[Abandoned] - Age of Quests

[MrBenn]

I wonder if a circular seal would fill the space better?

[foregone]

fix the wax seal (when foregone tells me what's wrong with the broken edges)

I've been busy staring at it continuously trying to work out how to translate it into words. The broken edges just feel too sudden to me and make it look removed from the map. What about trying to add a little ridge with a lightened colour, kinda of like broken coloured candle has a lighter colour on the inside?

i still have no idea what exactly you want me to do
i'll try to rework it on my own and see if i match your wish



edit//
would this be better?
i made it look like it broke in steps and partial pieces still remained at the broken edges. also i reduced the whiteness you mentioned before and made the cracks more visible.
the text is still crappy but as i said before it will be changed when i find a name.

Much much better, thanks DiM. Satisfies me on that point.

[DiM]

I wonder if a circular seal would fill the space better?

indeed a circular seal would fit nicely in that corner and i wouldn't have to bother with broken edges and stuff BUT i wouldn't be able to fit the map name inside a circular seal

[DiM]

V6.

redid the wax seal
removed the curl in top right corner to make room for text
added explanation that there are no diagonal attacks
changed text on map (except chart numbers)

Click image to enlarge.

i'd like the discussion to be oriented towards the gameplay. graphics can also be done later.
so please take a look at the bonuses and the placement of skills and treasure chests and give me your opinion. i think i've done a decent job arranging them but i've been looking at the map so much that i may have missed important things so it's always better to hear an opinion from somebody else.

[foregone]

On gameplay, as you requested (although I'm prob not the best for this):

So far I've only managed to stare at the bottom right corner, and it seems to me that the troll is in a far better position than the archer. As far as I can tell, the troll can get a +3 rage 5 territories up and a +3 strength 6 territories right. The archer can get a +2 within 3 territories leftward but his next closest bonus is the other +2 for strength up-left 10 territories away. The archer thus has 13 territories to wade through for a +4 to the troll's 11 for +6. And the archer's second likely +4 is very close to the beastmaster's start position.

Perhaps switching the dex at m13 and the cha at o13 would make it better for the archer's position? This way he'd only move a further 3 territories making it 7 territories for a +4 bonus vs the troll's 11 territories for a +6.

[DiM]

fair point.

i guess the best way to do this is by making a chart of each character and looking at each separate skill and deciding mathematically the distance.
unfortunately i don't have the time to do it now so i'll leave it for tomorrow.

[bbqpenguin]

the bloodstains now resemble spagghetio's stains...

is it supposed to be orc blood?

[cairnswk]

Dim. I've just looked at this new map...starting very professional. However i will look in more on it later to understand what is going on.
For now, i can't read whatever is on the red stamp top left corner.

[DiM]

the bloodstains now resemble spagghetio's stains...

is it supposed to be orc blood?

considering ketchup and blood leave very similar stains i guess they're ok.

Dim. I've just looked at this new map...starting very professional. However i will look in more on it later to understand what is going on.
For now, i can't read whatever is on the red stamp top left corner.

the red wax seal is where the title goes and i haven't bothered to make it legible because i don't have a title yet.
but i just might make it legible cause everybody seems to mention it

[Kaplowitz]

I dont like parchment, i think this would look better if you just made it like AoR1.

[DiM]

I dont like parchment, i think this would look better if you just made it like AoR1.

do you really think i can fit 261 terits and a lengthy legend if i make graphics like that?

[Kaplowitz]

Why not one big island? You can still have square territories, and everything.

[DiM]

Why not one big island? You can still have square territories, and everything.

let's be serious. a square island with square terits is pointless.
the graphics i chose are much more suited for the needs of this map.
i don't know if you played mud games. they were huge a long time ago when graphics weren't important and most of the maps looked like the map i made.

take a look at these:
http://www.deadofnight.org/images/pangaea.jpg
http://discworld.atuin.net/external/atlas/zoom-klk.gif

and these are examples of maps with good graphics because they were usually made in ascii
to be honest i actually pondered for a while on the idea of making the map only in ascii but i realised it's much harder than i thought

[DiM]

V7.
font changed all over the map
changed map name to Age of Quests (temporary until a better alternative is found)

Click image to enlarge.

i need feedback on the gameplay. anything from the value of neutrals, bonuses and placement of bonus terits on the map.
graphics can wait but don't be shy to post graphic comments also.

[MrBenn]

This map is ready to start moving along the development chain...

[Advanced Draft]

[DiM]

thanks for the sticky Benn.

anyway, i'm primarily seeking gameplay related feedback. i want to make sure the map is ballanced before i work any further on the graphics.

issues i'm interested in:

1. bonuses. i think they are ok, not too big but not too small, just enough to give you a reason to expand.
2. neutral values. i want people to move easily through the map so i think the low values i chose are doing just that.
3. placement of treasure chests and skills. this is the trickiest part as each starting location has different bonuses. this will need a lot of talking

[edbeard]

I'm not really fond of this text but it's more readable than before. I think I understand how things work (it's not really that complicated) but I'll ask to make sure.

