[Abandoned] War of Wizards

by **Industrial Helix** on Tue Nov 08, 2011 2:12 pm

Stamped and moved

by **natty dread** on Tue Nov 08, 2011 4:25 pm

Thanks!

by **natty dread** on Wed Nov 23, 2011 5:55 pm

Changed Heim colour to a bit darker, changed the Gnolls icon in the legend to match the one on the map.

Click image to enlarge.

by **natty dread** on Sun Nov 27, 2011 9:21 pm

Anyone have any gameplay input?

Should the port/ferry locations be reconsidered?

by **AndyDufresne** on Mon Nov 28, 2011 11:06 am

In regards to Ferries and Ports, for example, does TA4 connect to N5 or just N9?

The first post mentions 40 spell territories, is the break down divided evenly or not? A breakdown posted might help for some game play analysis.

--Andy

by **natty dread** on Mon Nov 28, 2011 11:33 am

AndyDufresne wrote:In regards to Ferries and Ports, for example, does TA4 connect to N5 or just N9?

The first post mentions 40 spell territories, is the break down divided evenly or not? A breakdown posted might help for some game play analysis.

TA4 only connects to N5 by the current plan. The idea is that all ports connect to each other, and ferries connect to nearby ports by the dotted lines. But I might change that whole dynamic...

As for spells, there's 8 wizards and 5 spells for each. There's 4 light wizards and 4 dark wizards, both groups have different spell sets, except for the level 5 spell which is the same for both but named differently.

The spell table is on the left side of the map, light wizards on top, dark on the bottom. The squares with the 888:s are the spells, spell descriptions are under the spells, and the wizards are the empty squares with coloured names on top.

BTW, this map probably has the largest killer neutral ever.

by **WestWind** on Fri Dec 02, 2011 12:36 pm

I love the idea of this- very unique.

Something I think would be very cool, but would add a lot of complication:

What if instead of every Light wizard having access to all the spells (and the same for the Dark wizards), you were able to "build" your own spell structure. For example, have 2 spells at each level instead of 1, but you can only pick one of each level. If you accidentally get 2, you receive a very large negative bonus. It would add a lot more to the overall strategy, and give you a lot of customization in what you want to go for.

by **natty dread** on Fri Dec 02, 2011 1:03 pm

WestWind wrote:What if instead of every Light wizard having access to all the spells (and the same for the Dark wizards), you were able to "build" your own spell structure. For example, have 2 spells at each level instead of 1, but you can only pick one of each level. If you accidentally get 2, you receive a very large negative bonus. It would add a lot more to the overall strategy, and give you a lot of customization in what you want to go for.

Interesting idea, but won't really work for the general gameplay of the map. The players need the freedom to use what spells they need, adding restrictions to it would just create unnecessary complexity, and there's plenty of complexity on this map as it is.

The spells will have different amounts of neutrals on them, though.

by **tkr4lf** on Fri Dec 02, 2011 11:18 pm

This looks like a fun map. I like the graphics so far, and the general theme is cool too.

I'll definitely play this one once it hits beta.

by **Victor Sullivan** on Fri Dec 02, 2011 11:24 pm

I apologize for my lack of words. Anywho, your bonuses and such seem good, the main issues gameplay-wise are going to be placement and neutrals. Let me study up a bit and get back to you.

-Sully

by **natty dread** on Sat Dec 03, 2011 3:20 am

tkr4lf wrote:This looks like a fun map. I like the graphics so far, and the general theme is cool too.

I'll definitely play this one once it hits beta.

Thanks.

Victor Sullivan wrote:I apologize for my lack of words. Anywho, your bonuses and such seem good, the main issues gameplay-wise are going to be placement and neutrals. Let me study up a bit and get back to you.

I agree. I can see 3 factors that should be balanced between the wizards:

- Bonuses
- Mobility
- Access to the Temple

I've planned the placement of the bonuses somewhat, each wizard should have pretty much equal access to 1 Village and 1 Mana Fount, which are the territories that give bonus to everyone by themselves... but the rest of the bonus structure isn't planned too much, except that each territory type is spread pretty much equally over the map, the north and south side both have equal amounts of each territory type (although I think the south has more territories in total, which may be an advantage or disadvantage, not really sure).

