Countries' initial home city counts

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • Countries' initial home city counts

      Folks,

      Is there a good discussion thread (that includes the game designers, and not just a bunch of random chuckleheads like me offering opinions) of why Dorado does these two related things:
      1) Handicaps so many positions by giving them 5 or 6 cities instead of 7 (I'm using the WW3 map as my example).
      2) Keeps the cities' resource types and resource-production constant across all games?

      Item #1 makes me reluctant to join new games once all the 7-city countries have been taken, and for me, item #2 takes away some of the pleasure of seeing each game as a new experience with nuances that will be different from previous games.

      I'm not asking this to start a debate, or to be convinced that I should like the consequences of either #1 or #2 - I'm asking because I want to know what the designers have to say about why they set things up this way. I'm confident they had their reasons.

      KFG
      PS: I'm asking here because my three different forum searches didn't turn up a decent answer.
    • Small country (refer to 5-6 homeland) usually start in somewhat safe place, few neighbour, easy to defense and attack other
      Large country (7-8) usually Europe, dense area, connect with so many neighbour to get attack by
      Ridiculous size (9 or more) naming Russia and USA, terrible to dense when getting gang, terrible early game growth due to lack of neighbour too, still incredible stronge late game

      History
      the map sure occasionally getting through map balance. in old day we use to have quite handful of 3/4/5 city countries which is super bad, a lot of veteran defending them to stay in game for the sake of challenge. some survive like Korea and israel, some don't.

      for my opinion, it quite balance but rough on the edge. enough to be in gray area where we can spend days debating does it balance or not
      This post was made by Leader of the Church of ROAD
    • It's true that at some point, the only reason why countries like North Korea exist is because we have people obsessed with "the next level of difficulty" to funny amounts

      "With North Korea, Win WW3 map in solo no diplomacy no purchase on market, never go under 25 simultanous wars, and win in under 30 days". We gradually turned into sadomasochists, just for the sake of having a little bit of challenge in public games.

      For the others, it's just a death trap.

      The gameplay reason behind the countries being of various size has always been tied to the designers vision of "why a chaotic melee brawl" is fun : it's unfair, it's not balanced, the chaos element that drives most players is what can give them fun.

      A point to add though : you'll often notice that for countries with more cities, the secondary cities produce usually "less" than the single one the smaller countries have. The discrepancy in cities is a bit less spectacular than what it seems at front value.

      This being said, the reason why resources are not "unbalanced" in order to create a dynamic market and more drive to conquest, is simply "businsses". Everyone consumes the same resources at the same time. You want more ? Gold.

      CoN relies immensely on resources for its income, to the point the designers are reluctant to change the formula : ain't broke, don't fix it.

      Nowadays, we got used to it, but in the early days, i lobbied for ressources and countries "like in Supremacy 1914" where you would have to take into account the economical genetics of your starting country for strategy.

      They mostly listened to us in terms of balance and the competitive maps are balanced (alliance challenges and tournament), but the public games are just here for casual fun.
      Running an online alliance is pretty much like running a small company, except you need to find other way than money to keep your employees productive. May they play or work, they are humans.
    • Im On Smoko wrote:

      A bit off topic but relevant in regards to resources, is that I noticed provincial / territorial resources are moved around, changed or removed on the same maps often enough for me to notice.
      Are you sure it's not the smoko, you've been smoko-ing while on smoko?
      *** The Creator of Zombie Farming ***
      The KING of CoN News!!!
      The "Get off my lawn!" cranky CoN Forums Poster - not affiliated with Dorado in any way


      "Death comes to us all. Shall I deal you in?" - DoD
    • Opulon wrote:



      Nowadays, we got used to it, but in the early days, i lobbied for ressources and countries "like in Supremacy 1914" where you would have to take into account the economical genetics of your starting country for strategy.
      I must say, I am glad they split from the Supremacy-Formula, because some countries there were pretty much screwed from the start because some resource were immensely more important than others. Even the implementation of cavalry did not really change that

      Though they kind of did in some aspect split to much from supremacy-formula.

      Resource production in general is very low and playing a 5 city country without a second supply city severly limits your options and makes playing quite painful

      And having two conquer hundreds of provinces is especially tiresome and boring with all those dead countries on the map
    • I agree. I would love to see them attempt, though, at some point, a game mode where countries are heavily disbalanced in economical production types :D


      I mean, what isn't cool with the perspective of playing a country that has no supplies nor electronics production ? (joking)
      Running an online alliance is pretty much like running a small company, except you need to find other way than money to keep your employees productive. May they play or work, they are humans.
    • Opulon wrote:

      I agree. I would love to see them attempt, though, at some point, a game mode where countries are heavily disbalanced in economical production types :D


      I mean, what isn't cool with the perspective of playing a country that has no supplies nor electronics production ? (joking)
      I guess, it would give some good incentives to 'import' more resources :D

      The post was edited 1 time, last by Kalrakh ().

    • Im On Smoko wrote:

      Dealer of Death wrote:

      Im On Smoko wrote:

      A bit off topic but relevant in regards to resources, is that I noticed provincial / territorial resources are moved around, changed or removed on the same maps often enough for me to notice.
      Are you sure it's not the smoko, you've been smoko-ing while on smoko?
      I no longer smoko. I vape nicotine.



      Not EXACTLY what I was implying. ;)
      *** The Creator of Zombie Farming ***
      The KING of CoN News!!!
      The "Get off my lawn!" cranky CoN Forums Poster - not affiliated with Dorado in any way


      "Death comes to us all. Shall I deal you in?" - DoD
    • Im On Smoko wrote:

      Dealer of Death wrote:

      Im On Smoko wrote:

      A bit off topic but relevant in regards to resources, is that I noticed provincial / territorial resources are moved around, changed or removed on the same maps often enough for me to notice.
      Are you sure it's not the smoko, you've been smoko-ing while on smoko?
      I no longer smoko. I vape nicotine.



      "Dr GREENthumb" reminded me of these guys, The Greenskeepers.
      -
      *** The Creator of Zombie Farming ***
      The KING of CoN News!!!
      The "Get off my lawn!" cranky CoN Forums Poster - not affiliated with Dorado in any way


      "Death comes to us all. Shall I deal you in?" - DoD