Conquer Club

Evil DIMwit wrote:

carlpgoodrich wrote:

jakewilliams wrote:Yeah, I think Babe needs to be at the plate at least close to the batter's box somehow.

Not sure this is exactly what you guys meant, but making the batter and home plate the same territory is an interesting idea. It would drastically change the gameplay, since home plate is part of the objective and the batter can be attacked by all the pitchers. You would also have to get rid of the killer neutral on batter which I think would hurt the gameplay at the beginning of games. Overall, this probably isn't a good idea, but I do agree with you that they should be physically close

In red is the big problem with this. I think the killer is fairly integral to the gameplay.

I agree, I noticed that halfway through writing it. Just thought it was an interesting idea (even if a bad one)...

I did consider having home plate connect to the batter, but figured that would be an unnecessary addition and just encumber the legend.

You shouldn't have the plate and batter connect, but maybe you could just make a colored circle (not yellow, because that's the color of the fielders) right next to the plate and make it look like it's holding the bat?

Well, here is the rearrangement I came up with. I know it's not much of a change, but I think it puts things together in a good way, and leaves some room for "some peanuts and cracker jack".



I don't know what happened to that nice font you had in the title.

Just my two-thirds of a cent:

It would be kind of nice to avoid name repeats with other maps. In other words, I think "Hank" is used in the US Senate map, so it'd be ice to change it to like a "Chaz" or something.

-Sully

Check back to the first few pages of this topic for the long debate about the names chosen to be honoured on this map. Hank would be Hank Aaron. Who is Chaz?

Victor Sullivan wrote:Just my two-thirds of a cent:

It would be kind of nice to avoid name repeats with other maps. In other words, I think "Hank" is used in the US Senate map, so it'd be ice to change it to like a "Chaz" or something.

-Sully

Sorry to dash everything you've ever believed against a rock, but "Hank" isn't even used in the Senate map.
"Bob" is, but I'm not changing it anyway. If you don't like that, move to whatever state Senator Bob is from and vote him out of office.

Evil DIMwit wrote:

Victor Sullivan wrote:Just my two-thirds of a cent:

It would be kind of nice to avoid name repeats with other maps. In other words, I think "Hank" is used in the US Senate map, so it'd be ice to change it to like a "Chaz" or something.

-Sully

Sorry to dash everything you've ever believed against a rock, but "Hank" isn't even used in the Senate map.
"Bob" is, but I'm not changing it anyway. If you don't like that, move to whatever state Senator Bob is from and vote him out of office.

Maybe I will. Maybe I voted for him. WHAT OF IT???

Love,
Sully

Chazz Michael Michaels

Army of GOD wrote:Chazz Michael Michaels

Chaz not Chazz oh my god you are so dumb!!!!!!!

Yeah. GOD!

