Wargrounds of Scape (WoS) - discussion thread

[1Mmirg]

Welcome BiggaBullfrog! We are more complete now than ever. #froglife

[BiggaBullfrog]

Thanks for having me, WoS! I’m excited to be on board and helping out!

Originally Posted by capsocrates

Hmm, looks to me like a scheme to get more Flash_19 maps into WoS...

can't say I'll complain!

I cannot confirm or deny the receiving of any bribes from Flash.

Originally Posted by superfrog

Been a hard couple hours for me without Bigga alongside me on a judging panel. Glad that ordeal is over.

Missed you too, fellow frog!

[superfrog]

I thought for sure that post was going to be some votes already…

[dok]

Ruined City by Leaf_It



I think this map does some really interesting things and I like it quite a bit. I enjoy the abundant intermediate height that gives you lots of places to set up and angles to attack from. The LoS blockers are pretty solid: the middle of the map does have some long sight lines, but the road shortens the approach there. Overall the road layout works very well - I thought I'd want the road to do a better job reaching the glyph areas, but I didn't really miss that (as long as the glyphs themselves provided some gravity).

I have one main issue with this map, and one minor one that I feel like I have to mention. I'll start with the main one: the proximity of the startzones. I kind of like maps that force you to react to your opponents quickly, but this map might take that to a bit too much of an extreme. Plenty of ranged figures can hit your startzone on turn one, and most melee figures can be on top of your startzone on turn 2. Honestly even just one or two more spaces of separation would make a big difference here. I realize this would require an extensive re-work and might rob some of the fun from the dynamic middle of the map, but I think it's probably needed.

The minor issue is one that is much more easily resolved, but one I feel I need to mention. The startzone colorings are pretty confusing. I get questions about startzones all the time when I run tournaments, and having to explain "it's grass and asphalt over there, and grass and concrete over there, but be careful because that adjacent concrete is not startzone" is a bit much. "Grass and everything behind it" is easy.

Anyway, solid map, but from me.

[BiggaBullfrog]

Well superfrog's been expecting some takes from me for nigh on a couple of days now, and there are some maps in the queue that I've got a lot of experience with that I feel comfortable putting votes down on. I'll start by throwing out my two most obvious votes.

Hellsgate by @mad_wookiee


Hellsgate was a go to map for some early year Utah and Idaho events, so I've got a lot of experience on it from my own games as well as watching others. The map looks awesome on the table, but there are some areas where I feel it falls short.

The glyphs play pretty yours/mine. mad_wookiee does a really good job with pathing and development to make it close, but due to the different start zone sizes it's always ended up being easier to go for the right side glyph in my experience.

The ruins on this map tend to encourage staring contests. They're great for protecting developing figures, but once you've gotten into position on your high ground, you don't want to leave it to run around the ruin and start fighting uphill. This puts more stress on the glyph locations, giving more power to the player who got a stronger glyph on their right. It's also easier to develop onto the edge-most height from the 7-hex plateau than from the other side of the board, meaning that, again, going right and getting a strong glyph ends up being the winning play more often than not.

This map is also easy to clog. Drawing a line with the ruins, there are two 1-hex choke points on the edges of the board with a 3-hex pathway in the middle, which plays more into the staring contest issues I've mentioned. If I develop right, I can block my high ground and glyph on that side with two figures well enough, and extremely well with three.

Ultimately, my games on this map just haven't had the dynamic interactions that I'm looking for in the best of the best. I vote NO to induct.

Venom by @Flash_19


Another map I've played on plenty in event and home games. I feel like this map quickly rose to be a staple of tournament map pools, and it's little wonder why. It's got great balance, smooth pathing, and facilitates a variety of play styles. Ranged, melee, swarm, pod, and other armies all have options on this map without any one feeling too much stronger than the other options.

I will say that usually reserve turrets of height (those small islands) give me pause, notably the 3-hex perches on this map right outside the start zone. However, Flash is able to counter those perches really well as most of their shooting options have easy access to jungle cover or matching high ground, and the road flanking it provides a quick in. You can set up shop there still if you're doing a slower pod army, and it's got plenty of defensive options, but you're giving up glyphs and the heights points on the map to do so. (I just happened to pick to review Hellsgate and Venom for these first two reviews, but I do think it's worth drawing a comparison of the difference in the plays and counter-plays that we see with them. Venom encourages a lot more interaction with even the highly defensive strategies.)

