Conquer Club

jefjef wrote:Quebec... 3 terts to secure the border from 3 terts that can attack... It's where I would start for sure as it is. Compare it to the other 4 bonus regions.

It needs another way in or a value reduction. IMO.

perhaps
yet unlike libs and Cuba
Gaspe will be a hard territ to control as it is opening up to Montreal and Natashquan on the Quebec bonus, NY on the reps and it touches the majority of its own territs
so it would be harder to hold those bonuses then the lib cuba combo
So I think NE is actually lower then it could be but is good becuase of the other bonuses that you can combo with
You maybe could lower Quebec to a three but I think the 4 is suitable there as well
i.e. you control quebec I come knocking in thru ny grab gaspe then i must choose one of two
or split my troop mass to sweep both to avoid retailaition(if that makes sense)
All in all NE is good at 3
Quebec could be lowered but i think it need more discussion!

ps you have a four way border at cuba entrace

Well if you hold NE & Quebec you have only 3 terts to defend against. (assuming the ship jumps aren't going to be used)

On this map that would be the strongest - securest bonus group to hold.

I think it's just too strong without a ship jump that connects to Quebec.

BTW. I only see 3 tert connect for the cuba bonus (assuming no ship jump)

Are the ship jumps gonna be used?

So far according to the poll, more would prefer V6 over V6a. So I think that's the way we're going to go.

In response to jefjef and danyael. If I add another way into Quebec, that will not change it's bonus (according to my bonus calculator). If I add another way into NE, the NE bonus does not change either. So both bonuses will remain at 4 and 3 respectively. With another attack/defend territory for the democrats, that would raise their bonus from +4 to +5. I can go with that if it is feasible.

As for the colors between Quebec and New England, I'll be swapping them in the next version. Also along with moving the 4 way corner between the Libertarians and Cuba.

So we are staying with the original version.

Here is V6.1

Changes made:

- Changed color of New England

Really that's it.

Need to do:
- Straighten out game play if needed! Please help!

[bigimg]http://img43.imageshack.us/img43/6996/fracturedamericav61.png[/bigimg]

I think the gameplay is great!

New for V6.2

- Changed some state abbreviations to full names where space allowed
- Move Canadian capital from Lakehead to Victoria
- Adjusted New England color in legend so to make the text easier to read

That's it for now.

Still needing comments on game play. If none maybe we can stamp it GP?

[bigimg]http://img35.imageshack.us/img35/1469/fracturedamericav62.png[/bigimg]

isaiah40 wrote:Move Canadian capital from Lakehead to Victoria

nice one. this is in line with the trend of a shift in power to the west.

jefjef wrote:Quebec... 3 terts to secure the border from 3 terts that can attack... It's where I would start for sure as it is.

captainwalrus wrote:There should be a pirate route from Nova Scotia to Labrador.

the map is missing something huge: newfoundland!

http://atlas.nrcan.gc.ca/site/english/d ... image_view

there's not enough room to show all of it, just the western part. newfoundland provides a natural link between nova scotia and labrador. labrador is english-speaking and relations with québec province can often be very prickly.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/newfoundland-l ... rador.html

given the choice, newfoundland and labrador would much rather join up with new england than with québec, so it's appropriate to put them in the new england zone. to keep the number of regions the same, merge natashquan (whose population in 2006 was 264) with québec. the capital obviously needs to be moved from labrador to québec.

http://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recen ... ll&Custom=

this is reasonable for gameplay too, especially if u remove the gaspé-natashquan link and reduce the république du québec bonus to +2. i know the calculators show +3 for a 4-region bonus with its attributes, but it is in a corner and therefore puts the holder in a powerful position in any multi-player game.

lt_oddball wrote:The boat icons you don't like, but the sea attack routes (like the one on the California peninsula !) are ok ?

the gulf of california stops short of the current mexico-usa border, so why does it separate san diego from arizona, leaving arrows to connect them?

http://www.lonelyplanet.com/maps/north-america/mexico/

if u lose both of the pointless orange arrow routes on the california peninsula and draw the gulf of california correctly, then it doesn't detract from gameplay.

i like the fact that most of the smaller bonus zones are in the middle, so that the grab-one-zone-then-stack strategy doesn't work very well.

jefjef wrote:How about a connecting tert from cuba to the bottom AMEXICO tert.

long-distance sea routes are not part of the character of this map. we can make cuba more difficult to grab by adding a mickey mouse region on one side of mid-florida (but keeping miami connected to jacksonville to avoid a "rail florida" set-up).

barterer2002 wrote:I'm wondering if Canada should be split into East and West. As it is, its an Asia type of continent that will never get held or even attempted by most players.

