Hello,

I will not have much time in the upcoming weeks to test the template, so I'd like some of you to play on it and give me some feedback:

http://warlight.net/MultiPlayer.aspx?TemplateID=260173

Settings should be exactly as here (yes, card limit settings too). I'll write later what ideas i had in mind with those new settings, but for now i'd like to hear outside opinions.

Of course modifications with similar settings on different maps are also welcome.

Playing three games on these settings now. Is really weird. I can't help but go for 2 bonuses but I've been told (and I think he was right) that 3s are better (get more income in the same number of turns).

One finished was a loss (but against a weird guy who said he was a multi account of a top 20 player).

problably billy

Luck Modifier is 0% but Rounding Mode is Weighted Random. Is that intentional or a mistake?

No mistake.

I changed offensive and defensive kill rates. Now, that makes 3vs2 100% accurate and leaves exactly 50-50 chance on having one leftover after 3vs2 attack, which is why i wanted weighted random. With straight round it leaves either no leftovers or always one leftover. That is the middle-ground between 0% luck straight round and 0% luck weighted round on standard kill rates. I might change the reinforcement cards to 2 pieces though.

I see. I really don't know anything about the difference between weighted random and straight round, it's just that everyone likes 0% luck + straight round more than 0% luck + weighted random.

I like 0% weighted more :)

we played two tournaments on it:

http://warlight.net/MultiPlayer?TournamentID=3792
http://warlight.net/MultiPlayer?TournamentID=3794

Slow Medium Szearth:

http://warlight.net/MultiPlayer?TemplateID=260359

Any thoughts on either of the templates?

Hum. It's quirky. 5 picks may be a bit too much. I liked Weighted Random, so I'd definitely take that over straight round. Things to point out: When on weighted random, 2-turn 4 bonuses seem to be the quickest mode of expansion. (West China may be viable with a triple pick depending on the wastelands/picks) Triple picking on a 4 definitely doesn't work. (You'll see a few games up there proving that). Africa is valuable, but very dependent on the placement of the wastelands to determine how fast you can take it vs how fast your opponent can get into Africa.

---

Pros:

15 wastelands of 3 + territories you didn't pick being 2. This opens the map considerably allowing many strategies to become viable.

Expansion is predictable with the luck and kill rates. Allows for 2-turn 4s using 2 picks.

With 5 picks, you can cover the entire board.

Cons:

3v2s being 50/50 means you could end up with absolutely no leftovers, the biggest implication being that you don't have delay moves.

Being that you want to find a replacement for Med Earth, you've turned it into 'Brawl Earth' with 5 picks. I don't think you mean to do this.

Pick stage is quirky. I thought it was just me, until I looked at the other games.. ending up with 4 picks or 5 picks on one entire side of the map happens frequently. The natural thought pattern being 2 picks here, plus a support pick, then 2 cover picks on the other side of the map, perhaps 3, then possible counter play against the first 2-3 picks. The reason? There isn't much else that's efficient on the board.

---

The goal is to fix med earth right? I think it has more to do with the map than it does with the template. To fix your template though, I suggest we play around with 4 picks and perhaps 10 wastelands of 3 with territories you didn't pick being 3. The luck settings are quirky, but they're not bad.

The goal is to find better 1vs1 strategic settings:

My thought process:
- many people hate 3vs2 being 80% (I actually think it's good for the game, but let's assume we need to fix it) so either make 0% luck straight round or make higher offensive kill rate
- 0% luck straight round leaves always 1 leftover which makes expansion extremely quick turning the game into a "street fight" rather than a strategic game so I need to slow it down somehow
- I can bump defensive kill rate so that we get no leftovers (slow medium szearth was the original template) which makes the game very strategic (i actually like slow medium szearth more)
- I can change offensive kill rate and implement weighted random
- strat 1vs1 had little to no recoverability, so with smaller bonuses we have more recoverability (breaking a bonus does not have that huge consequenses)
- the game is very slow with those settings, especially first few turns, so i introduced progressive reinforcement cards to act as a stallbreaker
- OD and OP cards are obviously redundant
- blockade is small, but we can afford to bump it up to 3 for example

In any case I do not think that those templates are brawls as my turkey is. I'd like to hear some more opinions, especially on slow medium szearth, since it was my initial idea. Possible tweaks with reinforcement cards or bonuses are also welcome.

I liked it, haven't done slow medium yet. I would have cyclic instead of random though, and 3.51 on the blockade like in strat 1v1.

I also appreciate the kill rate changes for attacking neutrals but I wish it was just the usual kill rates, when it comes to engaging the opponent.

I don't know wich Szearth I've played, anyway while I've enjoyed the games, I think that it has a big long run problem: since there are 5 picks it is pretty likely that in the long run income won't be very high, while cards keep on growing (thing that I like) so in this way bonuses' income starts to become not relevant, infact it is impossible to defend properly the fronts and the game just starts to be a big mess, in wich the initial advantages are more or less vain. This problem made the template not good for "pro"'s games, even if very enjoyable.
My suggestion to fix this problem is to introduce 3 (for the whole game) 200% abandoun (not blockades) cards (that you receive from the start), with wich will be easier to manage the advantage and make some decent calculations. Fun will be little less, but playability should benefit a lot.

I have noticed also that having first turn sometimes is essential especially since the overrated stuffs, so I think it would be nice to introduce one (for the whole game) OP card from the start, that should make the card management deeper.

I don't understand why Antarctica's far West and East aren't connected. Map mistake or what?