What's new
  • Welcome to the Heroscapers 2.0 site! We've still got some dust to clear and adjustments to make, including launching a new front page, but we hope you enjoy the improvements to the site. Please post your feedback and any issues you encounter in this thread.

Battlefields of Valhalla Discussion Thread

UranusPChicago

UranusPChicago

BoV Judge Emeritus
Site Supporter
Last edited by a moderator:
By-laws for the Battlefields of Valhalla:

SECTION 1: Submission guidelines and tips
1. Maps shall contain exactly 24 hexes of start zone for each player. Start zones must be identified in the build instructions and must accommodate the Marro Hive in some capacity.
2. Maps should be balanced for 1-on-1 competition between two (2) 400-600 point armies
3. Maps are generally not to exceed 1 MS and up to 3 terrain expansions. No more than 2 expansions of the same type may be used in a map. There are exceptions; please note the set classifications at the bottom of this section.
4. Use of the Marro Hive as a line-of-sight blocker is allowed with the SotM set. Keep in mind the fewer expansions a map includes the more likely it is to be used. Submitted maps must state what sets are needed.
5. Anyone can nominate a map for consideration, but it will not go through the judging process without a majority vote of the Council.
6. Submitted maps must include build instructions.
7. Glyphs are not required, but any number may be used to enhance a map.
(a) Maps containing symbol-side up Treasure Glyphs must state which glyphs are Treasure Glyphs, otherwise mystery glyphs will be treated as standard glyphs. (Until another means of marking Treasure Glyphs becomes available, any face-up Brandar can be designated in the build instructions as a symbol-side up Treasure Glyph.)
(b) Symbol-side up Treasure Glyphs must include a description of the trap the map uses in the build instructions. Trap design will be considered in judging the map.
8. Nominations should be in .pdf format. Special circumstances may warrant exception.
9. Maps should not heavily favor any one special ability to the point that it makes the map non-competitive if an army does not contain that ability (i.e. range, flying, etc.).
10. Do NOT slap a map together and nominate it for consideration. Nominated maps must have some games played by more than one person. Additional game play experiences and observations are encouraged.



Classification of Heroscape sets:
  • Master Sets. One of the following may be used as a master set:
    • Rise of the Valkyrie
    • Marvel: The Conflict Begins
    • Swarm of the Marro
    • D&D: Battle for the Underdark
  • Expansions: Up to three of the following may be used, with up to two copies of the same set allowed:
    • Road To The Forgotten Forest
    • Volcarren Wasteland
    • Thaelenk Tundra
    • Fortress of the Archkyrie
    • Ticalla Jungle
  • Hybrid Master Sets: One of the following may be used in place of two expansions:
    • Marvel: The Conflict Begins
    • Swarm of the Marro (Except when also used as a master set.)
    • D&D: Battle for the Underdark
SECTION 2: How maps are judged
Maps nominated for consideration will go through the following process after a majority of acceptance votes by the judges:
1. Maps will be playtested competitively at least once by all judges, using 400-600 point armies. Candidates for approval will be playtested more than once.
2. Consideration for approved maps will be given, generally, based on the following criteria and in this order: balance, interesting play, and aesthetics.
3. Time for consideration is: as long as it takes for the judges to make an informed decision.
4. Great maps will be approved; not good ones. Don't let this discourage you.
5. Judge discussions will occur in a public and private forums on the non-official Heroscape web site: Currently www.heroscapers.com
7. Reviews on maps will be public with status and results presented.
8. Maps that receive a super-majority of 75% (currently 5 out of a possible 6) of the Council will be formatted and given the Battlefields of Valhalla Seal of Approval. Judges may abstain from a vote on a particular map, thereby reducing the total number of votes needed for acceptance.

SECTION 3: Self-governance
1. The Council will contain six judges. The current judges are: 1Mmirg, Bengi, Dignan, fomox, RoninValentina
2. Judges will maintain their position unless:
a) They are not heard from by fellow judges on the official non-official Heroscape web site for a period of 31 days, or
b) They abstain for a total of three months or for three consecutive maps under review, whichever comes later.
3. If a vacancy on the council occurs, judges will be replaced by those who:
a) show interest in serving, and
b) after consideration of the sitting judges receive 75 % vote of approval. Voting and discussion of a replacement judge may occur in private.
4. Judges will not be allowed to vote on their own maps. During the judging of their own maps their vote will be considered an abstention for the percentages needed to both playtest and approve the map. Their vote will NOT be counted as an abstention for purposes of the "three consecutive maps" criteria in Section 3-2-b.
5. These by-laws may be changed and amended at any time by a 75 % vote of sitting judges.

