Conquer Club

• • • • • • Final Forge

---The Arms Race Map has reached the ‘Final Forge’ Stage. I've revived this thread from the pits of the Foundry Furnace (okay, maybe not) and have examined the contents. Nearly every major concern has been addressed. If there are any other current concerns, please make your voice heard. If after a reasonable amount of time there has not been any objection or protest, the map will be deemed finished with the 'Foundry Brand' of approval and will be submitted for live play. As long as there is still discussion or posts that have yet to be commented on, the map will remain in Final Forge until said discussion has reached the conclusion that the map has reached its final and polished version.

Post questions and concerns if any.

• • • • • • 

--Andy

(Got it right this time.)


--Andy

Woohoo - congrats Mibster & Widow...

C.

PS - is the animated Radar coming back for the final version?

yeti_c wrote:PS - is the animated Radar coming back for the final version?

On behalf of everyone here using crappy computers, I hope not. It looks great the way it is, no need to gussy it up.

Oh, and congrats WM n' mibi. You guys are like the Voltron of the foundry.

I don't think the legend is clear enough as to which territories have the decay on them. Maybe this is because you haven't decided yet. I think it might be clearer if you had text beside the missile explaining the decay, like you have with the "one way attacks up the missile".

Incandenza wrote:

yeti_c wrote:PS - is the animated Radar coming back for the final version?

On behalf of everyone here using crappy computers, I hope not. It looks great the way it is, no need to gussy it up.

Oh, and congrats WM n' mibi. You guys are like the Voltron of the foundry.

Thanks. And I agree with having no animation. The map does not need it. It will only lower graphic quality and annoy players.

WM

I will get to the other issues later.
-Legend understandability / readability
-Missile Launch Bombardment (what it can and can't)

I am busy tonight.

WM

I'm lazy so I haven't read any posts, but how does usa attack ussr?

Top Dog wrote:I'm lazy so I haven't read any posts, but how does usa attack ussr?

Instructions are on the map.

A little reading never hurt anyone. Don't be lazy.

OK here is V11

Changes:
-President is now Head of State
-Edited legend
-color coded the instructions for better readability
-used symbols instead of words for spy bombardment
-added spies attack spies. This allows the maps to be linked slightly. That way the maps can never be unwinable (see next fix)
-MISSILE LAUNCH can bombard foreign territories (NOT MISSILE)
-better explained decay on missile launch

The President +2 in the bonuses needs to change to Head of State too.

Looking good btw.

No they don't... both America and Russia have presidents..

MrBenn wrote:No they don't... both America and Russia have presidents..

The point is that President has been changed everywhere except on the legend. It's inconsistent.

That will teach me not to read the last few posts

Ogrecrusher is right - the changes are inconsistent; but I'm not sure that the Presidents needed to be renamed. Either way, as long as the legend matches the map, I'll be happy!

OK. I have been thinking about this for a while and I have found an issue.

Right now I changed the legend and have spies able to attack spies. The problem with this is that if you get +25 bonus, you don't actually need to launch an attack with the missile. You could just put those on the spy and attack, THAT IS BAD.

So I will be taking that back out. Spies will not be able to ATTACK spies.

But then here is the next issue. Currently the missiles cannot attack the other missile. But if that is the case the game will never end. But it does not make sense to have a missile attack another missile.

So what do we do?
Requirements:

• 1) USA cannot directly attack and conquer territories of the USSR (and vice versa)
  2) Missiles should not be able to attack other missiles.
  3) The game should be won by NUKING the other player to death.
  4) The missiles need to be setup so that a player cannot slowly stockpile armies on the warhead and then move them to missile launch the next turn
  5) Players must not be able to "hide" on the missile terriroties. They must be able to be killed

Solutions:

• 1) Spies are the only way (other than missiles) to affect eh number of armies in the opposing country. Thus once a player is eliminated from either the USA or USSR, they will not be able to occupy a territory in that country the rest of the game.
  REQ. #1 CHECK
  2) Easy they can't
  REQ. #2 CHECK
  3) The only way to win once you are off of one of the countries is to build up and NUKE the others in the opposing territory. (As long as there is no one on the other missile)
  REQ. #3 CHECK
  4) The missile launch is set to decay, always keeping 1 player army there once it has been conquered once. This causes a "wall" that a player cannot get past. If the fort all of there armies to teh warhead, the are usless because the next turn they are trapped by the single armies on missile launch. Or if the fort to missile launch , the decay kills all of them.
  REQ. #4 CHECK
  5) Thi sone is tricky
  -If we add decay to the missiles it still allows a single army to exist and thus keeps a player in the game.
  -If we have respawning neutrals, Then a player would never be able to get the +25 bonus because it is a requirement to hold the entire missile to get it.
  -If we changed the requirements for getting the +25, then every time a player got it they would need to attack back up the missile and hope they don't lose to many armies so they can still bombard. Plus that takes some of the fun out of the game. You would never see the missile slowly building.
  REQ. #5 PROBLEM
  SO HERE IS MY SUGGESTION.
  Spies can also attack opposing teams missile territories and missile launch.
  It is the only way I can see, that the countries are still separated but we don't have missile attacking each other.

