I for one am all for the minimap being either shrunk or (re)moved, because then there just might be enough room to maneuver for 2 entrances to each castle?

Top Score:2403natty_dread wrote:I was wrong

A good point, although 3,4 (maybe 5) player games could still lead to a large advantage that may make you strong enought to make retaliation difficult? Maybe not?yeti_c wrote: I don't think being paired with a neutral castle is too big a deal - if someone is and they grow strong - they'll just get picked on by someone else...
Top Score:2403natty_dread wrote:I was wrong
Maybe in a 3 player - but - there will be 2 players with neutrals in 3 player (or none) - (Or 1 player with 2 neutrals - but they won't have enough armies to capitalise on that I don't think...gimil wrote:A good point, although 3,4 (maybe 5) player games could still lead to a large advantage that may make you strong enought to make retaliation difficult? Maybe not?yeti_c wrote: I don't think being paired with a neutral castle is too big a deal - if someone is and they grow strong - they'll just get picked on by someone else...

Ok I can live with that. If his neutral thing isn't an issue then we can stick with not using starting positions.yeti_c wrote:Maybe in a 3 player - but - there will be 2 players with neutrals in 3 player (or none) - (Or 1 player with 2 neutrals - but they won't have enough armies to capitalise on that I don't think...gimil wrote:A good point, although 3,4 (maybe 5) player games could still lead to a large advantage that may make you strong enought to make retaliation difficult? Maybe not?yeti_c wrote: I don't think being paired with a neutral castle is too big a deal - if someone is and they grow strong - they'll just get picked on by someone else...
I'm not sure it's an issue...
C.
Top Score:2403natty_dread wrote:I was wrong
It's a nice idea but its not really the feudal way. and with the XML features we have it wouldn't really be possible without starting positions, which we have agree we won't be using.Geger wrote:Hey... I have an idea :
Beside in the Castle everybody start with 1 (or 2) extra region(s) outside. I think this will add more variations to the games
Top Score:2403natty_dread wrote:I was wrong
2 castles each. with the last 4 neutral. Good to see you back ianiancanton wrote:what is our current preference for the number of starting castles each in 1v1?
ian.
Top Score:2403natty_dread wrote:I was wrong
t-o-m wrote:
One thing that ive already told you, i dont like the way that there's only one entrance to each castle
Thanks Ian. I will do that for youiancanton wrote:imperial dynasty castle appears to have a unique advantage: it is one kingdom territory closer to the nearest village, xeu, than anyone else. this affects barbarian's chances negatively, since xeu is the closest village to barbarian castle. the other three villages are each contested by two equidistant castles.
imperial dynasty castle's edge can be removed by expanding the area of id2 and id4, so that id3 no longer adjoins id7.
other than the above, the arrangement of the kingdoms looks more symmetrical than in the original feudal war map.
ian.
Top Score:2403natty_dread wrote:I was wrong

Top Score:2403natty_dread wrote:I was wrong
Shouldn't be to much of an issue. there is still plenty of single terrs to build on to gain some extra bonus.iancanton wrote:that looks better! now i'm trying to think of a method to minimise the handicap to anyone who has the bad luck to start with both might and feudal, which are a long way from the three southern villages.
Top Score:2403natty_dread wrote:I was wrong
I agree. Someone with Might and Feudal would be guaranteed a village, and could defend it all with two territories.gimil wrote:Shouldn't be to much of an issue. there is still plenty of single terrs to build on to gain some extra bonus.iancanton wrote:that looks better! now i'm trying to think of a method to minimise the handicap to anyone who has the bad luck to start with both might and feudal, which are a long way from the three southern villages.
these are valid points, therefore i am happy to accept the territory layout as it stands. i'd like to see might and feudal brought more into the game by reducing the starting neutrals on tri 12 and ga'h 8 to 2 each, which will also bring rebel and warlords closer to tri. this helps might, feudal, rebel and warlords slightly, which compensates for them being further from the xeu bonus than the other 4 castles are.InkL0sed wrote:I agree. Someone with Might and Feudal would be guaranteed a village, and could defend it all with two territories.gimil wrote:Shouldn't be to much of an issue. there is still plenty of single terrs to build on to gain some extra bonus.iancanton wrote:that looks better! now i'm trying to think of a method to minimise the handicap to anyone who has the bad luck to start with both might and feudal, which are a long way from the three southern villages.
Top Score:2403natty_dread wrote:I was wrong
Top Score:2403natty_dread wrote:I was wrong
