so while looking at something else, i decided to try and dust this off again.

I could use some suggestions on gameplay options/necessities to make it more enjoyable. It's in beta if you want to mess with it.

thanks, 
w'top 

I find the borders to not be obvious - Why can T3 Attack T54?  I mean, if I play with the explorer for a while, I can kind of figure it out what the structure is, but it's convoluted, and when borders cross the board like that, it just doesn't make visual sense.

FWIW. That's my .02

fair enough (tho it is in the storyline in the about section - in both cryptic and plain terms). I'm open to changing it however if theres a good board at the end of it.

Yep - I get that the story-line is important.  I will say that the board is beautiful.  It's small enough that I don't mind the fact that the left hand side is much more densely packed than the right.  Normally, I'd complain about wasted space.  Because of how you've kept so much of the character textures on the board, I'd be careful with darker player colors, but really, the look is fabulous.

game here

http://www.wargear.net/games/join/380694

So only the front archers (that don't look like archers) can attack the witch doctor.  I don't see how that fits in the back-story (yet), but I think it would be a lot easier if you named the main characters -- Stones not necessary.   But archer 1,2,3 and pillars 1.2,3, etc, would be nice.

Also, it's strange that Pillar T5 attacks Archer T55, while Pillar T4 Attacks Archer T56.  On a normal map, I would equate those types of borders with sea lanes, which even when spelled out in the description, require dotted lines on the map.

And what the thing in the center - an "undead?"

definitely could name the archers and pillars, especially to coincide with one another.

yeah i saw the 'swap'  of the pillar/archer borders (it's on the top as well as the bottom); but didn't fix it until i had some other things to edit...

the thing in the middle is the witchdoctor, who is able to control the undead, but is not undead himself. 

Agree that that the territories should have useful names.

I understand why you don't have the archers attacking each other and same with the pillars, but without that I don't think much action is going to happen with them.  Seems like everyone will focus on the flagstones - and the bottom level at that.

Some thoughts -

Unit max of 10 is a pain.

the stones could use a different border structure that gets bonuses more quickly - hordes on the bottom level and then any 3 in a row on each level.

should have some time this week to tweak names and such (don't think the stones will get new names tho)

should there be a unit max anywhere? 

I don't think so -

weathertop wrote:

should have some time this week to tweak names and such (don't think the stones will get new names tho)

should there be a unit max anywhere? 

I tend to agree with A37, but it begs the question, where were you thinking and why?

thought there was a reason, but at this point however long later, i can't recall.

Hate the maxes.  We've got some extra feedback here if you want to creep the game.

I'm gonna win it, because I have bonus I can hold now, and the board is pretty open, which will make it near impossible for either of the other two to hold anything.  -Which is not good. It's pre-determined by mid game. 

Smaller continents, more defensible areas with choke points (several of different sizes and with different access levels) and a varied bonus structure will help with this. 

The one way border from the pillars to the floor makes holding the floor hard.

Amidon37 wrote:

The one way border from the pillars to the floor makes holding the floor hard.

Make that impossible.  Especially since those pillars can attack multiple territories.