Skip to Content

Wrap Around world VS traditional maps

13 replies [Last post]
larienna
larienna's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2008

I was studying isocahedral map layout to make a wrap around world map that would take the shape of a D20. You can find some examples here:

http://www.bgdf.com/node/3739

The problems I have so far is that with the little amount of hex each tile, it's difficult to come up with a combination of tilable hex that makes an interesting configuration of continents.

The second problem is that it is much more complicated for the players to visualize which hexes are connected together.

So I asked my self do I really need a wrap Around world?
What are the advantage or wrap around worlds?

I think that, yes, I like wrap around worlds. Because if you take other games like twilight imperium, you get in the situation where:

- Everybody jumps at the middle of the board that I will call the Melee.
- You are limited to confront your 2 side neighbor and the melee in the middle. So there are actually players you will never engage battle with.

So I was thinking if there could be alternative ways to implement wrap around world rather than using isocahedral maps. I know that with the diamonds in the pictures above, I can come up with different map configuration where each player possess 1 tile. (Sorry, I don't have pictures to illustrate yet)

Some of these maps combination can be circular. I could either make 2 circular maps like if they were 2 emisphere. Or for example a 6 point star, where the center of the map is the north pole and the points of the stars is the south pole. (Like a d8 but with 12 faces).

With a design like this, it create a double melee area, one in each pole. So if I cannot attack the player on the other side of the table using the north pole, I could do it using the south pole.

The advantage of using a star map compared to a square map (like in old video game RPG) is that the pole around the map will have the same number of space(hex) than the north pole.

Do you think that Wrap Around map are actually better?
Do you have other suggestion of wrap around maps that can be easily played with?
Are there ways to make regular maps as interesting strategically as wrap around maps?

Kirioni
Offline
Joined: 09/20/2009
Thoughts, Questions

I really like the idea of wrap-around maps, I think they add a real strategic element to them. Some questions that come to mind... are you planning on having randomization of terrain as part of the challenge or will the map be "fixed" once you get the shape down.

A quick google image search of isocahedral maps shows some interesting designs to play with, maybe incorporating an overlay of latitude and longitude might help players see what is where in relation.

Seems like a neat project!

Relexx
Relexx's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/31/2010
larienna wrote:The problems I

larienna wrote:
The problems I have so far is that with the little amount of hex each tile, it's difficult to come up with a combination of tilable hex that makes an interesting configuration of continents.

The second problem is that it is much more complicated for the players to visualize which hexes are connected together.


How about ignoring the hex and use triangles instead

Quote:
So I was thinking if there could be alternative ways to implement wrap around world rather than using isocahedral maps. I know that with the diamonds in the pictures above, I can come up with different map configuration where each player possess 1 tile. (Sorry, I don't have pictures to illustrate yet)

If i remember correctly, Risk's map wraps, and that is just a flat board.

Wrap around maps do add an interesting element, from my experience the edges create ambush sites as sometimes players forget about the other side of the map. But then again if it is core to the game then players will get use to it and remember where opponents may come from.

pelle
pelle's picture
Offline
Joined: 08/11/2008
Wizard's Quest have some nice

Wizard's Quest have some nice solution to the "you can only attack your two neighbors and the melee" problem. The map has a tunnel that you can use to "teleport" units from one end of the map to the other. There is also a long river, and a large lake, both which can be used (if you have some special card) to move units from one area next to the river/lake to another, effectively making many areas adjacent and allowing units again to "teleport" from one part of the map to another.

Hi-res image of that map board:
http://www.boardgamegeek.com/image/790546/wizards-quest

Nfs994
Nfs994's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/17/2010
Wrap-Around Maps

I was pondering this myself yesterday, but I think that new players coming to a game with a wrap-around board with such a complexity as your icosahedral map would have troubles figuring out what tiles connect. If you wanted to go to new lengths of construction, you could have a metal-lined or magnetic board, fold it up so it turns 3d and use magnetic pieces. Then you could just use a flat paper map for playtesting and prototyping. On the other hand, as Relexx had mentioned it, a flat, wrap-around map is possible. Axis and Allies used a flat map of the world and you could move off the edge of the board East and West (not North and South because if you went off North one way you would come out of the North another, not to mention the ice caps and Antarctica are in the way) and wrap around to the other side.

larienna
larienna's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2008
Replies

Quote:
are you planning on having randomization of terrain as part of the challenge or will the map be "fixed" once you get the shape down.

The map will be random. Each player will start on a tile, as they explore the map, they connect their tile to other players tile or unused tiles yet.

Quote:
Wizard's Quest have some nice solution

I know that game. It is indeed an alternative solution. BUt it's harder with a random map. I used the idea of wormhole for a space theme game that allowed you to jump 2 tiles ahead (hex tiles).

Quote:
How about ignoring the hex and use triangles instead

I thought about it. I know that triagle patterns can make better continent configurations. Still I will need bigger triangles since I need to fit a city token in each space. Second, it might become a bit more complicated to caculate range and distance unless grouping triangles as hex.

I also thought of playing hexagonal cities in a triangular map, giving various placement options. But the problem is that it will be complex to know which city is adjacent to another if there are gaps between cities.

Quote:
If i remember correctly, Risk's map wraps, and that is just a flat board.

True, but it's a fixed map. I can still do cheap wrap around like it's the case in old video game RPG (Dragon warrior and final fantasy. WHich mean have a square board and make each side wrap to each side.

rcjames14
rcjames14's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/17/2010
What Are Your Goals?

