Battlefields of Valhalla Discussion Thread

[Freezie]

If I counted right that means Burial Marsh just got inducted into the BoV! Way to go Panopticon!

['Scaper94]

Originally Posted by nyys

Still Life with Marro by tannergx
I'm not a fan of the glyphs being on the high points of the map. No to review.

As a suggestion to tannergx: try putting the glyphs in the swamp water next to the Hive. That might make the map a bit more melee-friendly.

[Dignan]

Maps pending acceptance for review:

Still life with Marro by tannergx

The map looks interesting and I love the name, but I simply can't overlook glyphs on height as they are positioned. It's just asking for trouble. NO to review.

Yea though I walk... by Typhoon2222

This looks pretty good. YES to review.

[tannergx]

Originally Posted by 'Scaper94

As a suggestion to tannergx: try putting the glyphs in the swamp water next to the Hive. That might make the map a bit more melee-friendly.

Hi 'Scaper94, "Still Life.." didn't start out as a tourney map... I built it for some family friends when I gave their son a Swarm and a Ticalla set last Christmas. So it was largely an experiment in building a map with 2 pretty limited sets. I was really surprised to see Michigan pick it up for their tourney, and even more surprised when ZB nominated it. Not that it's a bad map, I just didn't expect to see it get used. And I'm pleased that it worked out as well as it did.

Regarding glyph placement, the map originally did not have glyphs at all. But with the swamp route essentially low ground to all others, I found ranged units were happy to set up and camp on the Level 2 rock, sand and grass tiles, using the jungle terrain. There was no rush to the hills unless range fought against range. So I used the glyphs to reward advancement, and really to give melee armies a bonus for taking the hills enroute to engaging a ranged opponent.

I asked ZB about the glyphs they used at the Michigan tourney, and they used 2 low-power power glyphs (Dagma and Kelda). I think that's the key - low-power power glyphs or treasure glyphs. Regarding placement on low ground near the Hive, with power glyphs your figures have to stop, so they would create choke points in an already tight spot.

I know power glyphs on high-ground is in general a no-no - you don't want to juice up a ranged pod that is already camped on high ground. But I'm not sure the same rule should apply to treasure glyphs for example or even the weaker power glyphs. At some point, melee armies should get some benefit for storming the hill other than just to engage their ranged opponent.

Sorry for the verbose response... just wanted to get my thoughts down. And this isn't an appeal directed at nyys' and Dignan's decisions; I'm fine with whatever the BOV group decides.

Cheers,

~tgx

[rednax]

Actually at the tournament, we didn't use glyphs at all for the map. At least I don't think we did.

~Rednax

[Riggler]

I vote Yes to review Fire Swamp and Yeah Though I Walk
I vote No to review Still Life with Marro

Updated 12/27/10
Logged Dignan's No to accept Dragon's Gultch
Logged nyys Yes to accept Burial Marsh and Black Gold and no to accept Trailblazer
Removed Trailblazer as it could not pass
Added Still Life and Yeah Though I Walk to pending review
Logged 1Mmirg's Ytr on Still Life adn Yeah Though I Walk
Logged Riggler's Yes to induct Burial Marsh
Logged nyys Ntr Still Life and Ytr Yeah Though I Walk
Logged 1Mmirg's Yes to accept Buiral Marsh
Removed Burial Marsh as it is INDUCTED to the BOV
Logged Dignan's Ntr Still Life and Ytr Yeah Though I Walk
Logged Riggler's Ytr Fire Swamp and Yeah Though I Walk and Ntr Still Life with Marro
Removed Still Life with Marro from pending review
Moved Yeah Though I Walk to under review

Maps pending acceptance for review:
Fire Swamp by Killercactus
YES = 3 (1Mmirg, Dignan, Riggler) ; NO = 0 ; Pending = 3 (nyys,Lonewolf, Matthias Maccabeus,)

Maps currently being reviewed:
Dragon's Gultch by BiggaBullfrog
YES = 0 ; NO = 1 (Dignan) ; Pending = 5 (1Mmirg,Riggler, Lonewolf, Matthias Maccabeus, nyys)

Black Gold by Panopticon
YES = 1 (nyys) ; NO = 0 ; Pending = 5 (1Mmirg, Dignan, Riggler, Lonewolf, Matthias Maccabeus)

Shrine of Mo-Ne-Ca by tannergx
YES = 0 ; NO = 0 ; Pending = 6 (1Mmirg, Dignan, Riggler, Lonewolf, Matthias Maccabeus, nyys)

Jack of Spades by Gamebear
YES = 1 (Matthias Maccabeus) ; NO = 0 ; Pending = 5 (1Mmirg, Dignan, Riggler, Lonewolf, nyys)

Jungle of the Ancients by Angear
YES = 0 ; NO = 0 ; Pending = 6 (1Mmirg, Dignan, Riggler, Lonewolf, Matthias Maccabeus, nyys)

Eggbeater by dok
YES = 0 ; NO = 0 ; Pending = 6 (1Mmirg, Dignan, Riggler, Lonewolf, Matthias Maccabeus, nyys)

Yeah Though I Walk by Typhon222
YES = 0 ; NO = 0 ; Pending = 6 (1Mmirg, Dignan, Riggler, Lonewolf, Matthias Maccabeus, nyys)

[1Mmirg]

Thank you for the update, Riggler. I've now updated the first page.

