MAP - All map discussions here please

[Kael Hate]

But how would you put 12 elements in such a map that they can all attack each other (because that is basically the problem).

Yes, that is impossible in a flat figure, but in a 3D map it will be also difficult.

Quite easy to map in text where all distances between edges of territories is 0.
The issue is of a visual nature only.

[Kamietsu]

But how would you put 12 elements in such a map that they can all attack each other (because that is basically the problem).

Yes, that is impossible in a flat figure, but in a 3D map it will be also difficult.

However, I can see something in Terro's idea.

Give each element, let's say, 12 hexagons + a capital = 13.

You could use 3 or 4 different layers, like:

Underworld: Darkness, Death and Fire
World: Life, Gravity and Earth
Heaven: Air, Light and Water
Another Dimension: Aether, Time and Entropy

This made most sense to me:
Underworld: Darkness and Death are obvious, fire are the flames of hell
World: Earth (of course) and gravity should be placed in a normal world, life makes sense also.
Heaven: Air flies, light is about it for example: blessing and guardian angle, and water comes from heaven (rain)
Another dimension: Aether and Time are obvious, entropy gets here to make it 3:3:3:3 but entropy is also something we don't know on Earth.

You could add some cities (or whatever you call them) where you can buy or sell cards (if we chose so), where you could travel to other dimensions (also the cities there), they will be free places (no fights), but each time you go trough it, you lose 1 or 2 cards (to prevent people from abusing the free-ting).

I like this idea the best so far. A set of 4 overlapping maps, but could also be seen individually. And with having four separate maps, all which have many points of interactions to cross over into the different layers, it would be much easier to arrange and govern over. That way you don't have to have one super giant map to always look after.

Maybe even clans could be formed between the different layers. Like The Underworld, World, Heaven, and Dimensional would all be clans whom sort of war between each other, sort of. And as time progresses, new alliances could be formed between the elements, new enemies, etc.

Maybe things could go even as far as Elements crossing between the maps themselves. As new alliances form and old ones turn to enemies, over several turns, that Element could set up in an entirely differetn region.

Or maybe no clans at all and just those elements that are on similar levels get along to some extent better than with those of a different layer.

But then, the interaction between elements becomes a little more drawn out and specialized, since it would be difficult for Fire to interact with Air then, or vice versa. Or how would one enter and stay in the Heaven map? Would it be a series of flying cities with several Air Ports on the World map to connect them. And then maybe the Dimensional map could have access points on all three of the other maps. Maybe like Dimensional Gateways that were set up long ago when the World of Elements was still young.

but I think that would serve as the best and most realistic in terms of fiction way to go about things.

Also, I may not be online too often, or have the greatest of graphic skills, but I will draw up a draft, nothing too details, just a visual to go along with this idea. I'll try to get something done by this weekend. But yeah, I definitely think this would be the best idea, in terms of realistic fiction, and managing.

[Bloodshadow]

For the map, why not something like this:

There can be three maps, of four elements each. Each of the four-element group forms square, so there are three squares. The three squares are then interlocked together to form a cube. This is inspired by something Kael Hate posted a long time ago: each of the three squares can rotate freely, therefore all elements can reach all other elements.

The three squares can be the following:

Cardinal: - This square will resemble outer space.
Material: - This square will resemble the material world.
Spiritual: - This square will resemble heaven, hell, etc.

[thekillergame]

where is it for?? 

[Kael Hate]

For the map, why not something like this:

There can be three maps, of four elements each. Each of the four-element group forms square, so there are three squares. The three squares are then interlocked together to form a cube. This is inspired by something Kael Hate posted a long time ago: each of the three squares can rotate freely, therefore all elements can reach all other elements.

The three squares can be the following:

Cardinal: - This square will resemble outer space.
Material: - This square will resemble the material world.
Spiritual: - This square will resemble heaven, hell, etc.

Ooooh, thats quite trippy. I like it. The only advantage/disadvantage is that the elements will be furtherest away from their opposite.

[Scaredgirl]

Yes. You are going to try and give advantages to elements in different ways, either by location or some other method.

Problem is those advantages aren't equivalent. Instead of each team getting 1 apple, 1 banana and 1 orange. some teams could end up with 3 oranges and no other. If Oranges turn out to be stronger than the other advantages then the teams without oranges are disadvantaged.  Thus sucks to be them. If everyone has the same location compared to all others and have the same resources then only the Element is the variant and makes it fair cause that is what we are testing against each other.

No. The goal is to get everything balanced, but different. We are not going to give any element a disadvantage on purpose, but in case it happens, elements with slight map disadvantage might have a small resource advantage for example. This way the overall balance is about the same.

There has to be a certain level of realism in the map and in the world. Sure this is a game and not real life, but games often mimic real life which helps players to get into the game.  If you used symmetric "chessboard" maps, it's more like an e-sport or something. That's not the goal here. We are following the MMORPG model.

