Four corners

[DiM]

4 corrners of amarica?

what's this amarica you're talking about? and why does it have 4 coRRners?

on a more serious note, the 4 countries must have a connection. right now it's just too random.
so 4 neighbouring countries or at least 4 countries that have something in common could work better.

[Coleman]

I'm not sure if it would be better to agree with DiM or suggest the opposite. That the 4 countries have absolutely nothing in common of any kind whatsoever. Especially artistically. To me it seems like the victory condition itself is the theme.

Either way this idea is amazing and I would love to see how it plays out.

[Industrial Helix]

You seem pretty intent on sticking with the countries you've chosen and the idea is a solid one.

Now get some territory names on there! You may need to apply for supersize though.

[Evil DIMwit]

I'm not married to these countries; I just picked them because they have convenient region structures and because they're more or less in different parts of the world. If someone comes up with a good idea for a foursome (or threesome) theme, I'd be happy to pick it up. I've thought of using BRIC -- Brazil, Russia, India, China, the world's emerging powerhouse economies -- but these countries already have their own maps and plenty of exposure on the site.

This map has of course nothing to do with the Four Corners in the United States, and I don't know why anyone should be rewarded with a victory for controlling all of Utah.

Regarding capital bombardments and other map-to-map links: I feel like this would drive the map closer to what Cold War is, where the board is divided but there's still a bit of communication. In principle, I don't think that would break the map but it kind of takes away from the pure idea of strategically deciding which map to deploy in and which *not* to deploy in. Just kind of.
Then again, cross-map activity might add flavor. For example, suppose we do use BRIC; it might be interesting to add bombards at the Russia-China and China-India border. Then the countries' internal structures might reflect the fact that China is hardest to hold overall and Brazil is easiest to take over by itself.

[koontz1973]

I'm not married to these countries; I just picked them because they have convenient region structures and because they're more or less in different parts of the world. If someone comes up with a good idea for a foursome (or threesome) theme, I'd be happy to pick it up.

Here are some islands you can use that has a theme running through them.

Cape Verde, Devils Island, Sakhalin, Islas Marías, Green island, Gorgona

Theme being penal colonies. This gives you a theme but also maybe an extra winning condition (escape) and maybe an extra element or two to the game.

With the cross map ability, one of the unique things was that there was none. If you where to put it in, it might be worth thinking of placing one territ on each island (make it a high killer neutral so no one can stack on it to control) that can bombard the next island only, (A - B, B - C, C - D, D - A).

[Coleman]

I don't like the idea of cross map activity myself. I can forsee that leading to games that never end. Like a two player game where they end up removing each other from 2 of the 4 and then their bonuses per round would be so high that they could never stop each other from constantly bombarding back and forth.

[Evil DIMwit]

That's a good point. I think I'll hold off cross-map activity for now.

[Industrial Helix]

You know, i was looking at one of my student's English-japanese dictionaries and I noticed an awesome map of the English speaking world and I thought of this map. There was most of north america, insets for Alaska and Hawaii. New Zealand, Australia and the British Isles. I thought the "four corners' idea would be quite cool if applied to that. Not that I think you really need to change the map subjects, but it was an idea that popped in my head.

[tkr4lf]

Have you thought about how team games will play out on this map?

The way I see it, Team 1 eliminates all of Team 2 from one of the countries. They then pick the player with the stongest presence in that country, everybody reinforces to him, and he conquers it all from his teammates. Game over.

I don't know if this is necessarily a bad thing or not. Hell, it could be fun, actually. Just something to consider.

Really cool idea, though. I like it.

[Evil DIMwit]

I've thought about team play quite a bit. In fact, I think team play may be more intense and fitting than solo play on a map like this.

[Minister X]

Why not require winning two of the four instead of just one? One problem with just one is the chance of a fortuitous drop in games with about six or fewer players. It could be over rather quickly.

Also: I don't know anything about "super-size" but there seems no way to fit these many territories onto one map with room for troop numbers.

[Coleman]

Why not require winning two of the four instead of just one? One problem with just one is the chance of a fortuitous drop in games with about six or fewer players. It could be over rather quickly.

