The 3rd Dimension?

zorba_ca · Post by **zorba_ca** » Sun Apr 09, 2006 9:49 pm

One suggestion to keep improving the complexity and challenge of our maps is to possibly include territorial advantages.

I don't know how feasible this would be on the programming end, but it would be very cool if holding certain territories in the mountains offered that player an attacking and defending advantage (but perhaps a fortifying disadvantage).

For example, I was thinking that if one holds, say, Nepal in the Asia map, they would be afforded a the regular number of dice +1 (so attacking 5-1, they would get 4 dice! and defending 7-2 they would get 3 dice).

As well, in a one-fortification game, perhaps the territory can only be fortified by a maximum of one half of the armies in the adjacent territory with the largest force.

Hoff · Post by **Hoff** » Tue Apr 11, 2006 12:28 am

I second that, that would be interesting. Maybe not on all the maps tho.

Blitzkreig · Post by **Blitzkreig** » Tue Apr 11, 2006 10:43 am

I see how this could be interesting but it would drastically change the game tactics. Someone might just sit on one of those territories and keep putting men on it.

qeee1 · Post by **qeee1** » Wed Apr 12, 2006 2:59 pm

When I first saw this I thought what you meant was to have two or three different map screens, and the ability to attack up and down as well as accross... (Think a rubix cube with a square in the centre too, where you're able to attack all adjacent squares, so that's 6 attack routes for the centre square, 3 for the corner squares etc.). Just thought I'd throw that out there, don't think it would work unless done extremely well, but yeah.

Anyway your suggestion is interesting, be worried about what blitzkreig said though.

wolfman · Post by **wolfman** » Sat May 06, 2006 3:41 pm

I think it would be a worthy cause!

HighBorn · Post by **HighBorn** » Sat May 06, 2006 5:41 pm

i would love it.. now will sombody do it??

kingwaffles · Post by **kingwaffles** » Sat May 06, 2006 6:47 pm

I think it would be really cool but how would the programming work?

Jota · Post by **Jota** » Sat May 06, 2006 7:27 pm

I don't think any special programming would be needed. The trouble would be with figuring out how to clearly represent everything with a single, static map image.

kingwaffles · Post by **kingwaffles** » Sat May 06, 2006 9:28 pm

Maybe you're right about the programming bit, I just think that there isn't really anywhere in the XML to add that sort of thing... Who knows.. I don't really know what I'm talking about.
As for the image, you could jsut use like a little castle or a mountain or something then stick it in the key explaining what it does.

wacicha · Post by **wacicha** » Sat May 06, 2006 10:24 pm

maybe do what they do on the great china wall one way up to the mountain defense but mountain can attack all sides down

Twill · Post by **Twill** » Sun May 07, 2006 12:48 am

The problem would be with the dice probabilities and the way they are rolled.

We all know that the dice are pulled from a randomly generated set of numbers, if this were to happen, it would fundamentally change that list, and/or add another 2 (one for the 4 dice attack and one for the 3 defense)

The other issue is that 3 on 3 with defenders winning ties would leave the probabilities of attacker winning slim to none. I wouldnt know how to calculate the exact percentages, but I'm pretty sure 3 dice on 3 dice would suck for the attacker. (based on 2 dice against 2 dice, it would be close to or greater than 50% chance that the attacker would lose 3 armies per roll)

As Blitzkreig pointed out, it would probably lead to certain fortress countries which are essentially undefeatable.

That being said, interesting idea.

Twill

Jota · Post by **Jota** » Sun May 07, 2006 1:00 am

Whoops, please totally ignore my comment above. I had this thread mixed up with another one when I posted it.