I've had the chance to play several games on Jack of Spades and am impressed with the play. I love the way the shadows and jungle combine near the high points and the way the high points have sufficient height variance as well.

It is possible to rocked back to your start zone and that can be painful, but it is quite rare and unless you are stuck at the back of the start area, you can usually come up, using cover/shadows and come back. A very solid map that plays bigger than it looks (especially if valuable glyphs are in play).

I have to say that I'm bugged by the aesthetics (the Marvel warehouse base, the Marvel tiles, and the shadow bases from the rock outcroppings just don't look all that good, sadly), but given what this map is working with, I'm impressed. A very solid build for some of the most available sets currently.

I vote YES to induct Jack of Spades.

(And now I have my sets free to build the double BftU maps. Can't wait to try some of those!)

[rym]

Just a curiousity, but I've got a question that has bugged me for sometime. I notice that in a lot of you guys' reviews, the aesthetics of the map tend to bother you somewhat, and in some cases, some maps bother you more than others.

If that's the case, then why would you vote a map into the BoV? It seems that the BoV was designed to be the best of the best, which I - correctly or incorrectly - take to mean gameplay, use of terrain, overall balance, and aesthetics.

I'm not trying to be nitpicky, I'm just curious as to why you guys have voted yes on some maps when it was obvious the aesthetics bothered you.

It seems (though I haven't checked to confirm this), that more maps are making into the BoV than before. Perhaps it's an indication of the improving skills of the cartographers out there, but it seems like maybe the best of the best standard isn't being adhered tothe way it should be and some maps are making it in with 3 of the 4 categories being enforced instead of all 4.

Again, I'm just curious, and I'm certainly not trying to be a d-bag or anything, just looking to understand.

[1Mmirg]

Well, I'll answer for myself and using Jack of Spades as an example. I think the map is beautiful and uses pieces very well. The aesthetics here are related to the pieces themselves. The Marvel warehouse base, the D&D stalagmite bases, even the normal terrain in the Marvel set are, imo, a bit ugly. The flat colors of the Marvel tiles bug me, simple as that. However, I don't feel like a map should (a) never have these pieces in them or (b) always have to hide them. That just seems unfair.

So, the case of a map like Jack of Spades, I'm looking to see how well the pieces are used and allowing for a little bit of "this is a hard set of tiles to work with" in my judging--i.e. I feel like Jack of Spades is a best of the best that I've ever seen in terms of using Marvel effectively.

And, finally, the map simply makes up for any discrepancy in aesthetics in its really fun play and strong balance. The maps doubling of defense bonuses, glyphs inside "canals," and movement tactics make up for any oddities in aesthetics.

(And, of course, some judges will put more on aesthetics than others. I put a fair amount on it, but perhaps not as much as some other judges--and I definitely don't consider it the most significant of our criteria. For me, Balance is the one that I put the most pressure on, then Diversity of Play, and then Aesthetics--though if a map fails in any of those areas, it's gone, no question, just gone.)

-----

As to the issue of whether more maps are making it in or not, I haven't run the numbers. I think there was a lull a bit ago where things slowed down, but I don't think our current rate of acceptance is extraordinary or without precedence.

Either way, I do think that mapmakers are getting better and I think the amount and variety of sets has increased.

I am personally pleased to see the BoV growing and feel strongly that all recent admissions are at the same level as the earliest submissions as well (in general, of course, one or two maps may really stand out both then and now). And I'm glad to see the BoV offering more solid tourney choices. There is a real nice range of excellent maps available now. And I enjoy them all.

Hope that helps a bit to pull back the curtain, as it were. Thanks for asking, rym .

[nyys]

I'm not sure I've given a yes vote to a map that has bothered me aesthetically, so I'll defer to the other judges for this one.

[lonewolf]

Yes to review Fire Swamp.

[BiggaBullfrog]

If it's okay, I'd like to withdraw Dragon's Gultch from review. Comments from Dignan's review and suggestions from UtahScott have led to me tinkering with the map, and I'm coming up with what I think is a much better map, and hopefully if people like the new version, it will be nominated in the old one's place. My thanks to Dignan and any other judges who may have/be testing it (and if there are any more comments, I'd still love to hear them), but with a better map in the works, I don't think I'll make the judges waste their time on the original.