13 Colonies Quenched!

by **Industrial Helix** on Tue Aug 18, 2009 6:31 am

That was my point using the peloponnesian war example... That map has 8 starting points but in a 1v1 game, you only start with 2, rather than 4. So I'm confused.

If andrew knows anything, that'd be awesome.

I'm gonna post in the not maps forum and see what I get.

by **thenobodies80** on Tue Aug 18, 2009 7:11 am

8 starting positions

2 players
4 starting positions for each player

3 players
2 starting positions for each player
the 2 not assigned will be splitted randomly (as a normal regions) among the players

But, if you don't want that a player could have one of these unassigned positions, you can code them as starting neutral. In this way the starting position or is assigned or it will start as a starting neutral

by **thenobodies80** on Tue Aug 18, 2009 7:18 am

Poll Result

How should the bonuses be done?

Leave it as is or adjust the numbers a tad on the chart.....6.....75%

Keep the chart, adjust the ship bonus.....0.....No votes

Go back to individual bonuses per colony.....2.....25%

Other (Please specify).....0.....No votes

Total votes : 8

by **Industrial Helix** on Tue Aug 18, 2009 7:23 am

thenobodies80 wrote:8 starting positions

2 players
4 starting positions for each player

3 players
2 starting positions for each player
the 2 not assigned will be splitted randomly (as a normal regions) among the players

But, if you don't want that a player could have one of these unassigned positions, you can code them as starting neutral. In this way the starting position or is assigned or it will start as a starting neutral

Ok, that solves the 3 player game problem then, I'll code it so that the unassigned will go neutral in a three player game.

Which leaves the 2 player game... is there any way that I could code that in a 2 player game only that some of the starting positions begin as neutral?

by **thenobodies80** on Tue Aug 18, 2009 7:45 am

If you have 8 starting positions, in a 2 player game each player will start with 4 starting positions.

The starting positions are always splitted among the players, if there's a reminder it will be splitted as a normal territory,unless you have coded it as starting neutral.

E.g.

20 territories
9 starting positions
2 players

4 starting for each player and 1 reminder
if the reminder is coded as starting neutral it will start neutral (with x troops)
if the reminder isn't coded as starting neutral it will be added to the other 11 territories (20-9) and splitted randomly among the players

by **The Neon Peon** on Tue Aug 18, 2009 9:47 am

thenobodies80 wrote:If you have 8 starting positions, in a 2 player game each player will start with 4 starting positions.

The starting positions are always splitted among the players, if there's a reminder it will be splitted as a normal territory,unless you have coded it as starting neutral.

E.g.

20 territories
9 starting positions
2 players

4 starting for each player and 1 reminder
if the reminder is coded as starting neutral it will start neutral (with x troops)
if the reminder isn't coded as starting neutral it will be added to the other 11 territories (20-9) and splitted randomly among the players

Wrong. Take doodle earth for a simple example. 18 territories. According to you, they would be split, 9-9 +2 neutrals, but they are not. The amount of territories is the same as in a 3 player game: 6-6 +6 neutrals.

Take a look at feudal. In a two player game, it is not split 3-3, but as it would be in a 3 player game with 2 per person and 2 neutrals. Play a 2 player game on any of the AoR maps or Feudal.

THERE WILL BE 2 STARTING TERRITORIES IN A TWO PLAYER GAME!!! So don't worry about that part of the gameplay.

by **Industrial Helix** on Wed Aug 19, 2009 9:15 am

Click image to enlarge.

-Right now it looks like the idea of using starting positions is unfeasible. So, at the recommendation of Nobodies and iancanton, it looks like I might have to bump up the requirement of the French Fleet bonus. Ian suggested holding the ship, the landing point and a colonial capital.

- Well, the first problem is that Savannah was the state capital and both Williamsburg and Richmond (Jefferson moved the capital during the war) are in the present territory of Yorktown.

I like this idea because it gives Georgia a reasonably good position to fight over and gain to get a bonus of 2, shortly followed by the acquisition of any other colony to bring that to 4. That other colony could be a single terr. colony of Delaware, RI or Conn. or it could be a two terr. colony like Maryland. Not to mention that South Carolina is right next door and has only 3 more territories with one more additional defense point.

It aids Virginia significantly less, but the a player with heavy holdings in Virginia ought to be able to make a break for the Maryland/Delaware bonus or take the ships to get the Georgia bonus.

-A variation of this option is that the bonus for the French ship and colony gives only 1. I'm open to that suggestion as well.

