New map - looking for constructive criticism

[mabeenot]

Please take a look at the 1v1 map below. It's called "Feud" and the description will have a backstory about two feuding families with an ongoing conflict stretching back several generations. The feud has resulted in dead, trampled land in the center of the map while the inner kingdoms remain pristine.

I designed the "front door" of each kingdom to be easily defended yet not completely impervious. My hope is that an early stalemate in the center will drive players to fight more in the north and south regions. The mountains help prevent early village stealing by drakes and gryphons. Forests in the north benefit elves while a cave with two villages in the north-center can be easily defended by dwarves. Swamps in the south should be good for drakes, nagas, mermen, and some undead while the roads and grasslands provide access for horsemen.

The two kingdoms mirror each other with the exception of the south-central grassland, which is inverse. Even with this slight asymmetry, the villages in the grasslands can still be reached in the same number of turns by land and air units.

I would welcome any comments on faction balance, improving geography for locations of strategic interest, and cosmetic changes. What can you foresee will be the map's strengths and weaknesses?

Thanks in advance for the feedback.

UPDATE: Based on feedback, I've altered the map a bit. It's posted below the original. The clouded mountains in the south extend a little further in both directions to shield the grasslands from fliers. The trees have been thinned out a little in both the north and south. A cavernous passage has been added to the north mountains to benefit the movement for dwarves. Some other changes have been made to make the south more interesting. Let me know what you think of the changes.

UPDATE 2: More feedback and more changes. The northern forests have been thinned out some more while more hills have been added to benefit the orcs and dwarves. The mountain pass added in the second draft has been removed. I added some dead trees and hills to the swamp so that other factions are not completely helpless against drakes in the south. The most significant change is the grassland, which is now divided into fourths by the river. The grassland villages have been pushed back and the rivers provide more direct routes from the player's starting position to their side of the grassland. Player two should be able to reach their village before or simultaneously with player one and the forested hill next to the village should help in retaking the village if player one does manage to take it before player two.

Original

Updated

Updated Again

[Caphriel]

It looks rebel-favored. With those huge forests, they are both more maneuverable than anyone but the drakes, and have a defensive advantage. There's not much terrain for dwarves (unless some of those forests are forested hills), which means the Knalgans are half-crippled. Also, if it's symmetrical, how does it compensate for the first-turn advantage?

[mabeenot]

There's not much terrain for dwarves (unless some of those forests are forested hills), which means the Knalgans are half-crippled. Also, if it's symmetrical, how does it compensate for the first-turn advantage?

The north is definitely a good place for the rebels, although there are a lot of forested hills up there for the dwarves. The dwarves should also benefit from the small number of unclouded mountains in some very strategic places, including the main entrances to the kingdoms. I do realize some of the forests may need some thinning out. I've also thought of having some passages through the big mountains on the north border of each kingdom with mushrooms to slow flying units.

I am concerned about the first-turn advantage. The impassable mountains are supposed to restrict outward movement in the first couple turns and inward movement after that, but both sides are limited in that regard. I know there's a way to do it, I've just gotta figure it out. Suggestions are welcome.

[Caphriel]

The problem with forested hills is that it costs dwarves 2 MP to get into them. It costs elves 2 MP, also, but dwarves don't have as many to spare.

[Scipion121212]

The problem with forested hills is that it costs dwarves 2 MP to get into them. It costs elves 2 MP, also, but dwarves don't have as many to spare.

Are you sure? as dwarfes get 1 movement on both hills and forest..

[Caphriel]

Not sure at all, actually! I can't test it at work, and now that you mention that, I'm facepalming. You're probably right. I was probably thinking of Northerner units. Disregard my previous post

[xivarmy]

The center villages in the south might convey a heavy p1 advantage for some factions. it's only 13 squares to get to by the most direct path(for fliers), or 15 squares with 1 sand and rest flat, which would let most scouts get there before p2. Player 2 meanwhile is going to have a hard time assaulting it to take it back early because it's not much closer for him and he still needs to pick up the rest of "his" villages (10 squares with rough terrain, 12 with 1 sand, rest flat).

[mabeenot]

The center villages in the south might convey a heavy p1 advantage for some factions. it's only 13 squares to get to by the most direct path(for fliers), or 15 squares with 1 sand and rest flat, which would let most scouts get there before p2. Player 2 meanwhile is going to have a hard time assaulting it to take it back early because it's not much closer for him and he still needs to pick up the rest of "his" villages (10 squares with rough terrain, 12 with 1 sand, rest flat).

To fix this, do you think it would be better to make it harder for scouts to enter that area (more rough terrain and mountains) or to simply relocate the villages so that they are closer to each player's starting position?

[Caphriel]

As a third alternative, what about expanding the center area a bit so that the map is just a bit wider? On the other hand, there are already very few villages in reach for a ToD-based attack.

[mabeenot]

Based on the feedback, I've altered the map a bit. It's posted below. I also added it to the original post if you'd like to compare it to the first draft.

Changes:
The trees have been thinned out a little in both the north and south. The clouded mountains in the south extend further in both directions to shield the grasslands from fliers and riders. A cavernous passage has been added to the north mountains to benefit movement for dwarves. Some other changes have been made to make the south more interesting.

Let me know what you think of the changes.

I'm still looking for suggestions regarding the south-central grassland villages. Have the mountain changes helped or hurt the early game? Should I move the villages further apart to prevent the first player from stealing it?

Updated Map

[Caphriel]

The mountain changes don't really affect the grassland village; the quickest path to them is through the center for land-based units, and if I'm counting right (which I may not be), that's only one hex longer for flying units.

[xivarmy]

Slowing fliers: mushroom grove in the flight path behind the "gate" castle tiles perhaps.

You could also reorganise the keeps, move them out 1 tile, and take the "tip" of the keep off (with both changes it'd add 2 distance to both flight and land paths.

[Cruz]

When will people learn that most mirrored maps are not balanced due to p1 moving first:P

Hint: Can p1 take p2's middle village with a scout before p2 can?

[mabeenot]

When will people learn that most mirrored maps are not balanced due to p1 moving first:P

Don't worry, Cruz. I know it's a common problem with mirrored map. I just want to find an inventive way to fix it.

[Aethaeryn]

Could the south be a little too strong for Drakes? Plenty of sand and swamp there, and they stand to benefit more than anyone else because of that (especially the sand).

A flying scout will have trouble taking the north village because of the cave in the way, and I'm not sure horses would be much better off. This may favor Undead (who have bats, unaffected by things that slow other fliers down) and possibly Northerners (not sure on the wolf movement in cave).

One-hex-wide openings in caves and tunnels are usually frowned upon for the congestion they cause.

If I had to choose between Rebels and Northerners, I'd choose Rebels every time. The forests are too thick in the north, which will favor them (especially if there's no path through). Forest and hills should be in about equal number, since hills benefit orcs (and are the only real suitable terrain for Dwarves other than the rarer mountains, villages, and castles).

Villages next to mountains are usually frowned upon because it gives Dwarves too much of a strong position. Villages on mountains are even worse, since a Dwarf fighter or thunderer on that village will have 70% dodge and healing in addition to the great resists and HP they already have. Put a Dwarf on there, and only magic, luck, and overwhelming numbers can dislodge him. Putting mountain villages in a standard MP map are just as crazy as giving an elf side a forest village (except that the 70% dodge units on forest, do NOT have good melee or HP). Putting a mountain village and a hill-next-to-mountain village at the opening of a one-wide congestion tunnel is just begging for trouble. Dwarves on hill villages get 60% instead of 50% defense, remember that.