[Dom3] ANOTHER newbie game - MA, [5/5] - In progress

DSMatticus · Post by **DSMatticus** » Thu May 17, 2012 5:54 am

Zinegata wrote:
DSMatticus wrote: If we do VP's, which I'm fine with, it's possible to set it up such that some are in capitals, right? I'd like to force the eventual winner to have to at least break down a few other faction's doors.
I think that capital provinces are VP provinces by default. I've yet to see a VP gme wherein a capital was not a VP province.

Hm. I think you're right, actually.

koz · Post by **koz** » Thu May 17, 2012 6:00 am

Wow, so many folks agreeing with me. Gotta be a make-up thing for my Randomly Shit On Dreams Day yesterday or something...

Archmage: Bear in mind that Mictlan, despite its rainbow-esque appearance, is a Nature faction and does play like one.

Now I have to go practice my Machaka, and think of a characterization. Which is actually harder than it appears.

Archmage · Post by **Archmage** » Thu May 17, 2012 6:12 am

Mister_Sinister wrote:Archmage: Bear in mind that Mictlan, despite its rainbow-esque appearance, is a Nature faction and does play like one.

They have some nice stuff. I'm looking forward to the game. I don't expect to have an earth-shatteringly surprising strategy, but with any luck I at least won't make a fool of myself.

Map is going to be Small Divide (Wraparound).

Since I've never done this before, I'm not sure how to set up the VPs.

How many VPs should be placed?
How many VPs need to be capped, i.e., what percentage of VPs is necessary to win?
Consensus is "capitals are VP provinces," so that is set to yes.

If there are six capitals and we want some people's home nations to actually need to be captured for the win, something like 6 of 10 VPs on the map?

Zinegata · Post by **Zinegata** » Thu May 17, 2012 6:18 am

Archmage wrote:
Mister_Sinister wrote:Archmage: Bear in mind that Mictlan, despite its rainbow-esque appearance, is a Nature faction and does play like one.
They have some nice stuff. I'm looking forward to the game. I don't expect to have an earth-shatteringly surprising strategy, but with any luck I at least won't make a fool of myself.

Map is going to be Small Divide (Wraparound).

Since I've never done this before, I'm not sure how to set up the VPs.

How many VPs should be placed?
How many VPs need to be capped, i.e., what percentage of VPs is necessary to win?
Consensus is "capitals are VP provinces," so that is set to yes.

I'd suggest something along the lines of either 6 VP provinces or 12 VP provinces. Basically, make sure the total number of VP provinces is divisible by the number of players.

Then the number of VPs required to win should be around 30-50% of the VP total.

I think a good setup will be either 6 VPs, need 3 to win (meaning the victor conquered two capitals). Or 12 VPs, need 5 to win (victor conquered about half of the board). I am a bit more partial to the former given the smallish map.

Archmage · Post by **Archmage** » Thu May 17, 2012 6:21 am

The suggestion for capital-only VPs with 3 to win appeals. Objections?

koz · Post by **koz** » Thu May 17, 2012 6:26 am

I would prefer there to be non-capital VPs, because this means that fights over non-capital territory become much more relevant. If you make capital-only VPs, then you're basically saying 'everyone bumrush capitals'. And I think that's a bit dull.

And Archmage - I'm still making a fool of myself with my play, and I've been at this a while now.

DSMatticus · Post by **DSMatticus** » Thu May 17, 2012 6:32 am

Mister_Sinister wrote:If you make capital-only VPs, then you're basically saying 'everyone bumrush capitals'. And I think that's a bit dull.

That's really how it already is. The capital is the heart of your territory; it's where most of your mages sit and do shit. Not many people rebound from losing it. If you think you can take a capital, you probably should.

Zinegata · Post by **Zinegata** » Thu May 17, 2012 6:43 am

Yeah, in a tight map like this there won't be much fighting over just the non-capital VP. A war will probably aim for a knock out blow by taking the capital.

The reason to have more than 1 VP per player is to allow for some more granularity with the victory conditions. For instance - winning with 5 VP out of 12 means you probably conquered one enemy empire and are halfway conquering a second empire. As opposed to demolishing 2 empires in a 3 to win, 6 total setup.

It will not discourage players from gunning for the enemy capitals at all,

Korwin · Post by **Korwin** » Thu May 17, 2012 6:45 am

Just one thing, if there are only 6 VP's and they are in the Capitals (I think there are no ways for them not to be in the capital) you tell every player where the Capitals are.

In that case I would advice Mictlan to an Double Bless and to rush the nearest VP...

Zinegata · Post by **Zinegata** » Thu May 17, 2012 6:50 am

You wouldn't know who is in each province though, so your rush could end up meeting a weak enemy or somebody else with bless rush ideas...

DSMatticus · Post by **DSMatticus** » Thu May 17, 2012 6:54 am

That realization changed my research priorities fast.

Edit: plus, grabbing two caps within the first 20 turns pretty much guarantees the world is declaring war on you with that VP set-up. But yeah, maybe we should have 6 caps and 6 non-caps and you have to hold 7/12?

koz · Post by **koz** » Thu May 17, 2012 7:07 am

I'm all for 6 caps and 6 non-caps. It also means that I'll have to get my magic artillery power up faster - Mictlan is probably on my 'kill before too dangerous' radar.

DSMatticus · Post by **DSMatticus** » Thu May 17, 2012 7:31 am

Mister wrote:It also means that I'll have to get my magic artillery power up faster - Mictlan is probably on my 'kill before too dangerous' radar.

