Conquer Club

Ruben Cassar wrote:Like it or not, I'm able to differentiate between a region and another now while before I couldn't. So it's thumbs up for the new wider borders from my side. I understand that non colour blind people might prefer the older borders but for us colour blind players I think they are essential.

yeah, it works a lot better for me as well... I think the wider borders will look better as more changes occur.

Ruben Cassar wrote:Btw Oak, you didn't tell me what you think about making the name "End of Empires" instead of "The End of Empires". I think it sounds better and has more of an impact, what do you think?

I should definitely drop one "The" - not sure which. I'll play.

AndyBanana wrote:Are you going to make any slight alterations to the legend? I.E. maybe bolder text?

I can make it more legible, especially as I add more grunge.

AndyBanana wrote:Have you done anything to the flags? If not, are you going to?

I've cranked the opacity down on all of the flags so that the background color bleeds through and the individual colors don't pop out so much. I definitely think they look better the more faded-looking they are, but if I fade them out too much I'm afraid somebody will confuse the two tri-color flags.

Are there specific flags that are bothering you? Boats, Europeans, colonies?

I think the coloring scheme seems a bit inconsistent. The brightly colored continents (S. Africa, Middle East, etc.) don't seem to quite fit with the duller ones (N. Africa, Oceania). Other than that, it's looking great!

this is really great work, except for the colour of europe being indistinguishable from that of the chinese empire. use pink instead of yellow for one of them?

would ensigns, like the ones in cairnswk's forbidden city, fit the empire theme better than national flags? cairnswk uses military ensigns, though i link to merchant ensigns for the trading companies. i think this makes a difference only to great britain and germany, but the german ensign is more distinctive than the tricolour. links to the british red ensign and german naval jack are from the excellent http://www.fotw.net site.

http://www.fotw.net/FLAGS/gb-ensr.html
http://www.fotw.net/FLagS/de1871~j.html

u've given the whole of sakhalin island to japan. although japan had only the southern half, i can see why u've done it, since splitting the island leaves an awkward half-territory that has to be connected to the rest of amur territory (thereby causing problems similar to those of creta et cyrenaica in qwert's initial versions of imperium romanum). the japanese name of the island was karafuto; sakhalin is used nowadays because the whole of the island has belonged to russia since 1945.

rather than have three random provinces to represent han china, take the same approach as u have done for russia and use cities: peking (not szechwan) in the north, nanking or shanghai (not fukien) in the east and, most importantly, canton (not yunnan) in the south. adjust the border so that it is canton (currently yunnan) that has the sea link to the philippine islands.

the number of territories, 73, is good for 8 players. however, in a 2-player game, the first player receives 8 armies and, by winning only one territory from his opponent, brings him down to 7 per turn. adding two territories reduces the advantage somewhat. as before, to provide a better balance between the chinese and japanese empires, i suggest splitting japan into its three largest islands, being hokkaido, honshu and kyushu (this is virtually the only good point of cc's otherwise-horrible asia map), with the army circles going in the sea.

http://www.conquerclub.com/maps/Asia.S.jpg

ian.

Thanks for the thoughtful post Ian - I'll look at it more closely and make some changes when I'm more awake.

iancanton wrote:the number of territories, 73, is good for 8 players. however, in a 2-player game, the first player receives 8 armies and, by winning only one territory from his opponent, brings him down to 7 per turn. adding two territories reduces the advantage somewhat. as before, to provide a better balance between the chinese and japanese empires, i suggest splitting japan into its three largest islands, being hokkaido, honshu and kyushu (this is virtually the only good point of cc's otherwise-horrible asia map), with the army circles going in the sea.

I may be wrong, but I've got the map at 71 territories, of which four start neutral (the Trading Co's). Game start will look like this:
8 players: 8 terits each, 3 neutrals
7 players: 9 terits each, 4 neutrals
6 players: 11 terits each, 1 neutrals
5 players: 13 terits each, 2 neutrals
4 players: 16 terits each, 3 neutrals
2/3 players: 22 terits each, 1 neutral

In a two player game the first player will get 7 armies to start, and can knock his opponent's bonus down by taking two territories... this won't be impossible to do and could give the first player an advantage, but really there is never going to be a perfect start for a two player game on a 60+ territory map.

Adding two territories to Japan makes Japan a tough start, and I feel as if we already have enough tough starts on this map. If the consensus is that the two player situation is that bad we could split up Japan, or we could leave Japan as is and just NOT start the Trading Companies neutral.

Correct me if im wrong, but wasn't australia part of teh British Empire? Or did they become independant before 1910?

gimil wrote:Correct me if im wrong, but wasn't australia part of teh British Empire? Or did they become independant before 1910?

(i heard somewhere that autralia is still technically part of the British Empire because apparently they never declared inderpendance.)
But i'm not sure of that. Would Cairns know?