(11:59:47 PM) Helix: ok, let me make sure I get this right
(9/1/2010 12:00:14 AM) Helix: you start as a pitcher and assault Babe so that you can assault a ball somewhere on the field
(12:00:35 AM) Helix: then once on field, chaos ensues and players try to eliminate each other or to nab the bases
(12:00:58 AM) Evil DIMwit: That's the general idea
(12:01:49 AM) Helix: ok... then your legend needs re-working... I think you need to write it so that it reads more like the developments of baseball. 
(12:02:15 AM) Helix: so start with the business about pitchers, move on to batter and then the victory conditions ect. 
(12:02:19 AM) Evil DIMwit: Oh, wow
(12:02:37 AM) Evil DIMwit: I think it was the other way before, I didn't even notice that it switched
(12:02:42 AM) Helix: ah ok
(12:03:07 AM) Helix: so then the tricky bit a player faces is whether to go for a home run or for a defender
(12:03:24 AM) Helix: and I'm wondering if the home runs might be too small a neutral
(12:03:42 AM) Helix: its hard to call though
(12:05:17 AM) Helix: my instinct says go for the home run because none of the regional bonus seems like a good bet
(12:05:40 AM) Evil DIMwit: Hm
(12:05:58 AM) Helix: I mean, I could go for Hanks area but I've got to defend quite a bit of places
(12:06:21 AM) Evil DIMwit: True
(12:06:39 AM) Helix: I guess what irks me about the territories on field are the lack of choke points
(12:06:52 AM) Evil DIMwit: So that needs rearranging
(12:08:58 AM) Helix: I think so... look for the natural barriers of a baseball field like, forgive my baseball ignorance, the sandy bit in the middle and the two green areas
(12:08:58 AM) Helix: those are the three main parts
(12:09:19 AM) Helix: so break those up into areas... as you've done
(12:09:33 AM) Helix: but I think the steel walls have no place on a baseball field
(12:09:47 AM) Evil DIMwit: They're not really supposed to be steel
(12:10:13 AM) Helix: I would use sort of big territories to create a sort of impassable effect
(12:10:40 AM) Helix: I mean, visually, the walls just look odd
(12:10:48 AM) Evil DIMwit: That might be feasible
(12:11:09 AM) Helix: well I think it is
(12:11:14 AM) Evil DIMwit: Well, graphically it could just end up as thicker lines in the dirt vs. thinner lines in the dirt
(12:11:58 AM) Helix: well, abandon the lines all together
(12:12:06 AM) Helix: hang on... let me draw it
(12:12:16 AM) Evil DIMwit: Oh, go for it
(12:20:13 AM) Helix: ok... this might look like a better idea if it were more elegantly drawn out
(12:20:18 AM) Helix: but it gets what I'm thinking across
(12:20:35 AM) Helix: http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v302/ ... ap_6-1.png
(12:21:09 AM) Evil DIMwit: Yeah, I see what you're getting at
(12:21:12 AM) Helix: by superterritories, I mean those areas with 2 on them
(12:21:21 AM) Evil DIMwit: That's what I thought
(12:21:36 AM) Helix: anyway, with those you could have a more baseball field looking map
(12:22:07 AM) Helix: furthermore, how exactly we let you move on without naming those territories is beyond me
(12:22:16 AM) Evil DIMwit: Heh
(12:23:14 AM) Helix: anyway... I think the pitcher autodeploy needs to be upped
(12:23:40 AM) Helix: or perhaps have a starting amount of men as well
(12:24:05 AM) Helix: cause no way 5 men is going to get you through 3 for a ball, 1 for a territory and 1 for the bat
(12:24:05 AM) Evil DIMwit: A starting amount is not a bad idea
(12:24:08 AM) Evil DIMwit: Maybe 10 or 15
(12:24:42 AM) Helix: I think with a map like this, you ought to have a fair chance at making it on the field in round one
(12:25:00 AM) Helix: and my last crit would be the bases might do with an autodeploy
(12:25:34 AM) Helix: but you run into problems like a player getting first base and sitting on it until he can grab secodn and so on
(12:25:57 AM) Evil DIMwit: So is that a good idea or no?
(12:26:04 AM) Helix: well... kind of
(12:26:17 AM) Helix: I think it gives a player an incentive to get on base... which is a pretty baseball thing to do
(12:26:45 AM) Evil DIMwit: Maybe if it was a non-auto
(12:26:53 AM) Helix: that might be an idea
(12:27:52 AM) Helix: cause when a victory condition is an autodeploy territory I think that a player just has to take advantage of the autodeploy to win the game
(12:28:15 AM) Helix: so in my mind, unless the player is an idiot all he has to do is sit tight and gather slowly
(12:28:21 AM) Evil DIMwit: Yeah
(12:28:27 AM) Helix: but I play a lot of no spoils games
(12:28:43 AM) Helix: so its either got to be a low auto or a standard bonus
(12:29:11 AM) Helix: if its a standard bonus, then holding base becomes more attractive
(12:29:23 AM) Helix: even if you're not going for the win conditions
(12:29:31 AM) Evil DIMwit: Yeah
(12:29:55 AM) Evil DIMwit: I'm thinking maybe increase the bonus from the defenders
(12:30:04 AM) Evil DIMwit: Make it more like Oasis
(12:30:05 AM) Helix: now, the defenders might do well to be autodeploys
(12:30:22 AM) Helix: hmm
(12:31:40 AM) Helix: well, the reason I favor autodeploys on the defenders is because it simulates an overview of a game with the numbers being the strength of the player represented. Hank is looking strong, so I'm going to not hit towards him but Ted is looking tired so I'll take advantage of that. 
(12:31:56 AM) Helix: but in that scenario... players get better as the game goes on, as opposed to tired
(12:32:01 AM) Evil DIMwit: Heh
(12:32:06 AM) Evil DIMwit: Well, they go up and down
(12:32:10 AM) Helix: but I kind of think that's alright
(12:32:27 AM) Helix: cause a map doesn't represent the situation portrayed until about midway through a game anyway
(12:33:54 AM) Evil DIMwit: Also, the home runs don't need to be all *that* high
(12:34:17 AM) Helix: lastly, these are graphics crits, but you should use the baseball cap as the defenders icon and I find the names slightly tough to read
(12:34:41 AM) Helix: Well... just Ornie if that is what it is spelling... and that's because its on the curve of the circle
(12:34:53 AM) Helix: heh, i kind of liek the home runs way out there
(12:35:02 AM) Evil DIMwit: Ozzie?
(12:35:27 AM) Evil DIMwit: Yeah, the defender icon is provisional
(12:37:06 AM) Helix: well, count my vote for the iconic baseball cap
(12:37:42 AM) Evil DIMwit: Thanks

