Potential of the War of the Ring scenario as a competitive Map

I don't know how many of the higher ranks of the community have played this map, but i think its worth checking out as having CW'able potential perhaps with a few tweaks.

at current, in my experience, the map is most balanced with 5k or 10k funds, particularly 5k, higher funds just benefit evil rushes particularly with the orcs of the misty mountains with their OP but expensive attack trolls and the haradrims mumakill.

strats wise, ill just give a quick rundown on what i've found most effective with each side.

good:

elves - GW with 5k, possibly MOS with 10k

gondor - perfect defense or GW, pd being the stronger due to the slightly cheaper inf and that gondor basically needs to fend off mordor and haradrim

rohan - relentless attack or gw

Dwarves - GW

free people of middle earth - only GW, desert storm could work with this side if the eagles were boosted as a unit, at current theyre too expensive at 170 gold to be used

Evil:

mordor - GW, possibly sm because of the fell beasts, but due to the lack of air transports, i feel a tweak would be needed to this side to make if more usable

isengard - gw or mos, gw being the more powerful

Haradrim - GW

Orcs of the misty mountains - gw, RA or blitz, blitz being the best option for 10k games as it boosts the range of those op trolls

Easterlings -GW


i know some will dismiss this out of hand "because its a faggot scenario" or some other elitist nonsense, but i think this map is definitely worth looking into as its different and fun.

the original map maker talos appears to be inactive, and im not sure on what the deal is with tweaking other players maps, is permission needed etc.

but a few tweaks could really balance this map out and make more of the strats usable, at current the changes i would make would be

-boost rohans economy

-eagles -50 gold +1 attack

-fell beasts +1 capacity for militia

-attack trolls +10 gold

-ents -90 gold

some tweaks to the easterlings an dwarves to make them more imaginative would also be worth looking at

I don't know this map I will have a look. Screenshots? :S

To use any other map for competitive means, every competitive player would have to play or at least try the same map. Which map does that? The standard map of course. And another reason this doesn't work very well is that someone has to choose the map, thus giving the advantage to this person.

I agree that other maps are worth looking into, but only if everyone can stand on the same footing, which scenarios/custom maps don't achieve very well.

No, just no.

Kirjoittanut Desu, 20.12.2013 at 12:14

To use any other map for competitive means, every competitive player would have to play or at least try the same map. Which map does that? The standard map of course. And another reason this doesn't work very well is that someone has to choose the map, thus giving the advantage to this person.

I agree that other maps are worth looking into, but only if everyone can stand on the same footing, which scenarios/custom maps don't achieve very well.

yea its true, but tahts the thing, we need more competitive players to look into this, any games ive played have had mixes of low and high ranks so its hard to gauge how truely balanced/unbalanced it is

however one things for sure is its a fun map. i do like eu and eurasia and have lots of work to do on those, but ive seen some of the upper ranks complain theyre tired of 3v3 EUs or are over them, so this is simply a bit of variety thats worth looking into

Kirjoittanut Tundy, 20.12.2013 at 12:16

No, just no.

constructive input as always. care to elaborate on that? or are we just to dismiss ideas out of hand because you say no.

Kirjoittanut Permamuted, 20.12.2013 at 12:53

constructive input as always. care to elaborate on that? or are we just to dismiss ideas out of hand because you say no.

War of the rings is a really unbalanced map, and has no air units.
We should rather make cw's in ultimate ww2.

Kirjoittanut Tundy, 20.12.2013 at 12:59

Kirjoittanut Permamuted, 20.12.2013 at 12:53

constructive input as always. care to elaborate on that? or are we just to dismiss ideas out of hand because you say no.

War of the rings is a really unbalanced map, and has no air units.
We should rather make cw's in ultimate ww2.

the free ppls have eagles(air special attack) and mordor has fell beasts(air main attack), their stats mimic their original world map counterparts

and isnt ultimate ww2 a 20 player map? itd be extremely difficult for 2 clans to fill one of those, and theres a reason you dont see world map CWs, the same reason ultimate ww2 cws probably would not work.(6 hours spare anyone?)

Kirjoittanut Permamuted, 20.12.2013 at 13:05

Kirjoittanut Tundy, 20.12.2013 at 12:59

Kirjoittanut Permamuted, 20.12.2013 at 12:53

constructive input as always. care to elaborate on that? or are we just to dismiss ideas out of hand because you say no.