I don't think they need to be absolutely balanced, small imbalances will only create more interesting strategies for the map... but no Wizard should be at a significant, game-breaking advantage/disadvantage.

Also, another thing to consider is the territory bonus. I was thinking a regular +1/3 but capped at +5 or so... to give more emphasis on the bonus structure.

by **WestWind** on Sat Dec 03, 2011 12:27 pm

natty_dread wrote:
WestWind wrote:What if instead of every Light wizard having access to all the spells (and the same for the Dark wizards), you were able to "build" your own spell structure. For example, have 2 spells at each level instead of 1, but you can only pick one of each level. If you accidentally get 2, you receive a very large negative bonus. It would add a lot more to the overall strategy, and give you a lot of customization in what you want to go for.

Interesting idea, but won't really work for the general gameplay of the map. The players need the freedom to use what spells they need, adding restrictions to it would just create unnecessary complexity, and there's plenty of complexity on this map as it is.

The spells will have different amounts of neutrals on them, though.

Fair enough, I'll just shelve that idea for future use :p

I like the idea of the temple. I'm not sure it would get used in most games, but it adds an interesting element. I see access to the "build a bonus" icons as being the biggest thing to balance in this map. I also see Aris as being kinda backed into a corner as-is, but maybe I'm missing a gameplay feature that would help him out some.

by **natty dread** on Sun Dec 04, 2011 3:26 am

WestWind wrote:I like the idea of the temple. I'm not sure it would get used in most games

It will be used in all games, since it's the only way to eliminate players (aside from round limits and nuclear...). Wizards can only be bombarded by the temple, they can't be assaulted from anywhere else, and once you lose your wizard you're out of the game.

The idea of the temple is that it's a very high killer neutral, with 70 troops. You can attack it regularly by land, but it will cost you a shitload of land troops to do so, so it's not worth it... that's why there's the level 5 spell which has the only purpose of being able to bombard those 70 troops on the temple.

See, since we can't do conditional borders yet, this is a workaround... Ideally, if we had conditional borders, I'd make it so you could only attack the temple when you hold the 5th spell, but as it is now, it gives an interesting dynamic too... When you take the 5th spell, you start getting +10 troops on the spell each turn, so in about 7-8 turns you have enough to remove the troops from the temple, but you still have to conquer it by land and then use it to assault the other wizards.

WestWind wrote:I also see Aris as being kinda backed into a corner as-is, but maybe I'm missing a gameplay feature that would help him out some.

Being in the corner can be both an advantage and disadvantage. On one hand it's harder to move out, but it's also harder for others to reach you. Also, Aris is a light wizard so he can use the Tornado spell to assault all villages on the north side of the map.

by **WestWind** on Sun Dec 04, 2011 10:49 am

Oops, didn't read that the tower doesn't attack the wizard. The temple makes more sense now.

I can see the advantage of being in the corner, but I feel like until he gets Tornado, Aris is at a pretty big resource disadvantage.

by **isaiah40** on Sun Dec 04, 2011 1:05 pm

Sorry for the delay, I will take a look again at this this evening.

by **natty dread** on Mon Dec 05, 2011 2:59 am

Update Time!

- New arrangement for ports/ferries: Only ToF island now has ports, ports connect with all ferries, and ferries connect by ferry routes. This limits mobility but should give everyone pretty much equal access to the ToF island.
- Added region bonus to legend: maximum is +5, you get +1/3 with a min. of 3 like usual but more than 15 regions won't give a higher bonus

Click image to enlarge.

by **isaiah40** on Sun Dec 11, 2011 2:34 pm

natty_dread wrote:- Added region bonus to legend: maximum is +5, you get +1/3 with a min. of 3 like usual but more than 15 regions won't give a higher bonus

Looking at the bonuses, I don't see any bonus region that has 15 territories, so no one will get the +5. Oloch Tower has the most at 14 territories. So maybe say a max of +4? Also why is the S1-14 territories scattered all over the bottom of the map? It would seem that the S stands for Shrine? If so I think it would be better to have each Shrine labeled as S1, S2 etc. Then you can fill in all those extra territories with the naming of the respective bonus regions, thereby maybe you can have a couple of them with 15+ territories. Then you can have the +5 max territory bonus for each region.

by **natty dread** on Sun Dec 11, 2011 2:50 pm

isaiah40 wrote:Looking at the bonuses, I don't see any bonus region that has 15 territories, so no one will get the +5. Oloch Tower has the most at 14 territories.