I have to conquer all 9 of my territories to get hold of whatever fighting class I am. So if I start at A20 and I conquer those 8 territories, if I conquer E16, I'll get a +1 for being a cleric and holding the Cha territory

I wish you could make it more obvious which treasure chest is good and which is evil. I get that the blue starts which don't look blue on the map are good and therefore the purple looking (supposed to be blue) chests are also good but yea not that obvious. (I know you probably know all this but whatever doesn't hurt to say)



it seems like a lot of work to gain a class. 8 territories to kill. plus then after that you have to go through a lot of territories to get close to a bonus. I think it's obvious that all those blank territories should be either 2 or 1 neutrals. maybe consider dropping the neutrals to 1 in your class so these can be gained easily. territory count is going to be important since there aren't too many bonuses out there and they max out at +3.

whether you want to put 1 or 2 or whatever on blank territories depends on how you want the gameplay to be. if for instance, the barbarian holds the Str territory they get +3. if you put 2 on each blank, then the warlock can stop him fairly easily. the Witch wouldn't be able to break him (via stopping his class continent). do you want the class to be quite strong or do you want people to have to decided between defending and holding all at once. I prefer the latter so having 1 army on most blanks (except maybe those like the ones in between the barbarian and the warlock) seems better to me. getting around should be easy and 1 army does that.

the problem you're going to run into is the same as Das Schloss. I don't think cairnswk has solved it on his map yet. How do you get an objective map where eliminating other players is hard or impossible not to turn into a stalemate. to be honest, I'm not sure it is possible. I'd say you shouldn't put 50 armies on the objective. I'd put something much smaller like 16 or 20.


ok wait I think I missed something. the +1 and -1 for realms where you travel. so if I hold a class, I get +9? if this is true then I guess you have to make those +1. it's definitely interesting because there's less incentive to stop someone's bonus because you'll get a minus for it. especially on treasure chests. when you add the fact that generally people won't be getting large bonuses from holding skills, breaking people makes even less sense.

to be honest, now that I realised the +1 -1 thing, I think stalemates will be VERY commonplace on this map. everyone's getting a +9 minimum. how many armies will I have to get to A) grab the objective and B) hold the objective. people can't really get more than lets say +8 from skills. generally they'll be in the 3-5 range on that I think. I just don't see how people can separate themselves from the competition which is very important in a non-elimination game. I'll leave my previous comments even though they don't really apply since you might find some use out of them. even if you removed the +1/-1 thing I think you'd run into this problem. das schloss games ended when people deadbeated and allowed others to win. Or, one player was lucky enough to gain a totally dominating position. I don't think any player can gain a dominating position with the current gameplay or even if you removed the +1/-1 thing. I'm not really sure how to fix this. it's not an easy thing to get around.

[DiM]

first of all thanks for the feedback ed.

now onto the subject at hand

I have to conquer all 9 of my territories to get hold of whatever fighting class I am. So if I start at A20 and I conquer those 8 territories, if I conquer E16, I'll get a +1 for being a cleric and holding the Cha territory

well you got this one wrong. you don't have to take those 8 terits to get that class. perhaps you were misslead by the fact that each group is inside a rectangle. i'll have to fix that.
anyway each starting position is a character. A6 is Barbarian D1 is Witch etc.
the red/blue terits around each location are altars of good or evil. let's say you start with A6 (Barbarian). this means you are good. take a few blue altar terits and you get bonuses. go and explore tha map and take more altar terits and you increase your bonus even more.
so the continents in the xml will be based on the starting locations.

for example:
Barbarian Charm
components: A6 and F12
bonus: +0
or Barbarian Strength
components:A6 and G9
bonus: +3

because of the differentiated bonuses the same terit will give different bonuses depending on who's holding it.
noticed how strength from G9 gave 3 to the barbarian?
well the witch in D1 will get nothing from that.
Witch Strength
components: D1 and G9
bonus 0

so basically you have your class from the start. this gives you +1 (which is actually the bonus for # of terits held which will be set to a minimum of 1 similar to poker map) and then your first bonuses will come from the 8 altars surrounding your position.

