Workshop Thread

[Sir Heroscape]

Originally Posted by Nomad

I am still for Marsh Road. The changes look good. So, this means we get to play-test for review with three votes? We still need one more yes to review for Obsidian Wastes, pending improvement.

Correct. Lost Road Marsh will now be under review and Obsidian Wastes is pending until we get another vote.

[Leaf_It]

@BiggaBullfrog I have been trying to figure out how to rework Obsidian Wastes to remove the 2nd layer as you suggested, and I just can't find a way to make it work with the flat 3rd layer that now becomes the second. When I envision reworks for maps I look at their play areas as all the same terrain to focus more on the game play than anything else. When I do that after removing the 2nd layer, I'm left with an incredibly flat map that doesn't look fun to play on. It feels so bland and flat that I really can't help but hate it, and it doesn't feel like a map I would want to make. Since that approach wasn't working, I focused on something else you said, to the effect of making the start zones more intuitive. I moved them closer together, and made their shape very uniform and easy to identify. In the process I rearranged a number of hexes, and I feel that this made enough a difference to justify asking you to take a second look.

What do you think?

[Sir Heroscape]

I like the rework. I definitely will make for a bit of a bloodbath as units can now enter and develop into the center with ease. I don't have much to say. I'm happy with it. When you're ready to resubmit it again for consideration, I think I'd upvote it, unless someone pointed out a blaring issue or if you changed it again. But I like it.

[BiggaBullfrog]

Originally Posted by Leaf_It

@BiggaBullfrog I have been trying to figure out how to rework Obsidian Wastes to remove the 2nd layer as you suggested, and I just can't find a way to make it work with the flat 3rd layer that now becomes the second. When I envision reworks for maps I look at their play areas as all the same terrain to focus more on the game play than anything else. When I do that after removing the 2nd layer, I'm left with an incredibly flat map that doesn't look fun to play on. It feels so bland and flat that I really can't help but hate it, and it doesn't feel like a map I would want to make. Since that approach wasn't working, I focused on something else you said, to the effect of making the start zones more intuitive. I moved them closer together, and made their shape very uniform and easy to identify. In the process I rearranged a number of hexes, and I feel that this made enough a difference to justify asking you to take a second look.

What do you think?

Warning: this will be a longer post. And I apologize because I meant to talk to you more about it over the weekend, but as we both found out, I get bad at processing information at 3 am. But I do want to take some time to better articulate my thoughts on the map, especially because you've been putting so much work into it (which is awesome!). I really hope you (and other people reading) can see my point of view with my concerns (even if you disagree) and realize I'm not just trying to be a confrontational dirtbag. It's just that the more I've thought about it, this is what my stance on this map (and tournament maps in general) has become.

First off, let me say that I really like the new position of the ruins. I think that's going to help melee move up under cover a lot more easily without being a road block.

Next: yes, if you take out the second layer it's going to be a really flat map. I wasn't clear enough to show that wasn't my suggestion. I was merely pointing out that if you do take away the second layer the map doesn't lose very much because the third level is so flat. The flaw here (in my eyes) isn't that the second layer is there, just that it isn't doing anything to add to the map. Usually you want each level in a map to contribute somehow, but the second layer is just a speed bump on the way to level 3, if that makes sense.

My main concern with the map is that it's very bland strategically. Right now it's about as straightforward as you can get: move up, attack. Even taking height isn't as much as a battle because it's all lava up there, so you take it during the round, hop off at the end, hop back on during. Also, most of the height (the four corners) only really benefits ranged units who can sit up there and shoot across the field easily with height on everything else. Yes, the lava keeps them from doing it too comfortably, which is good, but it's just not compelling in a strategic sense.

There also isn't really high ground to aid a melee battle, so that will mostly comprise of melee units smacking each other on the flat areas between the lava hills (and there is a ton of flat area there). No clever maneuvering to gain an advantage, just a straight up smack down. (Huh, straight up smack down. I really like that phrase now.)

The glyphs are a straight shot from the start zones and are right at the edges of the battlefield. The don't really draw attention anywhere, it's all just going to be ... there. The map isn't forcing any decisions, and that's my biggest issue. No compelling pathing, no interesting interactions between armies, just a clash of enemies hoping to roll better dice.

Now, that's not necessarily a bad thing if that's what you're going for. This could be a great map if you just want to have big armies clash, and I'd be all for that. But when I'm looking for a tournament map, I want something that people are going to look at and think "Oh man, I want to play on that one. I hope I get pulled for it." This map doesn't have that hype factor that I'm looking for.

Is it balanced? Probably. It sure looks pretty balanced. Does it look cool? I mean, it looks flat, but I still love the aesthetic of using asphalt as obsidian. But will it provide the exciting and strategic gameplay that I feel should be included in a tournament map? In my honest opinion, no, I don't think so. And hopefully you can see why that's how I feel (again, even if you disagree).

So, now that I've hammered on that, what would I do to improve it? First, I would love some height variations. For example: I said level two isn't contributing right now. Well, that would change if you made a rivet that went from side to side (glyph to glyph or start zone to start zone, I don't care) to speed up movement. Units could charge along level 2 without having to climb up to 3. That takes level 2 from "speed bump" to "shortcut." Then you could take some of the hexes that the rivet freed up to add a bit of height variation to the flatter areas of level 3 (which will be less now that the rivet is there). I wouldn't throw in a ton, but just enough to compliment the lava high ground. The most powerful high spots should still be lava so that they come with risk, but a few smaller spots to add excitement to melee engagements will be welcome. (Kind of like the pockets of height you have next to the central lava - a couple more of those). In an ideal world, you would also be able to help force more compelling pathing by throwing in more pockets of molten lava, but let's not get ahead of ourselves; that could be too ambitious.

