Middle Earth: Battle For Arda - Official Thread

[zlefin]

minor bug: Just noticed that for Oliphaunts form when they've taken 2 hits, that form has a listed TUV of 0, which throws off the tuv calculations done by the battle calc (which really matters because the ai depends on them for its strategy). I don't know what others units' forms when taken a hit also have the default 0 tuv, thus throwing off estimations; as I was merely watching somebody else's game, and it's not so easy to check. I checked a few other units that happened to be wounded, and there weren't bugs on those, but I couldn't do a complete check.

[redrum]

@zlefin Glancing at the XML, the reason is that oliphaunt_hit2 aren't purchasable and don't have the tuv unit option defined so it defaults to them being worth 0.

[epinikion]

hello all.

I say: if eagles are not reduced to 4 movement evil is without a chance at this map. just a balance-issue. Dany agrees. besides that its not really understandable why eagles are so much better in air battles than nazguls (as the higher cost unit).

best, epi

[redrum]

@zlefin @alkexr Here is a PR to add the tuv for it: https://github.com/triplea-maps/battle_for_arda/pull/3

[alkexr]

@zlefin Having the oliphaunt_hit2 unit is a purely cosmetic decision, and it should be removed from the game as soon as there is another way to display multiple hits taken by a unit. There is another unit, the dragon_hit2, which had to be removed because of some bug when transforming an air unit mid-battle (it couldn't move that turn in NCM or something, I don't remember).

@epinikion @Dany I'm not currently in map-making mode, but those 6 savegames would be greatly helpful when I get back to polishing this map. From my experience I'm fairly certain that as it stands, Evil has a clear advantage. Prove me wrong with those games already, please! :beaming_face_with_smiling_eyes:

And, eh, @redrum, the game xml is generated by a script from the TAGX.xml outside the map folder. I'll need to re-do the whole xml and get rid of that script now that we have variables . Hacking the xml is not a very clean solution, but feel free to do anything that requires immediate action until I "return".

[epinikion]

@alkexr
hi, i don`t have all files and probably some of them are not the files from the finish of the game. I add for you, what i found. They are live played in a relatively high speed so probably you ll find mistakes. That doesnt change our conclusion. Problem of evil is that angmar falls and then north is free to pressure moria and saruman, while rhun and mordor and harad usually go strong but not fast enough. high elves go for eagles and later in the game there will be a circle of 5 terrs radius in all direction around the eagle stack as a deadzone for evil. thats too much.

dany bfa 7.tsvg dany bfa_6.tsvg dany bfa_5.tsvg dany bfa_4tsvg.tsvg dany bfa_3tsvg.tsvg

[Hao Zhou]

Is there a newer thread on this map, and is it still actively maintained?

I had a lot of fun playing this map vs AI. From my limited experience it is pretty balanced, maybe slightly favoring Good.

Gondor is really strong, and can hold off Mordor+Halad for an impossibly long time. In fact Gondor never really falls, the north trio is where Good tends to lose when they do.

The High Elf, Orc, Lorien area balance is very good. Nothing to comment there.
Rohan Saruman is connected to that and balance is good as well, although odd from lore perspective that it's Sauraman defending against Rohan all game rather than the opposite. From game balance point of view this works well though, as Evil is on a timer to win somewhere else before Suaraman falls.

Angmar can make good trades with dragons, though those don't end up in Angmar proper until at least Turn 2 - turn 1 is just very good trades vs dwarves. This makes it so Angmar can sort of hold it's own against the dwarves for 2 turns despite not really having any recruitment nearby. On the other hand even with recruitment, Angmar proper falls immediately. I don't see, having played both sides, how Angmar can any of this territory past even Turn 1. The flood of units from Arnor and Free Peoples means Angmar never really has a fighting chance besides finding favorable suicide strikes to hit at isolated units. Angmar can hold for a very long time behind walls but is it is always the first to fall on the evil side, and the collapse in territory is always within Turn 2.

Unit balance is odd, as many units are clearly useless -

• Goblin archers are totally useless, at 1/2 compared with 2/3 for goblin spearmen, they are useless even with the range support. Unless the enemy has huge stacks of eagles, it's not useful at all. Compared with the incredible value of archers on the Good side, not sure why this archer is so bad.
• The suicide fireball unit that Saruman has seems very high priced for something that dies.

