Wargrounds of Scape (WoS) - discussion thread

[BiggaBullfrog]

Originally Posted by Foudzing

Could you elaborate on why you think Fulcrum is "exemplary" (also bear with me but I don't really understand what that means) and "hold as best-of-the-best"? Or is it just a "gut feeling"? (Which is completely fine).

Sorry for taking so long, but I'm happy to explain what I meant!

By "exemplary" I mean that I feel that the map sets the example or standard for what maps should strive for. In the case of Fulcrum, I think that it has a few features that are usually red flags for me (such as height right outside the start zone, jungle on that height, narrow passage through the middle), but that its strengths outweigh the usual weaknesses that those features have. There ends up being a lot of strategy depending on matchup and map awareness. So, in the end, I felt that Fulcrum is an example of how to break rules or conventions well while still having a strong tournament map, thus putting it among the best-of-the-best.

Hopefully that helps!

[dok]

Dark Fulcrum by Gamebear (based on Fulcrum by Dignan)

I’ve been putting off this review, but not because I’m unsure about how the map plays. Obviously, if you scroll up, you don’t have to go very far to find a recent vote where I voted to retain Fulcrum in the WoS.

And here’s the thing: if I had to choose between Fulcrum and Dark Fulcrum to leave on my table for the next few months and play games on, I’d likely choose Dark Fulcrum. The removal of the jungle bush next to the right-hand 3-hex makes the classic defensive strategy harder to pull off. And the addition of shadow (including replacing some of the water in the approaches to height) adds some extra options to the map that I welcome. It’s a good map, and an improvement on the original by several measures.

That said, 2 sets of BftU is just a stronger, more versatile terrain set than RotV. I am not surprised that it’s a bit more interesting and dynamic: it ought to be. More than most members of the WoS, I tend to grade on a curve for the terrain used. Is DF better than Fulcrum by enough to merit the different terrain? I’m not sure the best way to address that question, but the simplest way is to compare both maps to maps in the WoS that already use these terrain sets. I prefer Canary over Dark Fulcrum more than I prefer Percolator over Fulcrum.

Is some of that just nostalgia after playing competitive games on Fulcrum for the last 15 years? I mean… probably. But given the lack of nostalgia I have around DF, I’d probably like it more if it broke away from Fulcrum even a bit more, perhaps adding a bit of level 3 on the left side or making it even easier to move onto the height without going through the center, or maybe even pushing the right side level 3 forward a little more to make it easier to contest.

Anyway, I like DF quite a bit, and I wouldn’t mind seeing it in any map pool, but for me, it’s a narrow NO to induct.

[Foudzing]

Dark Fulcrum by Gamebear:


This is a quite original map, and to my own opinion miles ahead of original Fulcrum in terms of balance (allowing a wider span of armies to be played) and playability (not being frustrated when playing on it).

This is a very balanced map to me, not as melee friendly as one can imagine, this is a map which allows multiples choices on how to tackle it, great. Overall, I'd have no trouble at all playing it in a tournament really.

But I still found some "problems" that bugged me:
Biggest one, in a lot of range vs melee machups the whole fight cater in a quarter of the map, there is very few reason for the range player to move out and "play the map". Even if the range player want to push for the level 4 and 5 of the islands hills it's much more often than not better to focus on securing one hill and camp on it rather than trying to get both, this is exacerbed by aura figures and low figures count for the ranged player.
Now granted this is a problem you'd have on any map, low figures ranged builds want to camp, sure, but I feel this map sightly exacerbates it, due to no glyph on the map, and by how the map is cut in half by the central valley. To my experience on the map it's quite rare that both hills see play.
Vegietarian pointed out once that he didn't like the map cause the +2 defense bonus flipped too many machups up, at first I kinda disagreed wiht this stance, to me a map that shake up the meta is great. But then after playing on it more I saw where his stance coming from, not the central + 2 defense shadow+jungle hexes, those are completely fine and very good , the problem was actually the two hexes right in front of the triangle outcrops. A double hexed figure can have one foot next to jungle and one foot on shadow and benefit from double defense bonus on level 2 while not being adjacent to any level 3 or 4. This is very strong on a lot of figures: Majors, Nerak, Swogs, MBS... and for the Majors especially there no reason to ever leave this spot.
Finally while the macro-positionning choices ("where should I pod?", "how do I attack?" etc...) are very interesting , I find the micro-positionning choices ("do I place my guy on this hex or this hex?") to not be as interesting and often obvious.

