag will be set up as a specified number of neutral armies, overriding their start element and not added to the general pool of starting forces drops in games where the number of players doesn't divide evenly.

This can already be done by coding the territories as neutral starts, which get over-ridden by the starting positions.

MrBenn wrote:

dolomite13 wrote:Don't know if this has been suggested before, however this would have helped me set up the starting drops in a map I am working on so I thought I would suggest it.

Suggestion Idea: Positions/Position Tag Starting Drop Override

Description: Add an "exclude" element for the <positions> tag that allows a mapmaker to ensure that leftover positions assigned by the <position> tag will be set up as a specified number of neutral armies, overriding their start element and not added to the general pool of starting forces drops in games where the number of players doesn't divide evenly.

This can already be done by coding the territories as neutral starts, which get over-ridden by the starting positions.

OK well now I'm really confused now. In a long email thread thenobodies80 explained to me that the leftover starting positions would get added to the general pool of additional starts.

thenobodies80 wrote:A game start
Game engine "counts" the players (A) and the starting positions (B).

B/A = C (and D)

where C is the number of starting positions for each player and D is a eventually reminder.
Now the game engine will sum the reminder with the other territories (E), then the total number will divided among players again.

D+E / A = F (and G)

F will be the number of territories assigned to a player (with 3 default troops) and G an eventually reminder (3 neutral troops)

In other words the game engine split the territories among the players ALWAYS randomly and give a 3 armies neutral to an eventual reminder.
The starting positions tags will force the game engine to choose this positions as first choice, so they will ever assigned to a player. When there's a reminder the engigne will consider the reminder of the starting position as a normal territory not giving to it a priority. So it could be assigned as a neutral if there's a reminder in the "second" splitting. It's random..

There's a long discussion about Starting Positions in this thread: viewtopic.php?f=127&t=68154

If your question isn't made clear by that thread, then feel free to bump it

Territories Decay to Neutral

Description:
A starting territory marked as a decay territory in the XML could result in a specified number of troops killed in that territory per turn. After a certain number of rounds, this/these territories would reduce to neutral.

Why It Should Be Considered:It would allow for starting territories to be decayed to neutral to allow these positions to be de-activated from the game. This would be helpful for the battleships in the Gallipoli map.

Lack Label (Mod Use):

Now, for a map I'm developing, how about maybe a +1 bonus of dice rolls, was the most unique thing I could come up with, perhaps we could amend that?

H-man wrote:Now, for a map I'm developing, how about maybe a +1 bonus of dice rolls, was the most unique thing I could come up with, perhaps we could amend that?

I'll put it in the form for you

Dice Roll Bonus

Description:
Be able to set a map so a bonus on it will give a player extra dice rolls.

Why It Should Be Considered:A new and unique feature that would enhance game play and open up possibilities
for a whole new niche of maps.
Lack Label (Mod Use):

ty, sailorseal

Temporary impassible

Description:
A territory only boarders some other territory severy certain number of turns. For example, territory A and B are devided by an impassible but they can attack eachother every third turn.
Why it should be considered
This would allow for interesting gameplay, and could let things like tides or rock slides or whatever be incorperated into maps.
Lack Label

Team Starting Positions

Description:
The territories of the team positions are handed-out amongst the team, whether dubs, trips or quads.

Currently, in quads (for example), if there are 8 starting positions - each player would randomly get 1 of the 8, each team would therefore get a random 4 of the 8.

My proposal would mean each team randomly gets 1 of 2 positions.

Why It Should Be Considered:It would make war scenario maps and sports maps much more meaningful - maps could be created where all members of the same team are on the same side in the battle or sports contest.

In short - more creative licence for map-makers and much more fun team games.

Lack Label (Mod Use): [/quote]

I've just taken the time to read through all 47 pages of this thread... there are several ideas/suggestions that have been repeated very many times... The time has probably come to lock this thread down, until some of the best ideas get implemented

i am not sure if this is the correct place for this post but i guess i will find out. i can think of a few things i would like the game engine be able to do and some of you have your own ideas and maybe we can all post them here and discuss them.

i would like to see the start position function expanded to be able to have starting postions grouped. right now they are just random. like for example if someone makes a civil war map and have the north vs the south, well territories are randomly given out. why not group them so a player will have all their starting territories in either the north or the south but not both. then more realistic battle maps could be made which i think would be much more fun. and this would make team maps much more fun to play as each teammate would start out in a specific area and have his own
job to worry about. current team mapping has the feel of not having much teamwork involved. my suggestion would make teamwork imperative. with the current start position workings this could be accomplished by have a small number of starting points like 6 or 8 and them making all the other territories neutral, but this just doesnt seem the same.

my other idea is have the <random> function to the game engine. take for example u want to make a map with winning conditions and you want those winning conditions to be random so the players wont know exactly what they need to do to win. this might sound stupid at first, but if you think about it, it could have alot of uses. take for example the board game called CLUE. well the victory conditons are not known at the start of the game except you know that one person committed the crime in one of the rooms and with one of the readily available weapons. well. someone could make a clue type map and the game engine could randomize an array of winning conditions.

i have read other map draft postings and can remember that some people said that what they wanted to do with their gameplay wouldn't work with the current engine, but i cant remember exactly what they were wanting to do.

being that people seem to have to good ideas about gameplay that would add extra fun to the maps, but just won't work using the current engine, i think that an update is in order.