Prince Of The City

[MrBenn]

As of 16 April...

The most helpful way of providing updates is to post the latest version in the thread (as well as the first post) together with a brief summary of the changes that have been made and any areas for discussion.

The current version isn't bad... there is the beginnings of something here...

As sully800 wrote, the information you put into the long post up there (^^) does make the map more interesting - what I'm waiting to see is some sort of visual representation of that on the map.

[Merciless Wong]

I posted the changes in the chat and on the first post. I have also offered to change the quote and put up an alternative in the first post. You ignored that and are still refusing the map on vague open ended criteria. That are plenty of metaphorical maps out there; campuses, shopping centers, homes, roman family trees,etc. I have not seen the demand that the metaphor needs to be made explicit before.

As I see it, if you don't like a map you effectively veto a map by:
1 Claiming you just don't get it
2. Refuse to evaluate any proposed changes the mapmaker offers to make
3. Refuse to offer any concrete suggestions

I am citing the drafting room guidelines below. I dispute your interpretation of your role.
Can you cite the criteria below you are using to veto the map? Your ability to veto a map at the draft stage on the basis of you not liking the theme or not getting the theme is not in the drafting room guidelines.
As far as I can tell clarity is satisfied and your consideration of theme is suppose to be in the context of originality, not because you just 'don't get it'.

I stand by my statement that you are conflicted out of evaluating this map based on your initial bias and again request an alternative moderator. At the very least I deserve an explanation how 'you not getting it' sits in the draft guidelines below.
Discussions on incorporation of more Machiavelli material (and I am amazed that Machiavelli needs to be explained to strategy gamers) in the graphic can be handled after the draft stage.

Drafting Room Guidelines

'Drafting Room'

To be considered a Working Draft a project must be more than just an idea; a Draft should have a clear thematic focus, a plan for how the gameplay will work, and a basic image which should include:
1. Territory Labels - temporary names or numbers will suffice, and are always open to change.
2. Borders/Paths/Impassables - it should be made clear where territories do/do not connect.
3. Bonus Areas - where combinations/groups of territories will award a bonus, this should be indicated on the map.
4. Legend - speculative bonus values and explanations of any attack rules or gameplay features.Draft images should not be larger than 630x600px (small image) or 840x800px (large image).

While in the drafting room, it is expected that a mapmaker will demonstrate:
a. significant knowledge of graphics tools and techniques,
b. the willingness to consider and respond appropriately to critical feedback
c. the ability to make multiple changes based on ongoing feedback
d. a solid understanding of the Foundry standards and process.

A Draft will not be considered for promotion to the Main Foundry without the support of CC users. If a map is not considered by the Foundry community to offer something original and/or interesting in terms of gameplay, graphics, and theme, its production will not be encouraged.

[oaktown]

The current version isn't bad... there is the beginnings of something here...

As sully800 wrote, the information you put into the long post up there (^^) does make the map more interesting - what I'm waiting to see is some sort of visual representation of that on the map.

I would agree completely with MrBenn's latest comments... the map is much improved since I last looked in a few weeks back.

And I'd also agree that the theme/back story you've crafted for the map is a potentially interesting one, but that the map doesn't really reflect it yet. You've got all of the elements of a Machiavellian, renaissance city indicated by the territory names - tower, fishing fleet, docks, plaza, etc. - but none of these things actually represented on the map. Giving us the actual flavor of the town would go a long way toward selling me on the concept. Florence, Sienna, Venice... these are beautiful cities that have all kinds of landmarks that would make for spectacular CC maps... city walls, cathedrals, towers, piazzas, etc. Better yet, pick a city to represent - Machiavelli was a Florentine, writing about Florence - show us Machiavelli's Florence. It's the most beautiful city I've ever been to, and would make your good idea a great map.

My experience is that attack line maps are a really hard sell. They're not as easy to follow as the standard regions/borders map, and you've made it even more difficult by creating 'blocks' in the background image, but not actually using the blocks. For instance, why can't organized crime attack the orphanage? Or Nightlife and Slums? Elite guard and Plaza? There are streets between these circles on your background image, yet for some reason I guess troops can't go down those streets. Right now the map would be easier to follow if you removed the background image completely.

Another problem with the attack line maps is that it's very hard for me - as a color-blind user - to figure out how the regions work. The Masses, Upper Class, and Theocracy circles are close enough in color that I can't follow which are which. If you had regions with solid fields of color and distinct regional borders I could follow them.

