Change in the foundry

[The Neon Peon]

I will say that all simple maps play generally the same. Some have different bottle necks, and varying bonus sises that change gameplay and strategy a little, but other than that, you could place any one of those maps, and it could just as well have been the Classic map, or the British Isles map.

More complex maps are a lot different. Just because I know how to play AoR, does not make me any better at Feudal, (and even the different forms of the map have completely different tactics, not anywhere near the same.) Just because I know New World makes me no more able to play on Waterloo. I like this in a map. If something is unique in more than graphics and arrangement of territories, there is more strategy.

The map foundry moving in this direction. Lets take a look as the past few maps:
City Mogul: unique
Conquer4: unique
Egypt Lower: standard
Egypt Upper: standard
Egypt Numbia: standard
Halloween Hallows: unique
High Seas: standard
Iceland: standard
Luxembourg: standard
Operation Drug War: unique
Poker Club: unique
Supermax: Prison Riot!: unique
Sydney Metro: standard
Treasures Of Galapagos: unique
The Citadel: standard
Archipelago: standard
Imperium Romanum: unique
Haiti: standard
Charleston: standard
Europa: standard
Madagascar: standard
Oasis: unique
Forbidden City: unique

Unique New Maps Total: 10
Standard New Maps Total: 13

Now, these seem to go against me. But take a look at the foundry without these last maps:

Unique Old Maps Total: 25
Standard Old Maps Total: 64

Big difference, eh? Look at the percents:

Unique New Maps Percent: 43.5%
Standard New Maps Percent: 56.5%

Unique Old Maps Percent: 28.1%
Standard Old Maps Percent: 71.9%

In my opinion, people are getting tired of the same old block of territories with bonuses. They are adding new features to gameplay and making their maps stand out.

Any thoughts on this change? The statistics show it is happening. You can argue about what I have defined as a standard or unique map, and there are a few on which I was at the borderline, but the outcome won't change much in the final statistics.

[BaldAdonis]

Looking at that list, I prefer the standard maps by a large margin. Aside from the Egypt atrocities, they all play well on every setting (can't play Egypt with two players, it's too small). The "unique" maps seem to have one "unique" setting that they work on, and then they're garbage if you want to play anything else. You can see it with most on two player/team games, but a few that work there (say, Prison Riot or Conquer 4) have abysmal set-ups for escalating games.

*edit*
It should be noted, of course, that a lot of the xml tools used to make these unique maps weren't available until very recently. Now if they could just add an extra tool that stops games from being made with certain map/setting combinations, they'd be set.

[e_i_pi]

Looking at that list, I prefer the standard maps by a large margin. Aside from the Egypt atrocities, they all play well on every setting (can't play Egypt with two players, it's too small). The "unique" maps seem to have one "unique" setting that they work on, and then they're garbage if you want to play anything else.

Wow, harsh criticism of the Egypt maps BA. I've played them a couple of times, and while I doubt they'll be my favourite, they don't rank as atrocious for me. I can think of a few atrocious maps (some very recent), but I'll avoid this becoming a b*tching session.

I agree to an extent with the "unique" maps. Though there are several that work on many different settings. And keep in mind that several standard maps don't work at all on certain settings. I had a 4p doubles game on a new one recently - that game went pear-shaped on the drop. I can't imagine how bad it would be with more than 5 players, and I don't intend on finding out.

I think the biggest problem i find with "unique" maps is that, if you don't now it inside out, you have no chance. I massacre some players on Waterloo, and consistently get beaten on AoR. Supermax against people that don't know what's going on is generally a cakewalk...

That said, I prefer complex maps, but I think mapmakers have to realise that the complexities of the map have to be spelled out in black and white. You might have a great idea, but if you can't communicate that clearly and concisely in the instructions, then (IMO) it becomes a bad map

[yeti_c]

*edit*
It should be noted, of course, that a lot of the xml tools used to make these unique maps weren't available until very recently. Now if they could just add an extra tool that stops games from being made with certain map/setting combinations, they'd be set.

FWIW - the XML for Conquer 4 has been written for about 2 years.

C.