I'm not too keen on the Europe colour, the actual colour, and i think it is a little similar to the China colour. It shouldnt matter too much.

But one thing i dont like with colours is Africa. The black on top and then the soft pale blue really dont match. Could you try something that is a little bit less contrasting?

I had Australia as a UK colony until page six...

asl80 wrote:sorry ... haven't read anything in this topic yet ... but the map looks good, only that in 1910 Australia had been federated (from 1901) and was no longer a colony of britain, though we did still shine thier boots for a long time remaining a "dominion" of britain or something of the sorts - meaning the boots we lick are still the queens ... but these have/had no official/practical bearing after federation.

I've read up a bit on this and asl80 is correct of course, though they have remained a part of the commonwealth (thus all the Aussies working in London!). If somebody can sort out New Zealand for me it'd be nice: they were also self-governing by 1910, and named an independent "Dominion" in 1907.

The colors can be swapped around... I'll play with them.

[bigimg]http://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r76/ron_parodi/hemisphere14.jpg[/bigimg]

iancanton wrote:this is really great work, except for the colour of europe being indistinguishable from that of the chinese empire. use pink instead of yellow for one of them?

I've changed a bunch of the colors around... Africa is back to brown and orange, which nobody took offense to earlier. Europe is the teal, Aus green, and South East Asia is something of a pink, as suggested. Not sure if I love the exact shades and I can tinker, but I hope the colors are more distinguishable from each other now.

iancanton wrote:would ensigns, like the ones in cairnswk's forbidden city, fit the empire theme better than national flags?

My thought is no - the Trading Companies don't represent a military force in the traditional or official sense - its a different kind of influence which is nationalistic but not militaristic.

iancanton wrote:u've given the whole of sakhalin island to japan. although japan had only the southern half, i can see why u've done it, since splitting the island leaves an awkward half-territory that has to be connected to the rest of amur territory (thereby causing problems similar to those of creta et cyrenaica in qwert's initial versions of imperium romanum). the japanese name of the island was karafuto; sakhalin is used nowadays because the whole of the island has belonged to russia since 1945.

Yeah, I've had trouble with how to represent the island, and I while not entirely accurate historically I think that this is a case in which function trumps history. But good catch on the naming - I've changed it to karafuto.

iancanton wrote:rather than have three random provinces to represent han china, take the same approach as u have done for russia and use cities: peking (not szechwan) in the north, nanking or shanghai (not fukien) in the east and, most importantly, canton (not yunnan) in the south. adjust the border so that it is canton (currently yunnan) that has the sea link to the philippine islands.

Done, done, and done.

Outstanding gameplay concerns? My sense is that we've finally landed on a good way to represent the Trading Companies in terms of how they'll play.

The wording of the Trading Co attack rule needs to be clarified...

map wrote:Imperial States may attack their Trading Co's. Trading Co's and Colonies of like flag may bombard - but not occupy - each other.

It currently reads as if Nigeria could bombard India...

Perhaps changing it to something like:

"Only Imperial States can take control of their Trading Co's. The Fleets and corresponding Colonies may bombard - but not occupy - each other.

MrBenn wrote:The wording of the Trading Co attack rule needs to be clarified...

Good catch Benny. What if I clarified the wording a bit AND spelled it out visually? I don't think anybody can screw this up:

[bigimg]http://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r76/ron_parodi/hemisphere15.jpg[/bigimg]

It's a little busy down there, so I'll explore ways of setting the legend in its own box.

I think you are on the right track, regarding the explanation in the legend. Could make it "One Way Attack" but the arrow is pretty explanatory.

Instead of using Netherlands, I'd use France...as then you can use the Madagascar Island as the example for the legend, which I think would make it even more understandable and recognizeable.

By the way, have you figured out New Zealand? Perhaps one of CC's players from the area might be able to help out. A list of people from the Scoreboard:

[player]lexie3000[/player], [player]BRADDY[/player], [player]Me-Da-MiNoRiTY[/player], [player]mcred[/player], [player]realmss[/player], [player]bazmac[/player], [player]riskitall25[/player], [player]Danzabar[/player], [player]Yardie[/player].

--Andy

AndyDufresne wrote:Instead of using Netherlands, I'd use France...as then you can use the Madagascar Island as the example for the legend, which I think would make it even more understandable and recognizeable.

Actually I used Netherlands for a reason - somebody out there might not put together that the "Dutch" trading co belongs to "Neth" so I thought I'd make this painfully obvious. But I understand where you're coming from - I think I'll change the island to be java and actually write it below, as I've done with Neth.

Oh look, here it is!