You know, for a world that's composed of all these Elements by some God (Zanzarino ), you'd think that the world would be in constant chaos from all these battles that, at some point, would cause the actual 'realm' of Elements to be shifting as well.

Why not have it so that, aside from the Elemental bases, the world is constantly changing in terms of spaces, and either spaces are added, removed, or switched around to give each element different advantages and disadvantages every set of a plethora of rounds, so that no element can be 'in the center' or having better access to a certain area of space, and whatnot?

This is exactly what's going to happen. Resources will move around, cities will get destroyed, others get built, etc. We will have a "living" map.

As for number of maps.. I'd like to see one big map (again, I'm following the MMORPG model). This has the advantage of everything being visible at the same time. Of course you can include the possible other maps next to this main map, basically merging everything.

Currently my favorite is:

Main map
Another dimension  +
Underworld  + 50% + 50%

This would be one big map and two smaller ones.

[Kael Hate]

No. The goal is to get everything balanced, but different. We are not going to give any element a disadvantage on purpose, but in case it happens, elements with slight map disadvantage might have a small resource advantage for example. This way the overall balance is about the same.

My experience of games over the last 30 years have taught me unless everyone starts identical its a disadvantage to someone.

There has to be a certain level of realism in the map and in the world. Sure this is a game and not real life, but games often mimic real life which helps players to get into the game.  If you used symmetric "chessboard" maps, it's more like an e-sport or something. That's not the goal here. We are following the MMORPG model.

I'm a fan of virtual worlds and things that roam in dimensions other than 2-d but I've built several dynamic 2-d mapping systems for games.  A big flaw with Flat mapping is fantasy and sci-fi worlds is the lack of or the measuring of terrestrial and non-terrestrial movement. An Aether elemental can step across dimensional planes, a Water elemental can swim, an Air elemental can fly whereas an earth elemental cannot, but you map how they move with a simple edge to edge system. Personally I don't like this, its more of a link to chess with its flat plane, map walls and constrained movement.

Personal views.

[Scaredgirl]

No. The goal is to get everything balanced, but different. We are not going to give any element a disadvantage on purpose, but in case it happens, elements with slight map disadvantage might have a small resource advantage for example. This way the overall balance is about the same.

My experience of games over the last 30 years have taught me unless everyone starts identical its a disadvantage to someone.

You needed 30 years of gaming experience to realize that? It's common knowledge and the most difficult part of game balance.

A popular board game called Twilight Struggle (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/12333/twilight-struggle) is a perfect example of very nice balance even though players have totally different starting positions and cards. Not all games have to be like chess to be balanced.

And like I've said, we are using the MMORPG model. I find it unbelievable that I need to waste my time defending a realistic looking world map over some manufactured symmetrical "chess" board. We can use the latter in some other event, but this event is about something else.

[Malduk]

I find it unbelievable that I need to waste my time defending a realistic looking world map over some manufactured symmetrical "chess" board. We can use the latter in some other event, but this event is about something else.

It is easy to say "we'll try to make it balanced, but if it doesnt work for someone, sucks for them". People playing the element that gets the short end of the stick would probably not see it as "realistic looking at world map" even if the whole system is prettier that way in the eye of the observer
It is quite normal to voice a concern over that.

As for mapping system, I quite like this idea:

The three squares can be the following:

Cardinal: - This square will resemble outer space.
Material: - This square will resemble the material world.
Spiritual: - This square will resemble heaven, hell, etc.

And about 50% of element on one map, wouldnt that make borders of element thorn between two maps more vulnerable to more attackers and harder to defend? On the attacking side, if rule of mark of territory gets implemented, attacking will also be harder as they'll need to have cards from many different elements.

[Krzysiek K.]

And about 50% of element on one map, wouldnt that make borders of element thorn between two maps more vulnerable to more attackers and harder to defend?

So, the goals are:
- make starting position identical to every element,
- make things look realistic

We have 12 elements, so the first thing that comes to mind is to use dodecahedron as a globe (we can subdivide it a bit to have more tiles) and randomly place elements on dodecahedron tiles. This way everybody will start having exactly 5 neighbors.

[Kael Hate]

And like I've said, we are using the MMORPG model. I find it unbelievable that I need to waste my time defending a realistic looking world map over some manufactured symmetrical "chess" board. We can use the latter in some other event, but this event is about something else.

I don't like MMORPG Models. I think they are deliberately unbalanced because you as the player are granted access to areas based on level.
I like opening equality and think that if I was to participate I would enjoy it more so thats what I'm going to campaign for.

Could we put it to Poll,
Which map style would you prefer?
- Perfeclty Equivalent style map with non terrestial limitations on territory interaction
- Uneven MMORPG style Visual Flat map with other advantages given to offset a disadvantaged map position.

[xdude]

1. I'd rather have a perfectly balanced map than a MMORPG-type map.
2. I'd rather have 1 big Map than a few layers, each with 2-4 elements on them.

So yeah, that's what I wanted to say.