--
Maps that were reviewed but not approved for Battlefields of Valhalla:
:!:Links to nomination
:jandar:Links to yes votes
:utgar:Links to no votes

Link to Updated List of Reviewed Maps (thanks, UtahScott!): 2007-2009 | 2010-

Old List:
Spoiler Alert!


Maps previously nominated but were not accepted for review (map balance varies wildly, please search the thread for why they didn't make it before using for competitive play):

Link to Updated List of Nominated Maps (again, thanks, UtahScott): 2007-

Old List:
Spoiler Alert!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think there needs to be a standard starting zone size for Tournament maps. It would really suck to get to the finals and find out your army suddenly doesn't fit anymore. The most units you can have in a 400 point army is 40, but I'd guess most people would agree a smaller starting zone helps relieve the squadscape problem a bit. Someone once suggested 22-24 hexes, which seems pretty fair.

But yes, I think any glyphs or starting zones should be part of the map for submission. Nothing can unbalance a map more than a few poorly placed glyphs or starting zones that put you at a severe disadvantage. If we're going to scrutinize every single tree and wall placed on the map, we should definitely take the starting zone into consideration.
 
UranusPChicago said:
Are we going to designate starting zones and glyph placement on all maps as part of the submission process?
Click to expand...

Yes, I think we should.

I see your point then; we need to use forsaken waters' winter holdout as a place to start and make some decisions about glyphs and starting zones from there.

Currently the start zones off of winter holdout are 18 hexes; we can easly tack two on each side to make 20.

I always liked the Glyph spots for "A" and "G" but could see trading one or the other or both for "V" and "K".
 
Rychean said:
I see your point then; we need to use forsaken waters' winter holdout as a place to start and make some decisions about glyphs and starting zones from there.
Click to expand...
Yup, we need to get the kinks worked out of the system before we test someone else's map.

First things first, here is a link to a virtuascape file of Forsaken Waters with glyphs and start zones winter holdout style.

http://www.cornpuff.org/Heroscape/downloads/Forsaken Waters.hsc

Alright, here's a shot at a balance analysis:
The Glyphs of Astrid, Gerda, Valda, Kelda and Dagmar are the the same distance away from both start zones for normal, double-based, slithering and flying units with the following exceptions. A slithering unit on the Red side can step on the Glyph of Gerda in 9 move points, where it takes a slithering unit 10 move points to get to gerda from blue start. A double based figure from Red takes 11 Move Points (MP) to land on the glyph of Dagmar, while the blue side takes one less MP.

I don't see either of these as problems, but its worth pointing out the glyphs are extremely balanced.

The biggest difference between the two sides is that Red side has an 'island' that is excellent for a Raelin perch. There is no analog on blue side, as Raelin has to pick going to one of the sides, or landing on the contested central table. I would see this as a potential issue, but this map has been playtested so bloody much that we know it isn't significant.

I don't like the position of the glyph of Dagmar, as it screws up mobility on that ledge. Stop on glyph rules, IMHO, aren't that much fun, especially when its the init glyph that you don't care about that much.

If we add start spaces, I can see a way to add 3 spaces to each side without screwing up the glyph balance. Personally, I don't see much of a reason to add hexes to the start zone, as the limitation lends itself to a different type of strategy. On the other hand, sure, why not increase them. Tournament n00bs might be upset if they find they cant use 22 of their gruts, and we do have a responsibility to the tournament patrons.

I guess I'd rather keep it at 18. We might be looking at maps with fewer start zones in the future, and I'd hate to eliminate them just based on that. Let's see, 24 drones is 400 points. Should this be a metric?

Oh wait, I'm blabbering. Adding 3 hexes to each zone looks nice, should lessen tournament frustration, and doesn't damage the equality of the map. I added these hex locations this image, and highlighted them yellow.

FW_proposal.gif


Back to the glyphs.

We talked earlier about tournament maps having 2 faces. The first is the 'director's cut.' This is how the mapmaker intends the map to be played. The second is the 'standardized version.' This version will always have a spot for the "A" and "G" glyphs and no others.

My proposal is to remove the glyph of Dagmar (init), and the start zones plus three (like the image above) to make the FW Tournament Mix. The move and heal glyphs should be kept on to go with the designers original map as much as possible. For future maps, I'd of course consult the designers before accepting changes, but I don't think Rob and Craig are going to stop by and validate these changes.

For the standard A & G mix, I liked the gencon setup. It used the Valda and Astrid glyph spots. I'd also be quite happy leaving them where they are.
 
Eclipse said:
:poke:

How goes this project?
Click to expand...