I prefer the latter so having 1 army on most blanks (except maybe those like the ones in between the barbarian and the warlock) seems better to me. getting around should be easy and 1 army does that.

i initially planned all blanks to start with 1. perhaps some will have more, i don't know. thing is i want people to move fast and yes some starting positions are close but that's why i made them unconquerable (so there won't be first round eliminations) and also added altars that give negative bonus to different alignments. because of the altar plus and minus bonus and because each location has diff alignment locations next to it i'm fairly sure there won't be any early rounds bashing and the actual battle will take place around the treasure chests and skills. for example the barbarian has the witch and the warlock as neighbours. neither of them wants to come inside the barbarian altar because they won't be able to eliminate him (starting position can't be conquered) plus they won't gain anything from this (the blue altar of the barbarian gives negative bonus to the red players (witch and warlock)) so they will probably go towards the centre of the map or towards another player of same alignment as them.

the problem you're going to run into is the same as Das Schloss. I don't think cairnswk has solved it on his map yet. How do you get an objective map where eliminating other players is hard or impossible not to turn into a stalemate. to be honest, I'm not sure it is possible. I'd say you shouldn't put 50 armies on the objective. I'd put something much smaller like 16 or 20.

that's why i said between 25 and 50. i want it to be low to convince people to go for it but not to low to allow a quick rush in the first 2-3 rounds.

ok wait I think I missed something. the +1 and -1 for realms where you travel. so if I hold a class, I get +9? if this is true then I guess you have to make those +1. it's definitely interesting because there's less incentive to stop someone's bonus because you'll get a minus for it. especially on treasure chests. when you add the fact that generally people won't be getting large bonuses from holding skills, breaking people makes even less sense.

to be honest, now that I realised the +1 -1 thing, I think stalemates will be VERY commonplace on this map. everyone's getting a +9 minimum. how many armies will I have to get to A) grab the objective and B) hold the objective. people can't really get more than lets say +8 from skills. generally they'll be in the 3-5 range on that I think. I just don't see how people can separate themselves from the competition which is very important in a non-elimination game. I'll leave my previous comments even though they don't really apply since you might find some use out of them. even if you removed the +1/-1 thing I think you'd run into this problem. das schloss games ended when people deadbeated and allowed others to win. Or, one player was lucky enough to gain a totally dominating position. I don't think any player can gain a dominating position with the current gameplay or even if you removed the +1/-1 thing. I'm not really sure how to fix this. it's not an easy thing to get around.

actually stalemates where my first concern when i decided to make this map objective only. that's why i added the +1/-1 thing and the personalized bonuses for each character.

imagine an 8p game. the first thing you have to do is get your altar bonus of +8. then you immediatelly have to go for other bonuses (treasure chests and skills) but also aim for another person that has your alignment. this way you'll get the +8 from that person's altar. for example the barbarian goes for the paladin and takes his altar imprisoning the paladin in his starting location. yes the paladin will still be active and he'll still get +1 per turn but that's surely not a problem and you could easily fend off any attempts he makes at breaking out.
so basically through this tactic at some point there will be 2 strong players from the starting 8, one from each alignment. this could be a potential stalemate BUT we have the personalized bonuses.
for example if the 2 remaining players are the barbarian and the troll then they'll fight primarily for strength and rage cause those are their best skills so whoever controls more eventually controls the map.
however some characters are more versatile than others. or the characters and one could proit from skills that the other character doesn't use. in our case the barbarian can also get a +1 from agility while the troll gets 0 from agility.

once you manage to rule the center of the map and take hold of skills you can go for the objective even if the other character still has 4 altars. or you can simply start raiding some of his altars and weaken him further. for example if the troll holds the warlock altar you can raid it and trash some of the troops he uses to imprison the warlock. then the warlock sees his chance to fight back and regain the altar thus weakening the troll even more.

in theory stalemates are possible. people that know the map perfectly and have very similar dice and strategies could come to a stalemate but frankly that happens on any map and they eventually deadbeat. i've been in such positions on world 2.1 classic eastern front and many other maps.

[edbeard]

trust me. it's way worse on a map where you can't be eliminated. das schloss showed this to us.

whether you're good or evil, your good or evil counterparts are quite far away so taking over one of them will take a long time. the +9 starting bonus (effectively) will make this even tougher to do. basically because of that bonus and that the other bonuses are relatively small, separation will be difficult. how do I become dominant? everyone will be fairly even in strength. somehow people need to be able to get larger bonuses so separation can happen. obviously on this map games will be long but the way you have it set right now will make these games go on forever unless people deadbeat or decide not to break the objective just so the game ends.

how would I combat this problem?

1. start the objective with less armies. it gives people the option to say "I might as well take it to force people to stop it and prevent them from grabbing other bonuses." there's also the strategy of me not stopping the objective and forcing someone else to do it. It kinda makes a back and forth of people stopping the objective one turn and grabbing bonuses in other turns. I'd say something small like 8 or 10.

2.
a.lower the bonus for holding the altars

b. increase some of the other bonuses or create couple new bonuses that are large.

this allows people who grab a few bonuses or one of the large ones to separate themselves and become a dominant force allowing the game to end.