Nitpicking, I still don't buy the cross-map attack route. Give a bonus for holding both gates maybe, but allowing the Foreign Powers to travel around the globe to hit the opposing gate leaves me perplexed.

You suggested that somebody else come in and take over the stamp on this one, and I think that is a reasonable request. There are other staff members to whom MrBenn could pass the stamp, including me. But keep in mind that while there are basic guidelines for the Draft stamp, it will always be somewhat subjective no matter who does the stamping. Giving a map the Draft stamp means that the Foundry is committing to see the map through the process; before I were to make such a commitment I'd like to at least see some examples of where you intend to take this map graphically.

And just for fun, I give you Ravenna, ca. 1600.

Click image to enlarge.

[Merciless Wong]

I don't mind the subjectivity, but I don't like the idea of the subjectivity held in the hand of someone who has some issues relating to the initial map. Especially in a process which seems to love sending people on circular wild goose chases.

Oaktown, on your suggestion, I moved away from medieval maps after considerable feedback that the clarity of the map was a strength and it was diffcult to mix the historic with the modern from no less than Andy Dufresne. I am not moving back 5 steps.
After all the gatekeeper in this process can then reverse direction and block the map because I listened to you and not the earlier feedback.
If the forum view is split, I should make a call and go with one or the other. I have gone with clear.

I appreciate color blindness but that is no requirement at the draft stage the maps be color blind friendly. How in the world is all Green England or all blue Greenland out of draft on that basis?

On why neighboring areas can't always attack each other- as the theme material explains, these are lines of influence along which regions 'turn' one another politically.
Not just geography. This is a political map.

On why foreign powers can change the gate, corruption is a form of influence and allows the reach betwen foreign powers and the gate.

Lastly, we have a Midkemia attack line map already.. we a have classic shapes as the most played map in CC and its all lines.. it passed. I'm not sure how you can tell a map that has gone through so much change for forum feedback over what lines work to go back to the territory design and disregard the support I have seen for a simple clear map earlier?

There is a criteria out there and people should stick to it. The criteria I saw emphasized clarity at the draft stage. Objections on theme are linked to originality - is that still disputed? As to my willingness to bend to the wind, I have made steps towards the blocky style with forum support and various other changes. So I don't think that can be disputed.

I'm discontinuing my efforts in this map until I get an answer from Mr Benn or someone else relating to the draft criteria. Is the draft stamp holder sticking to it or is he just being subjective?

Its up to the forum to decide whether this is a win for the forum or a loss but I would say that the forum has become a graphics shop and a clique at that focusing solely on more and subdivisions of existing geographies and seems closed to real new ideas.

A willing contributor outlining an interesting niche or theme is giving up, congratulations to Mr Benn. The Star Chamber rules.......
When everyone wonders why Classic Shapes is played so often compared to other maps, the obvious answer is that a staged process of screening for orginality, reeking of 'not invented here' syndrome will not generate creativity. Classic Art is a favorite of someone with a stamp and anything that detracts from that will be denied progress.

I think it will be obvious to anyone who looks at maps that get passed, that the maps that sail through seems to have draft stamp controllers linked to them.. after all who would give negative feedback to someone who can then block your maps without sticking to the Draft Criteria at all.

[the.killing.44]

I appreciate color blindness but that is no requirement at the draft stage the maps be color blind friendly. How in the world is all Green England or all blue Greenland out of draft on that basis?

Greenland Colorblind Checks:

show

England Colorblind Checks:

show

.44

[Merciless Wong]

If there is some kind of tool for modeling color blindness in maps, it would be a nice to have so please post the link. I haven't seen many other drafts that made it to map status being forced to run the color blindness test so its something I will deal with at the graphics stamp stage.

But like i said - I am trying to reconcile the current block on my map with the draft criteria. And the block is thematic.

I don't see how stamp holders can interpret the draft criteria to be the right to veto a theme they don't like.

Like, I don't get the England map. I did when he added the full quote to the map but it lost me when the roads and giant modern sign came back in and yet that map is out of draft.
But Mr Benn gets to veto my map because he doesn't understand the theme.