TL;DR:
Helix suggests:
1. Replace steel curtains with large dividing territories
2. Name all the territories
3. Reassess neutrals on home runs
4. Set a starting amount of troops on the pitchers
5. Give a bonus for the bases
6. Change the defenders to auto-deploy
7. Iconic baseball caps for defender icons

1. Agree. I was confus when I first saw the steel walls of doom.

2. I'm thinking, if you have enough room in the legend and stuff, to name them according to their location: Left Field (LF1, 2, etc.), Left-Center (LC1, 2, etc.), Center Field (CF1, 2, etc.), Right-Center (RC1, 2, etc.), Right Field (RF1, 2, etc.), Left Infield Dirt (LID1, 2, etc.), Right Infield Dirt (RID1, 2, etc.), Right Infield Grass, Left Infield Grass and Pitching Mound.

3. I don't think they're too small. I mean, I feel like the idiot who goes for them first will just open up the field (pun somewhat intended) for the next player to easily take and hold it.

4. I've never really helped out on maps before, but I don't see how something like this can be resolved. 3 seems good, but Idk.

5. +1 or 2 autodeploy?

6. I like killer neutrals better. It's like the gate keeps closing so that the next player isn't given an easy way through.

7. Copyright issues?

Also:

(12:34:41 AM) Helix: Well... just Ornie if that is what it is spelling

*facepalm*

Army of GOD wrote:4. I've never really helped out on maps before, but I don't see how something like this can be resolved. 3 seems good, but Idk.

The idea is to start with about 10 on each pitcher so the players have a good expeditionary force ready to take a foothold on the field. Otherwise, each player starts their first turn with 8 (3 there and 5 from the autodeploy), and right off the (ahem) bat, the players run into 1+3 killer neutrals on 2 territories -- that barely leaves any troops for the field.

Army of GOD wrote:5. +1 or 2 autodeploy?

Not an auto; an auto would promote stacking too much. The idea is to make the base desirable but to keep players from taking one base and stacking on it until eternity. I suspect a +2 bonus might be a bit high, so maybe just +1.

6. I like killer neutrals better. It's like the gate keeps closing so that the next player isn't given an easy way through.

Are you thinking the balls? The defenders right now give +1 non-auto bonus.

7. Copyright issues?

Not anybody's specific iconic cap, I presume; just generic iconic caps.

Evil DIMwit wrote:

Army of GOD wrote:4. I've never really helped out on maps before, but I don't see how something like this can be resolved. 3 seems good, but Idk.

The idea is to start with about 10 on each pitcher so the players have a good expeditionary force ready to take a foothold on the field. Otherwise, each player starts their first turn with 8 (3 there and 5 from the autodeploy), and right off the (ahem) bat, the players run into 1+3 killer neutrals on 2 territories -- that barely leaves any troops for the field.

