Conquer Club

Yeah, commanders all the way for me - for 3 reasons:

• Wicked gameplay
  To fit the revolutionary battle situation
  To provide a continuity element to the map pack

Just wondering if, gameplay-wise it might be better to have the cities / rural regions bordering the working class and middle class support (but they can still attack commanders perhaps)? Otherwise players might build on their commanders for turn after turn then have a battle over these spots. Having to go through cities/countryside means they cant strike from their auto-deploy spots, forcing cleverer tactics and forting.

@Bruce - Well, I totally understand the point you're coming from as I like a good classic map as well. If the commanders were just regular territories, then yeah, they'd be a waste. But they're autodeploying heavy numbers to emphasize the role of a strong commander in a military or political movement. I mean, is it not founded on reality?

@Teflon... yes. I think I like that and will give it a moment to work out the specifics and how I expect it to work out.

So I've been hearing a lot of complaints about the map and that it might be riddled with too many choke points. When i designed the map, I positioned the commanders in such a way as to counter this. Yes, the island has a lot of chokepoints if it were a classic style map, but the idea I had to counter this was that with Commanders on both north and south sides of the island constantly autodeploying, it would make it much more difficult to snake up the island with the usual grab and hold strategy. Any thoughts on this? Does anyone concur?

Also, there has been suggestions that the commanders one way attack their respective popular supports... thoughts? I was thinking of maybe making the cities able to hit the middle class, seeing as that's where they'd be, and then letting the rural regions also hit the poor classes. This might open up the map a little more as well.

Industrial Helix wrote:So I've been hearing a lot of complaints about the map and that it might be riddled with too many choke points. When i designed the map, I positioned the commanders in such a way as to counter this. Yes, the island has a lot of chokepoints if it were a classic style map, but the idea I had to counter this was that with Commanders on both north and south sides of the island constantly autodeploying, it would make it much more difficult to snake up the island with the usual grab and hold strategy. Any thoughts on this? Does anyone concur?

Yeah, I concur, at first look the map appears to be choke-city but the commanders mean it certainly isn't. I don't see a choke or linear issue.

Industrial Helix wrote:Also, there has been suggestions that the commanders one way attack their respective popular supports... thoughts? I was thinking of maybe making the cities able to hit the middle class, seeing as that's where they'd be, and then letting the rural regions also hit the poor classes. This might open up the map a little more as well.

I agree - one-way attacks from cities / rural regions creates better gameplay than direct commander-support tow-way links. Players need to think more careful about positioning whereas commander-support links just mean deploying on commanders.

Keep going, this map is gonna be cool gameplay.

I agree with DJ Teflon on all accounts. Not really much else to say than what's already been said.

-Sully

Ok, at the suggestion of Evil Dimwit, I've made it so that no single land area can choke up the island. I figure, both sides were using small sized forces, so this is plausible that neither could choke up the island so easily. So Voilà:

Looks mighty fine, Helix, mighty fine... What happened to this though:

Industrial Helix wrote:Also, there has been suggestions that the commanders one way attack their respective popular supports... thoughts? I was thinking of maybe making the cities able to hit the middle class, seeing as that's where they'd be, and then letting the rural regions also hit the poor classes. This might open up the map a little more as well.

-Sully

I'm a tad hesitant to employ it. I find symbols somewhat difficult to make sense of on a map when they indicate gameplay options and this is the only route I can see working. Furthermore, if I made all the rural regions able to hit poor class support, then the map might become far too open for my tastes. I'm very much a take and hold game player and such openness in a map really goes against my instincts.

It's possible that this could still be adapted if the current map is too chokepointy.

Industrial Helix wrote:I'm a tad hesitant to employ it. I find symbols somewhat difficult to make sense of on a map when they indicate gameplay options and this is the only route I can see working. Furthermore, if I made all the rural regions able to hit poor class support, then the map might become far too open for my tastes. I'm very much a take and hold game player and such openness in a map really goes against my instincts.

It's possible that this could still be adapted if the current map is too chokepointy.

I think it's fine now, I was just wondering why you decided not to put it in or if you just forgot or something. I think it's ready for gameplay I think the chokepoint issue has been solved as best it can.

-Sully

what about mountains between Escambay and Yaguajay?

when I good understand - when you conquered any town on the "map" (Santiago) you can attack commander in "legend" (Lee). and than attack Che Guevara in "legend" and from Che Guevara region Las Tunas on the "map"?

Well, I think I will skip the mountains there for fear of choking things up again.

And you're reading the map correct. Think of it as Che's army breaks into Santiago and hangs the corrupt leader.

Alright, so gameplay concerns.... anyone?

Lets start with bonuses
1) I'm considering a raise on commanders to +2 autodeploy
2) The cities and land territories act differently... and as I look at it I realize it needs some changes to prevent starting advantages. Stay tuned.

Industrial Helix wrote:Alright, so gameplay concerns.... anyone?

Lets start with bonuses
1) I'm considering a raise on commanders to +2 autodeploy
2) The cities and land territories act differently... and as I look at it I realize it needs some changes to prevent starting advantages. Stay tuned.

I agree both times.

Looking at how WWII Poland plays, I'm wondering if the class support bonuses might be spilt (2 for each) - with 10 to take for hard-to-defend bonuses they may be avoided?

Plus, weren't the cities and rural areas going to border the class support so that players dont just stack on commanders?

I'm really hesitant to make the actual provinces border the class support because, though it would make sense, it just adds to the things about this map that aren't readily apparent. Plus, I'm worried it might make things too open. I hate open maps.

Industrial Helix wrote: I hate open maps.

you still have not mountains between Yaguajay and Escambay

I know but... I really don't want to make the map a chokehold there... I'll try it on for size.

Update... I change the bonus system around a tad. Let's presume all but the commanders start at random deployment at 2.

Yes, better.

What's the rationale behind the one-way being one-way?

Castro and his men were captured early on in the revolution and sent to Isla de la juventude, which was a prison island at the time. He then escaped to Mexico, met Ché, and took a boat to Guisa where he fought Batista again and retreated into Bayamo. The one way reflects the route he took, minus Mexico, plus it makes the east end of the island more vulnerable, which it was, than the west end.

Pretend the Teal numbers are random deployment and the white are neutrals.

Ah ok, a quick conversation with Evil dimwit made it apparent to me that since i'm using starting positions for the commanders, I won't be able to limit the actual territories to 2... so, they will be three like any other map. The question remains, should the cities continue to be neutral and should they be set at 2 or 3?

It's my opinion that if people can't tell how the game is going to start by looking exclusively at the image, they will not post. So here it is, everything you need to know about the gameplay in one image:

I'm thinking the cities should start with 3 neutral.

Are there only 15 starting land territories? That makes a big difference between 7- and 8-player games.
Then again, as it is with 2-3 player games each M-26-7 commander starts with 2 extra troops over the Republic commanders, and having 16 starting land territories would extend this disparity to 4-player games...