Some units are very good

• The free people Pony riders is way too good for a 4 cost unit. Either make it cost 5, or make it a 1/1. Just the 4 move 1HP unit is worth 4, even if it has minimal combat value. While the regular hobbits aren't bad, they are completely overtaken by the choice of pony riders.
• All multi-hit air units are very good. Eagles are the biggest problem since they along with dragons are the best value, and High Elves actually have the income to buy them. Angmar can buy zero or 1 thorough the entire game due to losing all it's territory so fast, and that it doesn't even start with enough income to buy a single one (turn 2 will have the money, due to taking territory on turn 1, but even then fodder units might be a better choice). Had it been Mordor that can recruit dragons, it would absolutely be a balance problem. Nazgul are actually not great value, and they die easily to the huge number of Good archers, so they are not a problem. So just eagles, they need a cost increase.

Anyway, good work, and looking forward to an update!
(the AI will always kill it's Dragons or oliphaunt even when there's plenty of fodder remaining, since at the 3rd hitpoint, it values it at zero. this needs to be fixed).

[Cernel]

@redrum said in Middle Earth: Battle For Arda - Official Thread:

@zlefin @alkexr Here is a PR to add the tuv for it: https://github.com/triplea-maps/battle_for_arda/pull/3

I still dislike this option being part of the unit attachments. I think it should belong to production rules.

Also, in this case, you don't actually need this option, as there is no original value to override, in the first place.

@alkexr You can fix this issue by regular means, adding this production rule:

    <productionRule name="buy_oliphaunt_hit2">

      <cost resource="PUs" quantity="36" />

      <result resourceOrUnit="oliphaunt_hit2" quantity="1" />

    </productionRule>

This will value the "buy_oliphaunt_hit2" unit, no matter if no players have actually the option to purchase such unit.

Anyways, if you prefer doing it as @redrum suggests, I believe it's a couple months he is waiting for you to accept that pull request.

@redrum What do you think of the two alternative solutions? Wouldn't be better going my way for this fix, and, for the program, maybe also forbid assigning a "tuv" option to units lacking a production rule, to avoid the redundancy of having two ways of obtaining the same thing? I'm actually more bothered by the redundancy itself, than everything else: either the "tuv" option should not be accepted if lacking a production rule for the unit or the production rule should not be accepted if assigned to no players (but this second solution would likely bug a lot of existent games).

[redrum]

@Cernel No, one of the reasons "tuv" option was added was to override the purchase value as well in case you want to value a unit for the AI and TUV calculations differently from its purchase cost. Creating unused purchase rules and not assigning them I think is messier than just allowing "tuv" to be directly set for the unit.

[postaljester]

I haven't been a part of this map and it is deep in the development. I have played the older lotr map on triple a with a friend for a few years. As well as a lot of A&A and other mods.
I feel the new map is too busy with too many abilities. I understand the joy of creation, but each change has a high chance of limiting legitimate options while introducing trap options.
I like the overall idea and the passion, maybe the abilities will grow on me. As of yet I find them really off-putting.

[Cortrillion]

First off. Beautiful map, cool mechanics, please keep up the good work.
About the balance. Good will win 10/10 times in this map, given equal skill level on both sides.
Good start with more TUV, PU and Production. Good also is in a much stronger position to begin with. Angmar is alone vs 5 other teams, that is like a chess game where white side has 5 moves for every move on the black side.
Rohan is not under any pressure from Saruman in the start of the game, their units are much stronger, and they start with more. In 2 turns Freefolk can attack Saruman in the rear.
Lorien will not fall if they play full defense.
Gondor is much stronger than Mordor, and can stand alone vs Mordor and Harad indefinitely
Rhun cannot take any of the 4 cities unless they are allowed to, and even if they are it will take longer to take just Gror than it will take Angmar, Saruman and Dol’guldur to lose.
Unit balance
Rangers… omg the rangers, they are 2UP to cheap, at least. They are completely broken.
The 10/12 charge from eoling riders is very high for only 8 points, looks to be at least 4points to high (should be (6/12 at maximum)
Uruk Warriors for some reason have only 4/3/3 they should be at least 5/4/3 for the price.
But single unit balance is not the most important. Why are Gondor and Rohan not under any pressure? They don’t even really need help to defeat Saruman, Mordor and Harad. Why are Dol’Guldur a separate faction? They will lose so fast if faced with both Northmen and Wood Elven at the same time. Main problem is that the Evil side has less rounds then the good side. In a tactical game that is a major advantage. There is literally nothing Angmar can do, in the 5vs1 situation they are in.
Anyway. Here is a save game. It is a 5 player, game 3 good vs 2 evil.
2vs3battleforArda.tsvg

[mattbarnes]

@Cortrillion I love this map too and haven’t played it enough to validate your 10/10 for good claim, but I suspect it’s not as compelling as that. How about I challenge you to a game by email and I’ll try to see if I can succeed as Evil?

[Cortrillion]

Oh sorry @mattbarnes, didn't see your reply.

No I'm being overly hyperbolic, I think good has a stronger position because of a numerical advantage mainly. Evil won the game i just posted as a matter of fact. They had some major luck (6/6 hits vs rivendell walls) and gondor mad a bad judgment call and lost 200TUV.