Well 1,3 and then a 1 (in most cases) isn't that bad with a starting 8. But I can see why increasing it might be better. I expect to lose every 8v3 in my starting turn in Napoleonic Europe...

Army of GOD wrote:5. +1 or 2 autodeploy?

Not an auto; an auto would promote stacking too much. The idea is to make the base desirable but to keep players from taking one base and stacking on it until eternity. I suspect a +2 bonus might be a bit high, so maybe just +1.

Well it might prevent stacking, but if I had a base that gave a bonus, I'd throw that extra troop on it anyway. +1 seems better.

6. I like killer neutrals better. It's like the gate keeps closing so that the next player isn't given an easy way through.

Are you thinking the balls? The defenders right now give +1 non-auto bonus.

Whoops.

7. Copyright issues?

Not anybody's specific iconic cap, I presume; just generic iconic caps.

Well, what do you mean by this? Just general baseball caps? Perhaps we can make them the color of the team that they played on, but using the logo too would be infringement I'm pretty sure. But yea, anything is better than those blinding off-yellow circles...

Normally, 8 vs. 1+3+1 isn't bad, but here it's not enough to just conquer a field territory; you need to have enough troops left over to make it not worthwhile for other players to follow in your footsteps.

I think I agree about increasing the starting stack. If you do this, can we at least talk about reducing the auto-deploy on the pitchers (since the +5 won't be needed for the first turn). +5 every turn is lot, especially compared to the other bonuses. I think +3, maybe +4, would be better.

+5 might seem like a lot but the pitcher troops still have to go through 1+3 neutrals to get anywhere. Maybe I should reduce the balls' neutral count to 2?

At any rate I expect we'll be seeing the pitchers' troop levels growing into stacks and then occasionally coming out as a pitch, rather than trickling out steadily. It's like having built-in spoils that can go all over the field. I'd rather balance the scales by stepping up the other bonuses' values, but for now let's say the pitcher bonus is provisionally +4.

I hope you don't mind, but I used your map as an example in a Foundry Discussions topic Clicky maps and how they affect mapmaking. I see this map as one that would benefit if Clickable Maps (or at least, BOB's Map Inspect feature) were added to the site, since the labelling of maps would not need to be so thorough, and this one will need a lot of little labels.

Don't mind at all.

Incidentally, don't expect an update with any great haste, folks. I'm working on restructuring the field territory layout entirely -- probably making fewer territories, in fact -- and, I'm somewhat short on both time and inspiration nowadays.

All right. Trying out a new arrangement. Not sure about neutral values on the field yet, but let's say they're all 1s.

[bigimg]http://i1011.photobucket.com/albums/af239/RASSyndrome/Baseball/BMap_71.png[/bigimg]

The image border's a bit screwed up but I'll fix that on the next update.

I'm not really a fan of the light green lines. Maybe a thicker black for the borders or a dark green?

Also, I'm not really sure if it'd be possible, but it'd be cool if you could put the CC logo in the infield, kinda like as if the crew cut the grass that way.

And I think you should make the baseballs a bit more symmetrical, so there are 4 on each side instead of 3 and 5.

Army of GOD wrote:I'm not really a fan of the light green lines. Maybe a thicker black for the borders or a dark green?

Also, I'm not really sure if it'd be possible, but it'd be cool if you could put the CC logo in the infield, kinda like as if the crew cut the grass that way.

The lines are not meant to be permanent. They're just placeholders until I figure out how to best represent these boundaries.
I dig the logo idea.

And I think you should make the baseballs a bit more symmetrical, so there are 4 on each side instead of 3 and 5.

How about if I just get rid of the one left of Ted? I think the rest are in a pretty good dispersal for gameplay purposes.

I like the new title, clever.

Evil DIMwit wrote:

Army of GOD wrote:And I think you should make the baseballs a bit more symmetrical, so there are 4 on each side instead of 3 and 5.

How about if I just get rid of the one left of Ted? I think the rest are in a pretty good dispersal for gameplay purposes.

Hm. Yea, that would help the balance out.