Conquer Club

My first historical and geographical map Hope you like it, things should be pretty self-explanitory (I hope):



My favorite things about this map: small (only 21 territories) and unique, but not bafflingly complicated.


Oh, and guess what? This is my thousandth post (not counting the Off-Topics Forum)! To commemorate this achievement, I'd like to give this post my official stamp:



-Sully's 1000th post!

P.S. I don't need to hear anything about "you have too many ideas in the melting pot" and similar junk. I KNOW WHAT I'M DOING, thank you. I'm still doing Pachisi and plan on doing Conquer Kart Racing.

show: older versions

Well, there is a limit to how many maps you can have in the gameplay or graphics workshop and its a total of two between them.

That said, if you continue this map, you're going to need some better names that "Tigris 1" or "Euphrates 2"

I'd like to see the map use more of the rivers, perhaps something like an attack downstream. I figure they were massively important to Sumeria in terms of sustaining the cities, shouldn't they play a role in the map as well?

I'm not a huge fan of the plus 2 for x amount because I hate sitting there and counting each player's cities... I'd rather see an autodeploy of 1 per city.

And is it Sumer or Sumeria?

Industrial Helix wrote:Well, there is a limit to how many maps you can have in the gameplay or graphics workshop and its a total of two between them.

Duly noted.

Industrial Helix wrote:That said, if you continue this map, you're going to need some better names that "Tigris 1" or "Euphrates 2"

I figured it was more important to get a map up first then deal with land territory names later. I will give them names, though.

Industrial Helix wrote:I'd like to see the map use more of the rivers, perhaps something like an attack downstream. I figure they were massively important to Sumeria in terms of sustaining the cities, shouldn't they play a role in the map as well?

Yes, which is why I included that you have to hold a land territory (adjacent to the Tigris/Euphrates) in order to get the city bonus. The downstream attack doesn't sound bad... I'll look into that. But what if you're at the lowest/"downstream-est" point?

Industrial Helix wrote:I'm not a huge fan of the plus 2 for x amount because I hate sitting there and counting each player's cities... I'd rather see an autodeploy of 1 per city.

¿Por qué? Seems like this map calls for more than a simple auto-deploy... Idk, could you elaborate?

Industrial Helix wrote:And is it Sumer or Sumeria?

Sumer. Sumeria is an erroneous way to refer to Sumer (you can wiki it, if you'd like ).

Thanks for the quick response!

-Sully

I like it, small, but not overly simplistic like Lux/doodle.

Nice idea. I like the advantages provided by the river, that adds to the context / setting. Also, the number of territories, allied to the theme, could make this a popular map for quick speed games.

I'd recommend calling it 'Ancient Civilisation' or something though - other folks may come along wanting to create maps from even earlier epochs.

As Helix suggested, some more interesting territory names would add to the flavour.

I love the idea! Maybe because Sumer is in the Fertile Crescent, you can tie in farming to the map gameplay? Not every map has to have that kind of gameplay though, I just thought it could be interesting. Also, I actually would like it more if you included all of the empires in Mesopotamia. Just some thoughts.

Wow! Thanks for all the comments guys.

jigger1986 wrote:I like it, small, but not overly simplistic like Lux/doodle.

Thanks, that's what I was going for

DJ Teflon wrote:Nice idea. I like the advantages provided by the river, that adds to the context / setting. Also, the number of territories, allied to the theme, could make this a popular map for quick speed games.

Cool! Again, that's kinda what I was going for. I believe there was even a "There Aren't Enough Small Maps" thread.

DJ Teflon wrote:I'd recommend calling it 'Ancient Civilisation' or something though - other folks may come along wanting to create maps from even earlier epochs.

As Helix suggested, some more interesting territory names would add to the flavour.

I'll probably include "The First Civilization" in the title on the map. "Ancient Civilization" is a little too general for me. And how could other mapmakers make maps dated before this, if Sumer was the first civilization?
Like I said, I'll include territory names later.

RedFlyingGolf wrote:I love the idea! Maybe because Sumer is in the Fertile Crescent, you can tie in farming to the map gameplay? Not every map has to have that kind of gameplay though, I just thought it could be interesting. Also, I actually would like it more if you included all of the empires in Mesopotamia. Just some thoughts.

Including the farming aspect (assuming you are not referring to the kind of farming that's against the rules on CC ) seems like a neat idea, but I do want to maintain a certain simplicity. I don't think I will be including anything outside of Sumer, because I want to keep the map small, and keep the map, well, Sumer.