War of the rings is a really unbalanced map, and has no air units.
We should rather make cw's in ultimate ww2.

the free ppls have eagles(air special attack) and mordor has fell beasts(air main attack), their stats mimic their original world map counterparts

and isnt ultimate ww2 a 20 player map? itd be extremely difficult for 2 clans to fill one of those, and theres a reason you dont see world map CWs, the same reason ultimate ww2 cws probably would not work.(6 hours spare anyone?)

Ultimate ww2 usually ends in 20 turns.

A clan that can't field 10 members is not a clan....

I don't know about the detailed balance issues of this map (played it a couple of times and it seemed ok...). But I'm definitely in favor of the general idea of diversifying the competitive scene. I know many players want to play competitive matches but are tired of EU+. Some have left AW specifically because of this.

I would also strongly suggest Columna's SteamWars map as another candidate for competitive play. I find it to be quite well balanced.

Kirjoittanut Tundy, 20.12.2013 at 13:54

Kirjoittanut Permamuted, 20.12.2013 at 13:05

Kirjoittanut Tundy, 20.12.2013 at 12:59

Kirjoittanut Permamuted, 20.12.2013 at 12:53

constructive input as always. care to elaborate on that? or are we just to dismiss ideas out of hand because you say no.

War of the rings is a really unbalanced map, and has no air units.
We should rather make cw's in ultimate ww2.

the free ppls have eagles(air special attack) and mordor has fell beasts(air main attack), their stats mimic their original world map counterparts

and isnt ultimate ww2 a 20 player map? itd be extremely difficult for 2 clans to fill one of those, and theres a reason you dont see world map CWs, the same reason ultimate ww2 cws probably would not work.(6 hours spare anyone?)

Ultimate ww2 usually ends in 20 turns.

A clan that can't field 10 members is not a clan....

at the same time when most clans have an international membership of various timezones and work/play commitments? thats not easy to do

I'm very in favor of diversifying the competitive scene. However, the map you mentioned has some problems:

IMO, the maps should have very balanced units and access to all the other playing fields explored by the other players. So if just one faction has air units, I personally cannot trust that map for the competitive scene. Either no air or everyone has the same access.

Only very few players I know are able to properly balance units in a map with different sets of units for each territory. And those are barely active anymore.

The income/reinforcement/access trifecta is very important and often just arbitrarily boosted or nerfed by mapmakers. If I remember correctly, that map makes use of impassible terrain, with no-go areas contributing to the strategy, which is a good thing, but high level players would be able to exploit those in ways not predicted by the map maker. I barely played that map, so I cannot comment on income/reinforcement.

IMO, a map to be considered for coalition wars should satisfy these statements:

same unit set for everyone, or units with minor, documented changes;

a careful distribution of income, so no player can get +2000 income by himself (in a 3v3 setting)

and a careful distribution of reinforcements, so no player can get an obscene amount of units.

tl,dr: that map would not work.

Kirjoittanut Desu, 20.12.2013 at 12:14

To use any other map for competitive means, every competitive player would have to play or at least try the same map. Which map does that? The standard map of course. And another reason this doesn't work very well is that someone has to choose the map, thus giving the advantage to this person.

I agree that other maps are worth looking into, but only if everyone can stand on the same footing, which scenarios/custom maps don't achieve very well.

Whatever happened to adaptation?

Just no. it's not a particularly balanced map. you generally don't use sea combat at all where in europe transports are vital eg. you can get troops to greece from spain/france on reinforcement stage, or troops from Uk to germany maybe even russia nw if required. i know for a fact you can boost 15 infantry for NW in one turn from london if you have 1 transport ready in London, Hamburg, copenhagen, stockholm. using only inantry you get from those cities to replenish your range a bit.

Some balanced maps/scenarios

• Steam Wars (map)
  
• King of the Dungeon V1.2 (scenario: 3v3)

Kirjoittanut Columna Durruti, 20.12.2013 at 22:26

Some balanced maps/scenarios

• Steam Wars (map)
  
• King of the Dungeon V1.2 (scenario: 3v3)

Kingod the dungeon is not a good map, niether is any king of the hill in my opinion.