[thenobodies80]

Hi Merciless Wong,
I don't want waste time talking about your dicussion with Mr.Benn...we have only to talk about your map
i never posted here, but i spent many time on your map in the last period.
I need the time to reflect about what you're developing...
"De princibatibus" is the main theme of your map. Machiavelli was one of the most intricate figures of italian history, today, after 500 years from his death there are many open disputes about this man.
You wrote a great number of information in your first post, i think you have a great general knowledge and you're right when you try to use this as your strong point. Unfortunately i can't see on your map the visual way to give all this information to a future player.
You talk about the prince, where i could find what machiavelli said in the prince looking your map?
Where can i find what machiavelli thought about the perfect prince

Many men have imagined republics and principalities that never really existed at all. Yet the way men live is so far removed from the way they ought to live that anyone who abandons what is for what should be pursues his downfall rather than his preservation; for a man who strives after goodness in all his acts is sure to come to ruin, since there are so many men who are not good.

You did a quote and a title to explain all this on your map (and all that you wrote in the first post) ?
Do You require that a future player has to know the prince to play this map? I think could be easier to give to the player a clear idea looking this map. You can try to add some "features" that could emphasize the "factions" you created or give a sort of background...
Sully said you the same thing:

The information you just posted made this map 1000x more interesting.

See what you can do about conveying some of that information on the map! Not in paragraph form, but somehow incorporate the themes you are dealing with into the layout or the game play you are creating. The machiavelli quote is a great start by the way. Now that there is a reason for this map (something many current cartographers seem to miss completely) there is also a reason to play on it!

When your map was finished players has to love it for some reason...do you really think that here all players know (and probably love) Machiavelli like you? You're here to test your skill and to do a map that all people have to play.
You're developing a project and proposing it to community and now you have to respond to the most important question:
Why CC members has to play my map?

I like to see if with the next update you can make your map more interesting and appealing.
Think about the suggestions that oaktown give to you (could be aggod choice) :

For instance, why can't organized crime attack the orphanage? Or Nightlife and Slums? Elite guard and Plaza? There are streets between these circles on your background image, yet for some reason I guess troops can't go down those streets. Right now the map would be easier to follow if you removed the background image completely.

Show us the real plan you have in your head on the map itself.
You say that you don't want moving back 5 steps,see what gimil did here, "rules" are the same for everybody here. Nobody hate you or want to hold you.
Be more relaxed, don't stress yourself so much...you're only on the first step of the entire process, the way you decided to go through is long, and slow. Take your time, calm down, reorganize yourself and work on your map.

Come on! Are you a good prince or not ?

TNBDS

[Merciless Wong]

I have a dispute on the exact powers of the person who holds the draft stamp to sort out.
I want to know how he can block a map just because he doesn't get the theme.
That is inconsistent with the draft criteria I have been shown and have quoted.

I went through a big debate with lots of posters before I got consensus on the simple clean map. I can't please both the group that wants to go back to complicated rules and the people I built this map. The map is a simple map because politics is war by other means, no special rules necessary. The links are more logical than geographical, which is why Organized Crime cannot link to the Orphanage. These are lines of influence, not just geographic.

I have plenty of support on the clarity of the map and interest at this point (from those who are not obsessed with special rules or features) to go beyond draft. I cannot please that group as well as the 'every map must have special rules' group.

I want to know how the draft criteria, allows the draft stamp holder's personal tastes to block the map.

The draft criteria is asking for I quote 'a basic image". I have no idea how this can be construed to be equivalent to the kind of high end, subjective, artistic criticism of how the map doesn't bring the theme out - that is not a characteristic of the 'basic image' in the draft criteria.

Ican't see myself commiting any more work at the draft stage when I have a draft reviewer:
-Who has admitted he doesn't like my map, you can look back for the history of comments
-And who is not sticking to the draft criteria he quotes

I don't play rigged games.

As to Gimli going back, I note he had the draft stamp by then and was trying for final graphics.

Drafting Room Guidelines

'Drafting Room'

To be considered a Working Draft a project must be more than just an idea; a Draft should have a clear thematic focus, a plan for how the gameplay will work, and a basic image which should include:
1. Territory Labels - temporary names or numbers will suffice, and are always open to change.
2. Borders/Paths/Impassables - it should be made clear where territories do/do not connect.
3. Bonus Areas - where combinations/groups of territories will award a bonus, this should be indicated on the map.
4. Legend - speculative bonus values and explanations of any attack rules or gameplay features.Draft images should not be larger than 630x600px (small image) or 840x800px (large image).

While in the drafting room, it is expected that a mapmaker will demonstrate:
a. significant knowledge of graphics tools and techniques,
b. the willingness to consider and respond appropriately to critical feedback
c. the ability to make multiple changes based on ongoing feedback
d. a solid understanding of the Foundry standards and process.