But that's just an example of what I personally would do. Maybe you would do it differently. I would love to see that too. Maybe you want to go back to the original and make a hybrid between this and that. I think that could work great. That one had some good, compelling decisions it prompted. It's just that the movement to make them took too long and melee got shot to bits. Or maybe you just want to scrap it and redo the whole thing. That's awesome too. That's my usual approach when my maps don't work. There's no one right way. What matters is that you get there. And if you're that guy who worked and worked to get Matlis Tez into SoV review, then I'm pretty sure you can do anything.

Now, disclaimer: this is all my very personal opinion. It's entirely possible that I'm the only one who sees the map this way. And I'd be fine with that. That's why we have a panel of judges, so that I can't just be a blowhard who holds up maps. If the other judges like the map (and Sir H has already said he does) then they can outvote me and we'll review it for balance, and I would have no problem with that because they're awesome mapmakers with great insights. They see things that I don't, and if they all tell me I've got it wrong here, then I'll believe them 100%. If they do agree with me, then we're still on your side and want to see the map succeed. I personally think it has great potential.

You can also disagree with me and tell me why. I'm fine with that too and would be open to it.

So TL;DR: There's very very little "bad" with the map right now, but, IMO, right now there isn't enough "good" or "awesome" or what have you. Hopefully what I said makes sense, and if not I'll try to clarify further.

[Sir Heroscape]

@BiggaBullfrog , compelling argument and really good explanation of your points and insight on this map. I've been swayed on this one. I think my initial thoughts were too focused on this maps balance, which it probably has just fine. But your point about the strategic usefulness of this map is the clincher here. I have to agree, that a map should have a "wow" factor that gets people thinking strategically and excited about it. While this map looks nice enough and seems pretty balanced, I agree with your point that it just needs more "good" or "awesome".

I'd also like to see changes made to this current version before it's submitted for review.

[Nomad]

ARV judges - I know it is a busy time, but please consider a rework of my map, Thaeberian Wellsprings. The original map won the public vote in the Uncharted Wellsprings contest, but failed to gain the tournament worthy designation from ARV.

Thaeberian Wellsprings v2 addresses the concerns of the judges as follows:
- The start zones have been pushed forward toward the center of the map by one space by eliminating the drop into ice.
- The glaciers and area outside of the start zones have been rotated and reworked to enable armies to get out of their start zones faster.
- The valley in the middle of the map has been reduced in size and it is now easier to get side-to-side on the map.
- A third game scenario with different glyphs is provided to promote action in the valley. I am not sure if I prefer the old glyph choice or the new one, but they are both in the scenarios on the download.
- The glyph plateaus on each side of the map has been reworked to allow quicker and more balanced access from the start zones.
- I have six play tests on the map and I'm pleased with the results.

Thaeberian Wellspring v2



Thank you for your consideration.

[Sir Heroscape]

I like the changes. to review.

[BiggaBullfrog]

Looks like a good reworking, @Nomad . I'll vote to review it.

[superfrog]

I must say I'm disappointed that neither of my maps made the top 10. I think several of the maps in the top 10 are very good, but both of my maps are miles better than my last submission, Cracked, which finished rather well in the last competition.

Anyway.

Originally Posted by superfrog

Bloodred River Narrows build instructions. It uses 1 RoTV, 1 RttFF, and 1 TT, with Valda and Wannok.

From the Compendium:
Unusually warm currents from Volcarren flow through the Bloodred River, separating the frozen wasteland from the temperate forest as if a line were drawn between them. On one side: glaciers. On the other side: forests. The warriors who inhabit the territories on both sides of the bridge have been feuding over the land that surrounds the Bloodred River for centuries. Many battles are so fierce that the river becomes a dark red channel that flows back into the sea, warning others to stay away. Every year the Armies get larger and the battles more fierce. It seems that the Bloodred River shall forever live up to its name. The Bloodred River never freezes completely. Crossing the river over the thin ice is dangerous but necessary, as an attack from the bridge is always met with an equally fierce defense. The territories owned by the feuding warriors surrounding the Bloodred River is constantly changing; but it is the bridge that is the symbolic prize possession of battle, even though it serves no useful purpose other than bragging rights and exaggerated stories at the end of battle.

I'd like to submit this for consideration. I've found it to play very well in my games on it.

[Sheep]

I'd just like to know how Shadows over Bleakwoode didn't make it. I know you guys were saying there were a lot of strong submissions so was it a matter of no room in the inn or was there a design flaw? Thanks guys!

[Shurrig]

I'd like to submit my map, Forgotten Forest Road for workshopping! I like this map and would really like to see it deemed as tournament worthy; the few times I played on it made it seem pretty balanced to me, but I'd like some more feedback on what I should do to make it more competitive.


https://drive.google.com/file/d/1FDy...ew?usp=sharing

[Nomad]

I understand your disappointment @superfrog and @heroscaper2010 . We had some very tough decisions to make. There were so many strong submissions . . . and we had to narrow it down to 10 maps. There was talk of expanding the number of maps, but realistically we couldn't play test that many maps in a reasonable amount of time. For many maps that didn't make the top 10, a tweak or two is all that may be needed. I will get to specific workshop suggestions as time permits.