|
Maps & Scenarios Battlegrounds and scenarios |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
#13
|
||||
|
||||
Re: The Tournament-Worthy Asymmetric Map Workshop
Thanks KCU, not sure how I missed that.
|
#14
|
||||
|
||||
Re: The Tournament-Worthy Asymmetric Map Workshop
Its alright. I think its put in a weird place but that's just my opinion.
I also have a suggestion for play testing these maps. Play both sides of them when your testing these maps (if you have the time that is). If you play them both immediately something that may seem "broken" to a player on one side will make more sense when starting on the other side. I'll hopefully have a "detailed" report on Forgotten Outpost tonight to give to you all. Sometime between work and class I want to get a couple games in on one of our other "nominated" maps, I'm thinking Fort Lannister as Caught in the Middle has already got somebody else on it. Finally, a couple comments on what I see in the other two maps (I want to try to get pre-game comments and post game comments on any map that comes through here). First, Caught in the middle, if just looks really long. The other thing is the hight. The right side (in the PDF building instructions) has height much closer to the middle, height than can be reached in 2 turns by units with 5 move. Unless I counted wrong, the other side has height that is 10 spaces away. It would take the same unit 3 turns to get onto that height. Fort Lannister looks interesting. My only comment on that one is that the glyphs look easy enough to grab, but holding them seems nigh impossible. The defense glyph is going to be just as crucial for holding these glyphs as the attack glyph is to attack the fort because there is not jungle cover next to glyphs. I would consider switching the positioning of the attack glyph and defense glyph (and may do so after 2 games as built) just to see how it works. Everything else looks good, I especially like the fact that there are openings in the wall forcing the "defenders" to spread out a little more and choose their positioning well. I feel awkward trying to comment on my own map as there would be bias there, so I leave that up to you all. My Map Thread My Battle Blog and Strategy Blog and Article Links. OVAH site. Sept. 19, 2010 - ITS A BOY Last edited by KCU Master 2007; January 13th, 2009 at 01:26 PM. |
#15
|
||||
|
||||
Re: The Tournament-Worthy Asymmetric Map Workshop
Quote:
Size: Yes it's pretty long. It's shorter than Marr Highway, an existing BoV map though. It's also the third attempt at capturing the idea, and it's the shortest of the three. I'm not sure it can be much shorter---already the start zone separation is 13 (left) and 12 (right). That's much closer than I like. Perhaps the central zone can be squeezed narrower to stretch across the breadth of the map, giving either a little more space between start zones, or a slight shortening of the map. Height placement: it's deliberately lopsided, but I haven't carefully thought through the implications. I want the players to have to think carefully about which side will work best for which of their troops. I put the height that was more advantageous to the split player on the side where the LoS coverage was better. I wouldn't be at all surprised if I'd overdone it. The previous draft seemed to benefit the central player too much, and I think I might have overcompensated with both the height arrangements and glyph placement. |
#16
|
||||
|
||||
Re: The Tournament-Worthy Asymmetric Map Workshop
Ok, we'll see how these things play out. I would leave the center start zones how they are though. If you spread it out then their ranks are going to be spread very thin.
I guess that makes sense with the height. Again I'm curious on how it will play out. My Map Thread My Battle Blog and Strategy Blog and Article Links. OVAH site. Sept. 19, 2010 - ITS A BOY |
#17
|
||||
|
||||
Re: The Tournament-Worthy Asymmetric Map Workshop
Following KCU's lead, here are my initial pre-play observations on Forgotten Outpost and Fort Lannister.