-The third variation I am willing to consider is do away with the flags and go back to ships and have a ship plus its state give a bonus of 1 or 2. I'm hesitant with this idea because it will likely give Massachusetts a strong edge as it borders the single terr. colonies and New Hampshire, even at a bonus of just 1.

-As always, you're thoughts and criticisms are very much appreciated.

by **AndrewB** on Wed Aug 19, 2009 10:53 am

Comes from the Yeti himself:

viewtopic.php?p=1932159#p1932159

yeti_c wrote:
MrBenn wrote:So with 5 starting positions in a 1v1, 2 each would be allocated to players, with the third being added to the pot for distribution unless it was a designated neutral.

I think I've got it now

Correct.

C.

So if you mark them neutral, as well as starting positions, you will achieve the desired outcome.

by **AndrewB** on Wed Aug 19, 2009 11:23 pm

thenobodies80 wrote:If you have 8 starting positions, in a 2 player game each player will start with 4 starting positions.

I have asked yeti_c to confirm or deny this statement.

by **pamoa** on Thu Aug 20, 2009 1:28 am

thenobodies80 wrote:If you have 8 starting positions, in a 2 player game each player will start with 4 starting positions.

AndrewB wrote:I have asked yeti_c to confirm or deny this statement.

as I know in 2 players game starting position are diveided by 3 one for each player and one part neutral the rest is also neutral
so with 8 starting position you have 2 red / 2 green / 2 neutral and the rest 2 neutral

by **iancanton** on Fri Aug 21, 2009 3:48 pm

having 8 start positions won't solve much because our main issues are for 2-player and 3-player games.

if the french fleet bonus remains at one ship plus its landing point, then i propose one change to the map itself and coding only 2 sets of start positions, each consisting of 5 regions.

the change to the map is to add one region, fort pitt, to pennsylvania. this is located in the southern half of appalachia and will turn appalachia into an internal region. the extra region will reduce the number of 3-region states, therefore lessening the likelihood of one or more 3-region states being dropped by someone (currently about one-third) in 2-player and 3-player games.

http://www.ohiohistorycentral.org/entry.php?rec=2768

the 2 sets of starting positions each have 5 regions: one region from each of new hampshire, new jersey and maryland plus one region from each of the french fleet bonuses. this ensures that, in 2-player games, no-one can start with either a french fleet bonus or a whole 2-region state.

in 1v1, each player will then start with 5 positions plus 8 random regions, with 3 fixed neutrals, 9 random neutrals and 2 killer neutrals.

in 1v1v1, the numbers are: no positions and 11 random regions per player, plus 3 fixed neutrals, 13 random neutrals and 2 killer neutrals.

in games with 3 or more players, start positions as coded above will have no effect.

ian.

by **Industrial Helix** on Fri Aug 21, 2009 5:09 pm

Ok, what if we drop the premise of starting positions completely and go with the bonus of a ship, plus the colony it is connected with? I think going with the French ship, plus the colony it is connected with or a bonus of 1 will give the advantage to the south that it needs without having the risk of a 1v1 game drop of a bonus straight away.

Ian - If a player lands a 3 regions colony or a two region colony it won't matter because there is no bonus for a single colony. The best chance of having a lucky drop is to land 4 territories in either Maryland, New Jersey or New Hampshire. In which case, none have common borders and are extremely vulnerable to attack.

Though I like the idea of adding a territory to Penn., which I'm going to play around with and see what I can come up with.

by **RedBaron0** on Sun Aug 23, 2009 5:34 am

That makes a lot of sense, figure a ship has troops and gains control of the region it's invading and is then it troops are then supported by the region itself. Also since each ship except Georgia would have to gain 4 territories, plus the ship to gain a bonus makes it a 5 territory bonus which should a relatively low probability of dropping it on the start. Georgia and the ship is just 4 territories and gives a bit of a shift in power to the South which should even out somewhat any Northern advantage.

Only extra suggestion to this I'll add is perhaps you should connect the Boston ship to Mass. Bay just so all of the territories in that bonus are connected.

Sorry about the whole confusion about the starting position thing, my bad for bringing it up. I totally agree that you should ditch the starting positions, it's not worth the headache.

by **Industrial Helix** on Sun Aug 23, 2009 11:41 am

Nah, don't apologize for suggesting it. It was worth looking into anyway, its just I think this idea is going to work the best.