The map has a lot of very good points and is better in some aspects than some WoS inducted maps but its two main drawbacks (low incentive to go forward and small part of the map played each game) is keeping it out for me.
It is a great map to include in a well thought map pool and to add some spice and originility but to me sightly fall short as being best of the best. I vote no to induct.

[superfrog]

Dark Fulcrum by GameBear (and Dignan):

Seems like this map’s fate is sealed but I did want to weigh in. I (narrowly) decided against supporting Fulcrum and noted that I could see myself changing that opinion if a few things broke differently.

Dark Fulcrum changes more than the few things I mentioned and I think in doing so creates a superior map. It still very much feels like Fulcrum, but I find the triple outcrops superior to the ruins, the jungle placement is somewhat less effective for protecting pods, the shadow run down the middle is a welcome add for melee, and isolating the 7-hex on the left provides a few more interesting options in range/melee matchups.

There’s a few specific things I like less: the start zone lateral movement is worse due to having water sprinkled throughout, the shadow spaces without adjacent height can feel gratuitous (especially when a double-spacer can combo that with a jungle boost).

But overall it still manages to succeed in delivering a somewhat modernized version of Fulcrum’s gameplay. Do I think it’s the best map of its terrain combo? No, although I am biased. Do I think it’s the best no-glyphs map I’ve played? Yes.

I went back and forth here as well, but in the end I think my Fulcrum NO was narrow enough and the improvements here were helpful enough that I am coming down with an to induct Dark Fulcrum.

[Matthias Maccabeus]

I'm nominating Shoots and Leaves by Gamebear



https://www.heroscapers.com/communit...o=file&id=5518

It's been used at 2 Mass monthlies and a Michigan monthly according to heroscape.org
https://heroscape.org/map/view/?HeroscapeMap=140

It's also been used at least once at a Midwest Melee and at least once at a Ken Con.

[superfrog]

Dark Fulcrum is not inducted (2-2, 50%). First posts have been updated.

[Sheep]

I'd like to nominate Fire Isles (OEAO Edition).


.pdf

Been thinking about this one for awhile now and finally got intentional about playing a few games on it myself. Quick dynamic map with easy improvements over the original.

Tournament Usage:
.org page (contains 4 events)
VCheese 4

[superfrog]

You got links to prove tournament usage? I know it’s been used enough but want to check all the boxes here.

[Sheep]

Originally Posted by superfrog

You got links to prove tournament usage? I know it’s been used enough but want to check all the boxes here.

Oh doi!

Updated my post. There might be others but I didn't do a very extensive search. Enough to meet the qualifications for nomination.

[MegaSilver]

That list is missing HexiCon 1 usage.

[superfrog]

Fire Isles

I’ve been wondering when this nomination would come, as I know this map is a favorite of at least one of our other judges.

Fire Isles (the original) is a well-loved classic but has some oddities that prevent it from being top-tier in the modern game: the molten lava run and the Kaemon islands being the biggest two. Plus the SZs suck.

OEAO nicely addressed all of these issues, and found a nice place to use two long ruins if that’s a consideration in a map pool with Percolator (or one of the other excellent two-small-ruin maps out there).

I do really like the added utility of the sand level 2 in the center: it’s useful for melee figures crossing over laterally (no more “Nilf flying back and forth to deny attacks” shenanigans) and it’s useful for taking potshots at the SZ from a little bit more of a protected location. But melee has lots of tools at its disposal to combat this spot and other perches: the aforementioned long ruins, the safe level 2 as you develop left, and plenty of opportunities to either cap figures on level 3 height by climbing to level 4 or to tie down figures and force the lava damage.

I greatly appreciate the SZs being cleaned up so they are clear at a glance.

Overall, OEAO has taken a unique map that had some flaws and brought it into the present while still honoring the main concept of the original. This is one of the top two RotV/VW maps out there, imo, and one of the top few 1MS/1exp maps more broadly. to induct.

[OEAO]

Originally Posted by Sheep

I'd like to nominate Fire Isles (OEAO Edition).


.pdf

Been thinking about this one for awhile now and finally got intentional about playing a few games on it myself. Quick dynamic map with easy improvements over the original.

Tournament Usage:
.org page (contains 4 events)
VCheese 4

Thanks for the nomination!