Thanks for all your comments I would definitely appreciate more, if you have them.

-Sully

Victor Sullivan wrote:Including the farming aspect (assuming you are not referring to the kind of farming that's against the rules on CC ) seems like a neat idea, but I do want to maintain a certain simplicity. I don't think I will be including anything outside of Sumer, because I want to keep the map small, and keep the map, well, Sumer.

Thanks for all your comments I would definitely appreciate more, if you have them.

-Sully

Oh, Are the Euphrates and Tigris territories the starting points then?

Well, i just don't like the +2 for X amount because I really is a pain to sit there and count everyone's cities. And when I have to do that, I play a map less than I would.

The big gameplay problem I foresee is that players are going to basically sit on top of the territories and use that to guard their cities, the game is essentially going to be decided by whomever gets Euphrates 3 first. What if you made the territories killer neutrals so that players have to go from city to city in their conquering rampages? It would be close what an invading army would have to deal with and woul dmake for a much more fun game, imo.

Industrial Helix wrote:Well, i just don't like the +2 for X amount because I really is a pain to sit there and count everyone's cities. And when I have to do that, I play a map less than I would.

I agree, it is a pain to do that.

But don't you have the same thing in your Russian Revolution map?

"Territories in High Population areas draft more armies with Commander and HQ.

+3 for every 3 territories"

Industrial Helix wrote:Well, i just don't like the +2 for X amount because I really is a pain to sit there and count everyone's cities. And when I have to do that, I play a map less than I would.

The big gameplay problem I foresee is that players are going to basically sit on top of the territories and use that to guard their cities, the game is essentially going to be decided by whomever gets Euphrates 3 first. What if you made the territories killer neutrals so that players have to go from city to city in their conquering rampages? It would be close what an invading army would have to deal with and woul dmake for a much more fun game, imo.

Hmm... You have some good points here. I will look into them and put up another draft.

-Sully

Next draft:

I'm hesitant to implement the auto-deploys instead of the bonuses because I want the land territories incorporated more. Let me know your thoughts.

-Sully

It's a shame we can't do conditional autodeploys. I think that would be quite nice for this map.

Overall, i think the gameplay is a big improvement. It opens up the cities and increases their importance yet doesn't neglect the land territories but creating an incentive to hold them (and thus tie the rivers to the cities).

The Tigris and Euphates bonus seems far too high (unless they include the cities as well).

I'd like for the rules to explain the idea you have of the geographical reasons for the gameplay. For example, instead of saying cities need the territory for the bonus you could say "Cities give an increased bonus of +2 by holding the land which ties them to the river."

Anyway, I'd recommend a brief for this.

Industrial Helix wrote:It's a shame we can't do conditional autodeploys. I think that would be quite nice for this map.

I agree 10 gazillion percent!! I actually wrote down a "Pros and Cons" list between the auto-deploy and the standard bonus, and it was pretty equal, but the thing that tipped me over was the involvement of the land territories.

Industrial Helix wrote:Overall, i think the gameplay is a big improvement. It opens up the cities and increases their importance yet doesn't neglect the land territories but creating an incentive to hold them (and thus tie the rivers to the cities).

Thanks, that's good to hear

Industrial Helix wrote:The Tigris and Euphates bonus seems far too high (unless they include the cities as well).

Yeah, in fact I had changed that, but the application "unexpectedly quit" and I was trying to remember what I changed. Thanks for reminding me, I'll fix that. Oh, and no, the cities aren't included in the bonus.

Industrial Helix wrote:I'd like for the rules to explain the idea you have of the geographical reasons for the gameplay. For example, instead of saying cities need the territory for the bonus you could say "Cities give an increased bonus of +2 by holding the land which ties them to the river."

Anyway, I'd recommend a brief for this.

Alright, I'll see what I can whip up for ya Oh, and another thing I forgot to re-put-in is I'm gonna change the +2 for 2 cities to +1 for 1. Makes it a little easier on the player, I'd think.

Cool, thanks Helix. Still open to comments, so please, express your thoughts! I'll try to get another draft up including these things soon.

-Sully

Voila! Version 1.2:

Let me know what you guys think!

-Sully

Looks good to me... one last thing I need to make sure of though. Will you be developing gameplay and having someone else do graphics, like you did Pachisi? Or are you going to do them yourself?