As for connecting Boston to Mass. Bay, it's an idea... I don't want to increase the power of the North too much, but it does make some sense. If anyone has any input on this, let me know. In the mean time I will be considering it.

by **MichelSableheart** on Mon Aug 24, 2009 12:43 pm

I don't think it's a good idea from a gameplay perspective. Sure, it would make sense, but it makes it far too easy to start with the Massachusetts bonus. Which seems bad, because from the massachusetts bonus, it is relatively easy to upgrade to a +6 bonus (one territory makes +4, one more for +5, two more for +6). Currently, Exeter is (effectively) part of Massachusets. This one extra territory before you get the first bonus seems just what is needed to keep the north in check.

by **Industrial Helix** on Mon Aug 24, 2009 2:36 pm

MichelSableheart wrote:I don't think it's a good idea from a gameplay perspective. Sure, it would make sense, but it makes it far too easy to start with the Massachusetts bonus. Which seems bad, because from the massachusetts bonus, it is relatively easy to upgrade to a +6 bonus (one territory makes +4, one more for +5, two more for +6). Currently, Exeter is (effectively) part of Massachusets. This one extra territory before you get the first bonus seems just what is needed to keep the north in check.

Sorry... I'm not sure I understand.

The hold a ship and the connecting colony for the bonus doesn't make sense or are you talking about the starting points? For a British ship bonus of 2 a player needs to hold 4 territories and defend at 3. Which is a bit tough for only two men.

I'm not sure I follow your math either... can you explain in more depth?

by **MichelSableheart** on Mon Aug 24, 2009 3:03 pm

I meant it isn't a good idea to connect the ship "Boston" to Massachusets bay.

The reason for this:

Currently, to hold the massachusetts + ship bonus, you almost certainly need to conquer Exeter, because you need to move from one part of the colony to the other.

If you connect Boston to Massachusets bay, this is not longer necessary.

Therefore, if you connect Boston to Massachusets bay, the Massachusets + ship bonus will be easier to get.

Making the Massachusetts + ship bonus easier to get is not a good idea, because it has excellent expansion possibilities. If you hold it, you can conquer either Conneticut or Rhode Island (one country) to go from a + 2 bonus (massachusetts + ship) to a +4 (additional bonus for 2 continents). After that it is one more country (the one you didn't get the first time) to go to +5 (2 mass & ship, 3 for 3 colonies) total, and the 2 territories of New Hampshire after that for +6 total (4 colonies + massachusetts and ship).

I hope that explains better what I meant.

by **RedBaron0** on Mon Aug 24, 2009 10:51 pm

yeah, I see Michel's point there, probably best to not connect Mass Bay and Boston.

by **Industrial Helix** on Tue Aug 25, 2009 6:54 am

Yeah, I agree. No ship connection to upper mass.

by **iancanton** on Wed Aug 26, 2009 2:33 pm

Industrial Helix wrote:Ok, what if we drop the premise of starting positions completely and go with the bonus of a ship, plus the colony it is connected with? I think going with the French ship, plus the colony it is connected with or a bonus of 1 will give the advantage to the south that it needs without having the risk of a 1v1 game drop of a bonus straight away.

that was a brainwave! at a stroke, ur plan gives to all of the 4-region colonies a proper role in each game instead of being the worst places to have troops. will the british and french fleets both have the same bonus for one ship plus its connected colony?

Industrial Helix wrote:Ian - If a player lands a 3 regions colony or a two region colony it won't matter because there is no bonus for a single colony. The best chance of having a lucky drop is to land 4 territories in either Maryland, New Jersey or New Hampshire. In which case, none have common borders and are extremely vulnerable to attack.

it's the total chance of dropping 2 2-region colonies, 2 3-region colonies or 1 of each type that matters. this is way above 10% just now. now that the ship bonus gives a chance to the southern player, i see three different ways to solve this one: eliminate the bonus for holding 2 colonies, use a starting neutral on coos (or fort lee if preferred) or have 2 start positions (baltimore and delaware only, which will affect 2-player games only). u can also do none of these and try adding a region to new jersey (a 2-region colony) to see how things turn out.

Industrial Helix wrote:Though I like the idea of adding a territory to Penn., which I'm going to play around with and see what I can come up with.

before u do anything here, let's see what u have in store for the ships first. if the ships do not start neutral, then we have 34 starting regions. 35 isn't as good as 34.

ian.

by **jefjef** on Thu Aug 27, 2009 12:39 am

IMO the bonus values for colony possession needs to be increased by 1. IE. 3 worth 4.. 4 worth 5... 5 worth 6... 6 worth 7... etc... & take it up to 9 colony possession bonus worth 10. Or even 1 more than those values......... And the Algonkin indian tert. What I don't like about it is that it connects Mass bay with the same tert that borders bunker hill. (All part of the same colony.) Can ya connect it a little further south or redraw Saratoga so it doesn't connect to Bunker or even connect the jump at the same point the other connects (Appalachia) (Now that would be alot more viable path to assault from one end of the country to the other and really increase the value of and threat too Penn.)

by **Industrial Helix** on Fri Aug 28, 2009 12:50 pm

Ian-

The British ships work slightly different than the French ships. The British ships are hold BOTH ships and BOTH landing points (Bunker Hill and Long Island) for a bonus of 2. This way, the north doesn't benefit from the same type of bonus as the south. I think if I did 1 British ship and the colony for 2 then a player whole held the mass and New Hampshire bonus for 2, plus the ship at 2 would be at a bonus of 4... which seems to favor the north too much. Also, the ships do not start neutral.

