Rushing777 wrote:would be nice to get this coded and on the beta site to test out
4.13 should be ready for live testing on beta site in about +- 1 week!
Moderator: Cartographers
Rushing777 wrote:would be nice to get this coded and on the beta site to test out



thats awesomeSoN!c wrote:Rushing777 wrote:would be nice to get this coded and on the beta site to test out
4.13 should be ready for live testing on beta site in about +- 1 week!


AWESOME JOB PLURPLEplurple wrote:ok here is the xml for 4.16


I agree. At development the temples were ment to be 9 neutral strong* but the idea got abandoned to be more like "baltic crusades castle autodeploy style".loutil wrote:I have played 7 games on the map. In my opinion, the Temples are too easy to grab. In a trench game, good dice can capture a temple on your opening move. This almost seals the game. My suggestion would be to increase them from neutral 4 to neutral 6 or 8.
Here is a recent game where my opponent already has a temple starting round 2:
2025-06-14 08:07:16 - Incrementing game to round 2
2025-06-14 09:29:03 - ender_w99 got bonus of 2 troops added to ?
2025-06-14 09:29:03 - ender_w99 got bonus of 2 troops added to ?
2025-06-14 09:29:03 - ender_w99 got bonus of 2 troops added to ?
2025-06-14 09:29:03 - ender_w99 got bonus of 2 troops added to ?
2025-06-14 09:29:03 - ender_w99 got bonus of 2 troops added to ?
2025-06-14 09:29:03 - ender_w99 got bonus of 2 troops added to ?
2025-06-14 09:29:03 - ender_w99 got bonus of 3 troops added to ?



It was England +2 and "Ireland, Scotland and Viking" +3 once... but those bonusses were too easy to grab...that was a Mon Jun 12, 2023 version lolPeteee wrote:For historical accuracy England should be renamed Britain or Britannia or even British Isles.


This was changed for comments the map needed more "west to east" crossing points / attack possibilities because of the risk of having "choke points" at the crossing if not.loutil wrote:I just discovered that the West side Nobles can attack 2 terts on the east side of the map and East side can attack 1 tert on the West. This makes no sense to me? Particularly because of the imbalance. West side attacks a very significant territory.

Outremer 11 and Roman 2 make sense. Outremer 1 does not as it creates an advantage for the west.SoN!c wrote:This was changed for comments the map needed more "west to east" crossing points / attack possibilities because of the risk of having "choke points" at the crossing if not.loutil wrote:I just discovered that the West side Nobles can attack 2 terts on the east side of the map and East side can attack 1 tert on the West. This makes no sense to me? Particularly because of the imbalance. West side attacks a very significant territory.
If you look at the templar ships at the crossing point it says "+1 range" so any noble can land via the ship "on the other side" with the +1 range.
So:
West ship 5 (can be reached by East nobles due to the +1 range indicator) and thus can land in the Roman 2 Templar port (see map)
East ship 1 (can be reached by west nobles due to the +1 range indicator) can land in Outremer 1 and 11 Templar ports (see map)
Outremer 1 and 11 is next to Egypt, Syria and Dominions because these are interesting bonusses to get and a player on west side nobles should be able to do something to break it.
And Outremer 1 is also the historical objective for the Templars (Jerusalem), a terr fought by all.
If you believe it creates a too big unbalance then the Outremer 1 connection from the West Nobles can be scrapped. Outremer 1 is still attackable by East Nobles via ship n°2 in this map change (4.19):loutil wrote:Outremer 11 and Roman 2 make sense. Outremer 1 does not as it creates an advantage for the west.SoN!c wrote:This was changed for comments the map needed more "west to east" crossing points / attack possibilities because of the risk of having "choke points" at the crossing if not.loutil wrote:I just discovered that the West side Nobles can attack 2 terts on the east side of the map and East side can attack 1 tert on the West. This makes no sense to me? Particularly because of the imbalance. West side attacks a very significant territory.
If you look at the templar ships at the crossing point it says "+1 range" so any noble can land via the ship "on the other side" with the +1 range.
So:
West ship 5 (can be reached by East nobles due to the +1 range indicator) and thus can land in the Roman 2 Templar port (see map)
East ship 1 (can be reached by west nobles due to the +1 range indicator) can land in Outremer 1 and 11 Templar ports (see map)
Outremer 1 and 11 is next to Egypt, Syria and Dominions because these are interesting bonusses to get and a player on west side nobles should be able to do something to break it.
And Outremer 1 is also the historical objective for the Templars (Jerusalem), a terr fought by all.
Making Persia 4 attackable by East Nobles and then creating a northern connection from Persia to the West would balance much better.



So what is your opinion on 4.19 then good sir?loutil wrote:Temples are the priority on this map. If you are in the West and hold a temple, you are basically safe from the east (trench style). If you are in the East and take that temple, you are not safe from the west unless you make that change. That is the unbalance as I see it. Even non trench, the West is basically safe from an Eastern invasion getting to a Temple.

Let me play a few games with the changes before I respond. But, they seem a step in the right direction.SoN!c wrote:So what is your opinion on 4.19 then good sir?loutil wrote:Temples are the priority on this map. If you are in the West and hold a temple, you are basically safe from the east (trench style). If you are in the East and take that temple, you are not safe from the west unless you make that change. That is the unbalance as I see it. Even non trench, the West is basically safe from an Eastern invasion getting to a Temple.