Conquer Club

You may or may not be aware that there is a lot of discussion going on in the foundry about the size of maps. The official position has been set and you can see the guidelines in the first post of the stickied thread.

The World 2.1 map does not fit into these guidelines for the small map, so more maps of its size cannot be made at the moment. The reasoning for this is quite logical. The majority of players (actually 88%) who make it past the new recruit stage use the small map option. Making maps larger than the guidelines set would force scrolling on their part which is quite bothersome. I believe there are other reasons, but I won't claim to know them all.

Anyway, a few mapmakers feel this is unfair to have these restrictions and ask why World2.1 is allowed to be this large, but others are not.

One thing we don't know is if the players themselves are adamantly against more of these larger maps.

Question

For those of you that use the small version of the map, would you be opposed to having more World2.1 sized maps on the site?

I have provided 3 options for voting which should cover all bases.

I'd like there to be more of those maps, especially since theres an 8 player and 4v4 option on the to do list. And I feel that maps the size of 2.1 are better to do such games.

I also want bigger maps.

I'm sure people knowledgeable about the issue know my stance already, but just in case.

I think maps that desire to be larger then the specified requirements should be handled on a case by case basis. Maps that seem to be large just for the hell of it shouldn't be allowed. However, if a map would experience major graphical and game play set backs, moderators should review the map and decide accordingly.

An example specific to me is the Prison Riot map mibi and I are working on. mibi has managed to get the large map down to an acceptable size, but the small map is really going to be suffering as the army circles are still the same size in both versions. It may be reasonable to see how much mibi can shrink the map and allow him some more pixels for his small version to help alleviate this problem. I know we'll need to see mibi's attempt at a small version that fits the guidelines before any reasonable decision could be made, but again, this is just an example.

Another is DiM's map. DiM might hate me for this but I think he is a case for the maps that are large just for the hell of it. I don't see any reason for his Age of Might map to be outside the guidelines. His other chapters can be bigger if they need to be and he can take up the battle again then.

dunno if i'm missing the point of this poll but you seem to have missed "i use the large map option but do NOT want to see any more world2 maps"

thats coz they take so long though - nothing to do with screen sizes

Rocketry

Rocketry wrote:dunno if i'm missing the point of this poll but you seem to have missed "i use the large map option but do NOT want to see any more world2 maps"

thats coz they take so long though - nothing to do with screen sizes

Rocketry

That wasn't really the issue edbeard was looking for. Generally if you play on the large maps only he doesn't care what you think for the purposes of this. I know that sounds mean. This was more to see if we could get something that contrasts with what the moderators are telling us, that people who use small maps don't want more World 2.1 size stuff.

So far it looks like they do. But this isn't a democratic game site, the moderators still make the final decision, we're just hoping community nudging will get us somewhere.

Every single poll I have ever seen about number of territories or sizes of maps ALWAYS has the majority (by a landslide) voting for more territories and larger maps.

I mean come on now lets be realistic here. World 2.0 was a HUGE smash. It's not what people want though? I don't understand how that could be!

The problem is like you said map makers taking advantage over the amount of space they have. I agree AoM has a ton of wasted space with instructions and bodies of water that don't need to be so far apart.

This is not to please the masses at all. Just dig through the foundry and you will find a ton of polls about it with each and every single one with the same results. The community wants more room and options to be creative and see new creativity from the map makers.

Even this poll is showing you what the majority likes...

Eh, I hate the World 2.1 map personally, it's just too big for my liking. If any similar size maps were created I would probably never play them. However, I don't have a problem with making more big maps if there are people who want to play them, it's easy enough to choose which maps you play and which you don't

keep in mind, there may be other aspects of the world2.1 map that make it popular other than just it's size...

It was one of the first maps to introduce and really use well the idea of staged bonuses (segmented continents - you know what I mean) and it has some really great gameplay for large numbers of players.

Just the simple fact that a map with great gameplay is physically large, as well as having a lot of territories does not mean that by making other maps with the same dimensions, we would necessarily get better playability on maps.

When Rocketry suggested that there was an option missing, he actually has a fairly valid point. There is also something to be said for the fact that large maps like W2.1 have stalemate points and are harder to balance in general because of the possibilities, and by suggesting that the 3 options placed in the poll are able to represent everyone's opinion is a bit misguided. the questions (of almost any poll) will ultimately lead you to the conclusion that you want, just by the wording of them...this is why polls in general suck

Genghis Khan CA wrote:Eh, I hate the World 2.1 map personally, it's just too big for my liking. If any similar size maps were created I would probably never play them. However, I don't have a problem with making more big maps if there are people who want to play them, it's easy enough to choose which maps you play and which you don't

Agreed. I hate how the immense amount of territories leads to an unnecessarily long game.

I don't think I suggested anywhere that Large = Good. But, there are people who enjoy playing these maps quite a bit I imagine (I'm not one honestly).

This thread is not meant as a sign to say, "Oh we need larger maps and this is why." If larger maps of this size are added they should have the same high standards the foundry holds now.

There is not an option missing at all in this poll. Of course it's totally unscientific, but that's not the point. To be honest saying there is an option missing is a bit naive. The point of a poll is to seek information. Not only that but information specific to my interest. The point isn't to serve everyone but to find out about the population of people using small maps.

The parties I am interested in knowing the opinion of are the people using small maps. So, hopefully those who don't use them either didn't vote or voted for the large map option. (only added it to possibly help prevent those from voting when they don't use the small maps). For this population it's very simple. You either want larger maps or you don't. If you don't know or don't care then you don't vote.

I honestly don't mind either way if more maps of this size are made. But, others seem to care strongly so I wanted to know how the majority (small map users felt). Well I still want to know because there's less that 50 votes. In the perfect world we'd have an official CC wide survey and get 1000 respondents so we could have the +-3% sampling error with 95% confidence, and prevent question bias but oh well.

i think Edbard done a great poll and was actaully surprised to see him make this post and poll. Out of all the map makers he has hardly said a word about, then bang this thread.

Twill you just making a arse of yourself running round the forums and writting gibberish!! cant you see it? the gibberish i mean

World 2.1 is a freaking masterpiece of a map. I would definitely support another map that is as good as that one, disregarding the size. I was thinking that a WWII map with European + African theatres that is as big as 2.1 would be great.

d.gishman wrote:World 2.1 is a freaking masterpiece of a map. I would definitely support another map that is as good as that one, disregarding the size. I was thinking that a WWII map with European + African theatres that is as big as 2.1 would be great.

Well we don't have Africa but qwert is working on something like that. But it's still very very early.