Ziggurat [24/Nov/2017] v14.3 (p7)

by **Fuchsia tude** on Tue Jan 24, 2017 2:09 pm

Does E01 attack D02, D04, D06 and D08? Does it bombard every other square on the ziggurat? The sidebar is unclear whether it behaves like any other level of the ziggurat, or only bombards the camps.

by **Swifte** on Tue Jan 24, 2017 5:01 pm

E01 bombards everything (including camps) EXCEPT D02, D04, D06, and D08, which it attacks.

by **jonofperu** on Sun Feb 12, 2017 7:42 pm

Fuchsia tude wrote:Does E01 attack D02, D04, D06 and D08? Does it bombard every other square on the ziggurat? The sidebar is unclear whether it behaves like any other level of the ziggurat, or only bombards the camps.

"Religious influence of the summit-altar: E01 can bombard camps."
"High ground advantage: Territories can bombard the ziggurat below them."

E01 can bombard everything below it on the ziggurat (except the Ds it attacks) and due to "religious influence" can also bombard camps.

by **jonofperu** on Sun Feb 12, 2017 7:43 pm

How are we looking for getting this into official Beta?

by **Fuchsia tude** on Fri Feb 17, 2017 10:33 am

jonofperu wrote:
Fuchsia tude wrote:Does E01 attack D02, D04, D06 and D08? Does it bombard every other square on the ziggurat? The sidebar is unclear whether it behaves like any other level of the ziggurat, or only bombards the camps.

"Religious influence of the summit-altar: E01 can bombard camps."
"High ground advantage: Territories can bombard the ziggurat below them."

E01 can bombard everything below it on the ziggurat (except the Ds it attacks) and due to "religious influence" can also bombard camps.

I guess I wasn't sure whether E01 counted as a regular territory or not. Maybe rephrase to "E01 also bombards camps."?

by **jonofperu** on Fri Feb 17, 2017 6:20 pm

If people commonly find it confusing I would be willing to change it. However, "Territories can bombard the ziggurat below them" should be clear enough. "Religious influence" adds an ability without taking away what applies to all territs.

by **loutil** on Sat Feb 18, 2017 4:06 pm

I have not read through this thread and I am only now playing my first game on it. However, it seems to be quite unbalanced in favor of the first turn. It appears that player 2 is always playing catch up?

by **jonofperu** on Sun Feb 19, 2017 6:14 pm

I would think that hitting neutrals would put the first player at a disadvantage if anything. So far it doesn't feel to me like there's a disadvantage going second, but hopefully we'll hear from more people as it goes into full beta.

by **iancanton** on Tue Feb 28, 2017 6:57 pm

beta - quenching

the development period has concluded for the ziggurat map. the foundry and i hereby brand this map with the foundry beta brand. let it be known that this map is now ready for BETA play. after an extended period of time in BETA and once all quirks and issues have been resolved, the map will be put into full play (barring any admin or foundry foreman vetoes).

conquer club, enjoy!

while the map is in BETA play, there are a few administrative tasks that are required of the mapmaker(s) in addition to the initial gameplay testing:

a timely and constructive manner

iancanton.

by **josko.ri** on Wed Mar 01, 2017 1:16 am

Congrats for making the first map after more than one year into Beta stage =D>

Is it true that this map does not support trench play?

by **WOLFZ71** on Wed Mar 01, 2017 1:38 am

Wow! first time I've even heard of this map? I'm going to play it for the first time right now

by **jonofperu** on Wed Mar 01, 2017 9:53 am

josko.ri wrote:Is it true that this map does not support trench play?

I believe that is true. I can understand why, since you have to reach the top to wipe out the camps. I think it was an executive decision by the foundry.

by **WOLFZ71** on Thu Mar 02, 2017 1:14 am

I have a few games started now none have I completed yet but I do really like it! I can see it fast becoming my favorite map to play for the time being.

by **Bart-Jan** on Thu Mar 02, 2017 7:32 am

Played a few games on this map so far and I really like it. Very different from a lot of other maps in terms of game play.

I read some posts suggesting that the starting player would have an advantage (and some stating exactly the opposite). So far I haven't seen this in any of the games I played. The map seems pretty well balanced with the right amount of neutrals.

However I think the starting position is very important and a least once decided the game before it really started. I only played two player games so far so that could be part of the problem, but starting with two camps on adjoining sides of the ziggurat with the added advantage of two camps on the same corner gave me the possibility to get to the D-row with minimal losses. Once you hold that row for one or two turns the game is basically over since to fight back you have to abandon your camps leaving them open to annihilation from the summit.

Also I wouldn't supply extra armies for the amount of regions held. The autodrop on the ziggurat gives plenty of extra armies, in my opinion adding more isn't really needed.

by **djelebert** on Fri Mar 03, 2017 1:08 pm

good-looking map! It's quite the same system that in antartica mixed with baseball, but more balanced than antartica. It could be a good Quad map.

