I don't think this has been discussed in the forum, but there is I bit of lingo that new users might find confusing.  Here is what I came up with:

Hordes - A continent bonus structure where every 'internal' territory earns a bonus.  Internal means that you control all bordering continents.

Crab Game - A game (often down to three players) where no one is able to take a commanding lead.  Anyone who does begin to gain a lead is focused on by everyone else to drag them back down toward the rest of the pack (picture a bunch of crabs in a bucket).

ToS - The Other Site.   The site that dare not speak it's name.  Ok, it's warfish.net and a lot of wargear users came from there when Steven the admin and creator of warfish basically abandoned it for years with no support.

Am I forgetting anything?

I think it would be great if we had more names for some of the wargear map making mechanics (like hordes).  Maybe that mechanic used in M57s 'new world' could have a name?   Also, Ed's new map 'pipeline' where a bonus is giving for connecting two areas.  & Cramchackle's Roadwarrior and Fallout have a similar mechanic.  I suggest calling the pipeline one a 'conduit' and Cramchackle's an 'inverse conduit'

Thought of another one:

collector bonus - this is when territories give bonuses for each pair of territories you have.  A good example is the 'just gems' scenario for my 'Crystal Caves' board.

Ozyman wrote:

Hordes - A continent bonus structure where every 'internal' territory earns a bonus.  Internal means that you control all bordering continents.

Territories right?

Yep.  Good catch.

The reality is that there are just so many bonus structures possible.  Nevertheless, I agree that we could probably agree on some that are definitive in nature.  Hordes is a good example.  It is simple to define because it only uses Continental bonuses to to achieve.

I can't speak to the other mechanisms but I can talk about the ones I've incorporated in my boards.

Anarchy uses a pure system.  I purposely chose the name thinking that perhaps the word anarchy would become synonymous with the bonus structure.  Whether or not it will be used or become a popular system remains to be seen, but I seem to recall someone suggesting that they might make an "anarchy" version of their board.

New Earth employs a "remote feeder" system(for lack of a better description).  The territory that receives the bonus is not part of the continent that earns the bonus.  I'm pretty sure there are a number of boards out there that use such a structure. The problem here is that such a system can be configured in so many ways and have so many uses as to possibly render the moniker useless.  For instance, technically speaking, Go-Geared uses such a system.

That said, I agree with O that a coherent and consistent nomenclature for bonus structures would make it much easier for designers to communicate how boards work, and therefore for players to understand how boards work.  It would be pretty cool if a player reading a description could simply click on words like "hordes" or "anarchy", which would be linked to an entry for the word on a glossary page. 

"Castles" style board:

A board that has capital territories that are not assigned to players at setup.  Capturing a capital city generally grants you an advantage but also puts you in danger of being eliminated if you lose all of your capitals.

The original board: http://www.wargear.net/boards/view/Castles

Here are several variations on the style:

http://www.wargear.net/boards/view/Coffee+Capital

http://www.wargear.net/boards/view/Game+of+Hordes%21

http://www.wargear.net/boards/view/Marvels+Manhattan

http://www.wargear.net/boards/view/Of+Kings+and+Men

http://www.wargear.net/boards/view/Steel+City

http://www.wargear.net/boards/view/Total+WarGear

I'm not sure I've ever heard/used "Anarchy, Remote Feeder, Castles"...perhaps I'm out of date though.  Just curious if we're looking to create/add lingo or define what is existing/used?

Well, first I was trying to define the Lingo we currently use, but I thought it might be useful to expand it a bit too so that we have a more extensive vocabulary to talk about some of the complicated wargear topics.

As M57 said, one issue is that their needs to be a fairly well defined, easily understood and limited definition for a wargear neologism to be useful.

I think 'remote feeder' sounds a bit clunky, but the concept of a bonus that is placed on a territory that is not a member of the continent sounds useful.

The definition of 'Castles' is I think a good one and a fairly common dynamic.  I'm not 100% sold on the name 'castles', but for the lack of a better one, naming it after a prominent board that did it first is a good way to go.

Ozyman wrote:

Well, first I was trying to define the Lingo we currently use, but I thought it might be useful to expand it a bit too so that we have a more extensive vocabulary to talk about some of the complicated wargear topics.

As M57 said, one issue is that their needs to be a fairly well defined, easily understood and limited definition for a wargear neologism to be useful.

