By the way I noticed a minor glitch in the latest version (19a). So here's v20 with the shadow fixed - it was contradicting the lighting on the molecule!

Moderator: Cartographers
I think that the version 19a/20 is much better.
It's clean and it reminds me of my beloved chemistry lessons at school, when the teacher wrote all those big schemes of molecules on the blackboard.
Stop working on graphics (really good for this stage).
I think that the biggest problem with this type of map is the theme. It's difficult to find a real good support for a map based on a protein/molecule.
Work a bit more on your theme, maybe adding a text or moving the "memorize this....." because now it is hidden between all information of your legend.
I read "light green.....to both amino acids", but i don't read anywhere what the amino acids are.I don't think that everyone knows what they are. If you move the "memorize this..." text you have the space to make a sort of title for your bonuses:
Amino Acids:
V Isoleucine +5
V Proline +4
etc.
GT/TH/HA/IP/PG (amide nitrogens) color is almost the same you used for Glutamate, the difference isn't so clear, maybe try another color could be a good choice.
Why 4 nitrogens give only +1?Maybe i missed the explanation through the pages...
Bonuses look good, only the Histidine looks a +6 but the two nitrogens (+1) balance the +5 you've given to it.
Connections, they are clear except for a5/h9/t13/g8/p6. Can you find a way to make them more visible?
Finally colors are clear for me (except for regions with shared colors (the two letters help) but maybe they could create some problems for colorblind people, try a test with vischeck, it simulates the colorblind vision.
Have a nice day
Nobodies
natty_dread wrote:I've tried the coloured tint on the atoms before, you can find it if you browse some old versions. I personally think it looks better this way. Are they really so hard to tell apart now?
the.killing.44 wrote:Sorry to be blunt, but chemistry isn't exactly a niche I think is needed to be filled. You can continue if you wish, but I'm just warning you protein isn't a very appealing theme for a map.
by isaiah40 on 18 Oct 2009, 05:28
Good first draft! V5 is the better one by far. I really don't see any glaring problems except maybe reducing the opacity on the background. It is making the Histidine molecules seem fuzzy. Maybe you could also put a little bit of an outer glow around the molecule names to make them stand out a little more. That's all I see for now, looking forward to your next update!
by danoprey on 18 Oct 2009, 21:10
Yup, the one in the first post is the best so far, although I'd turn down the spread of the glow and turn up the opacity a bit.
Good work.
by khazalid on 20 Oct 2009, 00:39
i see you've added a few extra linking territories based on previous critique, but to me it really looks like it could be done with having at least another 2.
T8 - I1 and A5 - P3 would add a little more nuance imo.
very nice concept, i would definitely play for one.
by cyberyeti on 20 Oct 2009, 20:50
i love ti, make it, NOW!
by RedBaron0 on 21 Oct 2009, 06:06
Interesting map, I think something you can do to help those of the community without a scientific background is to to put onto the spheres the chemical symbol, not centered of course, since that'll be where the army numbers go. They won't even take up that much space since you've mostly got H, O, N, and C's to put in there.
by slowreactor on 25 Oct 2009, 23:26
Definitely like the new background, adds a new dimension to it.
by sexyflanders on 04 Nov 2009, 07:27
I Likey! look forward to playing it.
I bet you won't have to do very many more versions before you are done; it looks pretty good from where I sit.
by number five on 05 Nov 2009, 02:01
like it man
by Incandenza on 07 Nov 2009, 14:11
I really like what you're doing visually, I think the blackboard concept is dynamite. I'm not sure the gameplay is quite there yet, tho I'm currently lacking some sort of killer suggestion... one thing I'd recommend is to think about what game types you think this map would fit best, and perhaps tweak from there.
by thenobodies80 on 08 Nov 2009, 16:11
About the map:
I think that the version 19a/20 is much better.
It's clean and it reminds me of my beloved chemistry lessons at school, when the teacher wrote all those big schemes of molecules on the blackboard.
Stop working on graphics (really good for this stage).
natty_dread wrote:Community support?
Proteins 101 <v.22 Just Another Update> p1, p10
by natty_dread » 17 Oct 2009, 21:52
142 Replies
791 Views
Right, I understand what you are saying. But you also have to keep in mind that 90 replies in this topic are of your own. View statistics are never a very good suggestion of popularity.
I think the lack of comments and direction you are experiencing is most likely due to lack of enthusiasm by at least a portion of those commenting on maps.
Sometimes maps just don't seem to make it because of that lack of enthusiasm. Sometimes vacationing a map and then coming back to it is better, than pressing on with minimal or little support.
natty_dread wrote:I do get comments, and have been getting them all along. The thing here is that most comments have recently had to do with the graphics, and I should be concentrating on the gameplay now. To me it seems I'm not getting the feedback for gameplay because no one really has any ideas how the gameplay could be improved further. That's why I would like to get the attention of the people who frequent the main foundry, since it seems only a few of those people take the time to comment on new maps at the drafting room...
AndyDufresne wrote:natty_dread wrote:I do get comments, and have been getting them all along. The thing here is that most comments have recently had to do with the graphics, and I should be concentrating on the gameplay now. To me it seems I'm not getting the feedback for gameplay because no one really has any ideas how the gameplay could be improved further. That's why I would like to get the attention of the people who frequent the main foundry, since it seems only a few of those people take the time to comment on new maps at the drafting room...
I'm not sure "no one has any ideas on how to improve it further" is the most accurate interpretation, but I do agree one can see it that way. There may be a lack of gameplay feedback because the gameplay isn't that interesting. Sometimes great graphics can prop up a map with marginal game play. Sometimes great gameplay can prop up a map with marginal graphics. But when any map falls to both categories, fate rarely shines good news.
Maps are kind of like headlines in a newspaper, on a website, etc. They often need a hook of some sort. And I think you are still trying to find that hook to push your map over the edge into a great map.
Best of luck again,
--Andy
Return to Melting Pot: Map Ideas
Users browsing this forum: No registered users