Steam wars seems fairly balanced to be honest, a good mix of populated and not so populated countries as well as income differentials and a nice water divide that is not ridiculous like the Pacific or the Atlantic. I think it would be a lot more interesting if there were a few more port capitals Maybe in Renmark, Saadarkan, Essialtea, Brank. so that Naval commander and MOS is more viable.

the main problem i find with maps and this is particularly evident in the lord of the rings scenario is that it is just one massive land mass which makes for incredibly boring gameplay, you need the landscape variety that Europe has. no-one wants to play team games in Asia or america like maps because if is boring, people need to learn this.

Kirjoittanut nonames, 20.12.2013 at 22:39

Kirjoittanut Columna Durruti, 20.12.2013 at 22:26

Some balanced maps/scenarios

• Steam Wars (map)
  
• King of the Dungeon V1.2 (scenario: 3v3)

Kingod the dungeon is not a good map, niether is any king of the hill in my opinion.

Steam wars seems fairly balanced to be honest, a good mix of populated and not so populated countries as well as income differentials and a nice water divide that is not ridiculous like the Pacific or the Atlantic. I think it would be a lot more interesting if there were a few more port capitals Maybe in Renmark, Saadarkan, Essialtea, Brank. so that Naval commander and MOS is more viable.

the main problem i find with maps and this is particularly evident in the lord of the rings scenario is that it is just one massive land mass which makes for incredibly boring gameplay, you need the landscape variety that Europe has. no-one wants to play team games in Asia or america like maps because if is boring, people need to learn this.

Will add Extra Cities to Steam Wars (mostly some harbor cities). Good suggestion to make it more attractive/feasible for NC and bigger troop movement between continents.

Kirjoittanut Columna Durruti, 20.12.2013 at 22:43

Kirjoittanut nonames, 20.12.2013 at 22:39

Kirjoittanut Columna Durruti, 20.12.2013 at 22:26

Some balanced maps/scenarios

• Steam Wars (map)
  
• King of the Dungeon V1.2 (scenario: 3v3)

Kingod the dungeon is not a good map, niether is any king of the hill in my opinion.

Steam wars seems fairly balanced to be honest, a good mix of populated and not so populated countries as well as income differentials and a nice water divide that is not ridiculous like the Pacific or the Atlantic. I think it would be a lot more interesting if there were a few more port capitals Maybe in Renmark, Saadarkan, Essialtea, Brank. so that Naval commander and MOS is more viable.

the main problem i find with maps and this is particularly evident in the lord of the rings scenario is that it is just one massive land mass which makes for incredibly boring gameplay, you need the landscape variety that Europe has. no-one wants to play team games in Asia or america like maps because if is boring, people need to learn this.

Will add Extra Cities to Steam Wars (mostly some harbor cities). Good suggestion to make it more attractive/feasible for NC and bigger troop movement between continents.

port capitals would be what interests me so MOS can directly attack with subs and marines, and NC can attack and then hold the capital with destroyers.
look at europe for example, just adding port cities would not make NC any more usable because sure there is a hell of a lot of room to maneuver but you can't use your best units to take and hold cities (which every other strat in the game is able to do) simply because there just isn't enough port cities.

Of course there should be a happy median because if every city is a port city (Oceania) then naval commander would be OP

a good median for example is america because attacking with subs allows you to attack all there port cities (and two capital on both sides) with the subs you transported the marines in while using the rest of the marines to take cities elsewhere.

Kirjoittanut nonames, 20.12.2013 at 22:51

Kirjoittanut Columna Durruti, 20.12.2013 at 22:43

Kirjoittanut nonames, 20.12.2013 at 22:39

Kirjoittanut Columna Durruti, 20.12.2013 at 22:26

Some balanced maps/scenarios

• Steam Wars (map)
  
• King of the Dungeon V1.2 (scenario: 3v3)

Kingod the dungeon is not a good map, niether is any king of the hill in my opinion.

Steam wars seems fairly balanced to be honest, a good mix of populated and not so populated countries as well as income differentials and a nice water divide that is not ridiculous like the Pacific or the Atlantic. I think it would be a lot more interesting if there were a few more port capitals Maybe in Renmark, Saadarkan, Essialtea, Brank. so that Naval commander and MOS is more viable.

the main problem i find with maps and this is particularly evident in the lord of the rings scenario is that it is just one massive land mass which makes for incredibly boring gameplay, you need the landscape variety that Europe has. no-one wants to play team games in Asia or america like maps because if is boring, people need to learn this.