That's backwards. Blesses get less powerful with time. Not that jaguar warriors aren't useful straight into the late game, but every turn diminishes their awesomeness merely by happening.

Zinegata · Post by **Zinegata** » Thu May 17, 2012 7:55 am

DSMatticus wrote:That realization changed my research priorities fast.

Edit: plus, grabbing two caps within the first 20 turns pretty much guarantees the world is declaring war on you with that VP set-up. But yeah, maybe we should have 6 caps and 6 non-caps and you have to hold 7/12?

Actually, you auto-win once you capture two enemy capitals in a 6 VP (Capital only) setup. Which is to be expected, since you basically control half the world now.

Also, remember the big issue with Mictlan - Jaguars are cap-only in MA. That is why they fade later in the game; you only get a set number of them per turn because they're limited to your capital.

DSMatticus · Post by **DSMatticus** » Thu May 17, 2012 7:59 am

zinegata wrote:Actually, you auto-win once you capture two enemy capitals in a 6 VP (Capital only) setup. Which is to be expected, since you basically control half the world now.

I actually meant 'hold' two capitals, I was counting their original. My word choice was poor in light of that.

Zinegata · Post by **Zinegata** » Thu May 17, 2012 8:03 am

Taking your first enemy capital will not necessarily result in the world ganging up on you; because it's quite likely someone else will also be at 2VPs.

I honestly expect that the game will eventually become a three-nation setup after the first year or two of the game.

Games with few players and a relatively tight map are usually quick and bloody affairs.

Winnah · Post by **Winnah** » Thu May 17, 2012 1:01 pm

Could you post a link to the wraparound version of small divide?

I have the normal version, but my efforts to find the wraparound version have not borne fruit.

I'm otherwise ambivilant about the game settings. An UW nation has less to fear from a rush, but is also unlikely to be doing any rushing. That may hinder my efforts to stall a player that gains an early lead.

Archmage · Post by **Archmage** » Thu May 17, 2012 5:32 pm

Let's do 6 caps and 6 non-caps, then, total 12 VPs, 7 to win.

The wraparound map version on the server includes a link, but it's apparently a link to the original version and not the wraparound version. Does every player need to have the map in their maps folder (with the wraparound setting checked) before the game starts?

MisterDee · Post by **MisterDee** » Thu May 17, 2012 5:38 pm

Any chance of me joining the game?

I'm still at the learning the ropes stage - but still, I managed to conquer a couple of AI independent provinces, that means I'm ready for the big league -right?

I'll take whatever nation remains and isn't too horrible for a first-time player to use.

Archmage · Post by **Archmage** » Thu May 17, 2012 6:22 pm

Contrary to previous advice, I'm willing to play 7 if no one else minds, though that does mean we're going to have to choose a new map.

MisterDee · Post by **MisterDee** » Thu May 17, 2012 6:24 pm

Nah, forget it then. I can get by playing solo until the next one. And honestly I probably still need to do some homework to be at least better than an AI nation.

koz · Post by **koz** » Thu May 17, 2012 8:56 pm

Map is here.

Also, Archmage, do you need help setting up the game?

DSMatticus · Post by **DSMatticus** » Thu May 17, 2012 9:17 pm

Archmage wrote:The wraparound map version on the server includes a link, but it's apparently a link to the original version and not the wraparound version. Does every player need to have the map in their maps folder (with the wraparound setting checked) before the game starts?

Mister_Sinister ninja'd me. Use his map. You can change the map somehow. Under admin options and game settings, maybe? I don't know.

P.S., did you provide a link to the game on llamaserver at all? I didn't see it, but I'm guessing it's this one: http://www.llamaserver.net/gameinfo.cgi ... icBoogaloo

Anyway, on the wraparound thing: clicking wraparound doesn't make a Dominions 3 map actually wraparound. It makes the map image repeat itself infinitely in every direction, which is what a wraparound map should do (below the bottom, you have the top repeated, etc, etc). To make a map wraparound so that you can also move from top to bottom, you have to add connections after that manually. But the link Mister_Sinister provided already has all that, so we're good.

koz · Post by **koz** » Thu May 17, 2012 9:35 pm

DSMatticus wrote:
Archmage wrote:The wraparound map version on the server includes a link, but it's apparently a link to the original version and not the wraparound version. Does every player need to have the map in their maps folder (with the wraparound setting checked) before the game starts?
Mister_Sinister ninja'd me. Use his map. You can change the map somehow. Under admin options and game settings, maybe? I don't know.

P.S., did you provide a link to the game on llamaserver at all? I didn't see it, but I'm guessing it's this one: http://www.llamaserver.net/gameinfo.cgi ... icBoogaloo

Anyway, on the wraparound thing: clicking wraparound doesn't make a Dominions 3 map actually wraparound. It makes the map image repeat itself infinitely in every direction, which is what a wraparound map should do (below the bottom, you have the top repeated, etc, etc). To make a map wraparound so that you can also move from top to bottom, you have to add connections after that manually. But the link Mister_Sinister provided already has all that, so we're good.

My map should be on the server, under 'Broken Kingdoms Wraparound' or something, since I've made a game with it already.

Archmage · Post by **Archmage** » Thu May 17, 2012 9:43 pm

DSM found the correct link, yes. Should've actually linked that in the thread myself.

Mister_Sinister wrote:"Broken Kingdoms Wraparound"

Also, I'm not sure if I need help or not--the FAQ seems pretty straightforward, but it's always possible I screwed something up. I thought we were using Small Divide Wraparound, which is already on the server. If that's wrong, I'll fix it.