Evil DIMwit wrote:As for Canada: There's nothing wrong with having an Asia-type continent.

canada is not an asia-type continent. it has 8 border regions! i suggest renaming fort albany (population 5 hardy souls!) as timmins and merging kenora with lakehead (i recognise the name thunder bay more than lakehead, maybe because the airport is called thunder bay, or maybe because lakehead could be referring to any lake, but i'll defer to local knowledge!).

http://www12.statcan.ca/census-recensem ... ll&Custom=

this will reduce the number of border regions to 7 and make canada more playable.

ian.

iancanton wrote:the map is missing something huge: newfoundland! there's not enough room to show all of it, just the western part. newfoundland provides a natural link between nova scotia and labrador. labrador is english-speaking and relations with québec province can often be very prickly.

given the choice, newfoundland and labrador would much rather join up with new england than with québec, so it's appropriate to put them in the new england zone. to keep the number of regions the same, merge natashquan (whose population in 2006 was 264) with québec. the capital obviously needs to be moved from labrador to québec.

this is reasonable for gameplay too, especially if u remove the gaspé-natashquan link and reduce the république du québec bonus to +2. i know the calculators show +3 for a 4-region bonus with its attributes, but it is in a corner and therefore puts the holder in a powerful position in any multi-player game.

Done!

iancanton wrote:the gulf of california stops short of the current mexico-usa border, so why does it separate san diego from arizona, leaving arrows to connect them?

if u lose both of the pointless orange arrow routes on the california peninsula and draw the gulf of california correctly, then it doesn't detract from gameplay.

i like the fact that most of the smaller bonus zones are in the middle, so that the grab-one-zone-then-stack strategy doesn't work very well.

Done!

iancanton wrote:long-distance sea routes are not part of the character of this map. we can make cuba more difficult to grab by adding a mickey mouse region on one side of mid-florida (but keeping miami connected to jacksonville to avoid a "rail florida" set-up).

Done!

iancanton wrote:canada is not an asia-type continent. it has 8 border regions! i suggest renaming fort albany (population 5 hardy souls!) as timmins and merging kenora with lakehead (i recognise the name thunder bay more than lakehead, maybe because the airport is called thunder bay, or maybe because lakehead could be referring to any lake, but i'll defer to local knowledge!).

this will reduce the number of border regions to 7 and make canada more playable.

ian.

And Done!

Version 7
[bigimg]http://img8.imageshack.us/img8/6062/fracturedamericav7.png[/bigimg]

Deseret = 4 terts = 3 bonus

Quebec = 4 terts = 2 bonus

Cuba = 5 tert = 3 bonus
**************************************
Deseret = 3 tert border access defended by 3

Quebec = 4 tert border access defended by 3

Cuba = 3 tert border access defended by 2

Maybe Quebec should be raised by 1 OR Deseret reduced by 1

jefjef wrote:Deseret = 4 terts = 3 bonus

Quebec = 4 terts = 2 bonus

Deseret = 3 tert border access

Quebec = 4 tert border access

Maybe Quebec should be raised by 1 OR Deseret reduced by 1

For now the bonuses are staying were they are based on ian's suggestions. He suggested lowering Quebec to 2 even though the bonus calculator would say 3 or 4, just because it is in a corner. Deseret will also stay the same until others say the same thing.

Does CO connect to NM?

jefjef wrote:Deseret = 4 terts = 3 bonus

Quebec = 4 terts = 2 bonus

Cuba = 5 tert = 3 bonus

Ecovania = 4 terts = 3 bonus
**************************************
Deseret = 3 tert border access defended by 3

Quebec = 4 tert border access defended by 3

Cuba = 3 tert border access defended by 2

Ecovania = 4 tert border access defended by 3

Maybe Quebec should be raised by 1 OR Deseret reduced by 1

Quebec is no longer in a corner......

Danyael wrote:Does CO connect to NM?

Um, er, *cough, cough*, hmmmm. I guess it is a little close to tell. No it is not. I'll get it more obvious next revision.

jefjef wrote:

jefjef wrote:Deseret = 4 terts = 3 bonus

Quebec = 4 terts = 2 bonus

Cuba = 5 tert = 3 bonus
**************************************
Deseret = 3 tert border access defended by 3

Quebec = 4 tert border access defended by 3

Cuba = 3 tert border access defended by 2

Maybe Quebec should be raised by 1 OR Deseret reduced by 1

Quebec is no longer in a corner......

No it isn't, but I'm going by iancanton's suggestion to lower it to 2, and make Labrador and put in Newfoundland, and add them to the New England bonus. Now there is a clean route through New England to Quebec. In so doing the NEw England bonus got raised to +5, so let's wait and see what other people think, shall we?

