Mexican-American War Feedback Thread

[LordAdef]

Hey Shepherd,

I am having a good time and so far everything is smooth. If I had to say something, and although this is not an issue, I would only make New Mexico's colour slightly different to give more contrast with that of Alta California. The two regions plus the highlight selection colour are too similar. If you select Green River you will see what I mean.

 

[ndrm31]

Hi, Thanks for the map Shepher!!!

I had a very fun game on it, mayby the rivers could be more identified if its possible, anyway its great as it is right now

 

[sensadrome]

might be interesting if the US Navy could attack anywhere on the coast and not just the one place. early days in my game so will report back later... thanks for the map shepherd!

 

[Malpot]

I like the map for the most part so far, but I think the USA tert is too easy to defend. It only has 3 border terts that can be attacked, and to get to those, you need to cross a bunch of small terts in the Indian Territory or the Republic of Texas.

Dropping the river impasses between Pawnee and Missouri or Pawnee and Iowa would help, or doping the river impasse between Louisiana and the Gulf Coast or Red River would help. I also think having the ship allow for attacks both ways would help in this area also.

Another option would be like the USA map, make this protected corner only have a 2 troop bonus instead of 3.

Otherwise it is very fun!

Also +1 for not sweeping history under the rug. Parts of history are very offensive, painful and brutal. If you make those events disappear to sanitize the past or to be politically correct, a whole new generation will never learn about those mistakes and will be doomed to repeat them.

 

[legionbuck]

I don't see my Halls of Montezuma on the map ...

 

[legionbuck]

I suggest adding some stand alone bonuses...as in Chapultepec castle, a cannon battery symbol, cavalry symbol, things like that worth 1 extra troop for holding it.

 

[ndrm31]

I like the ship as it is now, otherway central mexio would be a to large bonus and easy to defend, I already had to chos to leave troops behind to protect from the navy ships, it creates a diferent gameplay since u cant use them for attack if u also hold the border regions

 

[Shepherd]

The map and brief have been updated to reflect some visual suggestions in this thread - rivers lighter in USA, and color of New Mexico more toward blue. Also the titles better reflect the name of the map. You will need to clear your cache to see the changes in your browser.

Gameplay suggestions are up for discussion, so let's discuss.

I like USA the way it is. +3 for a six region command with three borders to hold is fairly standard practice doing back to Africa on the old board game which shall not be named. And while that may seem a bit strong to some, consider the board as a whole: three other players are going to get smaller bonuses first by nabbing commands that are half the size, two of which are good for +2. There's no way you can take a smaller bonus and then go after USA. And once you manage to take USA, where do you go? Indian Territory and Texas are huge and hard to take and hold; maybe you crash through the neutral navy and take the +2, but you can't fortify back through the ships.

I considered adding bonuses for capitals or forts, but basically this is a map of a lot of open country and really large geographic regions. Chapultepec Castle is a good story today, but by the time cadets put up a fight there the battle was already over. Plus, region bonuses can tend to create unbalanced starts and muck up command bonuses, unless you scatted them throughout the map (Mars).

might be interesting if the US Navy could attack anywhere on the coast and not just the one place. early days in my game so will report back later... thanks for the map shepherd!

The intent was to represent the actual landing force - a historically significant one in that it was the first large-scale amphibious landing by US troops. Halls of Montezuma and all that.

 

[NewSheriffInTown]

The map and brief have been updated to reflect some visual suggestions in this thread - rivers lighter in USA, and color of New Mexico more toward blue. Also the titles better reflect the name of the map. You will need to clear your cache to see the changes in your browser.

Gameplay suggestions are up for discussion, so let's discuss.

I like USA the way it is. +3 for a six region command with three borders to hold is fairly standard practice doing back to Africa on the old board game which shall not be named. And while that may seem a bit strong to some, consider the board as a whole: three other players are going to get smaller bonuses first by nabbing commands that are half the size, two of which are good for +2. There's no way you can take a smaller bonus and then go after USA. And once you manage to take USA, where do you go? Indian Territory and Texas are huge and hard to take and hold; maybe you crash through the neutral navy and take the +2, but you can't fortify back through the ships.

