Rorke's Drift. [QUENCHED]

by **Sniper08** on Mon Jul 18, 2011 9:27 am

whats up with the pink font?im not a fan of it.

as far as legend goes i do think the ibutho terr bonus needs to be explained better.

by **koontz1973** on Mon Jul 18, 2011 10:25 am

theBastard wrote:now when we know what bonus is what it is clear

then Victor has point here - the large iButhos will give big (also quick) bonus.

I believe they are more than clear on the map with what you get for what territs you hold regarding the river warriors.

Victor Sullivan wrote:Okay, wow, I totally misinterpreted that on the map. When a map says,
King with 2 territs in same iButho =+2
King with 3 territs in same iButho =+4
I expect to receive 2 troops for holding a king and 2 territories in its iButho and 4 troops for holding a king and 3+ territories in its iButho. You need to be much more clear. Plus, I'm not so sure you want to make the bonuses so easy in the larger iButhos, do you? Just something to ponder. I'll have further comments on the matter later.

-Sully

Sully, I am in a quandry on why people think this is so hard to understand. I will add the word any to it so it will read

King with any 2 territs =+2,

That should clear up any silliness and allow me to concentrate on other things.
How are the bonuses easy, this I find ridiculous that anyone can say this (without causing offence).

If you look in the game play notes in post one, you will see that in a 2 player game, only 10 starting troops. With the kings being 5 neutrals, will anyone seriously go for a king and if they do, would they be able to hold it. But with 7 iButhos and 32 starting positions, that is on average 7 per iButho. Clearly 3, cannot fit 7 in so if you hold ten in each of the 3 larger ones and grab a king, the largest bonus you would get is 12. But the other player starts with 10 or 9 if you get lucky dice, they are going to come after that king or iButho in a big way. I would seriously consider any player trying for a king in a 1v1 game either seriously lucky or stupid.
The game play notes make the point that in some types of maps, the person going first will have an advantage but we need to reduce this as much as possible. By having the kings start neutral and the river warriors start programmed, I believe I have reduced it to a point of, it does not matter.

Going into 3 player games you get even less troops to start with so now the river bonus comes into play in a much bigger way. You are only going to start with 23 territs so again big iButhos only you get 7 territs per with a king that is +8. But again, who in there right mind will go for a 5 neutral with 7+3 and hope to keep it.

The odds of the king being captured early in the game and kept in round 1,2 or 3 are slim for small games, for the larger games, you will be waiting for later and later rounds.

If you look at the bonuses I posted, for the Cetshwayo iButho, you have an area that covers 15 normal territs, 4 river warriors and a king. You have 6 ways in (not including going through the outpost which gives you another 2). For all this, you get +20 bonus, +4 river bonus, +7 normal troops and the + 3 auto onto the king. This all equals 31 deployable and 3 auto. Now, while you are trying to capture all of this, I go into the outpost and win. :lol:

Lets go to the other end of the spectrum and look at 8 player games.
In this, you are only starting with 8 territs and 3 deployable troops. No one will go for a king in the first round unless they get a seriously lucky drop (I mean it would be a miracle for the computer to give all 3 surrounding a king to one player when you only get 5)
3 starting + 3 deployable going up 5 neutrals. No bonus.

If anyone is going to go for a king in round 1 or 2 it is more likly they will capture one of the 2 smaller ones (Kingul & Mpande). Easy to get and defend. With these you only get 4 with Mpande and 6 for Kingul. Both only have 2 entrances but Mpande has a slight advantage of being close to 3 river warriors (not enough for river bonus).

Remember - above figures are not accurate as any player may start with 1 or 2 or 3 + in any iButho. I have only given averages for starting territs devided up between the 4 larger iButhos.

Sniper08 wrote:whats up with the pink font?im not a fan of it.

as far as legend goes i do think the ibutho terr bonus needs to be explained better.

The pink is the same as the army circles. I do not like it either so it is coming out.
Thanks Sniper, I am not sure how to word the bonus if forced to change it but I cannot see any reason to do that apart from what I have posted above.

by **isaiah40** on Mon Jul 18, 2011 10:44 am

I think you can do away with the army circles all together. I think the numbers will be easy enough to see on the background.

by **Sniper08** on Mon Jul 18, 2011 10:50 am

isaiah40 wrote:I think you can do away with the army circles all together. I think the numbers will be easy enough to see on the background.

maybe but i think the army circles make it look better IMO

The pink is the same as the army circles. I do not like it either so it is coming out.
Thanks Sniper, I am not sure how to word the bonus if forced to change it but I cannot see any reason to do that apart from what I have posted above.

maybe put escalating upward in that order or you can use 2 more examples from the scale i.e. 4 terr +4 ,5 terr +6.idk how much more clearly u can make it.

by **koontz1973** on Mon Jul 18, 2011 11:16 am

isaiah40 wrote:I think you can do away with the army circles all together. I think the numbers will be easy enough to see on the background.

I will post two versions tonight. One with and one without. Not really fond of them but I am now so used to seeing them, the map looks strange without them in.

