So have a new map under development and need to do some testing. It's an NHL map and thus obviously more conceptual. I'd love to show it but need to play against someone else first to get the full effect.

So calling all puck fans!

Feel free to send me an invite. This sounds awesome!

Im a hockey fan but I dont think I will recive an invite.

Had to tweak it a bit more before creating the game.

http://warlight.net/MultiPlayer.aspx?GameID=1786094

Think this should let people at least see the map and its mechanics.

Currently, "Cup layer 1" only links to "Vancouver". I think you're missing a connection (not entirely sure which one exactly, I'm not an ice hockey fan) to somewhere on the East Coast.

I think thats how its suppose to be, once you capture a western division you spread out to all western confrence divisions leading to the Western confrence champion Vancouver, then you can get the bottom of the Stanley Cup. If you go Eastern confrence you make it to the Eastern confrence champ Boston and you can go to the top of the Stanley Cup, which would mean an epic battle in the cup.

RvW,
Boston connects to Chalice (the top of the Cup) and I made it this fashion to have the two conferences connected by the Cup. The two teams that connect were the conference finalists and Cup combatants last season.

It does admittedly make for something of a choke point though.


Was originally considering having the teams within a division only connect in order of their finish last season and distribution mode be the last team in each division so you had to fight your way up the standings. (for example, the NE bonus path would be Ottawa -> Toronto -> Buffalo -> Montreal -> Boston -> others)
Thought that might be too limited though and made less sense for random distribution.

Were it possible, I would love to be able to tweak connections based on distribution modes (to allow for the system described above) and to allow for higher neutral armies in specific spots (namely the Cup)

Also would be great to have a victory condition such as reaching the Chalice (having Boston connect to the bottom of course) to signify winning the Cup.

Oh sorry, I overlooked the connection to the top of the cup; I assumed it would be connected to the bottom of the cup as well (I guess I expected symmetry). Having a choke point in the cup is actually a good thing I think; it makes for more interesting game play!

What you said about "fighting your way up the standings", I don't think that's a very good idea. Sure, from a conceptual point of view it's interesting, but it would basically turn your map into a glorified version of the "Bracketology" map. Also, each local ranking is essentially a straight line. I generally like "London Tube Map", but those long lines going off into nowhere are a nuisance if you ask me; once your armies battle their way to the end, it takes forever to move them (one territory per turn) back to the front lines.

So, the final was between Vancouver and Boston? Did Boston end up winning the finals? Because if Vancouver won, I think you should have them connect to the top of the trophy and Boston to the bottom.

Maybe it would be better to call the map "NHL 2010-2011" (or whatever the common way is to refer to seasons). Because it looks like you put quite some season-depended stuff in there.

Also, how about explicitly mentioning the "Original Six" and "Cup Champions" in the description; for non-NHL fans, the map looks entirely symmetrical, but those two bonuses massively skew strategic importance to the East Coast.

If you want a "victory condition" which can be specified as controlling a number of territories, just make it a bonus worth 1000 armies. Even in fog games, where it's invisible if someone met the victory condition, seeing 1000 reinforcements appear at once should pretty much proof the point *and* make it rather pointless to keep fighting, instead of surrendering. Added bonus: if people want to play without the victory condition, the can simply zero-out the victory condition bonus. (Or, in the case of the Chalice, people could put it to a much lower value, maybe 10 or so. That still gives an incentive to fight for the cup, instead of only using Layer 1 to move between East and West, but won't be a game-ender.)

RvW

As for the similarity to bracketology, I hadn't thought of that. Glad I opted against that arrangement.

The finals were between Boston and Vancouver, with Boston winning. Thus their logo is featured in the top right corner and they connect to the top to the Cup.

I did put a bit of seasonal-dependent information in there so your point about the label makes sense.

I will mention the territories in the two bonuses you mention. While they may seem to skew to the east coast, its actually not that bad. Two of the 4 champs are in each conference and 2 of the Original 6 (league's founding members) are in the West. The two conferences are separated by the Cup so it will be hard to claim all six.

You make an interesting point in the final one... will have to consider that.


Thanks for the review... it's much appreciated.

After looking again, this time paying a little more attention, you are of course correct; the red area ("Central"), belongs to the Western half. I'll readily believe NHL fans know this by heart. But for me, it's rather counter-intuitive; at least calling Michigan and Tennessee and the others "Western" makes a lot more sense than calling Winnipeg "Southeast" and Texas "Pacific". ;)

Thanks for pointing out the "B" is the Boston logo, I was wondering where / whom it belongs to.

Are the colours you've used for the regions somehow "official" or "well-known"? In other words, in the eyes of NHL fans, are these in some way the "correct" colours of the regions? Because if they're not, maybe it would help non-ice hockey fan if you use a sort of colour-coding to make the (rather important) distinction between East and West. I'd suggest using yellow, orange and red for one of the regions, while using light blue, dark blue and green for the other one.

Thank you for making an interesting map to play on!

RvW... Dallas is out of place, always has been. Winnipeg is a new team thus, the odd placement. They were Atlanta last season and as such made more sense with the Southeast. There will likely be realignment next season to fix it.

The fact that Detroit and Nashville are West is a simple case of numbers... too many eastern teams to make them work. Just how New Orleans is West but Chicago is East in the NBA.

The colors have no real association so your point of the colors is a good one. Will definitely implement that change once a test run is completed.

Richard, are you planning on making a new map now that the NHL is switching to 4 confrences and no divisions?

Honestly don't know... wouldn't be a major change, just redoing the connections, bonuses and state colors.

Would mean fewer bonuses though would make it a bit simpler. Will decide after your test game is completed.

I feel sorry for you sharpe, this map has already become outdated by the NHL's division realignment of yesterday.

No worries Nuck, taken care of already.

http://warlight.net/MultiPlayer.aspx?GameID=1791185

Its an easy change between the two. The harder part is making the map itself and naming the territories (tedious). Besides, I somehow doubt you want to feel sorry for me...

One tiny mistake (not worth the fix now, but if you ever make an update), I don't think part of the cup should be called "Tear 4"... ;)

i made a 4-player ffa tournament and invited the map maker.

Oh, I found a bug in your map: the two teams in Florida somehow belong to the North-East bonus...

Moros, not a bug (don't know if you are being serious or not)... its the new alignment by the NHL that was just announced this past week. The conference names haven't yet been announced so I left them with the past division names.