I've included Venom at many a monthly event in Utah, and probably consider it for the map pool at least every other month, ultimately forcing myself to choose something else because we've already used it so much. I don't have an undisclosed ranking of every map I've ever played on that I'll only ever vaguely reference and never post (unlike some people), but if I did, Venom would be an easy high-ranker. I vote YES to induct.

[OEAO]

I just realized we rebooted WoS one year ago. Since then, we’ve inducted 11 maps, and we’ve denied almost 50 others. The queue (which once felt overwhelming) is down to a very manageable 9 maps- the lowest it’s been since the reboot. Thank you all for your interest in the WoS, and we hope to review many more maps in the future!

[Typhon2222]

Originally Posted by OEAO

I just realized we rebooted WoS one year ago. Since then, we’ve inducted 11 maps, and we’ve denied almost 50 others. The queue (which once felt overwhelming) is down to a very manageable 9 maps- the lowest it’s been since the reboot. Thank you all for your interest in the WoS, and we hope to review many more maps in the future!

Exactly one year ago today?

[quozl]

Originally Posted by Typhon2222

Exactly one year ago today?

A bit more. The reboot was August 3, 2021.

[OEAO]

Originally Posted by quozl

A bit more. The reboot was August 3, 2021.

Yeah- missed it by a few weeks.

[BiggaBullfrog]

Originally Posted by OEAO

Yeah- missed it by a few weeks.

Hold up, so Age of Annihilation was announced on the WoS reboot anniversary!? That's pretty darn rocking!

[quozl]

Originally Posted by BiggaBullfrog

Hold up, so Age of Annihilation was announced on the WoS reboot anniversary!? That's pretty darn rocking!

They were trying to steal your thunder!

[OEAO]

Wingspan: Wingspan is a very attractive map. Superfrog is a master of color blocking (grouping terrain by type), and Wingspan is one of the best examples of this technique that I've seen (the sand are SZs, the swamp surrounds the dungeon center, and the rock pokes out at level 3 and 4). I selected Wingspan for the ScapeCon II pool, and I think it's a pretty good map, but I think it needs work before it reaches WoS quality (especially given that Turmoil is substantially better with almost the same sets; I also prefer both Burial Marsh and Trouble Once Lurked Beneath to Wingspan, and again, those use almost the same sets).

My main issue with Wingspan is the height distribution. This map boils down to 6 heights, where the heights are VERY yours-and-mine (notably, the yours-and-mine heights issue failed both Fossil and Mayberry). There are a few reasons that yours-and-mine heights are problematic.

At a very baseline level, this distribution leads to melee vs melee stareoffs, as you are disincentivized from leaving your hill and swinging up at your opponent's. You basically have to go for the initiative switch play, which is not a great play experience, and basically takes all skill out of the matchup.

Beyond that, in other matchups, it's just not an interesting setup. The plays become too obvious. Height is clearly good, so why wouldn't I just take my height? There isn't competing for really anything. The shadow and jungle in the center do an ok job of mitigating this, but they just don't do enough here in my opinion.

It doesn't help that one shadow tile is basically wasted right outside the center middle of the starting zone- in about 10 games on it, I've only ever seen a dispatched Knight end its turn on that space.

I don't love the 2-hex swamp perch. My inclination is that it'd be better to just move it up one and have it be a "finger" off the level 3 rock. I'm not sure it's broken, but I don't think it really adds much- it's yet another obviously good choice for range figures (especially Q9) to be, on a map that already suffers from obvious choices.

I also think the map is wider than it needs to be. The glyphs feel so far removed from the action. I know there are some unused hexes left in the box, but I think you can free up even a few more by pulling in the map. This could allow for some more level 3 added in general, which would help dissolve the yours-and-mine hills problem. I also think it's worth exploring letting figures that get height over the glyph be capped ("capping"= getting height over them in turn- I get height over you, so you can get height over me; this is the essence of dynamic height that creates engaging gameplay in my opinion).

Lest this review sound too harsh, this is a pretty good map. I just don't think it meets the stringent standards that a WoS map needs to meet. I hope superfrog makes some improvements, because I do think it has potential. NO to induct.