Sniper08 wrote:
isaiah40 wrote:I think you can do away with the army circles all together. I think the numbers will be easy enough to see on the background.

maybe but i think the army circles make it look better IMO

The pink is the same as the army circles. I do not like it either so it is coming out.
Thanks Sniper, I am not sure how to word the bonus if forced to change it but I cannot see any reason to do that apart from what I have posted above.

maybe put escalating upward in that order or you can use 2 more examples from the scale i.e. 4 terr +4 ,5 terr +6.idk how much more clearly u can make it.

Look at the Pearl Harbour map. This is the same type of bonus as with the planes so if I put any 2 or any 3 in, it will be worded in the same way.

by **koontz1973** on Mon Jul 18, 2011 12:35 pm

Version 13A

Click image to enlarge.

Version 13B

Click image to enlarge.

Version 13's.
One has army circles one without. Which is better?
I am now happy with the territ lines. Just need to move them a little in places to make them more fluid.
Changed the wording in legend. This is now super duper clear and no one should be in any doubt.
As for game play, look at the one without army circles, this is set up randomly as an 8 player game. How the hell is someone supposed to get a huge bonus in the first rounds?

Please mods, can I have a stamp now.

by **Gypsys Kiss** on Mon Jul 18, 2011 3:01 pm

Without.............and you've put a space in outpost on the first line of the legend.

by **natty dread** on Mon Jul 18, 2011 3:04 pm

Without is better

by **isaiah40** on Mon Jul 18, 2011 3:50 pm

What the two above me said! Without beyond a shadow of a doubt!!

by **koontz1973** on Mon Jul 18, 2011 4:07 pm

No circles it is then.

by **koontz1973** on Tue Jul 19, 2011 3:45 am

I quickly set these up to show 3 types of games, small medium and large. This should allay sullivans fears over the huge bonuses that he expects.

show

by **Sniper08** on Tue Jul 19, 2011 4:04 am

only 1v1 are a problem as anyone who goes first on this map is gonna surely win the game with 9 starting troops.is there any way to reduce that to 5 or 6 for 1v1s?

by **koontz1973** on Tue Jul 19, 2011 5:37 am

Sniper08 wrote:only 1v1 are a problem as anyone who goes first on this map is gonna surely win the game with 9 starting troops.is there any way to reduce that to 5 or 6 for 1v1s?

Easy enough to code less starting positions for 1v1 games. Reduce it to 20 starting territs giving 6 deployable troops. Changed the first post to reflect that.

But like most maps that get played 1v1, it is normally the player with the lucky dice/drop that wins. Reducing the starting positions down to 20 will not solve that completely but make it for a more strategic game instead.

by **Sniper08** on Tue Jul 19, 2011 5:44 am

17 for each player would be better as 5 troops would be less of an issue and give the second player more of a chance

by **koontz1973** on Tue Jul 19, 2011 5:55 am

Less troops give more neutrals to the board. Been playing Hungary map a bit and there are so many neutrals it is bad now for 1v1 as a player gets drops in a bonus region all to himself.

I really do not want to go that low. 17 gives 5 troops, 20 gives 6. Both have player one taking 2 to reduce the second player 1 army. But with the extra territs in play you counter the effect of being able to grab bonuses easily, fill the board up a bit more.

71 playable positions, with only 17 per player, you get 34 in play and 37 starting neutral. That is over half the board that is deployable starting neutral.

71 / 20 starting is 40, 31 neutrals is under half and should give a better feel to the game.

edit:noticed on the Americas map that with 42 starting positions you only get 10. This can be used here. My starting territs in a 2,3 player game but limit the number of starting troops to 6. That seems to be the best of both worlds. I want more troops on the board to attack from and people want less starting armies.

by **koontz1973** on Wed Jul 20, 2011 12:54 am

Version 14.

Click image to enlarge.

Glow to the iButhos edges to show areas more. Green for brown and brown for green. What works, what does not?

New grass for the 3 grasslands. So much better looking IMO.
Could the same texture be used for the pastures / mud lands?

Thinner territ lines. Do they need to be thinner or thicker?

show: new gameplay notes

by **Seamus76** on Wed Jul 20, 2011 1:30 pm

I like the intricate gameplay elements, and the theme is certainly a nice addition and works well across the map. Just a quick look through I think the legend pretty much explains everything fairly well. There is one small change for your next version, you have an extra "the" in the line "All Zulus inside...". Other than that I'll keep looking and report back with any feedback. Keep up the good work.

by **cairnswk** on Wed Jul 20, 2011 4:11 pm

koontz1973...i know you're still in gameplay...so, i'm wondering if it's possible you can check the kerning on the font in the legend story and main instructions. the letters are bolded (i think) and some tend to blurr into each other. While it's legible, i think it can be improved upon, even if there is a clearer font available for use. Just a suggeston for examination.

the other thing is that some of your terr texts aren't immediately clear, perhaps they need a different colour or a glow/shadow around them.

by **koontz1973** on Thu Jul 21, 2011 2:03 am

Version 15.