It seems that you find yourself committed to a particular map construction by the set of goals you have. But, some of them do not appear to have been rendered explicit. As a result, we are unlikely to generate useful suggestions for you.

I gather that you want to create an enclosed planar space because you want players to start out with little knowledge of who or what surrounds them. You want players to be able to explore in any planar direction with an equal chance of finding something and for that exploration to bring them full circle back where they started. A circumnavigation... so to speak.

Unless you have in mind a very exotic version of interstellar space, no form of planar space will properly represent interstellar exploration. However, if you have in mind settlers on a hypothetical planet with no icecaps or other obstructions, then I can see how you might want to create a mechanic like this.

But, keep in mind that you will never be able to model complete fog of war in a tabletop game. Unless you're thinking kriegspiel, the players will at least know what hex each other start on, so they will be able to calculate the fastest route to each other. If not with certainty, then probabilistically. And movement constraints are not necessarily a bad thing.

Unlimited actions (whether that is movement or targeting) often creates a balance of power dynamic that greatly impedes the completion of a game. If certain spots are more defensible than others, then players have additional constraints to their action which not only make the game end faster, they also introduce new strategic considerations.

When balanced against the intuitive difficulty of conceiving of a properly 'wrapped' flat representation of a sphere, you might actually gain playability if you allow for a little incorrectness. Otherwise, you might find that the game (at least as a tabletop game) is not fun to play.

larienna
larienna's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2008
Damn, my tab closed by error

Damn, my tab closed by error and I lost my post. I'll try to retype it.

Quote:
t seems that you find yourself committed to a particular map construction by the set of goals you have.

Well I wanted to know if it was actually essential to have a wrap around world. It seems that point to point connections seems to help create a similar feeling.

Maybe I could push the idea of mirror world and have 2 maps (Like in MOM), one over the other with gates that connects both world. It will create something like an electronic board with connections on both sides of the board.

Quote:
But, keep in mind that you will never be able to model complete fog of war in a tabletop game.

Connecting tiles was a playable compromise to have some sort of map exploration. Of course, the more tiles there are on the map, the more unexpected the world would be.

Quote:
Unlimited actions (whether that is movement or targeting) often creates a balance of power dynamic that greatly impedes the completion of a game.

Well maybe latter in the game, some upgrade would allow you to travel faster on the sea or in the air to make locations closer to each other.

That is another thing I have realised, I cannot make a map of odd shapes because distance calculation is important. I might have more freedom if distance calculation was not essential.

Quote:
When balanced against the intuitive difficulty of conceiving of a properly 'wrapped' flat representation of a sphere, you might actually gain playability if you allow for a little incorrectness.

I do not mind have a bit of illogic in the map design. A square flat map would allow wrap around using the corners. It might not be so bad.

ascendingrules
Offline
Joined: 10/17/2010
Titan style wraparound

Just another idea to consider-- Titan had a board that behaved like a wraparound board, using somewhat coerced paths. A fast-moving clockwise path of death in the outer ring. A twisty counter-clockwise track of opportunities in the middle ring. And a very tight and rewarding ring of six spots in the center of the board, representing, I think, the poles, where you were only allowed to dip in and out momentarily. After the first few turns you could end up near anyone's pieces.

If it fits with your game maybe you could use a circular track (or two) with limited shortcuts to jump through the middle.

http://boardgamegeek.com/image/265747/titan

larienna
larienna's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2008
About titan: Weird, but

About titan: Weird, but interesting.

gabrielcohn
Offline
Joined: 11/25/2010
Risk

My first thought was Risk--you can make a much more detailed map where each area on the "edge" clearly shows which other "edge" areas it connects to. (you can use dotted lines, numbers, symbols, etc. depnding on the theme...

-g

Koen Hendrix
Offline
Joined: 11/24/2010
A Risk-esque map -- areas

A Risk-esque map -- areas connected by lines -- seems a good solution to me for your average boardgame. It doesn't go particularly well with dividing the whole map into hexes, but it's simple and organized and recognizable. In my opinionit's definitely preferable to using some strange sphere-to-board map projection (where no straight line is really a straight line)...

Just use lots of lines to give everyone plenty of options. Or spice it up with 'fast travel' routes or teleport, as suggested.

~Koen

irdesigns510
irdesigns510's picture
Offline
Joined: 06/24/2009
might be off topic...

... but when i was reading this, i was envisioning a magnetic rotating globe, and players tokens are little magnets.

maybe there is a way to use this, and include sunlight... like vampire armies.

doing this will eliminate any troubles with hexes too, as you can just print freely.

drktron
drktron's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/18/2010
map

I'm not sure if this is anything you had in mind but you got me thinking. What if you used an Octagon shape(more like a square with clipped corners) that each player starts on. Four small squares (the size of the clipped corner) labeled North, South, East and West (N, S, E, W) and matching the players color are placed in the clipped corner of the home "octagon". I'll call them Nodes. ( You could divide the "octagon" into whatever smaller territories you wanted). When you explore (move off the octagon) you place down a new octagon (random terrain) adjacent to it. In a bag you have copies of each players Nodes(their color and cardinal direction) as well as ones of other colors or neutral. New nodes would be drawn from the bag and placed on explored octagons. A player could move from a node to its matching node. This could be on the octagons in front of you or other players. Essentially each player has their own ever-expanding board in front of them linked to the other players by the matching nodes.

I'm not sure if this would work well or if its ever been done but just a thought.
see the image" Octagon map with nodes"

Syndicate content


forum | by Dr. Radut