CC Archery v22ish [D]

[gimil]

How about this, we remove the lobby with the only way to win is buy using the objective. It forces people to attack to gain cards and/or bonuses to gain the troops to hold the objective.

[Kaplowitz]

That could work, but according to DiM's scenario, people will still just try to stop others from getting bonuses.

[gimil]

That could work, but according to DiM's scenario, people will still just try to stop others from getting bonuses.

We cant really be sure that it will be that hard to get a bonus.

[DiM]

That could work, but according to DiM's scenario, people will still just try to stop others from getting bonuses.

We cant really be sure that it will be that hard to get a bonus.

actually we can be. simple question.
you have 2 options to take a bonus.
a. attack a neutral terit with 5 armies
b. attack an opponent with 5 armies.

you will always chose b because at the same time you break my bonus and also gain a bonus for yourself.

i have spent a few more minutes studying the map and it seems the gameplay is even worse than i thought.

first of all. every target colour loses 1 per turn. this means white will always be undefended otherwise it's useless to take it. so if i take white and leave just 1 army (to avoid the decay) i'll surely lose it to the next player. so useless.
further uselessness is seen when we compare the bonuses. gold gives 4 and you must kill 8 neutrals to get it. white gives 1 and you must defeat 5. so why go for white when i can go straight for gold?

second problem is the objective. it really offers lots of abuse chances. so the archer plus the bullseyes win the game. since i already said why attacking anything is not worth it, the best strategy would be this:
for the first 9-10 turns just deploy on the archer. do nothing else. you'll have enough troops to kill the 72 neutrals on the bullseyes. now in freestyle games make sure you take your turn last and take the bulls eyes. then as quick as possible start the next turn. you win.
or even better let your turn time out and you can begin the next turn and don't have to wait for others to begin it.

so this needs a whole lot of redesigning to make it work because as it is now it's all about build-ups lucky dice and freestyle abuse. no sign of strategy whatsoever.

[gimil]

Then why dont you spend some time with suggestions rather than another wall of problems, then maybe we'll get somewhere.

[DiM]

Then why dont you spend some time with suggestions rather than another wall of problems, then maybe we'll get somewhere.

i already made a suggestion but it involves a total change.

narrow the line of sight of each archer. this way expansion will be possible without the fear of somebody else coming and taking your bonus.


imagine this map as feudal. each archer is a castle. now try to play feudal if the castles can attack any terit on the map except other castles. will you venture to take a village? i bet not.

[gimil]

That would require more targets which we cant fit and it we reduce two archer to be able to attack one target then we'll still have the same problem but with more focus,

[DiM]

That would require more targets which we cant fit and it we reduce two archer to be able to attack one target then we'll still have the same problem but with more focus,

true and even if you can fit 8 targets you still have the same problem. let's say you fit the 8 targets and make connect only at the bullseyes. players will be able to develop but they'll reach a stalemate when they all have the bullseyes.

that's because the map is a symmetrical conquest type and this sucks.

imagine chinese checkers where each player starts with the tip of a triangle and everything else is neutral. total bullshit.

so you must either get rid of the conquest thing, but this involves adding more terits or simply allowing bonuses to be received from the drop which will simply screw everything.
or get rid of the symmetry. i think this is the solution but how will that be achieved is totally beyond me. i can't think of anything.

[gimil]

Perhaps I could rework the entire thing.

Remove the lobby and place two groups of 10-15 terrs that start as random placements. The archers start neutral and you have to fight to get an archer and move onto the targets.

[DiM]

Perhaps I could rework the entire thing.

Remove the lobby and place two groups of 10-15 terrs that start as random placements. The archers start neutral and you have to fight to get an archer and move onto the targets.

that could work. do a rough sketch of what you have in mind and we'll see if it's balanced or if it even makes sense

[Kaplowitz]

Perhaps I could rework the entire thing.

Remove the lobby and place two groups of 10-15 terrs that start as random placements. The archers start neutral and you have to fight to get an archer and move onto the targets.

that could work. do a rough sketch of what you have in mind and we'll see if it's balanced or if it even makes sense

That sounds like a good solution, but to make it more real, maybe the archers cant hit targets on their own, and need to get a bow first.

Same concept, different way of saying it.

[gimil]

Perhaps I could rework the entire thing.

Remove the lobby and place two groups of 10-15 terrs that start as random placements. The archers start neutral and you have to fight to get an archer and move onto the targets.

that could work. do a rough sketch of what you have in mind and we'll see if it's balanced or if it even makes sense

That sounds like a good solution, but to make it more real, maybe the archers cant hit targets on their own, and need to get a bow first.

Same concept, different way of saying it.

Not possible with the XML.

[Kaplowitz]

Perhaps I could rework the entire thing.