We all pretty much stopped down to prepare for the tourneys we were playing in this weekend. I do believe you will see some movement now on this front.

I will be making a more concerted effort in the coming weeks to focus on this endeavor.
 
CornPuff said:
Back to the glyphs.

We talked earlier about tournament maps having 2 faces. The first is the 'director's cut.' This is how the mapmaker intends the map to be played. The second is the 'standardized version.' This version will always have a spot for the "A" and "G" glyphs and no others.

My proposal is to remove the glyph of Dagmar (init), and the start zones plus three (like the image above) to make the FW Tournament Mix. The move and heal glyphs should be kept on to go with the designers original map as much as possible. For future maps, I'd of course consult the designers before accepting changes, but I don't think Rob and Craig are going to stop by and validate these changes.

For the standard A & G mix, I liked the gencon setup. It used the Valda and Astrid glyph spots. I'd also be quite happy leaving them where they are.
Click to expand...

I don't think the glyphs are as important as the glyph locations. I see the value in maintaining the integrity of the original map design as far as glyphs ...but I also see value in having the optimal glyph spots identified for random as well. Glyph A is the best primary placement of 1 random glyph and glyph V is the second most optimal placement when using 2 random glyphs. The reasoning here is that two glyphs that close together (A&G)with no cover between will usually be controlled by the same player. Glyph spot V allows a spot with cover further away making it harder to hold both glyphs at once. This could be noted as part of the download or recommendation; basically if using 1 random glyph use this spot, if two use these two, etc...

Too much detail? Ultimately the tourney manager will decide what they want to do but I think it is important to have 1-2 random glyph locations pre-identified.
 
I second Rychean on glyph location. I recommend that we just use the "?" glyph when identifying the glyph locations. I tend to think of "scenario" maps using specific glyphs.

Yes, there are some of the glyphs that IMHO have no business being in a tournament setting, but I will leave that for the tournament directors to decide on.
 
Wow, a lot has happened in the other thread since I made that big post. We can ignore all of my past rhetoric about the 'directors cut,' as i think that has all been resolved.

Since it is our duty to present the best version of the map to tourney organizers, I think we should use the map in the image above, without random glphs, instead with all 4 pre-placed glyphs. I've played the 'winter holdout' scenario several times, and always thought it was a blast, I think the Kelda glyph is a fine addition to this map, even though it may increase gametimes.

I really think specific glyphs are great for many maps, as where a glyph is changes the dynamic of the map a lot. Say you have a glyph of lodin randomly placed in the V or K spot. Well then that sucks, because now no one really has any incentive to go over there. Randomness should be left for casual play IMO, while people should have more knowledge ahead of time for competitive play.

Then again, if you know what glyphs are going to be on a map, and then randomize their locations, then that is a different story
 
I think all boards should have a 24 starting zone, just add more tiles on the back side ( what I did in Canton was for the boards that didn't have 24 starting spaces, you could only add extra spaces if you needed them ). We used random glyphs in the canton Tourney and I think it worked out better then knowing what was where. In the Central Ohio tourney you had people wanting one side or the other because they wanted to be closer to the attack glyph verses the defense glyph. When they are random ( unknown ) you don't have this problem.

I also made a house rule where the curse only affectst he team that picks it up, it cost me the tourneyment but I really like that rule.

Truth was at both of these tourneys, maybe ask him what he thinks.
 
Heroscape Maps Approved for Competitive and Tournament Play

By-laws

Goal: To offer the Heroscape gaming community balanced, playtested maps for both tournament and competitive play. And to establish standards for playable, balanced, and aesthetic maps.

SECTION 1: Submission guidelines and tips
1. Maps shall contain 24 start zones.
2. Maps should be balanced for 1-on-1 competition between two (2) 500 point armies.
3. Maps shall be limited to 1 MS and up to 3 terrain expansions, no two of which can be the same, with the exception that 2 Road to the Forgotten Forests are allowed. Keep in mind the fewer expansions a map includes the more likely it is to be used. If the map makes use of a few wave expansion tiles, that will be acceptable. Submitted maps must state what expansions are needed.
4. Anyone can nominate a map for consideration, but it will not go through the judging process without a majority vote of the Council.
5. Submitted maps must include build instructions.
6. Glyphs are not required, but any number may be used to enhance a map.
7. Maps should not heavily favor any one special ability to the point that it makes the map non-competitive if an army does not contain that ability (i.e. flying, lava resistance, etc.).
8. Do NOT slap a map together and nominate it for consideration. Playtest your submitted map AT LEAST once, or judges will be likely to hunt you down and flog you with wet noodles.