Are players limited in only conquering territories in their own areas? There's like over 180 territories on the map. Even with 8 players, that's over 20 territories per player, and when you get to 4 players, each can have over 40 territories, so the limit of 15 territories that give a territory bonus doesn't seem too high to me.

isaiah40 wrote:Also why is the S1-14 territories scattered all over the bottom of the map? It would seem that the S stands for Shrine?

Nopes. The naming scheme is pretty simple actually:

- Territories within range 3 of towers are named after their correspondig wizards (Aris = Ar, Merin = Me etc.)
- Villages are named with village names
- Mana founts are named Mana
- ToF island territories are named TF
- The rest of the territories are named by the side of the map they're on, North side = N, South side = S

isaiah40 wrote:Then you can fill in all those extra territories with the naming of the respective bonus regions, thereby maybe you can have a couple of them with 15+ territories. Then you can have the +5 max territory bonus for each region.

Oh, I think you misunderstand. The territory bonus is a standard territory bonus, the one you get for having territories (ie. "regions" by the "official CC lingo") and as such it applies to all territories on the map, there's no regional bonuses at all.

All the actual bonuses on the map are collection bonuses, resource pairs, etc. There are no fixed bonus regions of any kind.

by **isaiah40** on Sun Dec 11, 2011 3:03 pm

Okay, then you need to change it in the legend to read something else. Right now it reads "Region bonus max +5" Which denotes that you will only receive a max of +5 men per region bonus.So maybe word it to read Max troops +5 or something along those lines.

by **natty dread** on Sun Dec 11, 2011 3:20 pm

No, region refers to territory. Andy is always pushing us to use the "official CC lingo" so I thought I'd oblige him for now.

Look at any game log and it says "xxx received y troops for z regions".

by **isaiah40** on Sun Dec 11, 2011 3:36 pm

Okay fair point. So how about "Max troops +5"?

by **natty dread** on Sun Dec 11, 2011 3:41 pm

isaiah40 wrote:Okay fair point. So how about "Max troops +5"?

Hm, seems a bit ambiguous on it's own.

How about if I shorten the "Each wizard receives +1 autodeploy" to "+1 autodeploy per Wizard" so I can get 2 lines for the region bonus...

by **isaiah40** on Sun Dec 11, 2011 3:45 pm

Do it and I'll take a look.

by **natty dread** on Sun Dec 11, 2011 3:47 pm

Now there should be no ambiguity:

Click image to enlarge.

by **isaiah40** on Sun Dec 11, 2011 3:51 pm

If anyone complains that they don't understand why they only get 5 troops then well .... :-#

[Abandoned] War of Wizards

Re: War of Wizards [29.10.11] Page 1

Re: War of Wizards [29.10.11] Page 1

Re: War of Wizards [29.10.11] Page 1

Re: War of Wizards [24.11.11] Page 2

Re: War of Wizards [24.11.11] Page 2

Re: War of Wizards [24.11.11] Page 2

Re: War of Wizards [24.11.11] Page 2

Re: War of Wizards [24.11.11] Page 2

Re: War of Wizards [24.11.11] Page 2

Re: War of Wizards [24.11.11] Page 2

Re: War of Wizards [24.11.11] Page 2

Re: War of Wizards [24.11.11] Page 2

Re: War of Wizards [24.11.11] Page 2

Re: War of Wizards [24.11.11] Page 2

Re: War of Wizards [24.11.11] Page 2

Re: War of Wizards [24.11.11] Page 2

Re: War of Wizards [24.11.11] Page 2

Re: War of Wizards [5.12.11] Page 3

Re: War of Wizards [5.12.11] Page 3

Re: War of Wizards [5.12.11] Page 3

Re: War of Wizards [5.12.11] Page 3

Re: War of Wizards [5.12.11] Page 3

Re: War of Wizards [5.12.11] Page 3

Re: War of Wizards [5.12.11] Page 3

Re: War of Wizards [11.12.11] Page 4

Who is online