Large Middle Earth - strategies
I have just started playing this map. I'm keen to hear other players' strategies and observations.
I've been made aware of this previous thread also:
Incidentally, I note that the High Elves have Ranged units but no Melee units, so the Ranged feature doesn't come into play. Was that a deliberate design?
@mattbarnes "Was that a deliberate design?" Lol. I don't remember myself ever noticing that :) No, that's... erm... weird design, I guess :)
@alkexr Wouldn't the ranged unit come into play if they can team up with Allied nations that have melee units?
wouldn't that make sense from a design standpoint? Requiring the forces of good to work together to prevail?
@hepps Yeah, I was thinking about that, but it is an attack-only bonus, and it seems like two different players can't attack at the same time. I considered the case when a battle is not over in 10 rounds and allied reinforcements come in, but it turns out the reinforcements fight their separate battle. But this would just be nitpicking anyway.
I hope at least I can learn from this. With all that time spent on figuring out how the pieces should fit together and failing to notice trivial weirdnesses like that I have the best reason to believe I could do better.
Writing things down seems to be quite productive. I just realized the reason. Pretty obvious in hindsight.
So, feedback comes well after the game is released that there is a trivial weirdness in the design, which I didn't notice before the game was released. Why? Because, well, the feedback came AFTER the game is released, not before. I should have asked for feedback earlier. Good lesson.
And I will learn it, too. Expect a new map to be announced shortly.
@alkexr Sorry.. thought the ranged unit would be a defensive support. Haven't actually played the game.
alkexr - you shouldn't be hard on yourself, it's a great map, and the debate in 2015 (before my time) shows you consulted others widely.
If you're open to more feedback then I will also offer the following but please take them as constructive ideas and not criticism:
- the General Notes describe a couple of routes crossing water (eg Undeep): is it possible to find a way to make those visible on the map?
- the Game Notes should recommend that players turn Show Map Details on: I do not do this normally but luckily spotted this feature which is crucial for your map that makes so much good use of terrain
- the Game Notes should make clear whether you recommend use of Low Luck or not: I assume the game is designed not to use Low Luck, else why give units "2x4" attack rather than "8" attack say?
- the Game Notes should make clear whether Sea Units are recommended or not (currently these default to "off" and the only reference to these is in the version history right at the end)
- make clearer how all the National Objectives work: eg are some of them a one-off payment only, rather than a per turn benefit? What if you capture a one-off target then lose it again?
- should more races have a blitz-capable unit, for taking territory and retreating? For example, light cavalry can't even blitz
- why have one-hit Flying units (eg bats) been made so vulnerable to archers' anti-air fire?
- Lorien has the same issue as the High Elves, ie no Melee units to benefit from Ranged bonuses
- there's the typo for the Dwarf Axe-thrower attack value, mentioned on the other recent thread
@mattbarnes Oh, and the Dwarf Axeman data has an error too.
@mattbarnes Being hard on myself is hard enough, don't make it any harder.
Accepting feedback and not taking it personally is a skill I'm still learning. Give me feedback, so that I can practise! :)
As for the feedback:
- Undeeps: good point, I will do it in the next version (if there will be one).
- Wow. It is possible to turn that off?
- Having 4x2/12 charge is necessary, because 8/12 leads to errors. A 36-attack dragon would attack with 35 on a -1 terrain, and not a single f*** will be given. But a 6x6-attack dragon attacks with 5x6 only (still impressive, but the reduction is noticeable). And a unit giving 2x4 support to x_unit requires 4 x_units present to fully utilize the total bonus of 8. All of these still apply in LL. It is up to the players whether they want LL or not. (Will be added to game notes.)
- Sea units are not recommended, naval combat is rather marginal and somehow I just couldn't make functioning canals. It still puzzles me why. (Will be added to game notes.)
- National objectives: those "T" "1T" "T4" "F" "1F" etc. symbols are supposed to be the engine's way of telling this stuff, make a suggestion to improve this in the new UI thread https://forums.triplea-game.org/topic/464/taking-your-suggestions-for-a-new-ui
- blitz: idea noted
- bats: that's a side effect, issue noted
- no melee: noted
- tooltip: Will be fixed.
Well I hope that there will be new versions in future. It's a fascinating map.
Thanks for the explanations above. Especially the one about 4x2 etc. I think I'd like to switch to LL because it allows for more precise "hit and run" attacks without accidentally over-running into dangerous territory.
Unless there are other negatives to sea units, I would disagree with your recommendation. Sea battles might be marginal but the ability to raid coastal territories with small landings could be useful. Eg Harad could harass the Gondor coast to distract them from Mordor. Also the Gondorian ships at the start can be used to evacuate their easternmost troops.
National Objectives: I meant only to add to the Notes a key to the T and F symbols for those who are unfamiliar with the engine.
@alkexr Just downloaded this.... love what you have done with this map.
I certainly hope you continue to work on this. It shows so much promise and is so far along already.
One question.... I couldn't find any reference to the objectives... are they supposed to be on the map?
@hepps you can see the Objectives in the right hand window if you select the relevant tab
@mattbarnes Yes I see it now thanks.
There are quite a few of them. Not to mention from what I can tell is one-off's and multiples.
Might be worth putting some visual que's on the the map. Perhaps simple icons in the territories where these are present.
Maybe something like a coloured circle for Regional objectives.
Coloured square for one-off's.
Coloured triangle for multiples.
Was taking a look and did a little sketching... as an example.
justbleh last edited by
I love this map and have won on both sides and FFA as almost all of the factions at one at a time. Adding visual que's for the objectives would have helped the first time I played. The notes and objective tabs are essential to look at the first few times playing.
General_Zod last edited by
@hepps Beautification has begun. :)
@hepps What program have you used to create this? Can you describe how you draw such things?
@justbleh Won FFA with almost all factions? Can you send save games? I'm really interested in it. It would help with balance.
@alkexr Sure as soon as I have some time I'll prep a step by step guide.
@general_zod Easy there Zod.... Wasn't signing on to do this map. I was just farting around with some stuff when I looked at this map.
Feels like this map still needs some love and attention in regards to its play-ability and design before it would even warrant being considered for a visual up-grade.
And given its size... I am not about to invest several hundred hours in working on a 12 player FFA that would NEVER see the light of day. People can't get 4 person FFA going.... 12 is an utter nightmare.
General_Zod last edited by General_Zod
Btw, @alkexr 2 nice free graphic software links below.
People can't get 4 person FFA going.... 12 is an utter nightmare.
If it was only 12. Fortunately this one is not FFA (primarily).
@alkexr Yah. As being "Middle Earth", this is a polarised 1v1 conflict. Myself, I'm not a fan of having a FFA option when it doesn't make any sense with the lore of the scenario, but it can't hurt.