Posts: 5,607
Threads: 618
Joined: Feb 2012
Reputation:
0
I'm thinking all kingdoms from 1st and 2nd Cycle would be available choices to the players.
Posts: 2,252
Threads: 227
Joined: Feb 2012
Reputation:
0
Great.
Lord Diamond
Please do not take any of my comments as a personal insult or as a criticism of the game 'Alamaze', which I very much enjoy. Rather, I hope that my personal insight and unique perspective may, in some way, help make 'Alamaze' more fun, a more successful financial venture, or simply more sustainable as a long-term project. Anyone who reads this post should feel completely free to ignore, disregard, scorn, implement, improve, dispute, or otherwise comment upon its content.
Posts: 682
Threads: 44
Joined: Apr 2013
Reputation:
0
So, potentially you could end up with everyone on the western half of the board?
Posts: 5,607
Threads: 618
Joined: Feb 2012
Reputation:
0
(09-26-2013, 01:55 AM)Jumbie Wrote: So, potentially you could end up with everyone on the western half of the board?
No, see "Kingdom Location".
Posts: 1,962
Threads: 70
Joined: Jun 2013
Reputation:
0
My only question here is the challenge involved with differentiation. Even with 15 Kingdoms, we see some small overlaps. If we add Westmen, Paladins, Halfling, Urik, Nomads, etc., will there be enough variety among certain positions? There are already similarities between EL and DA, and BL and RD. I could see more similarities developing between UR and TR, and HA and GN, and among the various races of humans.
I guess this will always fall along the lines of people's individual tastes varying, to some extent, just wondering if there are some other mechanics we might be able to add to further increase differentiation.
Perhaps beefing up the "alignment" or "faction" mechanic would help. Or alternatively, add a component such as ideology or government type (with certain in-game benefits and restrictions). Religion might be another possibility, although that is notoriously touchy ground, and might require a lot more background and development work.
Posts: 220
Threads: 8
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation:
0
Would the old 1st Cycle kingdoms get some special orders as the 2nd Cycle kingdoms have now? If they don't get some kind of boost, they'll be at a pretty significant disadvantage I think.
Overlap doesn't bother me too much. So there's a TR and UR in the same game. They have similar abilities - so? Might be interesting to see what happens if they go head to head
Given this new format, how will Natural Enemies work? I assume that mechanic would be removed, as it's a major advantage if a kingdom doesn't have its natural enemy playing in a game.
Posts: 5,607
Threads: 618
Joined: Feb 2012
Reputation:
0
(10-12-2013, 08:48 PM)Cargus10 Wrote: Would the old 1st Cycle kingdoms get some special orders as the 2nd Cycle kingdoms have now? If they don't get some kind of boost, they'll be at a pretty significant disadvantage I think.
Overlap doesn't bother me too much. So there's a TR and UR in the same game. They have similar abilities - so? Might be interesting to see what happens if they go head to head
Given this new format, how will Natural Enemies work? I assume that mechanic would be removed, as it's a major advantage if a kingdom doesn't have its natural enemy playing in a game.
Yes, Cargus. You feel me. All you said will happen.
Posts: 682
Threads: 44
Joined: Apr 2013
Reputation:
0
So... The Swampmen return?
Posts: 5,607
Threads: 618
Joined: Feb 2012
Reputation:
0
10-13-2013, 08:41 PM
(This post was last modified: 10-13-2013, 09:16 PM by Ry Vor.)
(10-13-2013, 05:05 PM)Jumbie Wrote: So... The Swampmen return?
Yes. Swampmen!
And Barbarians,
and Halflings,
and Nomads,
and Uriks,
and Paladins,
and Westmen.
There will be changes to all kingdoms - for example, the previously centrally located kingdoms like Giants and Paladins received some advantages to offset the vulnerable central geography. Now, Giants or Paladins might be anywhere on the map. But mainly, it will be to bring 1st Cycle kingdoms (above) up to 2nd Cycle standards, and then we make a few changes from there.
I'm still sorting out how to do the selection of geographic zones without bidding gold from starting treasury. I'm mulling something where a signup involves assigning 10 points between kingdom and zone. So, maybe player A chooses 10 points for Red Dragon, and so 0 for zone, meaning he will take any of the 12 zones not chosen by those players assigning some setup points to zone.
Or a Player could go the other way, pick, say a zone with a capital in Oakendell, assign maybe 5 points for that, and 3 to the Dark Elves, 2 to the Elves. It would be unlikely (I am just guessing, who knows?) someone would bid more than 5 for the Oakendell zone, and so his concern is if he doesn't get either the Dark or High Elves.
Seems like it could be a strategy in itself, and then the next mechanic would be the signup is on the forum, as now. And (maybe) players can change their bids for both kingdom and location anytime during the signup. Once there are 12 players, maybe the bidding stays open until 8pm Eastern the next day. Only numerals (no decimals) to spend the 10 points, and whoever posted first with the current bid wins any ties.
In that way, there is the excitement of what kingdom and persona will be where, and then when the game begins players can strategize based on that knowledge.
Additionally, we might be able to award the winner of a 3rd Cycle game 13 (say) selection points in her/his next game. Maybe a player in their first 3rd Cycle game gets 12 points.
Posts: 976
Threads: 33
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation:
0
10-13-2013, 11:35 PM
(This post was last modified: 10-14-2013, 02:24 AM by Hawk_.)
(10-13-2013, 08:41 PM)Ry Vor Wrote: (10-13-2013, 05:05 PM)Jumbie Wrote: So... The Swampmen return?
Yes. Swampmen!
And Barbarians,
and Halflings,
and Nomads,
and Uriks,
and Paladins,
and Westmen.
There will be changes to all kingdoms - for example, the previously centrally located kingdoms like Giants and Paladins received some advantages to offset the vulnerable central geography. Now, Giants or Paladins might be anywhere on the map. But mainly, it will be to bring 1st Cycle kingdoms (above) up to 2nd Cycle standards, and then we make a few changes from there.
I'm still sorting out how to do the selection of geographic zones without bidding gold from starting treasury. I'm mulling something where a signup involves assigning 10 points between kingdom and zone. So, maybe player A chooses 10 points for Red Dragon, and so 0 for zone, meaning he will take any of the 12 zones not chosen by those players assigning some setup points to zone.
Or a Player could go the other way, pick, say a zone with a capital in Oakendell, assign maybe 5 points for that, and 3 to the Dark Elves, 2 to the Elves. It would be unlikely (I am just guessing, who knows?) someone would bid more than 5 for the Oakendell zone, and so his concern is if he doesn't get either the Dark or High Elves.
Seems like it could be a strategy in itself, and then the next mechanic would be the signup is on the forum, as now. And (maybe) players can change their bids for both kingdom and location anytime during the signup. Once there are 12 players, maybe the bidding stays open until 8pm Eastern the next day. Only numerals (no decimals) to spend the 10 points, and whoever posted first with the current bid wins any ties.
In that way, there is the excitement of what kingdom and persona will be where, and then when the game begins players can strategize based on that knowledge.
Additionally, we might be able to award the winner of a 3rd Cycle game 13 (say) selection points in her/his next game. Maybe a player in their first 3rd Cycle game gets 12 points.
Maybe you should give the Urik the option to recruit both OG or OR. The terrain they were in would determine the troop type they got.
Also, flexible starting locations will need to involve starting sea power locations.
|