SECTION 2: How maps are judged
1. Maps nominated for consideration will go through the following process after a majority vote of the judges.
2. Maps will be playtested competitively at least once by all judges, using 500 point armies. Candidates for approval will be playtested more than once.
3. Consideration for approved maps will be given, generally, based on the following criteria and in this order: balance, interesting play, and aesthetics.
4. Time for consideration is: as long as it takes for the judges to make an informed decision.
5. Great maps will be approved; not good ones. Don't let this discourage you.
6. Judge discussions will occur in a public forum on the official non-official Heroscape web site: Currently www.heroscapers.com
7. Voting on maps will occur in private, but vote totals will be presented publicly.
8. Maps that receive a super-majority of 75% of the Council will be formatted and given the Battlefields of Valhalla Seal of Approval. Judges may abstain from a vote on a particular map, thereby reducing the total number of votes needed for acceptance.

SECTION 3: Self-governance
1. The Council will contain six judges. The first judges are: CornPuff, Eclipse, Revdyer, Riggler, Rychean and UranusPChicago.
2. Judges will maintain their position unless a) They are not heard from by fellow judges on the official non-official Heroscape web site for a period of 31 days, or b) They abstain for a total of three months or for three consecutive maps under consideration, whichever comes later.
3. If a vacancy on the council occurs, judges will be replaced by those who a) show interest in serving, and b) after consideration of the sitting judges receive 75 % vote of approval. Voting and discussion of a replacement judge may occur in private.
4. Judges will not be allowed to vote on their own maps. During the judging of their own maps their vote will be considered an abstention for the percentages needed to both playtest and approve the map. Their vote will NOT be counted as an abstention for purposes of the "three consecutive maps" criteria in Section 3-2-b.
5. These by-laws may be changed and amended at any time by a 75 % vote of sitting judges.
 
Hendal said:
I think all boards should have a 24 starting zone, just add more tiles on the back side ( what I did in Canton was for the boards that didn't have 24 starting spaces, you could only add extra spaces if you needed them ). We used random glyphs in the canton Tourney and I think it worked out better then knowing what was where. In the Central Ohio tourney you had people wanting one side or the other because they wanted to be closer to the attack glyph verses the defense glyph. When they are random ( unknown ) you don't have this problem.

I also made a house rule where the curse only affectst he team that picks it up, it cost me the tourneyment but I really like that rule.

Truth was at both of these tourneys, maybe ask him what he thinks.
Click to expand...
You have to be careful not to exceed the single master set limitation when adding anything to an official map. At Gencon we had exactly one master set per map to work with and ran short on hexes by trying to add to deployment zones.
 
Hey fellow judges, are we ready to do the process on Forsaken Waters?

Almost seems like a trial run, but probably one we need to do. New thread? Hov MAP: Forsake Water?
 
Let's just throw down in this thread. We need a guinea pig map to work with and what better map to work with than Forsaken Waters. I think the only real decisions to be made are on glyphs and starting zones.

Let's get this thing rolling...

Let's get ready to rumble!!!!!
 
Well, FW uses exactly one MS. Hasbro gave us 18 hex start zones. My proposed start zones are 21 hexes large, we will need to increase them somehow. We would have to increase it to 24 hexes without upsetting the glyph balance. Maybe we could add some expansion tiles to the back of each side?

Also, I vote for the Kelda, Valda, Astrid and Gerda glyphs to be present as they are in winter holdout. I vote for the removal of the glyph of dagmar, as I always hated that glyph placement because is causes movement over glyph confusion.

This is a good start. Add three more hexes to the start zones in an intelligent way and we can call this one done.

FW_proposal.gif
 
CornPuff said:
Well, FW uses exactly one MS. Hasbro gave us 18 hex start zones. My proposed start zones are 21 hexes large, we will need to increase them somehow. We would have to increase it to 24 hexes without upsetting the glyph balance. Maybe we could add some expansion tiles to the back of each side?

Also, I vote for the Kelda, Valda, Astrid and Gerda glyphs to be present as they are in winter holdout. I vote for the removal of the glyph of dagmar, as I always hated that glyph placement because is causes movement over glyph confusion.

This is a good start. Add three more hexes to the start zones in an intelligent way and we can call this one done.

FW_proposal.gif
Click to expand...

We actually played this with 500 point armies when I ran the flagbears out the other night. we left the existing start zones and filled in the back side of the starting zones with 3 two-hex pieces on each side to bring the total up. That way you don't have to worry about upsetting the glyph or terrain distances. And the only reason most people would use starting spaces farther back is if they had to.