Will add Extra Cities to Steam Wars (mostly some harbor cities). Good suggestion to make it more attractive/feasible for NC and bigger troop movement between continents.

port capitals would be what interests me so MOS can directly attack with subs and marines, and NC can attack and then hold the capital with destroyers.
look at europe for example, just adding port cities would not make NC any more usable because sure there is a hell of a lot of room to maneuver but you can't use your best units to take and hold cities (which every other strat in the game is able to do) simply because there just isn't enough port cities.

Of course there should be a happy median because if every city is a port city (Oceania) then naval commander would be OP

a good median for example is america because attacking with subs allows you to attack all there port cities (and two capital on both sides) with the subs you transported the marines in while using the rest of the marines to take cities elsewhere.

Interesting. Understood. Supported. To be implemented.

Kirjoittanut Permamuted, 20.12.2013 at 22:43

Yea gard lol, these bloody conservatives

@ pulse and arbitrator, each side has one race with an air unit, at current neither is really usable, except the fell beasts and they dont provide any particular advantage other than a longranage ability to wf

but thats irrelevant anyway, air units have no effect on the balance of the map, a player without air units has as much of a chance as defeating one of the players with them. the main issues lie in the economy and the pricing of some units.

but what bugs me about your post is that you like arb are very quick to dismiss the map as not being competitive, mostly because it isnt the same as the eu map lol. you both fail to see that with a few tweaks it could work fine.

its a different map, shock horror, different.

i dont see ppl complaining in eurasia CWs that its difficult to ferry units from japan to pakistan in 1 turn lol. why on earth should the use of sea transports be vital to a map.

i dont know whether you guys missed the part of my original post where i said the map needed tweaking, or the part in the title where i said the map had "potential". Well it was just an idea anyway, take it or leave it.

ps, ill check out this steam wars map, ive never heard of it or seen it being played

Because balanced competitive Atwar was built around eu+. it is the most diverse map out there (even currently with all the other maps) also every strategy is plausible to play under the right circumstances.

Looking at the battle for middle earth i only ever see one or two strategies i would ever go in with (unless of course I was late joining)
Guerilla Warfare and Imperialist.

GC, PD, IF not good for massive maps with barely any transports. RA and MOS too expensive to be cost effective. SM, no units so pointless
There is also no diversity in income, it's all just pretty much the same everywhere so there are important places to capture to hinder you opponent other than their highest reinforcement cities. Oh and it's one massive blob of landmass that has similar reinforcement patterns or income paterns like EU+ (eg. benelux, massive income, balkans tiny income significant reinforcements, Scandinavia spread out medium reinforcements with a highish income and an area that can easily swap hands quickly.)

you get the picture. I can go on forever.

I think it'll be a good idea. Something different from the average 3 vs 3 face off. This would allow new player to shine.

The strats and units are balanced for the default map... To make it balanced enough for competitive play you would need to alter the strats and units.. And it's not possible to change the strats for a map. Not to mention all of arbitrators points.

Kirjoittanut Xenosapien, 07.10.2014 at 11:11

The strats and units are balanced for the default map... To make it balanced enough for competitive play you would need to alter the strats and units.. And it's not possible to change the strats for a map. Not to mention all of arbitrators points.

dat necro

Kirjoittanut Guest, 10.10.2014 at 09:16

Kirjoittanut Xenosapien, 07.10.2014 at 11:11

The strats and units are balanced for the default map... To make it balanced enough for competitive play you would need to alter the strats and units.. And it's not possible to change the strats for a map. Not to mention all of arbitrators points.

dat necro

the lord of the rings maps is shit by current map making standars.

Nice necro

Kirjoittanut Tundy, 10.10.2014 at 10:21

Kirjoittanut Guest, 10.10.2014 at 09:16

Kirjoittanut Xenosapien, 07.10.2014 at 11:11

The strats and units are balanced for the default map... To make it balanced enough for competitive play you would need to alter the strats and units.. And it's not possible to change the strats for a map. Not to mention all of arbitrators points.

dat necro

the lord of the rings maps is shit by current map making standars.

it is but i stand by what i said, it has potential if someone like you or tiktok had a go at balancing out the units and sides.