Also: I don't know anything about "super-size" but there seems no way to fit these many territories onto one map with room for troop numbers.

Right but two problems with that:
1) If you are eliminated down to one corner you still have to keep playing, unless we try our hands at a losing condition for that.
2) We would HAVE to have cross map activity because a four player game could end up with 1 player in each corner building for eternity.

These problems are solvable of course, if we wanted to go that route. The solution to problem 1 would solve problem 2 although the victor would be the person who lost last.

[Evil DIMwit]

Problem 1 is very feasible to solve with the current XML framework. So it is a possibility to have "win by controlling two countries, lose by being eliminated in three countries." Then again, I'd expect anyone who controls a whole country to have a damned good shot at taking over another country starting next turn, as long as they aren't completely eliminated in the intervening round.

[koontz1973]

2) We would HAVE to have cross map activity because a four player game could end up with 1 player in each corner building for eternity.

Easy to solve. Use planes the same way as the helicopters are used in Das Schloss. Bung a huge neutral in there to stop players using them before this happen.

[Peter Gibbons]

Do you have a better idea?

First, I want to say that I love this idea in general. And I think the four you picked are excellent. If this is a one-off map, why not have them be random like you have them? I'm all for that.

That said, not sure this is a "better idea,"just trying to expand on your idea... if this concept catches on, why not do a "Four Corners" pack, like the Interstate system? I'm thinking each region would encompass four smallish states. The below is just a series of examples, nothing I'd write in stone...

Four Corners of the Americas [Suriname, Dominican Republic, Belize, Uruguay]
Four Corners of Africa [Tunisia, Rwanda, Ghana, Lesotho]
Four Corners of Asia [Nepal, East Timor, Sri Lanka, Taiwan]
Four Corners of Europe [Monaco, Liechtenstein, Kosovo, Denmark]
Four Corners of the Middle East [Qatar, UAE, Lebanon, Kuwait]

Would be a lot of work, but if the general concept catches fire--and it seems like people really like it--why not have a series planned out before you get started, so that there's a clear path to developing more than one of these sort of maps?

[brandoncfi]

Love this map and game play very unique

[Coleman]

I know you are used to long production times but anything new and unique gameplay wise is certainly very welcome. The faster we can get this to beta the earliler we will know if it even works or if it will require a major revision like das schloss did.

[Evil DIMwit]

The reason it's taken so long is because I've been at a tremendously busy period in my life -- starting a job and moving to a new city and driving across the country and doing fascinating things -- but it looks like things will be stabilizing soon so hopefully I'll be able to move at least some of my maps forward (including this one).

[Coleman]

The reason it's taken so long is because I've been at a tremendously busy period in my life -- starting a job and moving to a new city and driving across the country and doing fascinating things -- but it looks like things will be stabilizing soon so hopefully I'll be able to move at least some of my maps forward (including this one).

No worries, life comes first. Pretty sure nobody understands that more than me now.

[ironsij0287]

I had an idea regarding the four countries used.

I don't know if you're keen on fictional places but what if it was just one country but mirrored four times into four different dimensions or alternate realities? Almost like a comic book bizarro world scenario.

Here's a crudely drawn example of my idea.



While the country and territories would be essentially the same in all four you could put different elements in each so they all contrast each other.

[Minister X]

Looks very much like an Andy Warhol!

I prefer four completely different to four varieties of the same place. No special reason - just more interesting.

[The Bison King]

It's a cool idea, but you still need territory names before I can move it.

[hoschke118]

The Four Asian Tigers?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Asian_Tigers

[phantomzero]

The Four Asian Tigers?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Asian_Tigers

great idea! I want to see this map!

[obm311]

i like the bottom to maps but i dont like the top left one because it is cut of by the border and looks visually unappealing (it works on the bottom left one becasue it changes in to a less vibrant colour were it cut off) and the right top one just look a bit of a wierd shape but is ok.

i think you should stick with either a mini map or numbers drifing around the edge in telling bonuses, because i think it look a bit messy how it is.

but the idea and the execution so far it the best i have seen in the map foundry