[DiM]

trust me. it's way worse on a map where you can't be eliminated. das schloss showed this to us.

whether you're good or evil, your good or evil counterparts are quite far away so taking over one of them will take a long time. the +9 starting bonus (effectively) will make this even tougher to do. basically because of that bonus and that the other bonuses are relatively small, separation will be difficult. how do I become dominant? everyone will be fairly even in strength. somehow people need to be able to get larger bonuses so separation can happen. obviously on this map games will be long but the way you have it set right now will make these games go on forever unless people deadbeat or decide not to break the objective just so the game ends.

it was never meant to be a 5 round map. i want long hard fought battles but i see your point. some people may not see the beauty of long battles and may give up.

1. start the objective with less armies. it gives people the option to say "I might as well take it to force people to stop it and prevent them from grabbing other bonuses." there's also the strategy of me not stopping the objective and forcing someone else to do it. It kinda makes a back and forth of people stopping the objective one turn and grabbing bonuses in other turns. I'd say something small like 8 or 10.

i have nothing against reducing the objective bonus as long as it's not too low as to allow people to rush towards it in the first few rounds.

for example the barbarian is 10 terits away from the objective. with his +9 per turn he could save for 3 turns and then go for the objective if it has a low value (8 or 10)

now that i think about it that may not be so bad afterall, if people allow him to do it then it's their fault. i like it but i don't know if this could be turned into abuse in freestyle. i would appreciate input from freestyle players.

2.
a. lower the bonus for holding the altars

b. increase some of the other bonuses or create couple new bonuses that are large.

this allows people who grab a few bonuses or one of the large ones to separate themselves and become a dominant force allowing the game to end.

a. no i like it like this
b. increasing some bonuses can easily be done but adding new ones is really hard cause i don't have space on the legend.
or perhaps i could squeeze some bonuses like "Eldar of..." that gives you +5 for holding all the terits of the same skill. i think i might be able to add a line like this in the legend.


PS: i just realised V7 above is actually the same image as V6. wtf did i do? i'll upload the correct one when i get home

[yeti_c]

Another thing you can do to enhance bonuses - is increase the amount of bonus you get from territories...

This would reward the player who travels and takes over territories. (Which is something that should be rewarded in an RPG game) and discourage people to turtle/rush.

The other thing to consider - is that your current theories are all based on 8 player games.

4 player games will have 2 characters each. So what gives a bonus to one of your characters - will take away a bonus from another... (if you have opposite alignments) - if you have the same then you double your bonus.

2 player games will have 4 characters each. - This will surely throw your balance out of whack?

One thing to cure this - is (I think) to remove the -2 for the treasure chests. - So if you hold a correct treasure - you get +2 - if you hold an incorrect treasure you get nothing - but you do stop others from holding it.

(Note if you have 2 characters of opposite alignment - treasure chests are useless to you).

C.

[DiM]

damn talk about screwups, i forgot you still can't chose starting terits and they are assigned randomly.
this means both treasure chests and alignment terits are useless.

in a 4 p game if a guy starts with 2 good characters he's at a big advantage than a person that starts with 1 evil and 1 good.

and even if i remove the minus bonuses this is still bad.

let's say player A starts with barbarian and paladin. he will get the altar bonuses for each and they will be double. if player B starts with cleric and witch he will get the altar bonuses for both and if i keep the minus bonus he will actually get nothing if i remove the minus and make it zero then he will still get half of what player 2 gets. this sucks

so clearly something needs to be done. treasure chests are easy, just make them give +2 for same alignment and 0 for different alignment but the starting altars are tricky.
one way would be to make each altar give a bonus only to the character that starts there. anyone else gets 0 but this will lead to a lower number of overall bonuses.

this means i must increase the bonuses found on the map. i don't want to increase the bonuses from skills or from treasure chests so maybe givingbonus for terits owned would work.

if i leave it a the default level then at 261 terits in an 8p game it would mean an average of 32.5 terits per player. that's 10-11 extra troops. in 4 player games it would be 21-22 troops per player. i think that might be just what's needed. incentive to go out and explore plus problem with minus bonuses solved.
thanks yeti

[yeti_c]

one way would be to make each altar give a bonus only to the character that starts there. anyone else gets 0 but this will lead to a lower number of overall bonuses.

How about "home altars" give double "away altars"?

C.

[yeti_c]

The other thing I suggest you do - is read the last 30 something pages of the Das Schloss topic - to make sure you fully understand the good/bad things that come out of not being able to kill someone... (In the end it looks like Das Schloss is going to allow a kill technique under extreme circumstances)

C.

[DiM]

one way would be to make each altar give a bonus only to the character that starts there. anyone else gets 0 but this will lead to a lower number of overall bonuses.

How about "home altars" give double "away altars"?

C.

i have nothing against this as long as i can fit it in the legend.
and i'll check the das schloss thread but i still want to make this map objective only. last i remember lack asked for maps that are objective only and except das schloss i don't think there had been other attempts.