I considered adding bonuses for capitals or forts, but basically this is a map of a lot of open country and really large geographic regions. Chapultepec Castle is a good story today, but by the time cadets put up a fight there the battle was already over. Plus, region bonuses can tend to create unbalanced starts and muck up command bonuses, unless you scatted them throughout the map (Mars).


The intent was to represent the actual landing force - a historically significant one in that it was the first large-scale amphibious landing by US troops. Halls of Montezuma and all that.

+1 on everything that was said.

 

[NewSheriffInTown]

Wondering what people thought about having the Ship starting off with 2 neutral instead of 3? Comments?

 

[Shepherd]

Sometimes neutral 2s make sense, and I considered it, but I talked myself out of it. In the case of this map there is only one region that can hit the ship - Louisiana - because historically that's where the Navy sailed from. Making that a 2 means that the player who gets LA on the drop has an easy first take, and an easier path to a first card. I like making that first round as even as possible.

 

[Bluebonnet]

Sometimes neutral 2s make sense, and I considered it, but I talked myself out of it. In the case of this map there is only one region that can hit the ship - Louisiana - because historically that's where the Navy sailed from. Making that a 2 means that the player who gets LA on the drop has an easy first take, and an easier path to a first card. I like making that first round as even as possible.

Playing doubles, each player has 15 regions starting with a deploy of 5. With that large of an attack, i am not worried abut a easy card, i am looking to blast the opposing team. Even a 5 person game would have a minimum of 4 to deploy and be more interested in hitting the other guy over an easy neutral.

In larger games after the sets have built up, it may be worth going via ship to jump elsewhere to attack. But so far I havent seen anyone use the ship on my doubles or singles. Attacking a neutral 3 isn't worth it when there are other paths available.

 

[NewSheriffInTown]

Well regardless of the 2 or 3 discussion, Strategically I have to agree with gtivan, in the first move a player usually looks at going after their opponent, or to start working on a command, i don't think i have ever attacked a neutral in the earily part of game just for card, that would not make sense, especially if it is not part of a bonus. just saying...

 

[LordAdef]

Shepherd,

#1. You are a f@@ing genius. Your maps are actually works of art in all respects!
#2. All historical details only make the map more fascinating. By the way, I like the ship exactly as it is, as it was.
#3. I am glad my colour suggestion was constructive. It is much better
#4. Every one of those small particularities only make the map more unique. You just made another hit here
#5. Big chance this is going to be one of my favorities, along with the Balcans!
#6. Can't wait to test it in doubles.


May I suggest one thing? To make it different and even "dandier", you could make all troop containers round.

Once again, congratulations and thanks for this fantastic new Map. I mean it!

 

[legionbuck]

+1 on everything that was said.

That's what I was referring to...the way Mars is set up, good map !

BTW, to us Marines, Chapultepec isn't a " good story " since so many officers & Nco's died taking the castle, hence our blood stripe on dress blues trousers. It was the key to taking Mexico City !

 

[ndrm31]

But so far I havent seen anyone use the ship on my doubles or singles. Attacking a neutral 3 isn't worth it when there are other paths available.

I have see it in a desperate try to break central mexico, anyway I agree with shep, It shouldnt be the only 2 troops region, on the other hand it forces u to leave troops in veracruz, to protect a gulf coast &/or central mexico command, so that could be interesting.

Team games:

Sofar Im in 2 doubles games, all is going well, both balanced games at the start

Real time:

Played 1 yesterday, without problems to load, or processing at the start of the turns

 

[StudioCity]

Im in one of the test games,its early days but I do like the look of the Map so far

 

[Derswick]

I played once and it was great with no bugs. Would like to try another.

 

[NewSheriffInTown]

There are a couple to join here - https://www.majorcommand.com/GameFinder.php?matchany=1&mapid=28&active=1&showDups=1

 

[BeanZ]

There are a couple to join here - https://www.majorcommand.com/GameFinder.php?matchany=1&mapid=28&active=1&showDups=1

Yeah, come and join the completely insane 24 player mercenary game... what on earth was I thinking when I made that one?!?!?!?!