[bigimg]http://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r76/ron_parodi/hemisphere16.jpg[/bigimg]

wow, this looks quite impressive compared to what i commented on last...

i didn't know its possible for bombardments to work 2 ways... i guess you learn something new everyday.

and do you have to hold trading co's to hold europe?

ps. and as a regular 1v1 player, i don't think you should accomodate the second player by making japan bigger.... we all know you have to deal with bad drops sometimes... shit, it can even happen in classic w/ 6 players...

whitestazn88 wrote:wow, this looks quite impressive compared to what i commented on last...

thanks

whitestazn88 wrote:i didn't know its possible for bombardments to work 2 ways... i guess you learn something new everyday.

yep, it's well within the limits of the current xml. It'll be a first I guess.

whitestazn88 wrote:and do you have to hold trading co's to hold europe?

No, and I hope there's nothing about the map that suggests that you do. If that tripped up anybody else I could put in a line of text saying "Trading Co's are not part of a region" but I hope that it's pretty self-explanatory from the map.

whitestazn88 wrote:ps. and as a regular 1v1 player, i don't think you should accomodate the second player by making japan bigger.... we all know you have to deal with bad drops sometimes... shit, it can even happen in classic w/ 6 players...

Yep, I've seen guys start with all of Australia in six player classic games, so I can't get too bent out of shape over small games on a big map. You start a two-player player game on a 70 territory map and you have to know that the first player has an advantage.

I do, however, have something of a solution. Currently there will be a minimum of one neutral territory in games of every size (in addition to the trading co's which start neutral). I could code it so that one of the territories in the Japan region is also a neutral start, thus making it impossible that anybody can start with the entire region, and making it significantly less likely that somebody could start with three. Something is going to be neutral anyway, why not set what it is to even up the game?

Discuss... and which territory should it be? I'm leaning toward Korea because it plugs things up the least.

with that many territs, you can just as easily take a new continent or break the japan one if you go second.

the game has always been about strategy, as well as about some luck of the dice.

and just because someone gets a bonus in the first turn or two doesnt equal a win... leave japan alone.
because in a 1v1 game, anyone could drop any of the continents conceivably, it doesn't mean you have to put one neutral in each.

and about the trading co's, you're right, it doesnt seem like they are part of the continent, but i just thought that europe wasn't that big, and it didn't merit the +8, so i thought they might be part of it. now that i counted the territs and borders, the +8 makes sense, as does the fact that the trading co's don't belong to the continent.

Did you abandon the rivers as continent texture?

About color scheme, I would say you maybe have to make china and se asia a bit denser now it seems they have less color than he other regions.

Again it's a very good map, can't wait playing it!

oaktown wrote:

whitestazn88 wrote:i didn't know its possible for bombardments to work 2 ways... i guess you learn something new everyday.

yep, it's well within the limits of the current xml. It'll be a first I guess.

Waterloo has "Mutual bombardment".

C.

yeti_c wrote:Waterloo has "Mutual bombardment".

Nuts! Leave it to cairnswk to beat me to the punch.

oaktown wrote:

yeti_c wrote:Waterloo has "Mutual bombardment".

Nuts! Leave it to cairnswk to beat me to the punch.

hehe... you meant yeti

[bigimg]http://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r76/ron_parodi/hemisphere17.jpg[/bigimg]

Little stuff - renamed Chinese Turkestan to avoid in-game confusion. Redrew the Caspian Sea 'cause it looked awful. Tweaked some mountains to better reflect real geography. Flip-flopped the lines in the title because it'll probably be "eastern hemisphere" in the gamefinder, so that may as well be first.

pamoa wrote:Did you abandon the rivers as continent texture?

I'm slowly adding them... kinda like blue-grey veins!

pamoa wrote:About color scheme, I would say you maybe have to make china and se asia a bit denser now it seems they have less color than he other regions.

Agreed... done.

Could you put 'Dutch Trading Co.' by the ship on the legend? I know you're tight for space... can it be shortened to 'Dutch' / 'Dutch Co.' / 'Dutch Trading' / 'Dutch T Co.'???

MrBenn wrote:Could you put 'Dutch Trading Co.' by the ship on the legend?

As a matter of fact, yes I can.

[bigimg]http://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r76/ron_parodi/hemisphere18.jpg[/bigimg]

oaktown wrote:

MrBenn wrote:Could you put 'Dutch Trading Co.' by the ship on the legend?

As a matter of fact, yes I can.

[bigimg]http://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r76/ron_parodi/hemisphere18.jpg[/bigimg]

Looks good

Looking good, I like the bottom legend now.

A few random things: A few of the flags look slightly off. Is the Germany Flag (inside the country's borders) using the same red as the others? Is the difference a real life difference in the flags? (I am unfamiliar with the flag of Germany from this era.) I'm not sure I made sense...I'll come back if I didn't.

Additionally, the German Flags in Africa don't seem to all look alike. The E. Africa seems to have a stronger, darker black, than the other colonies.

Lastly, I'm loving the rivers. I really appreciate the graphics of this map, even in spite of the mountain tree roots. Keep up the excellent work.


--Andy

i see no rivers.....

explanations are needed