Competetive mirrored maps

Can we please have at least one map that is completely balanced(please trolls spare me the "world map can also be balanced yada yada)?
Like a mirrored made up map or a mirrored version of a section of the world map...
Only a mirrored map can deliver perfect balance where players can truly play competitively 1v1 matches.
At least one....
A map where most countries are viable to start in and it does not matter who gets the first pick.

Asymmetric maps can achieve complete balance. picking a symmetric map is just easier design wise. The problem with symmetric maps is that it reduces the variance in possible starting positions by a factor of number of lines of symmetric the map has. The general design philosophy is also to replicate, meaning that the designers don't want to drift to far from the real world.
Your comment on first pick is also a fallacy, because it will always 'matter' if somebody has first pick because it is having an affect on the game but it not that which we should care about and should instead care about neutralizing it to at least reduce the advantage of picking in a certain position.
Most countries on the map don't need to be viable, also, it is just that we need a large number of starting options. Even if only 5% are viable, that could be enough to make the game interesting and varied if there are a large number of total countries in the map.
I agree with your philosophy of giving some sort of competitive option to the game. In fact, not having it goes against the logic of having a coalition section.

True and it would make 1v1's much easier for both parties of AW tournaments happy.

This was brought up a long time ago from i think last march
wont happen anytime soon, i guess?

Geschrieben von ShoreVictory, 08.02.2012 at 16:09

Asymmetric maps can achieve complete balance. picking a symmetric map is just easier design wise. The problem with symmetric maps is that it reduces the variance in possible starting positions by a factor of number of lines of symmetric the map has. The general design philosophy is also to replicate, meaning that the designers don't want to drift to far from the real world.
Your comment on first pick is also a fallacy, because it will always 'matter' if somebody has first pick because it is having an affect on the game but it not that which we should care about and should instead care about neutralizing it to at least reduce the advantage of picking in a certain position.
Most countries on the map don't need to be viable, also, it is just that we need a large number of starting options. Even if only 5% are viable, that could be enough to make the game interesting and varied if there are a large number of total countries in the map.
I agree with your philosophy of giving some sort of competitive option to the game. In fact, not having it goes against the logic of having a coalition section.

I completely disagree with you.
Assured perfect balance can only be achieved with a mirrored map.
An unmirrored map might seem balanced at one point and unbalanced at another a mirrored map can be constructed with assured balance.
@first turn argument
First turn does not have to be an advantage, Afterwind is not Chess, turns are taken simultaneously.
The only thing that prevents perfect balance in Afterwind, for both players, is the map design.
Extreme example to make my point:
A map with only 2 countries that are exactly the same.
In such a map it does not matter who picks first.
A more practical example would be a mirrored map with several regions, since no matter what country the first player picked the other player can always pick the same spot on the mirrored part thus ensuring perfect balance.

Geschrieben von GlennMiller, 08.02.2012 at 22:52

This was brought up a long time ago from i think last march
wont happen anytime soon, i guess?

I wonder what the chance is of a dev replying here?

BasiC, reread what i said and take note that the first turn comment relates to it needing to be minimized, and that i never state that it affects a mirror map. Your comment has made me quite angry because it is shown a complete inability to consider my various for and against points, especially with regards to asymmetric maps.

Before you start being a 'whiny little bitch' about the game, I suggest you go and read some game design books, because until you have, only your observations are relevant and not your solutions to what you consider to be problems.

You might also want to look up the definition of 'matter'.

Geschrieben von BasiC, 11.02.2012 at 03:00

Geschrieben von GlennMiller, 08.02.2012 at 22:52

This was brought up a long time ago from i think last march
wont happen anytime soon, i guess?

I wonder what the chance is of a dev replying here?

Pretty high actually - around 98.5%, I'd say. Anyway, as has been mentioned multiple times before, AW engine only allows one map - the current world map. Yes, it's limiting, but we had to sacrifice it to provide a better world map experience. The best alternative is a highly balanced scenario.

Geschrieben von Ivan, 11.02.2012 at 03:48

Geschrieben von BasiC, 11.02.2012 at 03:00

Geschrieben von GlennMiller, 08.02.2012 at 22:52

This was brought up a long time ago from i think last march
wont happen anytime soon, i guess?

I wonder what the chance is of a dev replying here?

Pretty high actually - around 98.5%, I'd say. Anyway, as has been mentioned multiple times before, AW engine only allows one map - the current world map. Yes, it's limiting, but we had to sacrifice it to provide a better world map experience. The best alternative is a highly balanced scenario.

Hmm, ok i guess.Thats that.
Is it not possible to take a part of the actual map, draw new borders on it and in effect create a mirrored map?

Geschrieben von ShoreVictory, 11.02.2012 at 03:36

BasiC, reread what i said and take note that the first turn comment relates to it needing to be minimized, and that i never state that it affects a mirror map. Your comment has made me quite angry because it is shown a complete inability to consider my various for and against points, especially with regards to asymmetric maps.

Before you start being a 'whiny little bitch' about the game, I suggest you go and read some game design books, because until you have, only your observations are relevant and not your solutions to what you consider to be problems.

No need to get angry.
What you wrote is a bit messy and problematic to understand.
You might not be a native English speaker so it might not be your fault but its hard for me to understand nuances in your paragraph when you write in bad English.

It is basic and logically bulleted. I used no technical language nor did I use any complex nuances that are difficult to interpret. If you can't understand bullet points with connectives then I worry for your reading and the literacy of your native country. I find it especially ironic that you criticize my english despite not being able to spell 'competitive' correctly in the thread title.

I don't with to discuss this any further, because to do so would be to undermine the scope of this thread.

I've made balanced scenarios where incomes are generally the same for all regions of the earth. It's so balanced that equally skilled players can't actually kill each other. Last time I tried a high rank only balanced World game it led to a 50 turn war of attrition.

Question answered.