I think 'remote feeder' sounds a bit clunky, but the concept of a bonus that is placed on a territory that is not a member of the continent sounds useful.

The definition of 'Castles' is I think a good one and a fairly common dynamic.  I'm not 100% sold on the name 'castles', but for the lack of a better one, naming it after a prominent board that did it first is a good way to go.

i thought they were called 'capitals'...

Shouldn't something have to be used in more than 1 map and perhaps by more than 1 map maker to be considered a "Term"?  I "coined" the term "Collectors Bonus" on ToS with Risky Kong and used it in a few other maps that didn't work as well, but I blatantly did it just because I didn't like the fact that Cram was getting all the props for Hordes! and wanted in.

Anyways, I just think we should save the term "Wargear Lingo" for stuff that actually is lingo and not just stuff that applies to 1 map.

I agree.  Up to this point the terms in Ozy's original post are used all over this site without an explanation of what they were.

Gameplay and mapmaking elements like "Simulgear" or "Capitals" that are already defined in the FAQ don't need to be listed here.

RiskyBack wrote:

Shouldn't something have to be used in more than 1 map and perhaps by more than 1 map maker to be considered a "Term"? 

I agree.. I used the example of Anarchy as a descriptor, when in fact there is no other board that uses the Anarchy paradigm for production.  Currently, that word has no business being included in a site glossary.

I used the admittedly clunky term "remote feeder" to describe a more and more commonly used production scheme, yet it doesn't as of yet have a descriptor.   I had to make it up on the spot, and personally I think it's worse than clunky.. Eventually, someone will coin a term that others use to describe a bonus is placed on a territory that is not a member of the continent.

A term becomes part of the lingo only if people use it.  I think right now we could easily compile a list of 20 or so definitions that a noobe could benefit from being able to find all in one place, even if they can be found in other places on the site.

Continent, Territory, Border, Dice Mod, Hordes, H-Rating, Factory, Capital, Fog, Fortify..

There are more and more similar concepts that need differentiation..  For instance the difference between bonuses that are Factory created and a bonus that can be placed anywhere on the board.  I prefer to call the latter an "in hand" bonus, only because no one has coined a term for it yet.

M57 wrote:

I agree.. I used the example of Anarchy as a descriptor, when in fact there is no other board that uses the Anarchy paradigm for production. 

I've been meaning to say this, but I think the Anarchy theme needs to be used in a situation with 1-way borders where the production goes in the direction opposite of the attack.

weathertop wrote:

i thought they were called 'capitals'...

The term capitals refers to a territory type that is clearly defined in the help.

The term Castles style map refers to a map that uses the game play dynamic developed by Cram and repeated by several other mapmakers. 

I think that the Castles style of play is as clearly defined as the Hordes! style of play. 

I have been using this term for some time when evaluating new maps and making suggestions about game play.

and here i thought castles was simply another way to define capitals. didn't ever consider the hordes aspect to it. so you're saying castles = capitals + hordes (not including capitals in hordes calculations)

weathertop - I don't think that is at all what Raptor is saying.  Here is make take on the Castles definition:

A 'castle' is a capital that is also:

• unassigned to begin with
• provides an advantage (usually additional attack, artillery or view range)

Risky -  I thought you came up with the 'collector bonus', but I wasn't sure so I didn't want to start giving credit out for these terms.  Good Job! Really a nice dynamic.

I think collector bonus is a great example of something that can be defined even more clearly. i.e.   Collector(ib,cb,cs)

• ib is the individual Bonus for any single territory.
• cb is the  collection Bonus
• cs is the collection size (can be left off if the traditional 2)

So for example for my 'just gems' scenario I could say that same colored gems give a bonus = Collector(1,1).

That works out to 1,3,6,10,15,21 if you have 1,2,3,4,5,6 territories.

Alternatively, if you have to have a pair of territories to get any bonus:

Collector(0,1) gives you 0,1,3,6,10,15

An example of a non-2 collection size, would be something where you need 3 territories to get a bonus:

Collector(0,1,3) gives you: 0,0,1,4,10,20

In general if you have N territories out of Collector(ib,cb,cs) set, your bonus is:

ib*N+ cb * N choose cs

(p.s. google knows how to solve (X choose Y), so you can just plug that formula into google).

Who came up with ToS?

Wow.  I'm impressed that defining things actually makes things more complicated... 

Yeah... maybe 'clearly' isn't the word I should have used.  More like completely.