Workshop Thread

[Sir Heroscape]

[Flash_19]

to review Durgeth Swamps

[Nomad]

for me as well. Thanks for moving the palm away from high ground.

[Sir Heroscape]

Durgeth Swamps by Heroscaper2010 is now under review...

Durgeth Swamps - .hsc

[Nomad]

Battlefield 23 by @Flash_19

I did not get a chance to play test the first version of this map before it received two down votes from my highly-esteemed fellow ARV judges. So, I entered play testing on the revised version with a blank slate.

Check this out. In four tests with 500 v. 500 point armies, the average margin of victory was 53 points. That is what I like to see! The armies were a variety of builds. Battlefield 23 is a wonderful sight to have set up on the table. Game play was solid - in every way. Height, cover, blockers, and pathing (even side to side considering how wide it is) were all beyond reproach.

I was initially concerned about all of the castle walls, palm trees, and battlements in terms of how huge figures would be able to maneuver - it seemed crowded in spots. I ran tests with Augamo, Greater Ice Elemental, and Nilfheim. All of the large/huge figures were able to be placed on every hex with the right positioning.

I liked this map so much, it has now moved into my top 10 of tourney maps with this terrain to consider when I host them (which will happen again someday!)

Oh, so this is an official for induction to the ARV cannon.

[BiggaBullfrog]

Battlefield 23 by @Flash_19

The first version of Battlefield 23 suffered from some really strong high ground perches for Raelin/Range to abuse. Battlefield 23.2.0 strongly improves upon the first version, with the notable improvement of having the height more consolidated into certain focus areas, and having those areas more easily countered by the road that leads to them. Turns out, that makes for a really good map.

Battlefield 23 is definitely a top tier map in terms of balance and interesting/exciting plays. It has strong high ground on the sides that also have glyphs nearby to control, but they’re limited by line of sight blockers and being vulnerable to rushes from the road. There is also good potential to make aggressive pushes through the center utilizing the height there, but that is also countered by the road and jungle across the map. Even development has some good decision-making to capitalize on; usually I found that development to the left of the start zone felt easier with the road and closer high ground on the flank, but trying to slow roll left leaves a player open to counterattacks from central height, road, and even power plays on the same side from an aggressive opponent. Overall, games were constantly fun and exciting on this map, and I definitely recommend it.

to Battlefield 23 induction stuff.

[Flash_19]

Thanks for your playtesting efforts and reviews @Nomad and @BiggaBullfrog ! I really appreciate it!

[Ulysses]

I'm not a judge, but I've had a lot of fun on Battlefield 23 and plan to be setting it up again Sunday for a couple new players!

[Sir Heroscape]

Originally Battlefield 23 rubbed me the wrong way. There were a lot of little things I wasn't liking. Overall it was a good map, but I was glad to see it make it's way back into the consideration of the judges for a 2nd run.

This time around Flash has provided rather significant changes to the map design WITHOUT disrupting the overall original footprint. i.e. it looks like the original. That takes a lot of time and effort to rework a map so that it maintains the integrity of the original design but make the changes necessary to balance it. This version does that in a much nicer way. The development feels more natural and both sides (whether with slow figures or fast), have equal opportunity to grab power glyphs. The hills on each side aren't really hills and do a good job with road and jungle and LOS blockers to make camping on one side NOT the obvious decision. Development through the center was much faster, and did lend itself to more conflict, but that's more an observation than a nitpick. I like maps that pull the tension between fast low ground and more developing time on high ground. The pitfall for most maps like that is that the hills can tend to be too strong, but the case is not here. The hills are still very accessible from the center if the conflict starts to evolve toward height/glyphs and that is a very good thing.

Overall, what was a good map and didn't make it in, is now a great map that has made it in. Thank you @Flash_19 for taking the time to be meticulous and prepare something great.

for Battlefield 23

[Sir Heroscape]

Battlefield 23 by @Flash_19 has received 3 upvotes and has been inducted in the ARV Archives. Official Map thread pending...

Battlefield 23
Requires 1x RotV, 1x FoA, 1x TJ

.hsc file located here

[superfrog]

Cool stuff! I know Leaf_It used to make official ARV topdowns but for the time being I've moved the existing topdown to the ARV folder to celebrate!

[Flash_19]

Originally Posted by Sir Heroscape

Originally Battlefield 23 rubbed me the wrong way. There were a lot of little things I wasn't liking. Overall it was a good map, but I was glad to see it make it's way back into the consideration of the judges for a 2nd run.

This time around Flash has provided rather significant changes to the map design WITHOUT disrupting the overall original footprint. i.e. it looks like the original. That takes a lot of time and effort to rework a map so that it maintains the integrity of the original design but make the changes necessary to balance it. This version does that in a much nicer way. The development feels more natural and both sides (whether with slow figures or fast), have equal opportunity to grab power glyphs. The hills on each side aren't really hills and do a good job with road and jungle and LOS blockers to make camping on one side NOT the obvious decision. Development through the center was much faster, and did lend itself to more conflict, but that's more an observation than a nitpick. I like maps that pull the tension between fast low ground and more developing time on high ground. The pitfall for most maps like that is that the hills can tend to be too strong, but the case is not here. The hills are still very accessible from the center if the conflict starts to evolve toward height/glyphs and that is a very good thing.

Overall, what was a good map and didn't make it in, is now a great map that has made it in. Thank you @Flash_19 for taking the time to be meticulous and prepare something great.

for Battlefield 23

Thanks so much for your review and playtesting efforts Sir H!