A Draft will not be considered for promotion to the Main Foundry without the support of CC users. If a map is not considered by the Foundry community to offer something original and/or interesting in terms of gameplay, graphics, and theme, its production will not be encouraged.

[sailorseal]

I have a dispute on the exact powers of the person who holds the draft stamp to sort out.
I want to know how he can block a map just because he doesn't get the theme.
That is inconsistent with the draft criteria I have been shown and have quoted.

Look. We have all had our "scuffs" with MrB but he is not discriminating against your map. If anything you are discriminating against his. Stopping a map changes nothing here(See Antarctica). If you want the system changed make a thread in Not Maps about it, if your right the system will change, trust me.
But make a fine map and MrB will gladly stamp it,

Am I wrong B?

[Merciless Wong]

Mr B is not authorised to stamp a map if he thinks its a fine map. He's authorised to execute the criteria for a draft. Again, I'd like to hear his basis for refusal - based on that criteria.

I am not advocating a system change, I am requesting the draft system stick to the system they have written down. Based on what I see here, the draft doesn't even need final bonuses (just speculative).

How can Mr Benn rationalize insisting on an unclear, thematic change to graphics that he won't even specify so he personally gets the theme better?

Drafting Room Guidelines

'Drafting Room'

To be considered a Working Draft a project must be more than just an idea; a Draft should have a clear thematic focus, a plan for how the gameplay will work, and a basic image which should include:
1. Territory Labels - temporary names or numbers will suffice, and are always open to change.
2. Borders/Paths/Impassables - it should be made clear where territories do/do not connect.
3. Bonus Areas - where combinations/groups of territories will award a bonus, this should be indicated on the map.
4. Legend - speculative bonus values and explanations of any attack rules or gameplay features.Draft images should not be larger than 630x600px (small image) or 840x800px (large image).

While in the drafting room, it is expected that a mapmaker will demonstrate:
a. significant knowledge of graphics tools and techniques,
b. the willingness to consider and respond appropriately to critical feedback
c. the ability to make multiple changes based on ongoing feedback
d. a solid understanding of the Foundry standards and process.

A Draft will not be considered for promotion to the Main Foundry without the support of CC users. If a map is not considered by the Foundry community to offer something original and/or interesting in terms of gameplay, graphics, and theme, its production will not be encouraged.

[MrBenn]

While in the drafting room, it is expected that a mapmaker will demonstrate:
a. significant knowledge of graphics tools and techniques,
b. the willingness to consider and respond appropriately to critical feedback
c. the ability to make multiple changes based on ongoing feedback
d. a solid understanding of the Foundry standards and process.

A Draft will not be considered for promotion to the Main Foundry without the support of CC users. If a map is not considered by the Foundry community to offer something original and/or interesting in terms of gameplay, graphics, and theme, its production will not be encouraged.

make a fine map and MrB will gladly stamp it

I don't mind the subjectivity, but I don't like the idea of the subjectivity held in the hand of someone who has some issues relating to the initial map.

I think we've established that your first draft was rubbish. As far as I'm concerned, I had hoped that any past grievances were dealt with... as I've stated a couple of times, your current draft is better, although I (and others) would like to see your vision for the map come into its own.

Mr Benn gets to veto my map because he doesn't understand the theme.

I've never said I don't understand the theme - I just don't think that the theme is portrayed very clearly on the map. I'm not calling a veto, and I don't think I'm being petty or unreasonable - I'm just trying to uphold the standards that we have come to expect in the Foundry

As to Gimli going back, I note he had the draft stamp by then and was trying for final graphics.

Perhaps a better example would be Led Zeppeliner's Treasure Island map, which had over 20 pages of comments before receiving his stamp. During that time, LZ didn't kick up a fuss and complain about being ignored - he took on board the feedback leveled at the map (not at the mapmaker - an important distinction); his exemplary attitude has been to his credit.

I'm discontinuing my efforts in this map

As per your request, I will now move this thread to the Recycling Bin. If you change your mind, and choose to continue working on it, then I would urge you to take on board the above comments from oaktown and thenobodies80. As is the case with all maps that go on hold, an update is required before getting back into the system. If you do choose to continue development, then thenobodies80 will probably take on any stamping duties, in order to prevent further accusations of bias.