Regarding a drop on 2, two-territory colonies: I looked at the bonus calc. and the chances of dropping a 4 terr. bonus in a 2 player game is under 1% for a player receiving the bonus and just under 2% for any player receiving the bonus. A three player game has 2.6% chance of any player receiving the bonus. In reality... the smallest undroppable bonus on the map is a single 4 territory bonus.... I think that puts me under the 10% chance.

I dunno, like I said, I'm bad with numbers and stuff and I might be reading this thing backwards or something, but I think it should be fine.

Jefjef-

Uping the bonus per groups of colonies held... Maybe, I'm open to it. I think i can do with upping the bonus for holding 3 colonies and more by 1, but I'd rather hold the 2 colonies at 2 so as not to favor the Conn. and RI area too much. Let me think about it.

As for linking Alogonkin elsewhere... good point. I think it will raise the attraction of the Indian routes and improve fluidity of the map... Expect it next update.

by **Industrial Helix** on Sun Aug 30, 2009 12:31 pm

Ok... made some changes and updates. The smallest dropable bonus region is now 5 territories: Mayland and something else. The smallest bonus is still two, but you got neutrals to go through to get it. That should put the dropable bonus to rest.

The total number of dropable terrs is 36, the total number playable is 41 including the killer neutrals.

Added a territory in New Jersey and New Hampshire.

Upped the bonus by 1 on each.

Redrew the connection of Alogonkin to Appalachia.

Click image to enlarge.

by **thenobodies80** on Sun Aug 30, 2009 2:14 pm

Industrial Helix wrote:...The total number of dropable terrs is 36

The problem with 36 regions is that in 1vs1 and in 1vs1vs1 games each player will start with 12 territories.
The first player will take 4 troops and if he will conquer a single opponent region, the second player will start with only 3 troops. First player advantage.

Everything else seems fine to me

by **Industrial Helix** on Sun Aug 30, 2009 2:59 pm

So that means, sub how many territories or add how many?

I know in 1v1 it the terrs are split into thirds, how does it work with 1v1v1?

If I add 2 more terrs then it should be good right?

13 Colonies Quenched!

Re: The 13 American Colonies [D] Update 8/16 Gameplay

Re: The 13 American Colonies [D] Update 8/16 Gameplay

Re: The 13 American Colonies [D] Update 8/16 Gameplay

Re: The 13 American Colonies [D] Update 8/16 Gameplay

Re: The 13 American Colonies [D] Update 8/16 Gameplay

Re: The 13 American Colonies [D] Update 8/16 Gameplay

Re: The 13 American Colonies [D] Update 8/16 Gameplay

Re: The 13 American Colonies [D] Update 8/19 Gameplay p. 13

Re: The 13 American Colonies [D] Update 8/16 Gameplay

Re: The 13 American Colonies [D] Update 8/16 Gameplay

Re: The 13 American Colonies [D] Update 8/16 Gameplay

Re: The 13 American Colonies [D] Update 8/19 Gameplay p. 13

Re: The 13 American Colonies [D] Update 8/19 Gameplay p. 13

Re: The 13 American Colonies [D] Update 8/19 Gameplay p. 13

Re: The 13 American Colonies [D] Update 8/19 Gameplay p. 13

Re: The 13 American Colonies [D] Update 8/19 Gameplay p. 13

Re: The 13 American Colonies [D] Update 8/19 Gameplay p. 13

Re: The 13 American Colonies [D] Update 8/19 Gameplay p. 13

Re: The 13 American Colonies [D] Update 8/19 Gameplay p. 13

Re: The 13 American Colonies [D] Update 8/19 Gameplay p. 13

Re: The 13 American Colonies [D] Update 8/19 Gameplay p. 13

Re: The 13 American Colonies [D] Update 8/19 Gameplay p. 13

Re: The 13 American Colonies [D] Update 8/19 Gameplay p. 13

Re: The 13 American Colonies [D] Update 8/19 Gameplay p. 13

Re: The 13 American Colonies [D] Update 8/30 Gameplay p. 13

Who is online