Thoughts? Here is the map so it is easier to read an d look over.

make a missle defense system?

ooo how about a satellite that attacks the nukes (not in keeping with cold wart but still trying help here)

I don't necessarily think that it's is a bad thing that spies can directly attack spies, as it's a nice approximation of turning an enemy spy into a double agent and using that agent to infiltrate the enemy government. But I get why you wouldn't want them to be able to, as it kinda fucks up your gameplay concept.

I suppose a potential solution would be to allow spies to conquer spies but not allow spies to conquer "normal" terits. They'd still be able to bombard the denoted enemy terits, of course.

As far as the missile problem, have the spies be able to bombard (rather than simply attack) enemy missile territories, so it's more like sabotage than conquest. Plus why not make the +25 autodeploy in missile launch?

On a different subject, I wonder if anyone's going to go to the effort of attacking the bunkers. A +2 autodeploy ain't bad, I guess, but you won't be able to build up an army then fort it to missile launch, and in a chained or adjacent forts game, the bunkers will be somewhat less than useful. Maybe they should start with only 1 neutral, and put 3 neutrals on the important land-based terits (spy, head of state, etc) that do considerably more than just autodeploy.

I was going to suggest the autodeploy, but I don't think the XML allows for a continent to only be deployed on 1 territory.

legend says president but map says head of state on both countries

actually I think the missile HAS to be able to attack the other missile.

Let's say I ONLY own the head of state, launch codes and the missile. I bombard my opponent so he only has the missile. But, now I have to take over his missile. I'm not able to do it this turn because I need to get to my spy or however you set it up.

Now, my opponent uses his turn and has X armies on a missile territory. He takes over the missile launch territory and bombards my codes and head of state. Now we both only hold missile territories.


I believe this will play out no matter how you do it unless the missiles can attack each other.

I like the idea of the spies being able to sabotage the missiles...

Incandenza wrote:On a different subject, I wonder if anyone's going to go to the effort of attacking the bunkers. A +2 autodeploy ain't bad, I guess, but you won't be able to build up an army then fort it to missile launch, and in a chained or adjacent forts game, the bunkers will be somewhat less than useful.

The bunkers are designed to "build up" to protect from a missile launch. It is less appealing for the attacker to waste 25 armies trying to kill the bunker with 12 than it is to kill the president or other vital areas. Then the bunker becomes more of an army depot and can slowly move it troops out while maintaining it own protection.

Originally the bunkers were safe from NUKES but we had the same problem we currently have with the missile, how do we kill them.

WM

edbeard wrote:actually I think the missile HAS to be able to attack the other missile.

Let's say I ONLY own the head of state, launch codes and the missile. I bombard my opponent so he only has the missile. But, now I have to take over his missile. I'm not able to do it this turn because I need to get to my spy or however you set it up.

Now, my opponent uses his turn and has X armies on a missile territory. He takes over the missile launch territory and bombards my codes and head of state. Now we both only hold missile territories.


I believe this will play out no matter how you do it unless the missiles can attack each other.

OK. I see your point and it makes sense. I don't like it but I can't se another way around it.

Legend will read
<Spies can bombard foreign: symbols
<Silos can attack the launch platform of same countries missile
<Missile launch: can bombard any foreign territory
<a players missile launch armies decay to 1 at start of turn.

And I will turn the Head of State back to president

WM

How about if the spies can bombard either missile, and couldn't be bombarded by them... this would add to the "whose side are the spies really on?" element of the game.

I haven't thought through the impact this might have on gameplay, but am puttng the suggestion out there

MrBenn wrote:How about if the spies can bombard either missile, and couldn't be bombarded by them... this would add to the "whose side are the spies really on?" element of the game.

I haven't thought through the impact this might have on gameplay, but am puttng the suggestion out there

The issue comes in when after a NUKE, the only territories left occupied are missiles. Players are stuck.

I think missiles attacking missiles is the only way.

WM