Click image to enlarge.

Seamus76, thanks for spotting the double the, fixed.

cairnswk, might be in gameplay but all thoughts are good thoughts. Looked at the legend font and played around with it. Tried different fonts, colours etc etc (not sure what you mean by kerning). For now I have just darkened the legend and changed the gold story to white. This needs to be changed as it blends in with the instructions. Will keep playing with it so any guidance would be helpful.

Played around with the names in the territs as well. Some names are very long while some are short. Did not want to change the font (but played with it) but fond the best solution was to make the areas darker. This brought the wording out more. Tried to put a shadow around the names in the form of a block and looked OK. Will show it later today for feed back on what works and what doesn't.

As for things changed in this versions.
Added a territ to Phunga iButho as I had lost one in a previous version. This now makes the count 71.
Redid the green elephant grass (impassable).
Made Hitch territ bigger to balance the top building.
Turned the glow of the iButho edges as it looked to bad to keep and did not fit the map.
Gave title more pop.
Various minor improvements around the board.

Is there anything else in the way off game play that needs to be dealt with?

by **isaiah40** on Thu Jul 21, 2011 9:51 am

Kerning is the spacing between the letters.

by **koontz1973** on Thu Jul 21, 2011 11:15 am

Thanks isaiah, googled it and changed the spacing. Will post map later tonight.

by **natty dread** on Thu Jul 21, 2011 11:32 am

One graphical thing:

The background (the part where you have the title, the green thing around the map) should be separated from the map area. You need to decide if it's a background that's below the map, or a frame that's on top of the map, but either way it should be separated from it better. Currently there's no transition between them, it just changes abruptly.

by **koontz1973** on Thu Jul 21, 2011 4:22 pm

Version 16A.

Click image to enlarge.

Changed the spacing between letters. Should be easier to read now.
Removed border completely. Looks better? Thanks natty.
Changed title background to match legend background. Slightly lighter so easier to see. Can make darker or legend lighter if needed to match.

Are there any more gameplay issues that I need to address?

Need to touch up the rock impassables on the right.

by **koontz1973** on Fri Jul 22, 2011 8:29 am

Next one.

Click image to enlarge.

Redrew top of Cetswayo iButho for better spacing.
Changed one of the kings names to Bethelezi (the chief who played Ceteswayo in the film)
Redrew territ lines.
Completly redid rocks.

by **koontz1973** on Sat Jul 23, 2011 8:31 am

Just asking, is there any elements to the game play that is stopping this one going forward?
While working on the next update it would be nice to know if I need to add or subtract anything.

Rorke's Drift. [QUENCHED]

Re: Rorke's Drift [18 07 2011]Version 12 Pg 1/8 Gameplay re

Re: Rorke's Drift [18 07 2011]Version 12 Pg 1/8 Gameplay re

Re: Rorke's Drift [18 07 2011]Version 12 Pg 1/8 Gameplay re

Re: Rorke's Drift [18 07 2011]Version 12 Pg 1/8 Gameplay re

Re: Rorke's Drift [18 07 2011]Version 12 Pg 1/8 Gameplay re

Re: Rorke's Drift [18 07 2011]Version 13 Pg 1/9 Gameplay re

Re: Rorke's Drift [18 07 2011]Version 13 Pg 1/9 Gameplay re

Re: Rorke's Drift [18 07 2011]Version 13 Pg 1/9 Gameplay re

Re: Rorke's Drift [18 07 2011]Version 13 Pg 1/9 Gameplay re

Re: Rorke's Drift [18 07 2011]Version 13 Pg 1/9 Gameplay re

Re: Rorke's Drift [18 07 2011]Version 13 Pg 1/9 Gameplay re

Re: Rorke's Drift [18 07 2011]Version 13 Pg 1/9 Gameplay re

Re: Rorke's Drift [18 07 2011]Version 13 Pg 1/9 Gameplay re

Re: Rorke's Drift [18 07 2011]Version 13 Pg 1/9 Gameplay re

Re: Rorke's Drift [18 07 2011]Version 13 Pg 1/9 Gameplay re

Re: Rorke's Drift [20 07 2011]Version 14 Pg 1/10 Gameplay

Re: Rorke's Drift [20 07 2011]Version 14 Pg 1/10 Gameplay

Re: Rorke's Drift [20 07 2011]Version 14 Pg 1/10 Gameplay

Re: Rorke's Drift [21 07 2011]Version 15 Pg 1/10 Gameplay

Re: Rorke's Drift [21 07 2011]Version 15 Pg 1/10 Gameplay

Re: Rorke's Drift [21 07 2011]Version 15 Pg 1/10 Gameplay

Re: Rorke's Drift [21 07 2011]Version 15 Pg 1/10 Gameplay

Re: Rorke's Drift [21 07 2011]Version 15 Pg 1/10 Gameplay

Re: Rorke's Drift [22 07 2011]Version 17 Pg 1/10 Gameplay

Re: Rorke's Drift [22 07 2011]Version 17 Pg 1/10 Gameplay

Who is online