Hexagon [4.0] is submitted for review.

[garvisus]

New map: Hexagon [4.0] by garvisus.
Map editor link: Hexagon [4.0]

[garvisus]

All units available at capitals. North river blocked with krakens. Some 3-turn and all 4 and 5-turn units available in the item cities.

[KGB]

This map really needs another update. The neutrals are overly hard (kill 2 minotaurs + 1 Lt Inf) for what you get (1 Lt Inf). On top of that the ruins are ridiculous (2 mummies in L1 ruins) and offer low rewards (250 for L1 ruins).

So you end up just rushing another player because it's too hard to conquer neutrals and much easier to just take another players city.

So please change the risk-reward on the cities/ruins. If we have to take down 2 Minotaurs (or Spiders etc) on a +10 wall bonus cities then there better be Minotaur (or Spider etc) production in the city. Otherwise it's better to just put 2 Hv Inf in all the cities. And the L1 ruins need to be dialed back from 2 Mummies to units normally found in such ruins (skeletons/ghosts). 250 gold isn't game breaking by any means.

At the moment I don't really find this a fun map to play.

KGB

[Moonknight]

I agree with KGB, i played this map once, and unless it is greatly changed (city production), i don't see myself playing again anytime soon.

[Chazar]

We are currently playing a 3vs3 ladder on this map, and it turned out exactly like KGB predicted: everyobdy rushed directly against the enemy team with one big stack, and the surviving heroes now rush on into the enemy's homeland, facing no more noteworthy opposition. Game over.in 11-12 turns. No one of my team wants to play that map again - but then again, we were on the loosing end of the hero clashes, so we might be biased.

The problem I see with this map is that it railroads the players too much: what is left for a player to decide?

Your only choice is the production in the captial, otherwise there is no choice: production is severly restricted, the difficult terrain leaves little room, and one must gather all troops in a single stack in hope to capture even a single neutral city (2 minos + 1 dwarf + 10 wall need some serious effort to conquer, and one even risks loosing a hero). The ruins are useless and have risky non-standard undeads, which is irritating and prevents leveling. Playing the map feels like a slow hike through a bog.

I like the idea of strong neutrals blocking certain key roads and providing some hero XP. I also like the non-symmetric terrain. I am also in favour of restricting some production - after all, I fondly remember those moments in Warlords1 when one captured a city offering production of a certain powerful unit type. So the idea of this map is pretty nice and appealing, but for now it is just too much. Or maybe it is just not intended to be played as 3vs3.

[Chazar]

PS:
Maybe there is an easy fix against rushing that keeps the idea of the map intact?

How about adding triggers that give the conqueror of a neutral city 2 minotaurs?

Currently, if one throws a stack against a neutral city, one looses a lot of troops and gains some weak production capability plus a liability of a weakly defended city. If one could quickly replenish the troops through these triggers, then conquering the neutrals becomes a feasible strategy.

[smursh]

I agree about the ruins particularly. In a 3x3 game I played I lost a hero to alv-2 ruin with 18 ul which meant no lead hero. All for a 500 gold reward? You need full strength UL- 12 for lv-1, 20 for lvl-2 to even bother. Yet with the need to spend so much on prod., who can afford ghosts/wizards to get the UL to get the UL to explore the ruins to get the gold to buy the units?

[LPhillips]

Garvisus is active. Yo, got a progress update for us?

Honestly, making it harder to rush players wouldn't see the map played more. People like wealthy maps. It was always irritating to conquer 5-10 cities and have terrible income and a host of Scouts, Crows, and Light Infantry. West Illuria was popular because it gave absurd income and let players mass uberstacks of powerful units to try to steamroll each other.

1) Restricted production is enough of a handicap to accomplish your goals without powerful guards as well. There should never be more than 1 extra defender, and not more than a Heavy Infantry, if all the city offers is Light Infantry production. Even then it ought to have other advantages like strategic positioning and/or good income.

2) Ruins should never have defenders disproportionate to the rewards. It's difficult enough to get an appropriately leveled/equipped hero onsite; maps that stack powerful armies on top of ruins and/or fill them with powerful undead must also offer strong rewards for the conquest. For example: A level 3 ruin close to someone's capitol is actually harder to search than one on the frontier, as one must backtrack to reach it. One map I played recently featured such a ruin, with a dragon on it, and a randomized reward (which was crap and much of the time will likely be so for anyone searching it).

You don't have to go for a map that will be everyone's favorite. I doubt that Burning Ice, a 20+ turn 1v1 ladder map, will ever be the crowd favorite. But you don't want to make your maps punishing to play.

PS: I like your map. Voted it my favorite in design for the contest. The criticism is just meant to be helpful.