Middle Earth [13.0] is submitted for review.

[Jeremy]

New map: Middle Earth [13.0] by Jeremy.
Map editor link: Middle Earth [13.0]

[Jeremy]

Updated per player suggestions. Added city back for Dwarves, made Minas Morgul easier for Mordor to take.

[Jeremy]

Updated per player suggestions. Added city back for Dwarves, made Minas Morgul easier for Mordor to take.

[KGB]

Even though some sides are hopeless (Gondor/Rohan) and semi-hopless (Witch King/Dwarves) this can still be a fun map for team play depending on how good a player is in Mordor/Shire.

If it's a good player in those sides it can be a rout but a mediocre/weak player in those sides makes for a decent game.

Here is an example of what I mean by a rout. I recently played the Shire on a rich start (1400ish gold). I took a Barb on turn 1 and started Wizard procution in the capitol and captured the Wizard city next to the capitol on turn 1. With the Wizard I started with heading for Saurman I was able to pillage/raze much of his cities on turn 3. My dual Wizard production then allowed insane expansion and held the Witch King in his cities for fear of blessed Wizard attacks. The game was over very quickly with my Barb doing some more expansion/looting ruins for gold.

KGB

[Jeremy]

After having played many, many games on this map on all sides, I certainly would not describe Gondor as hopeless -- it's one of the strongest positions, only held in check by the fact that it has so many neighbors.

The Dwarves have the opposite issue. Their native position isn't great, but they functionally have just one neighbor, the Orcs/Witch King, and the Orcs have to deal with the fact that they have two neighbors who have little better to do than to attack them. Because of this relative position, I consider the Dwarves the safest position to play. I added back a city for them not because I think they need it for play-balance reasons, but because everyone was shocked that they started so slowly. (Didn't hurt their win percentages, but it was slower than your typical Warbarons start.)

Glad to hear of the Shire and Saruman fighting. One reason they both have Wizards is to encourage such fighting. Still, it takes a pretty incompetent Saruman to lose Isenguard to Wizards. Neither Rohan or the Shire have crows -- which further helps Saruman easily defend his position.

[smursh]

I agree that Sauruman should be able to defend better. In a recent game I played with that start I was able to take advantage of the wizard production to expand twice as fast as everyone else. Even though my orc ally was overrun I was able to pillage the shire by turn 5. What seems to happen is that between the shire and Sauruman the fight is over faster than the fights in other sections of the map, with the winner dominating the northwest section of the map.

This also brings more chance to these starts, if you wizard can win multiple battles early, and the enemy wizard loses his first solo battle you will easily defeat him. If the situation is reversed you may not get a second chance.

[KGB]

Jeremy,

By Hopeless I mean those sides basically spend the entire game on the defensive and must wait for the Shire player to relieve them. It's true Gondor has some cities to the south but his expansion ends quickly after getting those few cities and his offensive chances are virtually zero because by the time he gets the cities to the south of his capitol Mordor is crossing in force in the north and Haradrim is coming by boat with Elephants in the South. I've played Gondor several times and have never been able to successfully invade Mordor/Haradrim with a halfway competent player playing those sides until the Shire arrives and takes down Isengard by which time the game is virtually decided anyway.

The Dwarves have the exact opposite issue. They often never get into battle other than a brief skirmish with the Witch King. Usually the Shire attacks first due to their better movement and the Dwarves provide the finishing touches. After which they are too slow to walk south to help against Mordor so their job ends with the defeat of the Witch King.

So many players find playing those sides boring because they have almost a set role. The Shire is the only interesting side to play for 'Good' because the Wizards and their expansion allows them to pick what kind of game they want to play.

Note this is scenario mode. FFA games are something else entirely and really outside the scope of what the map was designed for.

Smursh,

Isengard/Shire Wizard battles really matter who goes first. That allows one or the other player to steal a march on the other. If you get the double Wizard production for the Shire it's HUGE because you have 2 Wizards to 1 allowing you to pin Isengard in their 3 home cities and the one just to the north for many turns due to fear of Wizard attacks. With Rohan help from the other side it really makes it tough for Isengard if the Shire player comes in force (which they should do since the Witch King doesn't expand that fast and taking out Isengard is the most important thing that the good side can do).

KGB

[Jeremy]

Sounds like I should remove default Wizard production from both the Shire and Saruman, and merely make it a build option for each of them -- and in just one place each. Would that solve many of the Shire/Saruman issues?

Still, it might create other problems, because I want to encourage the Shire to fight Saurman rather than the Orcs, and I want to encourage Saruman to fight the Shire rather than Rohan -- or at least to give each of those positions both options.

[Jeremy]

So gentlemen, what specific changes would you suggest I make, to either the Ladder or Scenario versions.

Obviously, I'd like to stay true to the story/theme, but I'm willing to sacrifice some of that for balance and fun.

[KGB]

The best change is probably the one you are most loathe to do.

Looking at some of the Tolkien maps:
http://hugo1900.pagesperso-orange.fr/MA ... ION-7.html

The change I would make is to adjust the map itself slightly for game play.
1) Move Moria about 5 squares to the north
2) Move the Isengard area about 10 squares to the north. Move the river only 5 as part of Rohan movement and then just have the other 5 be the river curving to the north.
3) Move Rohan/Gondor/Mordor about 5 squares to the north (shrink the area above Mordor to that water by those 5 squares)
4) Move the Dwarf Iron Hills area about 3-4 squares to the left and potentially south a couple of squares.
5) If you are really ambitious I'd also move Gondor/Rohan/Isengard around 2-4 squares to the left as well to give a bit more separation to Mordor.

This will bring Isengard/Shire closer by 10 squares to conflict and make Isengard better able to aid the Witch King. It will also spread out the distance between Rohan/Isengard by 5 squares to prevent early crow/rush tactics. It also allows Rohan/Isengard/Gondor/Mordor a chance to get to Moria/Mirkwood before the game ends (those areas are almost never used). The Dwarves will enter battle slightly sooner and have a better chance to come into conflict with Mordor. Lastly it puts Haradrim 5 squares further from Gondor allowing more time for Gondor and potentially allowing you to give another city to Haradrim due to the fact they'd get into conflict another turn or so later.

KGB