Conquerman and "-1 territory adjustment"

toprichard · Post by **toprichard** » Tue Feb 05, 2008 9:40 am

From game 1691040.

I can't see on the key any details of why someone should get a -1 bonus for territory count. Am I missing something?

TopRich

yeti_c · Post by **yeti_c** » Tue Feb 05, 2008 9:47 am

toprichard wrote:From game 1691040.

I can't see on the key any details of why someone should get a -1 bonus for territory count. Am I missing something?

TopRich

It's explained in the legend - due to the large amount of territories on the map - the more you hold the less you get...

It is in the bottom right hand corner.

C.

toprichard · Post by **toprichard** » Wed Feb 06, 2008 5:47 am

Sorry but that still doesn't explain it.

Turn 3 for Red:

33 territories: 33/4 should be 8 armies but red got 11-1=10

Turn 4 for red: 32/4 should be 8 but red got 10

Eh?

BaldAdonis · Post by **BaldAdonis** » Wed Feb 06, 2008 5:58 am

toprichard wrote:Sorry but that still doesn't explain it.

Turn 3 for Red:

33 territories: 33/4 should be 8 armies but red got 11-1=10

Turn 4 for red: 32/4 should be 8 but red got 10

Eh?

It works like this: for the first 30, you get 1 for each 3. For the next 30, you get one for each 4. So, in your example, he has 33, so he gets 1 for each 3 in the first thirty, hence 10, and 1 for each 4 in the next thirty, hence 0. It's poorly worded in the legend, but they mean you to infer this.

yeti_c · Post by **yeti_c** » Wed Feb 06, 2008 6:34 am

Baldadonis is correct.

If it were done the way you have it - it would mean that as soon as took the 31st territory - then you would lose armies... which is not conducive to deciding a game!!

C.

toprichard · Post by **toprichard** » Wed Feb 06, 2008 11:14 am

Understand now. The Legend is shockingly bad.

Thanks

luv2tri2 · Post by **luv2tri2** » Thu Feb 07, 2008 6:36 pm

the entire map is bad

owenshooter · Post by **owenshooter** » Thu Feb 07, 2008 6:39 pm

luv2tri2 wrote:the entire map is bad

here it comes... 3......2........1......-0

The1exile · Post by **The1exile** » Thu Feb 07, 2008 6:41 pm

Is that it? You've just explained one of the mysteries of CC to me, BA. Not that I have any intention of playing CM any time soon, unless I feel like endurance testing a new version of firefox or something.

john1099 · Post by **john1099** » Thu Feb 07, 2008 6:57 pm

The1exile wrote:Is that it? You've just explained one of the mysteries of CC to me, BA. Not that I have any intention of playing CM any time soon, unless I feel like endurance testing a new version of firefox or something.

Me as well, I didn't know about that.

Conquerman and "-1 territory adjustment"

Conquerman and "-1 territory adjustment"

Re: Conquerman and "-1 territory adjustment"