Im in a game right now, but maybe after that one is done.

Regards

Cort

[Cernel]

@Cortrillion said in Middle Earth: Battle For Arda - Official Thread:

About the balance. Good will win 10/10 times in this map, given equal skill level on both sides.

Well, if two very good players play a map with low luck (just guessing), you just need that map to be a little unbalanced to eventually get to a virtual 100% win for one side. So, this statement greatly depends on dice settings and what level is the "equal skill level" of the players.

[NinjaWolfHybrid]

Hi, Flanagan here, creator of the original Middle Earth map and units. I just wanted to say this looks great and give my approval and support.

[Cernel]

@NinjaWolfHybrid said in Middle Earth: Battle For Arda - Official Thread:

Hi, Flanagan here, creator of the original Middle Earth map and units. I just wanted to say this looks great and give my approval and support.

I'm under the impression that Battle For Arda is actually taking over the old Middle Earth in lobby popularity, but hard to say, as they are both rarely played.

Unless someone did it, maybe you want to reopen a new official thread for your map, or former map (as I recall veqryn affirmed the current owner is @Ajmdemen, which is not active since a while), as in the move to this forum all map threads have been left behind.

Also maybe you want to ask for taking actual ownership of your map, or former map, in GitHub, if that would be fine with everyone involved.

[daneffuller]

• Love this game. Nice feel/flow and very large map.
• Good is strong in my opinion, and if they are too strong (as others have commented), then I suggest Rangers be limited. In the books there exist only Rangers of the North and Rangers of the South (Arnor and Gondor) and only a very few of them.
• If you delete the rangers from Free People, you may want to give them catapults. Also, if Free People have no anti-air, then they would depend on allies to help them deter dragon attacks (I like this potential dynamic)
• Some have commented that Angmar is near impossible to play successfully. It would be easier for Angmar if they had a really cheap defensive unit to stack up or to go out with the Dragons. Bats could be added to Angmar too. Such cheaper units could help soak hits to prevent dragons from dying as easily in border territory skirmishes and help maintain a land buffer between Angmar's capital and her enemies. In addition, Arnor could be weakened (fewer unit options and no starting ramparts) and depend on allies to stand up to a full-on Angmar assault -- I believe that the North Kingdom was an abandoned, wild and sparsely populated region in the LotR.
• It appears that Lorien is vulnerable to a combined Saruman and Orc assault strategy. However, this could be dissatisfying since the Saruman/Rohan conflict is so central to the books/movies. Anything to make the Saruman/Rohan conflict more central to the game would be of interest to fans, I believe.
• If more evil players are needed, a Variags of Khand player could be added. Make them with fast moving units (perhaps similar to Rhun). They could choose to move North or West, which would add more variation in play from game to game.
• Absolutely beautiful map! Keep up the great work and THANK YOU!

[alkexr]

@Hao-Zhou

Is there a newer thread on this map, and is it still actively maintained?

Actively maintained? Well, sort of. I would want to, but it's not always possible.

Rohan Saruman is connected to that and balance is good as well, although odd from lore perspective that it's Sauraman defending against Rohan all game rather than the opposite. From game balance point of view this works well though, as Evil is on a timer to win somewhere else before Suaraman falls.

It's a very difficult part of the map to balance. If Saruman would be stronger (I mean 4 or so additional units), Rohan would be swiftly crushed.

Angmar can hold for a very long time behind walls but is it is always the first to fall on the evil side, and the collapse in territory is always within Turn 2.

Yes, pretty much. But I want to avoid stacking even more production into their cities.

Goblin archers are totally useless, at 1/2 compared with 2/3 for goblin spearmen, they are useless even with the range support. Unless the enemy has huge stacks of eagles, it's not useful at all.

They get large bonuses in hills and forests. Goblin archers are one of the strongest units against Lórien IMO.

The free people Pony riders is way too good for a 4 cost unit. Either make it cost 5, or make it a 1/1. Just the 4 move 1HP unit is worth 4, even if it has minimal combat value. While the regular hobbits aren't bad, they are completely overtaken by the choice of pony riders.

I was just about to nerf pony riders last time when life started happening.

@postaljester

I feel the new map is too busy with too many abilities. I understand the joy of creation, but each change has a high chance of limiting legitimate options while introducing trap options.

Well, I boldly went where no man had gone before, to see what was there, what worked and what didn't... I've learned a lot from it, and although I would do many things differently, I don't regret the slightest bit of work I've put into it. My very goal with this map was to show the world that units can be more than just 3 numbers, even in premodern settings.

