Conquer Club

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!

Templars 4.14 as the comments are still there that Egypt continent color is too much the same as Caliphate and Cyprus is unclear SO HERE IS 4.14:


Templar ship 3 in the East connects to Cyprus I (the sea fort) and Templar ship 4 to Cyprus II

Saladin Cav in Egypt are placed next to the camel so they can jump over to Caliphate 2 and 4

Temples have matching regions details in troop count area and matching continent symbol

Seljuk continent color has added "sand" in slighty different color to stand out more to acre "port city".

Nobles spawnpoint +2



NO MORE CHANGES!

and small 630x600;

SoN!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!

thats awesome

Will not change the positions of the troop count hereafter (nor the mechanic in autodeploy numbers) so XML is not hampered in any way (for Plurple who does the XML) but made a few more details to stand out / to be extra clear / fool proof so here is 4.16:



and small:

4.15 is coded (XML) and LIVE on BETA SITE!

ok here is the xml for 4.16

plurple wrote:ok here is the xml for 4.16

Templars2.xml

AWESOME JOB PLURPLE You are faster then the speed of light

All fixed!! Put me in coach, im Ready to play!


109 Territories, 15 Continents, 1 Win Objective, 12 Start Positions, Min Reinforcements: 3

Continents:
England (4) Portugal (2) France (5) Holy Roman Empire (6) The Caliphate (8) Cyprus (2) Egypt (4) Outremer (10) Syria (6) Seluk Persia (9) Port D'Acre (2) Sultan Dominions (4) Templar Fleet West (7) Templar Fleet East (7) Templar Fleet (20)

Autodeploys:
Nobles (12): +2
Templar sea forts (2): +1
Crusader Stronghold (1): +1
Temples (4): +3
Sultan (1): +2
Caliph (1): +2

Beta Tester TeeGee made a comment that the connection between France and England is subject to debate wether it's clear enough or not.
Another comment was that England is to easy to hold "to be a biggish bonus with few attack points at the moment"

So the best way to make that fix is having France 1 connecting to England 1 (instead of England 3)

So this is version 4.17 where this fix is in place:

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 ?

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 ?

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".

But the basic idea of Templars (to become grandmaster) is a map that flattens out dice and drop to the max so it should be higher then 4 after testing yes.

On the other hand: the temples are also supposed to be the game.

And making Temples neuts higher also affects the bonus of Portugal and Cyprus so perhaps that should be +3 (after augmenting the neutral troop count on the temples).

So: in summary: Temples should go from neutral 4 to neutral 5, 6, 8 or 9 (changed to 8 or 9 the Portugal and Cyprus bonus should / could be higher too: +3? ).
(I do not want to drop the Temples autodeploy from 3 to 2).

Lastly : the crusader stronghold should be a +2. A +1 is just not worth grabbing.

*In Templar numerology, the number 9 is associated with the nine founders of the Order of the Temple and the 8 pillars of a Templar temple under one cornerstone to make it 9 devine. The templar initiation ritual, performed at a temple, has also nine flights or levels.

Not sure you need to increase the bonus for Cyprus or Portugal. To get the bonus, you will need to hold a Temple. That seems bonus enough.

Also,
If you make the Crusader Stronghold a plus 2 or higher, it needs to be a stronger neutral at the start. Otherwise, in trench games, it is an easy grab from Persia X and a major advantage.
You could also make Persia 10 a starting neutral to equalize?

I like your insights loutil

We should test the changes soon!

TEMPLARS 4.18



and small:

4.18 is live on the beta site

For historical accuracy England should be renamed Britain or Britannia or even British Isles.

Peteee wrote:For historical accuracy England should be renamed Britain or Britannia or even British Isles.

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 lol

you can still see it here:



One rule of making maps is the following:

Although mapmakers are encuraged to be accurate while developing their maps, it is clear that the maps we have (and develop) on Conquer Club are not meant to depict any actual reality or history, etc. but made more for playability reasons. Graphics and historical accuracy are always utterly servient to the gameplay. We make maps that are meant to be played.

But if you get 10 people posting here to change it to "Britain" i ofcourse will, with a different symbol like this one: https://wappenwiki.org/index.php/Kingdo ... at_Britain

Ofcourse in 1100-1300ish years (age of the Templars) the Kingdom_of_Great_Britain and it's coat of arms did not already exist, that was 1700ish

So propose a "coat of arms" of "Britain" too, one you think is historical correct for the 1100-1300 medieval period so i can change GFX properly

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.

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.

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.

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.

SoN!c wrote:

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.

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.

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.

Outremer 11 and Roman 2 make sense. Outremer 1 does not as it creates an advantage for the west.
Making Persia 4 attackable by East Nobles and then creating a northern connection from Persia to the West would balance much better.

loutil wrote:

SoN!c wrote:

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.

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.

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.

Outremer 11 and Roman 2 make sense. Outremer 1 does not as it creates an advantage for the west.
Making Persia 4 attackable by East Nobles and then creating a northern connection from Persia to the West would balance much better.

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):



The name "ENGLAND" is changed to Britain aswell on 4.19.

and small version:

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.

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.

So what is your opinion on 4.19 then good sir?

SoN!c wrote:

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.

So what is your opinion on 4.19 then good sir?

Let me play a few games with the changes before I respond. But, they seem a step in the right direction.