Page 1 of 1

Proposed Rebound Update

PostPosted: 15 Jan 2018, 02:50
by Ben
After a very long absence, I have returned to see that some players have disagreed with the state that I left my maps in. I'm not blind, nor deaf. I saw and heard the common complaints. Location 2 on Rebound has always been the most unpopular location on the map. I even avoid it myself when I can, as building there is just so strange.

My other maps need work, too, but here is my proposal for changing location 2:


The most obvious change is the placement of the coal. Most is directly near the storehouse, which should ideally enable a plan with all coal-consuming buildings to be placed bottom-right of the storehouse. Another coal mine borders this space, which should suit the plan nicely. Further, a straight path to the forests to the right will enable coal mines to be sprung up quickly while also establishing solid wood production early on. Perhaps the most helpful effect from this change is that it was very difficult to efficiently build in the area between the gold and iron mountains. With only coal mines going there now, the plan is more simple.
There are other small changes as well. Against my stubbornness, I finally removed the extra trees bottom-left of the storehouse, enabling farms and other production to be planned more easily. More trees have been placed above and to the right to compensate for the lost trees.

All in all, I think the location should be much more enjoyable. Please let me know if I have your support for these changes.

Re: Proposed Rebound Update

PostPosted: 15 Jan 2018, 11:10
by thunder
Hey Ben,

Maybe I'm not the largest fan of the Rebound, but Only replacing that coalfield would not really help in my opinion. I think to this location has kind of similar problem as location 5 on Coastal Expedition. This problem is the placement of the early effective woodcutters. If somebody know loc2 of Rebound then the city can be as good as the others, maybe the map has weaker locations also. I played this locations once -twice and 1-1 replacements and I remember first time I f...d up and then even a good player trolled me so that was a memorable game to me, but I think the problem is really the forest placement and the question or dilemma is the fell only the nearest forest next to the storehouse or not.
The bottom right forest is hardly catchable in useful time and the north trees are also far from the storehouse and can not build too much things between the stone and iron hill. Now the only good way is the start with forest only left and try to catch up the right side forest as early as possible.

If I were you and would have to fix loc2 on Rebound then I would delete the right stone mountain and place the iron hill to there. This would give few extra space next to the storehouse. Even would move the whole location to more right to be further from location 1 - can delete 10-15tiles from right-for this need ironhill replacement. these changes would give more fighting space too. Location 2 is a kind of opened location compare it with location 1 and many time players even not care about defending this loc2 with towers as opened. I use to see only undefended Barracks here.

Here is what I mean.
Screenshot 2018-01-15 12-09-19.jpg

And you know what I like how the snowy version fit to the map :wink:

Re: Proposed Rebound Update

PostPosted: 15 Jan 2018, 20:41
by Chris
Good job, should do the trick. Make the update and let us try.