In both cases the start zones confuse me a little. They seem to wilfully not use the extremes of the map. Is this to get the start zones closer to the castle structure? My first hunch on Forgotten Outpost is that the castle side has a big advantage. The noncastle side has the attack glyph and some jungle, but the castle team has guaranteed +1 to attack and defence. My hunch is that the noncastle side needs more. Fort Lannister's Attack, Defence, Move and Initiative seem closer to what is required, but that is four figures needed to hold and I think still might not be enough. I'd also like to empahasise the asymmetry further still. Rather than adding back in what the lower team is missing (attack, defence, move), I'd like to experiment with Wannok (wound) or Ivor (range), and maybe even a Mitonsoul panic button or two. Anyway, I'm looking forward to building and playing them. I'll probably go for Fort Lannister first, purely because I'm already testing KCU's River Crossing. EDIT. Another thought that applies to castle maps in general and is not particular to either these two or asymmetry: what about Krug/Grimnak/Templar/Grok Riders... Large and huge melee figures are in real trouble. Is there anything we can do about this? |
#18
|
||||
|
||||
Re: The Tournament-Worthy Asymmetric Map Workshop
The thing about Forgotten Outpost is that the hill immediately beside the Red Start zone. That hill not only gives a better firing position, allows you to fire on any units who are slow making it into the castle, and it also allows you access to the outer wall which completely mitigates any advantages the castle team has, it actually tilts things back in favor of the red team.
The most difficult part for the Red Team is going to be the actual entering of the castle, but that's why the road is there. I'll let you know how it goes tonight. My Map Thread My Battle Blog and Strategy Blog and Article Links. OVAH site. Sept. 19, 2010 - ITS A BOY |
#19
|
||||
|
||||
Re: The Tournament-Worthy Asymmetric Map Workshop
Sounds good KCU.
I've added LongHeroscaper's map "Where The Road Ends" to the first post. The road is balanced against closer high ground and better cover. |
#20
|
||||
|
||||
Re: The Tournament-Worthy Asymmetric Map Workshop
I like the broken wall feature of Fort Lannister. It makes it possible for the attacker to jump inside and go after heroes, which is nice. One specific criticism to that map - currently a double-spaced figure can only start on one side of the battlements.
Quote:
Quote:
Along the same lines, you have to keep in mind what any primarily melee army is going to do if they get the castle. They can't properly take advantage of the height, and we're giving the other side better access to the glyphs. |
#21
|
||||
|
||||
Re: The Tournament-Worthy Asymmetric Map Workshop
Quote:
I'm now imagining a map with a whole range of single-use glyphs available to the side that has the terrain disadvantage: Mitonsoul, Sturla, Kelda, Oreld,... |
#22
|
||||
|
||||
Re: The Tournament-Worthy Asymmetric Map Workshop
I am currently holding the build instructions for Forgotten Outpost in my hand, and I'm about to go down into my secret lab(My basement) and build the outpost. Does anyone have any thoughts on armies that I should try on the map?
Your curiosity will be the death of you....
|
#23
|
||||
|
||||
Re: The Tournament-Worthy Asymmetric Map Workshop
Quote:
As reports come in we might want to make sure we've covered all common army builds, probably many times each, but I think for now just go where your urges take you. Thanks for contributing to the project! (If I switched "workshop" to "project" then we'd be the TWAMP. ) |
#24
|
||||
|
||||
Re: The Tournament-Worthy Asymmetric Map Workshop
In all honesty and in the best interest of this project, take army that you have taken (or seen at) to a tournament and play it against another tournament army. I think that would be the best way to determine balance in any map and be the best way to start looking for flaws.
My Map Thread My Battle Blog and Strategy Blog and Article Links. OVAH site. Sept. 19, 2010 - ITS A BOY |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Are the elves tournament worthy? | Vydar_XLIII | Heroscape Strategy Articles | 21 | November 24th, 2008 05:29 AM |
Balanced Asymmetric Maps | kookoobah | HeroScape General Discussion | 19 | October 23rd, 2008 07:52 AM |
a first time tournament worthy army? | scapersbeware | Competitive Armies Discussion | 9 | March 19th, 2008 03:55 PM |
What is a tournament worthy army? | keglo | HeroScape General Discussion | 11 | February 6th, 2008 04:28 PM |
Not Tournament Worthy? | Browncoat | Competitive Armies Discussion | 3 | February 23rd, 2007 03:18 PM |