Crescendo [4.0] is submitted for review.

[LPhillips]

New map: Crescendo [4.0] by LPhillips.
Map editor link: Crescendo [4.0]

[LPhillips]

Several balance changes made. Mostly the restriction of paths. The north/south areas are significantly different, and there should be several options for gaining control there. Ruin locations and rewards slightly reworked.

FFA games play out like several 2v2 matchups, with the first player to defeat his opponent gaining an advantage. However, fully conquering an opponent's land takes 15-20 turns, and access to others' lands after that is very limited, so it takes some time before you'll see anyone interrupt your fun.

[LPhillips]

Hi. It seems that some people have enjoyed Crescendo, and so it's worth improving and polishing.

Please give your opinions freely and tell me what you like or dislike about it, and any form of suggestions. I'll confine myself to answering questions directly, and after a few days (whenever there is time) suggestions will be included in the revisions to Crescendo 5.0.

[LPhillips]

This is a shameless bump!
Many maps are being revamped for 0.8. I am trying to revamp this map as well. It seems plenty of people are playing on it, but no one has any feedback! I know it's not perfect, so either no one reads the forum (false) or this topic is lost in the shuffle.

Please, tell me about things that suck on this map so I can fix them before issuing the next version. Thanks guys!

[Moonknight]

LP, here are my thoughts:

1. Having set production in all cities may not make this a great ladder map. It provides an advantage for those who have played the map before (and I realize that is really the case for all maps, but knowing what production is around the corner is different than knowing what production is good for the map).

2. It is very difficult for Orange and Red to battle and Teal and Black, might need some type of path, even if it is hills, ice or sand on the outskirts. Or, have the city that is connected by the pond link up to the other side in the middle of the map.

3. It would be great if you could set up a scenario map that makes it top 4 spots vs. the bottom 4 spots!

[LPhillips]

Alright! Thanks for the tips!

1) This is a very valid point, but I don't see a satisfactory solution. Any specific suggestions?

2) An ongoing consideration has been a path behind the fishing village to the giant-producing city. The balance concern is that in FFA games, the only thing facilitating the survival of the inner 4 players in the event that one of the outer 4 defeats his opponent early is the restricted access. Do you think a neutral-guarded path would be satisfactory?

3) Will do! I have no experience with the new map editor, but that will be a primary objective.

[Argammon]

Sorry teammates, I have to disagree.

1) That is Imo not a valid point because a clever player can take a look at the map in the mapeditor. I don't do that in non ladder games (fun games) but in ladder games I usually do so.

2) I think the map is a lot better for team play compared to FFA. Perhaps you should balance the map for that.

Hope that was a bit helpful.

[LPhillips]

Sorry teammates, I have to disagree.

How dare you?
The real objective of this topic is for everyone to say that it's perfect and nothing must be changed! No one may express any alternate opinions!!!


Is it possible to view others' maps in the map editor? Really? I learn something every day. Checking it out now, awesome feature!

My attempts at FFA balance may have to be abandoned in the end. But on the upside: If it's balanced for FFA, then it's balanced for team. Not necessarily true the other way around. So FFA balancing is at least not counter-productive.