I played it few times, in poly and 1vs1.
one remark, the map is quite unbalanced in 1vs1, each player don't have the same number of base on each side. it could make a big difference if one guy have the 4 bases of one side. I know there's already a lot of map where drop is determinant, but it seems that this map wasn't made for unbalanced drop.

by **robellis00** on Fri Mar 03, 2017 2:13 pm

In the spirit of progress, and to support the March monthly Challenge, here is my feedback.

I've played a handful of games on this map. For the first few games, I felt there was an unfair advantage to the first player. It appeared as though player 2 actually was always playing catch up, as was mentioned earlier. However, the more games I have played, I am learning that there is more strategy to consider and employ. For now I'm still thinking there is an unfair advantage, but I will have to play several more games to determine what my feedback will be. Maybe adjusting the number of troops that are autodeployed on the home terits would make it more even for player 2.
I totally like the idea of the top of the ziggurat being able to bombard everything. It makes good sense.
For a constructive comment, nuclear and zombie spoils totally ruin the game when they nuke/zombify a home terit. I had that happen to me and there is no recovery from that. If you can prevent trench on this map, is there a way to also prevent nuclear and zombie spoils on the home terits?

That's all for now.
Thanks for the opportunity to provide feedback.

by **lokisgal** on Fri Mar 03, 2017 3:29 pm

Ive just now completed a few games on this map

On a positive note its easy to grasp the generally idea of how it plays out, the key is clear and easy to understand
Negatives - I also think it favors who goes first and its also appears to be a stack map and hope you get better dice. I think there is more strat than Ive discovered so far but perhaps a few unexpected twists and turns would make it more original? It reminds me a bit of Anarctica (though the bombing is certainly different)

by **jonofperu** on Fri Mar 03, 2017 5:15 pm

robellis00 wrote:is there a way to also prevent nuclear and zombie spoils on the home terits?

That would be an awesome option. I hate nukes generally, but they can be so unfair if you kill a starting spot like on this map.

by **ooge** on Fri Mar 03, 2017 8:25 pm

on the positive the map looks good.

on the negative,I have played two games on this and the strat seems to be stack and dash for the bombing terr. maybe to similar to Antarctica map? maybe create bonus situations to defend against a player who is simply stacking? negative as well the name,talking to others about this map we are calling it Z-map.

by **WOLFZ71** on Sat Mar 04, 2017 3:01 am

ok so now that I have played, won and lost a few games I would like to say having all of the auto deploys is a great idea and makes you really think about a changing strategy constantly. The biggest problem I find is that the neutral number of the alter should be higher given the advantage of going first makes it easy to ascend to the top and eliminate your opponent in under ten rounds. If it was higher like 13-18 neutral troops would balance the odds a little better I think.

by **General Bax** on Sat Mar 04, 2017 3:50 am

positive comment: the 3d effect is nice, i'd even deepen it.

negative comment: why can't the base camps attack on another? in a true ziggurat battle campaign that's what everyone would do first...

and an out of the box suggestion: in any pyramid, the outside is very impressive, but there are also graves and catacombs inside.

how about adding a small box on the map, an extra area with a few regions you can reach only through the bottom or the top of the pyramid?

holding this extra area could be a winning condition area or just a high bonus area

by **Awoodness** on Sun Mar 05, 2017 7:14 am

Not a fan of bombardment from the camps. In escalating games I am in, we are just stacking and bombarding. I think a map should encourage you to progress. And bombarding from the outside over a wall when those on the wall can't do the same doesn't make sense.

by **Lord and Master** on Sun Mar 05, 2017 6:17 pm

It's awesome. Thank-you jonofperu i'm loving this map!

Perhaps neutrals within the ziggarat should auto-deploy each (or every other) round too, as a slight deterrent for building..?

Also the bit about bombardments that people seem to be struggling with is clearly the base camps in fact have trebuchet and/or catapults, parked beautifully out of the ziggarats defenders range...

by **eddie2** on Mon Mar 06, 2017 12:57 pm

like the map think the 10 troups loss is not enough. For e01. Your just gonna bombard everything you can then fort back . A auto reset to 10 neutral or make it like a plane on ww2poland where u cannot fort of it.

by **jdw35** on Mon Mar 06, 2017 3:16 pm

I am generally a fan of the map, it seems like a great concept! Thanks for putting in the work to make it happen.

In most of the games I have seen up until this point the person that gets first turn has a very sizable advantage. Especially with the drops being uneven on each of the 4 sides. I would suggest implementing equal drops in 1v1 games so each player has the same number of bases per side along with making the neutrals harder to take (start them off as 3 each) that will lessen the odds of the person who starts being able to take a large number of territories that give auto deploys.

I also think it could be beneficial to make E01 start as a higher neutral amount and then reset to a slightly lower neutral amount each time it is taken.

My final thoughts are to consider limiting the distance that each camp can bombard. Rather than give each base access to the entire side, perhaps you could give it a 2 or 3 territory range limit.

All in all I enjoy the map. I do feel however that the strategies involved are somewhat limited so I don't know how popular I see the map remaining