@Cortrillion

About the balance. Good will win 10/10 times in this map, given equal skill level on both sides. Good start with more TUV, PU and Production. Good also is in a much stronger position to begin with.

Much of that TUV advantage is just walls. Also, there are other factors in play, not just raw stats. Maybe Good is somewhat stronger though.

Angmar is alone vs 5 other teams, that is like a chess game where white side has 5 moves for every move on the black side.

Having the same number of units distributed among 5 players means more canopeners, but it also means you can only use a fifth of your total force in a single attack, which makes taking fortified positions difficult. It's a tradeoff. The problem with Angmar is not that there are 5 players against them, but that those 5 players are like 3 times as strong as them.

Rohan is not under any pressure from Saruman in the start of the game, their units are much stronger, and they start with more. In 2 turns Freefolk can attack Saruman in the rear.

Yes, but I don't think this can really be resolved without changing the map itself (or creating even more problems).

Anyway. Here is a save game. It is a 5 player, game 3 good vs 2 evil.

Many thanks!

@NinjaWolfHybrid

Hi, Flanagan here, creator of the original Middle Earth map and units. I just wanted to say this looks great and give my approval and support.

Hi! I forgot to mention anywhere how shamelessly I ripped off or stole some unit images, player colors, game notes format and whatnot from that old map of yours. But probably everyone knows it anyway. Thanks a lot for that map. It was one of my favourites back then, when I found TripleA. You probably deserve a line in the credits for all that.

@daneffuller

Some have commented that Angmar is near impossible to play successfully. It would be easier for Angmar if they had a really cheap defensive unit to stack up or to go out with the Dragons. Bats could be added to Angmar too. Such cheaper units could help soak hits to prevent dragons from dying as easily in border territory skirmishes and help maintain a land buffer between Angmar's capital and her enemies. In addition, Arnor could be weakened (fewer unit options and no starting ramparts) and depend on allies to stand up to a full-on Angmar assault

That sounds like too much. If Angmar is on the offense, then where exactly does Good have a chance at gaining ground? I'm not saying they should collapse immediately like they do now, but if they can go on a rampage, that has to mean Evil is clearly favored. But I do see your point.

I believe that the North Kingdom was an abandoned, wild and sparsely populated region in the LotR.

At the time of the War of the Ring, Arnor didn't exist, nor did Angmar. Annuminas, Fornost, Amon Sul, Carn Dum were all in ruins and mostly or completely abandoned. But this is not the War of the Ring, this is the Battle for Arda, where these factions exist in their full glory... well, alright, in some of their former glory.

It appears that Lorien is vulnerable to a combined Saruman and Orc assault strategy. However, this could be dissatisfying since the Saruman/Rohan conflict is so central to the books/movies. Anything to make the Saruman/Rohan conflict more central to the game would be of interest to fans, I believe.

Third (?) comment mentioning how bad the Rohan-Saruman front is. Which it is. Unfortunately, I don't have good ideas to solve this, aside from significantly overhauling the layout of territories around Rohan. Which is a lot of work, and importantly, a lot of work not only for me.

If more evil players are needed, a Variags of Khand player could be added. Make them with fast moving units (perhaps similar to Rhun). They could choose to move North or West, which would add more variation in play from game to game.

There is a reason they were removed at some point since the old Middle Earth map. They aren't fun. Too small, too far away from anything, and only roughly 1 canonical locations available to work with. Even the much larger Harad is struggling with similar problems.

---

Thanks, everyone, for all your feedback and supportive words! I've read and considered all of your points, even if I didn't respond to each one of them. It's possible that some update is going to come in the near future. I'll also try to respond faster next time, I'm probably not setting a very high bar with that.

[Quizblorg Quizblorg]

Just discovered this map and, though I can't comment on balance yet, must say it is amazing. Beautiful and lots of fun.

[Cernel]

Front Porch is given as a "cave", but I suppose it should be a "mountain", instead. If so, it needs to be fixed. If not, then the details are confusing, as that looks like a mountain, like all other actual mountains.

Anyways, the "cave" concept is questionable. Where there is a cave, there is a mountain too, the cave being inside it. So, if I should move into mountains, shouldn't I be able also to move into a territory with a cave without actually going into the cave?

For example, if I'm able to move into mountains, and I'm in "East Mountains of Angmar", why do I have to go into "Mount Gundabad", or anyways exit the mountains, to go into "West Grey Mountains". I think I should be able to stay into the mountains, instead. If I am a mountaineer, I think I should also be able to move between "East Mountains of Angmar" and "West Grey Mountains" also in case "Mount Gundabad" if in enemy hands, as I don't need to enter the caves, but can walk on the mountains, over the caves underneath them.

I don't get why am I obliged to enter caves if I am a mountaineer and want to move on a same mountain range with a cave in between.