For what it's worth, I think the map does have potential. I'm sorry that my initial criticism was overly harsh - I think it's a real shame that you have reacted so negatively, particularly after I took the time to apologise and explain the reasons for my criticism. Regardless of what happens next in terms of this map, I hope that we can bury the hatchet and move on.

--MrBenn

[Teflon Kris]

Seems there is a call to make the map theme clearer.

Why not revert to straighforward 'Class War' - maybe quote Marx etc.

Then if you get any objections from the right, you'll have political support from most of the world.

[Merciless Wong]

b. the willingness to consider and respond appropriately to critical feedback

The problem is this - I had plenty of feedback that favored a clean simple map and loved the map earlier. You can disregard that support and hold up maps until there is at least one alternative opinion then use it as an excuse for veto on lack of forum support.

I've never said I don't understand the theme - I just don't think that the theme is portrayed very clearly on the map. I'm not calling a veto, and I don't think I'm being petty or unreasonable - I'm just trying to uphold the standards that we have come to expect in the Foundry

This is the bit I object to. The drafting guidelines do not highlight a role for you to block a map because the theme is not clear enough for you in the graphics. You do not at the draft level have the role of randomly upholding your chosen standard. That is an expansion of your role, justified by selective use of the forum support and feedback criteria to block the map. Looking at the criteria it seems quite clear that I have to have a theme but the criteria refers to a 'basic image' including 4 items. It doesn't say the 'basic image' have to artistically incorporate the theme at this point. If the rules don't mean 'basic image' then explain why they say 'basic image'.

'Drafting Room'

To be considered a Working Draft a project must be more than just an idea; a Draft should have a clear thematic focus, a plan for how the gameplay will work, and a basic image which should include:
1. Territory Labels - temporary names or numbers will suffice, and are always open to change.
2. Borders/Paths/Impassables - it should be made clear where territories do/do not connect.
3. Bonus Areas - where combinations/groups of territories will award a bonus, this should be indicated on the map.
4. Legend - speculative bonus values and explanations of any attack rules or gameplay features.Draft images should not be larger than 630x600px (small image) or 840x800px (large image).

While in the drafting room, it is expected that a mapmaker will demonstrate:
a. significant knowledge of graphics tools and techniques,
b. the willingness to consider and respond appropriately to critical feedback
c. the ability to make multiple changes based on ongoing feedback
d. a solid understanding of the Foundry standards and process.

A Draft will not be considered for promotion to the Main Foundry without the support of CC users. If a map is not considered by the Foundry community to offer something original and/or interesting in terms of gameplay, graphics, and theme, its production will not be encouraged.

Delay moving the map to the foundry, you strike me as the kind of person who rushes threads that don't reflect well on you out of sight. I noticed after our last exchange in the England map you posted a large image to move the selected of your quoted reviews along. I want my time before it gets moved on and I what the community to form a view on this.

At this point, I want the nobodies80 to hold the draft stamp. And you to agree not to pm any instructions to nobodies80. I'll make my updates when I hear this is officially the case.
I think its quite clear you are unable to separate my beginning the map from the current map since you brought it up again.

I think we've established that your first draft was rubbish

Fact is, if someone is not into the graphics thing and is doing it all on free packages on his first map - it is quite understandable the graphics starts off weak. If you can't get past that you are effectively discouraging creators other than the very graphics focused clique that seems to be stuck on producing map after map with the same features (territories and enough complex rules to make the map 'original').

By focusing on graphics in the early draft stage and requesting the same thing over and over again (must be a geography, must have special rules) the forum is producing a clear lack of diversity - I think the way the draft criteria has been misused has been part of this.

[Merciless Wong]

I am listing quotes from this thread to demonstrate forum support for the map as a simple map.
I am not saying I won't figure something out on the theme - I just think its not something that Mr Benn can insist on under the draft guidelines.

I like this a lot. Seems to be a fine map. Maybe add more GP features that play to the Prince of the City theme

I added the Secret Sociey thing which forum support lobbied out.

As i said, i think the gameplay of this map should be interesting, especially without spoils, and i look forward to seeing this get through the foundry. I like the idea of a map with a lot of chokepoints, and no non-classic gameplay devices. if you want to add bombardment or autodeploy or etc... go for it, it's your map. But i advise against it.

Support for the simple map

I'm more partial to the white background (gives a stronger contrast, but it isn't overwhelming which is nice), and also the circular army shadows over the pentagons.


--Andy

Support for the map

i will do the xml for ya

Support for the map and even an offer of xml

=D>

this is what i've been directing you toward, you're now beyond my expertise. Best of luck, i'll keep an eye on the forum and see if i can help out at all.