Remove the lobby and place two groups of 10-15 terrs that start as random placements. The archers start neutral and you have to fight to get an archer and move onto the targets.

that could work. do a rough sketch of what you have in mind and we'll see if it's balanced or if it even makes sense

That sounds like a good solution, but to make it more real, maybe the archers cant hit targets on their own, and need to get a bow first.

Same concept, different way of saying it.

Not possible with the XML.

I was saying archer terriories, land territories, and bow territories. Bow territories attack the targets. Its the same as your idea, just a different way of saying it.

[gimil]

I see, that gives me an idea.

[fireedud]

So will this turn out to be something like where you start out into territory A, attack archer B, attack bow C, and then attack target D?

[yeti_c]

Hang on...

So where does that have us - a race to the archer - and then the same problem?

Personally - I actually don't agree with DiM's synopsis...

You forget that you don't actually have to take territories - you can weaken them from the archer - thus leting you attempt to let someone else take the targets. - and then you take them from them.

One thing I do agree with - is the -1 on the targets... how about swapping that with a +1... that way you can actually leave troops on the targets and therefore away from the archer...

I do agree that the wall needs to be higher too. Say 200...

C.

[DiM]

Hang on...

So where does that have us - a race to the archer - and then the same problem?

Personally - I actually don't agree with DiM's synopsis...

You forget that you don't actually have to take territories - you can weaken them from the archer - thus leting you attempt to let someone else take the targets. - and then you take them from them.

One thing I do agree with - is the -1 on the targets... how about swapping that with a +1... that way you can actually leave troops on the targets and therefore away from the archer...

I do agree that the wall needs to be higher too. Say 200...

C.

yeti, let's say you weaken a target to tempt somebody to take it. but that somebody will think: "hey, if i take that, then yeti is gonna attack me back and take my bonus. then i'm gonna attack him and take his bonus and so on. so what's the use? i'll just sit back relax and wait for yeti to get bored."

[yeti_c]

Hang on...

So where does that have us - a race to the archer - and then the same problem?

Personally - I actually don't agree with DiM's synopsis...

You forget that you don't actually have to take territories - you can weaken them from the archer - thus leting you attempt to let someone else take the targets. - and then you take them from them.

One thing I do agree with - is the -1 on the targets... how about swapping that with a +1... that way you can actually leave troops on the targets and therefore away from the archer...

I do agree that the wall needs to be higher too. Say 200...

C.

yeti, let's say you weaken a target to tempt somebody to take it. but that somebody will think: "hey, if i take that, then yeti is gonna attack me back and take my bonus. then i'm gonna attack him and take his bonus and so on. so what's the use? i'll just sit back relax and wait for yeti to get bored."

Then I'll take it and move all of my armies onto it - you can either - burn all your armies breaking it - or you can go for your own bonus.

C.

[DiM]

Hang on...

So where does that have us - a race to the archer - and then the same problem?

Personally - I actually don't agree with DiM's synopsis...

You forget that you don't actually have to take territories - you can weaken them from the archer - thus leting you attempt to let someone else take the targets. - and then you take them from them.

One thing I do agree with - is the -1 on the targets... how about swapping that with a +1... that way you can actually leave troops on the targets and therefore away from the archer...

I do agree that the wall needs to be higher too. Say 200...

C.

yeti, let's say you weaken a target to tempt somebody to take it. but that somebody will think: "hey, if i take that, then yeti is gonna attack me back and take my bonus. then i'm gonna attack him and take his bonus and so on. so what's the use? i'll just sit back relax and wait for yeti to get bored."

Then I'll take it and move all of my armies onto it - you can either - burn all your armies breaking it - or you can go for your own bonus.

C.

if you do take it then i'll be at a big advantage. you have less troops than me (cause you battled with the neutrals) plus i have the advantage of the attacker rolling 3 dice vs 2 dice.
so i'll surely attack you and take your bonus

trust me. it can't work. you attack the neutrals = you lose

[Kaplowitz]

So DiM, you want there to be a couple of targets that each archer can attack? Then once they have enough bonus, they go for the lobby?

[max is gr8]

I have got an idea to improve the game play problem you need to get the bow and arrow to shoot at the target, the arrow is turned neutral every turn the bow is not. No lobby, instead there is a win condition

[rocky mountain]

thats a good idea. the arrow can be like 5 neutral killer neutral, and the bow 4 neutrals? i don't really see how that will solve the DiM's problem though, but i like the idea.

[Kaplowitz]

I see, that gives me an idea.

Anything on this gimil?

[gimil]

I see, that gives me an idea.

Anything on this gimil?

I might give it a shot tonight. Althought I may require getting both the graphics and gameplay stamp revoked.

[AndyDufresne]

If a large overhaul is being done, then gimil is correct about the stamps.


--Andy