Take a look at some of these bonus spreadsheets, they should help.

CairnsWK's Continent Bonus Spreadsheet
Widowmakers' Continent Bonus Spreadsheet

Hopefully your numbers are pretty close to what you already have, and probably should be. Another big concern you are going to have is you have several small territory count bonuses that with a lot of territories to be distributed makes the possibility that 1 player starts with a bonus fairly common. Take a look at this spreadsheet from MrBenn that fairly well calculates the odds of a player starting with a bonus.

MrBenn's Bonus Probability Calculator

RedBaron0 wrote:Take a look at some of these bonus spreadsheets, they should help.

CairnsWK's Continent Bonus Spreadsheet
Widowmakers' Continent Bonus Spreadsheet

Hopefully your numbers are pretty close to what you already have, and probably should be. Another big concern you are going to have is you have several small territory count bonuses that with a lot of territories to be distributed makes the possibility that 1 player starts with a bonus fairly common. Take a look at this spreadsheet from MrBenn that fairly well calculates the odds of a player starting with a bonus.

MrBenn's Bonus Probability Calculator

Thank you red! Yes I have one of the two spreadsheets. I just used Mr.Benn's spreadsheet and the only one that may be of concern is the Metis bonus which has a 10% chance in a 3 player game of getting it. If Mr.Benn looks at it we'll see what he has to suggest.

You could code one of those territories neutral, or add a territory... say cut Minnesota in half North be Grand Rapids and South be St. Paul, or something along those lines. 87 territories is a much cleaner number, 2 and 3 player games would split 29 territories even, if you go that route.

Changes made for this revision:

- Changed Quebec Bonus to +3
- Cut Metis Bonus into 4 territories and increased it to +4
- Removed small island in Nova Scotia as so not to confuse people
- Moved a couple of mountains to clarify that CO does not connect to NM

Need to do:

- I don't have a clue right now

[bigimg]http://img43.imageshack.us/img43/1013/fracturedamericav71.png[/bigimg]

I keep forgetting about this and it was probably discussed somewhere in this thread.

The Capitols bonuses. A bit heavy?

You could even incorporate hold all Caps as a victory objective.

Could also skip the bonuses and autodrop +1.

Could make them bombards vs other caps.

Lot's of possibilities.

Sorry if it's been discussed but it is a very long thread.

jefjef wrote:I keep forgetting about this and it was probably discussed somewhere in this thread.

The Capitols bonuses. A bit heavy?

You could even incorporate hold all Caps as a victory objective.

Could also skip the bonuses and autodrop +1.

Could make them bombards vs other caps.

Lot's of possibilities.

Sorry if it's been discussed but it is a very long thread.

Yes there are lots of ways I could do it. I have thought of all of the above. I do like the idea of all capitals can bombard each other, but to do that I probably would have to start them as neutral of 3 or 5. That brings the starting territories down to 73, probably wouldn't be that great. If I have the capitals as an autodeploy of +1 that would make it so you would have to be a little more strategic in your play as you wouldn't get those extra men. I don't like the idea of hold all capitals as the objective because I don't want this to be another conquest map. So there are really 3 ways I'm willing to go with this. Question is which way makes the most sense for the map? "To be, or Not to be. That is the Question" - William Shakespeare

I think you should bring Metis' bonus back down to 3. Metis is already a terrific place to expand into from Canada; in fact, it's easier to hold Canada with Metis than without. You really don't need to give players more incentive to hold it.

I really like it... a few things...
Personally, I would keep metis at 4 bonus because you have to protect all 4 borders... however, I would change democrats to 3 since it's only 3 borders.
Second, the "pink" colors are a little confusing... the democrats color looks a lot like metis... what about one being yellow?
Even if you don't change anything, I am looking forward to playing this map!! Well done, Isaiah!

Evil DIMwit wrote:I think you should bring Metis' bonus back down to 3. Metis is already a terrific place to expand into from Canada; in fact, it's easier to hold Canada with Metis than without. You really don't need to give players more incentive to hold it.

Well he added a tert to it & Metis is assaultable from 6 terts. It works ok as a 4.

Capitols:
Why not do auto deploy - bombard and NOT neutral start....There are 14 of em.. Could make the Bombard for bordering bonus region caps only.

My chicken avi just don't like the bonus structure/value on them.

Lots & lots of options.

I personally like the capitals bonus as it is right now. Looking great!

jefjef wrote:
My chicken avi just don't like the bonus structure/value on them.

Lots & lots of options.

So what bonus structure/value does your chicken suggest?