Support for the map

Hey merciless... I see that there has been some progress since I last poked my head in.

What I like: the gameplay is fairly straightforward. I personally prefer a simpler map without extra rules that i need to follow, and for anybody making a first CC map I think this is the best way to go. I also appreciate that you are allowing for multiple good places to start with a few little bonus regions.

Support for the simple map

Option 1 looks the best


Also, the bonus for holding 3 secret societies should be removed as the secret societies are too far apart to be held easily. You should just have a +1 autodeploy for them.

Support for an earlier and less finished version of the map.

You seem to have competing elements in your map---namely sharp and crisp edges vs fuzzy glowing orbs---and this is distracting. I'm a fan of the sharpness that you've got---I'd continue in that direction.

--Andy

Support for the clear and simple map

I think this is the better of the images you've posted on this page, although like Andy, I prefer the circles to the pentagons or random smiley-shapes!

The map looks clean and crisp which is good,.........

We've established the map is clean and crisp

[oaktown]

Wong, you have quoted the Drafts guidelines, and it's time somebody quoted them back to you.

While in the drafting room, it is expected that a mapmaker will demonstrate:
a. significant knowledge of graphics tools and techniques,

This was certainly no the case in your earlier drafts, and while the latest version is considerably better I'd still like to see what tricks you have up your sleeve other than putting territory rings over a static background.

While in the drafting room, it is expected that a mapmaker will demonstrate:
b. the willingness to consider and respond appropriately to critical feedback

This tirade you are on is hardly "appropriate response" to what I would consider to be reasonable feedback.

While in the drafting room, it is expected that a mapmaker will demonstrate:
d. a solid understanding of the Foundry standards and process.

You are questioning everything from MrBenn's role in the process to the need to make your map colorblind friendly.

As I see it you have yet to meet very clear and specific qualifications for the draft stamp.

That said, I DO NOT THINK THAT THIS IS A BAD MAP. Sorry to yell that, but I want to make it clear that I don't think your time is wasted on this map; I just think you need to think about how you're incorporating the theme into the graphics and gameplay. It can be as simple as putting a tower next to the territory called "tower."

Specifics about colorblindness (since you asked): it's not about shades of blue looking exactly the same... I can tell a dark blue from a light blue without a problem, especially if they are presented side by side. The trouble with attack line maps - and I have this same problem on Rail USA - is that the yellow isn't side by side with the orange, so i can't contrast them. This is totally fixable, and you don't have to work it out at this stage, I'm just saying that working it out is going to a lot harder on this type of map than a traditional region map.

Anyway, I think you have the makings of a good map here. I hope that you take a week or two off, think about it, and come back to it with fresh eyes. I do this all the time, and while it means it takes me six months to finish some maps, I do finish.

[Merciless Wong]

Wong, you have quoted the Drafts guidelines, and it's time somebody quoted them back to you.

While in the drafting room, it is expected that a mapmaker will demonstrate:
a. significant knowledge of graphics tools and techniques,

This was certainly no the case in your earlier drafts, and while the latest version is considerably better I'd still like to see what tricks you have up your sleeve other than putting territory rings over a static background.

Draft asks for a 'basic image'. While you and Mr Benn read something more into it. I disagee with your interpretation. Explain how the words 'basic image' imply the kind of professional graphics package work you guys are requesting.

Wong, you have quoted the Drafts guidelines, and it's time somebody quoted them back to you.

While in the drafting room, it is expected that a mapmaker will demonstrate:
b. the willingness to consider and respond appropriately to critical feedback

This tirade you are on is hardly "appropriate response" to what I would consider to be reasonable feedback.

While in the drafting room, it is expected that a mapmaker will demonstrate:
d. a solid understanding of the Foundry standards and process.

You are questioning everything from MrBenn's role in the process to the need to make your map colorblind friendly.

There's a catch 22 here. You feel your view on color blind friendliness veto's Prince in the City unless its a territory map.... but maps like Midkemia and Rail USA do exist with the same attack line principle. I dispute the need to settle color blind issues at this point.

Now when I dispute the need for color blind design at this point, I get accused of 'inappropriate response'. Effectively speaking, my insisting that we go back to the rules, leads to me being accused of 'inappropriately' responding to feedback. This is a circular argument that makes it impossible to argue with Mr Benn's and your position; that he and you can read graphical standards that are beyond a 'basic image' into the draft standard.