Also, write a design brief so I can add this map to the map surveyors dispatch coming up.

Industrial Helix wrote:Looks good to me... one last thing I need to make sure of though. Will you be developing gameplay and having someone else do graphics, like you did Pachisi? Or are you going to do them yourself?

Also, write a design brief so I can add this map to the map surveyors dispatch coming up.

I'm gonna see if I can get a fellow CC member to help with the graphics - Spike has been ridiculously slow in getting Pachisi's graphics done (though in his defense, he did get sick like two or three times since the last update). If I manage to get Photoshop, I may do the graphics myself, but that doesn't seem likely at this point. And I will post my design brief now.

-Sully

Victor Sullivan wrote: how could other mapmakers make maps dated before this, if Sumer was the first civilization?

that depends on how you define civilisation..
yes they were (together with the egyptians) one of the earliest people to develop writing rather than pictography..

but there were walled cities many thousands of years before the sumer

and the word sumer is akkadian.. much later...

the sag gi ga lived in ki en gir

I'd like to ask something that I don't fully understand. In order to get the city bonus, do you need the city to be connected to its river area, or to any river area?

I'll say with an example: It doesn't seem logical to get Kish bonus if you have Tigris 2. In my opinion you should only get Kish bonus if you had Tigris 4.

ballong wrote:

Victor Sullivan wrote: how could other mapmakers make maps dated before this, if Sumer was the first civilization?

that depends on how you define civilisation..
yes they were (together with the egyptians) one of the earliest people to develop writing rather than pictography..

but there were walled cities many thousands of years before the sumer

and the word sumer is akkadian.. much later...

the sag gi ga lived in ki en gir

"Most historians believe that one of the first civilizations arose in Sumer, a region that is now part of modern Iraq. Just what set the Sumerians apart from their neighbors? Most scholars define civilization as a complex culture with these five characteristics: (1) advanced cities, (2) specialized workers, (3) complex institutions, (4) record keeping, and (5) advanced technology." Right out of a history textbook just for you (I borrowed one from the humanities department at work)

OliverFA wrote:I'd like to ask something that I don't fully understand. In order to get the city bonus, do you need the city to be connected to its river area, or to any river area?

I'll say with an example: It doesn't seem logical to get Kish bonus if you have Tigris 2. In my opinion you should only get Kish bonus if you had Tigris 4.

Ah, good point, and your idea makes perfect sense, but my theory was as long as you have access to the rivers somewhere, you can produce. I fear there will be some gameplay issues if this were implemented, as cities in Euphrates 3 would be harder to get the bonus for (since there are 4 of them) than say Borsippa in Euphrates 4, yet both Borsippa and any city in Euphrates 3 would yield the same bonus, if that makes sense (not to mention Tigris 2 would be almost useless).

Thanks for the comments, guys, keep 'em coming!

-Sully

P.S. I think this is ready for gameplay, no? Though I suppose it's not up to me...

Victor Sullivan wrote: (4) record keeping

yeah that would be one definition that puts sumerians and egyptians among the first civilisations.. although I´m sure there existed more rudimentary ways to keep records even before writing proper.. but enough with my spam.. doesn´t really matter.

Do you plan to include any marshlands or lakes in your map? The marshes seem to have been an important part of the sumer creation myth..

and I wasn´t kidding about ki-en-gir btw.. if you call it by its akkadian name you probably should include the true sumerian name somewhere.. or at least the cuneiform writing.

ballong wrote:

Victor Sullivan wrote: (4) record keeping

yeah that would be one definition that puts sumerians and egyptians among the first civilisations.. although I´m sure there existed more rudimentary ways to keep records even before writing proper.. but enough with my spam.. doesn´t really matter.

Do you plan to include any marshlands or lakes in your map? The marshes seem to have been an important part of the sumer creation myth..

I don't think so, I'm trying to keep things strictly outside of Sumerian myth, but thanks or the idea, they are always welcome

ballong wrote:and I wasn´t kidding about ki-en-gir btw.. if you call it by its akkadian name you probably should include the true sumerian name somewhere.. or at least the cuneiform writing.

I'll see what I can do, but that will be further down the line (Graphics Workshop).

-Sully

This map is too small (21 territories) to make it through the foundry. I have other concerns about the map, but the smallness of it makes it little more than a crap-shoot.

Alright, I'll see what I can do. What are your "other concerns"?

Also, I just counted and Doodle Earth only has 18 territories...?