I've never had a problem with the Dagmar glyph on this map. Its a powerful glyph in my opinion, but it is right out there in the middle of the action most of the time. So there is ample opportunity to take it. I give it up quite often. I'm not concerned with my opponent having it until turn 2 hits and I'm not concerned with holding it myself until turn 3 of a round.

Sum up: I don't see a problem with all the glyphs in Winter Holdout. As for start spaces, why not add them to the back side of the start zones. My suggestion from the bottom up on the left side and fill in the middle on the right (to keep it behind existing start zones.)
 
I'll clarify my issue with dagmar (and its not that big of an issue). In my plays of this map, the 'stop on glyph' rule and the placement of the glyph of dagmar caused some frustration. Often times you would want to run over that space to attack, but would be forced to stop.

I like the glyph of dagmar, I just don't like the placement. I'd accept the glyphs on this map either way (with or wothout D), but my preference is to leave dagmar off.
 
Grungebob, that is a good point, I just have over 30 MS so extra tiles is not a big issue for me. Of course my tourneyment was one of the smallest, maybe the smallest with 9 people, I had 8 boards set up, so I had lots of extra tiels to use, and then some.

CornP - I would say add an extra 2 tile beside the dagmar so you could go around it? just an idea - of course this is using more tiles which may not always be feesable if you are limited on tiles.

FW has always been my favorite board from the MS.
 
Hendal said:
Grungebob, that is a good point, I just have over 30 MS so extra tiles is not a big issue for me. Of course my tourneyment was one of the smallest, maybe the smallest with 9 people, I had 8 boards set up, so I had lots of extra tiels to use, and then some.
Click to expand...
Well when you go out of town to host a tournament like at Gencon, there are limitations to what can be accomplished. The one master set per map is a necessary limitation and should be adhered to strictly.
 
I really expected judges to chime in faster than this. Were my expectations higher than they should have been?
 
Riggler, I hate to disappoint, but I not going to be posting on a daily basis. Heroscape happens to be me favorite game to play, but falls short in priority to many things in my real life.

Have patience, grasshopper.

On to the map judging...

I am not a fan of of naming specific glyphs to a map, I am more of a fan of picking random glyphs from a glyph pool and placing them on a predetermined hex. I have no reasoning to say one way is better than the other, I just wanted to explain where I am coming from.

I agree with GrungeBob that we need to try to limit any "extra" hexes from appearing on tournament maps. Onesy and twosy extra hexes may not seem like a big deal to us, but that is because I am betting that we have most of everything that Hasbro has released and in multiples at that. I believe that we should limit maps to just whole Master Sets, none of the Wave figure expansions.

That being said, in able for Forsaken waters to reach the 24 hex starting zone and not mess up the balance of the map against the glyphs, it might be easier to stretch the starting zones back. Without changing the lay of the map too much, I think we can get away with moving the 2 three-hex grass pieces that appear toward the bottom of the map to behind the 21 hex starting zones that CornPuff suggested. What do you guys think about that idea?
 
I think those 3 hex grass tiles need to remain where they are at. I have seen both of those 3 hex pieces factor into games on FW; they should not be moved.

The additional 3 hexes are attainable like so:
FW_proposal_a.gif

the new black spots will work fine to accommodate the larger start zone of 24 hexes.

I feel strongly that the terrain already in place on FW needs to remain intact.

I have already stated my opinion that glyphs should be set for random; I am in agreement with UPC on that point.
 
First order of business: I agree with Rychean about his new 24-hex proposed start zones. I agree that we should avoid using 'Booster Terrain' like the plague.

Second order: glyphs.
Rychean said:
I have already stated my opinion that glyphs should be set for random; I am in agreement with UPC on that point.
Click to expand...

Well, I think random isn't as good as fixed. Random will produce a pretty crappy board sometimes, and fixed will always produce the same good board. Random glyphs adds a heavier luck element to the board, making it less strategic. I haven't seen much argument other than 'gut feeling' as to why random glyphs are good, and I would love to hear some reasons. I don't think random glyphs are the spawn of satan, I just think fixed glyphs are the best option for tournament play.

But if I'm outvoted, I might as well be constructive.

So, are we going to mandate how random glyphs work? Are they revealed before order marker placement? Are the revealed when you step on them? If we are going to use Kelda on random glyph tournament maps, we have to reveal glyphs before first round order markers. I strongly urge that we advocate this method of play if we are judging random glyph maps.

Which glyphs go randomly into which spots? We need to define the "Glyph Pool" from which we select glyphs and the "Glyph Locations" of where we put them.

I think [KAVG] should be our glyph pool, and the [KAVG] hexes should be our glyph locations. I am open to the idea of including the [D] glyph to the pool and locations.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top