You are doing what Mr Benn did with selective reading of support - using a subjective standard as a rationale for enforcing your point of view.

The same implies your interpretation of my disputing the process as showing lack of foundry understanding. Its a subjective argument you can use to block a map on anyone who doesn't interpret the foundry rules your way.
Your actions are equivalent to arresting anyone who disputes a speeding ticket for disturbing the peace .

The fact that a good part of the foundry standard mentions a 'basic image' and defines this but is barely paid any attention to when Mr Benn and you are rationalizing things suggests a problem.
I am happy to call the problem to attention of the foundry

By the way, I love Judge Scalia and Clarence Thomas for their originalist view of law- documents should be read with original intent in mind... what does all that 'basic image' stuff imply about what a draft is intended to be. How come Mr. Benn gets to ignore that?

[Danyael]

Specifics about colorblindness (since you asked): it's not about shades of blue looking exactly the same... I can tell a dark blue from a light blue without a problem, especially if they are presented side by side. The trouble with attack line maps - and I have this same problem on Rail USA - is that the yellow isn't side by side with the orange, so i can't contrast them. This is totally fixable, and you don't have to work it out at this stage, I'm just saying that working it out is going to a lot harder on this type of map than a traditional region map.

i have troubles with blues purple and pinks aswell as red green browns (not very common) but i agree with oaktown that have the colours close to contrast them helps

[oaktown]

You feel your view on color blind friendliness veto's Prince in the City unless its a territory map.... but maps like Midkemia and Rail USA do exist with the same attack line principle. I dispute the need to settle color blind issues at this point.

Wow, Wong, did you read what I wrote at all?

The trouble with attack line maps - and I have this same problem on Rail USA - is that the yellow isn't side by side with the orange, so i can't contrast them. This is totally fixable, and you don't have to work it out at this stage, I'm just saying that working it out is going to a lot harder on this type of map than a traditional region map.

I really think you should take a break from this map, play some games, and come back to it fresh. This will be my last post here for a while.

[thenobodies80]

I'm back

At this point, I want the nobodies80 to hold the draft stamp. And you to agree not to pm any instructions to nobodies80. I'll make my updates when I hear this is officially the case.

For me it's ok. But i like to see you more relaxed.
I can assure to you that Mr.Benn hasn't to send instruction to me, there's a criteria to follow and this is what i will do.

Before you will make your update i like to stop myself to solve this unclear point:

Nobody says that your map isn't a draft image.

'Drafting Room'

To be considered a Working Draft a project must be more than just an idea; a Draft should have a clear thematic focus, a plan for how the gameplay will work, and a basic image which should include:
1. Territory Labels - temporary names or numbers will suffice, and are always open to change.
2. Borders/Paths/Impassables - it should be made clear where territories do/do not connect.
3. Bonus Areas - where combinations/groups of territories will award a bonus, this should be indicated on the map.
4. Legend - speculative bonus values and explanations of any attack rules or gameplay features.Draft images should not be larger than 630x600px (small image) or 840x800px (large image).

Your map respect all these points.
But these are the starting requirements, if someone here think your map hasn't met the 4 basic points, you would be moved to the ideas subforum. And this thing not happens.

Now you're in the drafting room, you posted your draft image and actually you have to work on these:

While in the drafting room, it is expected that a mapmaker will demonstrate:
a. significant knowledge of graphics tools and techniques,
b. the willingness to consider and respond appropriately to critical feedback
c. the ability to make multiple changes based on ongoing feedback
d. a solid understanding of the Foundry standards and process.
A Draft will not be considered for promotion to the Main Foundry without the support of CC users. If a map is not considered by the Foundry community to offer something original and/or interesting in terms of gameplay, graphics, and theme, its production will not be encouraged.

Before being moved on to the next stage of development in the mapmaker must have a plan for the production of the map, and present key map information and updates in a manner that is user friendly and consistent with the foundry standards. Once these criteria have been met, the Working Draft will receive the first of the Foundry Brands.

Don't blame me, but actually your are only working on losing support and good feedback. People don't like to spend time on reading about "flames". Actually you "lose" Mr.Benn, now oaktown,who is the next?
I'm saying to you if you lose feedback you will lose your map:

A Draft will not be considered for promotion to the Main Foundry without the support of CC users. If a map is not considered by the Foundry community to offer something original and/or interesting in terms of gameplay, graphics, and theme, its production will not be encouraged.

