Re: Big maps, few players: Balance?
 

Yes, you're right that the provinces/player ratio is the important thing here, but I couldnt decide upon all sensible combinations.

On the other hand, I do assume that people rather play bigger maps with fewer people than vice versa. Therefore by looking at the shift between the answers of the first and the second questions one can deduce the ratio I am interested in.

But I guess the poll isnt that important here anyway. I am really more interested in what people do to keep the balance.

Re: Big maps, few players: Balance?
 

I'd believe:

World Rich if Ermor or Pangea CW are IN.
Unless world standard is fine too.

Research:
Standard in map with 1-200 province.
Difficult in map with 201-300+ prov or
V.Difficult in map with 300+ prov

Usually I believe this is a nice setting.
Number of players counts not so much for this, but much more for pretender desing, since the more we're the earlier we come at war.

Re: Big maps, few players: Balance?
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I think it's more a single extremely vocal player, than a collection of other players.

Re: Big maps, few players: Balance?
 

First, the definitions of map size do cause some heated discussions until its dicovered that they have very different ideas of things like "small" and "large". You might take a galnce at a write-up I did on the subject. http://www.dom2minions.com/maps.shtml
Actually your poll looks like it got pretty close.

In general people tend to prefer the smaller maps. They dont get alot of discussion that way because small-medium maps are the size that can be dome manually. So most of them have names and people declare their love by saying the name of the map. Really big maps are hard to do manually. Most of them are done as ugly random generates so they dont tend to have names.

And yes big maps create an imbalance. Small maps create an imbalance. Long maps, plains/woodlands, water, mountains, design of the province borders... all of those in a map can give an advantage to one nation over others. The game is very complicated and the perfect "chess board" fair balanced tournament map would be very VERY difficult to create.

[ May 26, 2004, 15:15: Message edited by: Gandalf Parker ]

Re: Big maps, few players: Balance?
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Well Gandalf has told us the most popular downloads are the largest size maps(400+). No opinions... just FACTS.

Re: Big maps, few players: Balance?
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Well Gandalf has told us the most popular downloads are the largest size maps(400+). No opinions... just FACTS. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Well thats the most popular on my site. I was just surprised that anyone other than me was willing to play on such monsters. I wouldnt expect alot of interest in my small maps since they are ugly and we now have such excellent ones manually made. I think if we compared the huge and epic downloads from my site, with the map downloads from Illwinters site (most of the small-medium maps are there) we would discover that Dom2 players cover the whole range rather nicely.

I would point out though that there is apparently a need for someone to take one of my Epic sized maps, make it pretty (I can explain how some paint program commands can help alot there), make it interesting (the biggest request is for uncrossable mountains to create zones and chokepoints). The new Faerun map is I think the only Epic sized map we have other than the random ones.

[ May 26, 2004, 17:11: Message edited by: Gandalf Parker ]

Re: Big maps, few players: Balance?
 

Responding to original question, without full quoting:

* Size and players affect balance a lot, but large maps don't "break" balance. They just change it. I'd say that small maps with many players are the most unbalanced, because there are fewer options and super-combattants and first-strikes are favored. When there is plenty of room, then there are many more options, god choice is less important, and everyone has time and opportunity to come up with something effective to do. Initial strength may be relatively less important than on crowded maps, but it's still useful for kick-starting initial growth, which tends to be a self-reinforcing effect.

"Are non-recuperating combating pretenders like wyrm or cyclops more useless in bigger maps, as they have to fight more in a longer game, hence getting more afflictions?"

Nothing is entirely useless, and "more useless" is a contradiction in terms.

Players who think non-recuperating combat pretenders are ineffective, want to have their cake and eat it too, without having to take any risks or learn how to fight effectively or manage risks.

Focusing on affliction risk doesn't make sense to me, although on a simple level, if you want to kamikaze your pretender recklessly as much as possible, then yes this will be an effect.

Large maps do reduce the importance of pretenders, and especially combat pretenders, for the basic reason that there is only one of them, so they are a smaller part of a larger world. In a large world, even if you have nothing that can beat an enemy pretender, you can easily win if you can consistently beat his other armies. If the map is so small that there are few armies, few battles, it becomes hard to avoid a single ultra-powerful unit.

"Are researching/rainbow pretenders less useful in smaller maps?"

I'd say so. Especially if a combat pretender can show up at your doorstep in the first few turns, before you can develop a counter.

PvK

Re: Big maps, few players: Balance?
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">As you yourself mentioned, the advantage granted by, and utility of, an SC declines late game: Non-recuperating, "budget" combat pretenders like a Wyrm or Cyclops, which generally provides a secondary function in addition to his role as an SC, such as primarily scales or a blessing, and what gains you were able to reap with him early game.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Even if you fight fairly conservatively, afflictions happen. Of course, afflictions can be cured with modest effort, and if you're fielding a high-affliction risk SC, you should be planning either medical leave or a better HMO plan. This is hardly an arduous chore that renders your SC useless.

Re: Big maps, few players: Balance?
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">That's one of the many reasons I like super large maps. Another reason is huge maps mean there will be huge armies ! Another reason is its very unlikely another human opponent can rush attack you.

[ May 26, 2004, 21:16: Message edited by: NTJedi ]

Re: Big maps, few players: Balance?
 

Norfleet: Yep, and yep. I agree.