I hope we can "work" together to move your map in the main foundry.
But a easy colorblind issue can not be a cause of dispute...or you 'll find yourself alone very soon. (mine are friendly words not a threat )

I checked all the previous posts and there's a clear request to see in the map all the information you wrote in the first post.

In your map probably you mean that if you hold the territories with the same influence area you could take the dominance.

The concept is wonderful, but where is on the map?
Actually i see only territories with non geographical names and zones with non geographical names, and both could be associated with politic arguments.
But this is not an explanation about the influence fits in your map.

I saw your posts around, and i think you're a person that like focus himself on GP, but the gameplay has to be visualized on the map.
you say that you don't want a geographical map, but i see a geographical map. There are some zone with some coloured circles...and bonuses are restricted on a single zone.
The influence, the power could be shared...the best way to take the dominance.
I like to see some figures (territories) that connect the powers and the influences each other...
I see theocracy linked with academia, why not to use some famous figures like an amanuensis monk, that could share the culture power and the church power in the same time? Or who can link the organized crime with the city council, some corrupted politic?
It's only an idea, you are free not to follow it.

I hope your update comes soon.
And be patient, when your map will be ready, not me, not Mr.Benn, will ask for a sticky thread and a general review...but ALL the foundry memebers ask for it...you will realize that!

Have a nice day

TNBDS

[Merciless Wong]

So how come the map gets moved without the time period from last update?
Like I said, there are some people who behave badly and like to see the evidence of that swept under the carpet instead of openly discussed in the forum.

I have listed the forum support I have gotten and I disagree with selective listening of forum support to block a map. And I further disagree that the forum process knowledge criteria can be used to block anyone who challenges your interpretation of the draft criteria.

[thenobodies80]

So how come the map gets moved without the time period from last update?

Only to clarify I have no power to move posts.
Don't accuse me about doing something i can't do.
If you want to talk about the map develpment i'm happy to discuss with you,being sure about my fair position, but i don't want you put me in flame.

Have a nice day

TNBDS

[Merciless Wong]

Not accusing you, just asking how come it was moved. If you didn't do it, I presume Mr Benn did. Any chance you want to comment? I thought you had handed draft duties to nobody on this map?

I said I would update if nobody was the moderator, not sure on what basis you can move the map (if you did) after supposedly recusing yourself due to bias.

Quoting me:

Delay moving the map to the foundry, you strike me as the kind of person who rushes threads that don't reflect well on you out of sight. I noticed after our last exchange in the England map you posted a large image to move the selected of your quoted reviews along. I want my time before it gets moved on and I what the community to form a view on this.

At this point, I want the nobodies80 to hold the draft stamp. And you to agree not to pm any instructions to nobodies80. I'll make my updates when I hear this is officially the case.
I think its quite clear you are unable to separate my beginning the map from the current map since you brought it up again.

I think we've established that your first draft was rubbish

Fact is, if someone is not into the graphics thing and is doing it all on free packages on his first map - it is quite understandable the graphics starts off weak. If you can't get past that you are effectively discouraging creators other than the very graphics focused clique that seems to be stuck on producing map after map with the same features (territories and enough complex rules to make the map 'original').

[MrBenn]

I'm discontinuing my efforts in this map

As per your request, I will now move this thread to the Recycling Bin.

Not accusing you, just asking how come it can be moved. If you didn't do it, I presume Mr Benn did. Any chance you want to comment?

I advise you to actually read what people write.

Wow, Wong, did you read what I wrote at all?

As is the case with all maps that go on hold, an update is required before getting back into the system.

[Merciless Wong]

As per your request, I will now move this thread to the Recycling Bin. If you change your mind, and choose to continue working on it, then I would urge you to take on board the above comments from oaktown and thenobodies80. As is the case with all maps that go on hold, an update is required before getting back into the system. If you do choose to continue development, then thenobodies80 will probably take on any stamping duties, in order to prevent further accusations of bias.

Actually, you said you would move it if I don't change my mind and continue. I said I will continue and will work with nobody.

If you can't stay out of a process you have recused yourself from, it does raise the question of bias, doesn't it.

[MrBenn]

As per your request, I will now move this thread to the Recycling Bin. If you change your mind, and choose to continue working on it, then I would urge you to take on board the above comments from oaktown and thenobodies80. As is the case with all maps that go on hold, an update is required before getting back into the system. If you do choose to continue development, then thenobodies80 will probably take on any stamping duties, in order to prevent further accusations of bias.