Conquer Club

Well, four has got to go, I picked 7 also, but then three might need some impassables.

Four is out of place though.

reggie_mac wrote:I like the idea of this map, its going to be epic to play on. But making it a max of 6 citys / 'tech trees'?

oaktown wrote:Game type flexibility. The map should support various game types and not be designed with specific/limited game settings in mind (standard, assassin, fog of war, 2 players, etc.).

Kind of a bit outside where it needs to be going, unless there are changes afoot im not aware of. So in an 8 player game, then 2 people are automatically at a disadvantage as they have no 'tech tree'

Thanks for your comments reggie_mac.

Our first intention was to make the map playable for 8 players. But we have seen that due to limited space available, 8 players are too many for this concept. We are cuting down to only 6 players in order to make the map possible.

Hope that explanation helped.

SuicidalSnowman wrote:Well, four has got to go, I picked 7 also, but then three might need some impassables.

Four is out of place though.

Don't worry SuicidalSnowman. We will certainly add some impassables. But before adding the impassables, we need to decide which 6 cities are staying and which 2 cities are leaving.

And thanks for your vote

OliverFA wrote:Time for an update!

My personal preferences are to remove cities numbers 3 and 4, because they are in the middle of the map, and removing them would leave the six surviving cities in the "corners" of the map.

I agree, but cities 5 and 6 should be moved slightly north. If cities 3 and 4 are removed, it looks as if city 1 will gain a huge advantage due to the surrounding neutral land.

OliverFA wrote:

reggie_mac wrote:I like the idea of this map, its going to be epic to play on. But making it a max of 6 citys / 'tech trees'?

oaktown wrote:Game type flexibility. The map should support various game types and not be designed with specific/limited game settings in mind (standard, assassin, fog of war, 2 players, etc.).

Kind of a bit outside where it needs to be going, unless there are changes afoot im not aware of. So in an 8 player game, then 2 people are automatically at a disadvantage as they have no 'tech tree'

Thanks for your comments reggie_mac.

Our first intention was to make the map playable for 8 players. But we have seen that due to limited space available, 8 players are too many for this concept. We are cuting down to only 6 players in order to make the map possible.

Hope that explanation helped.

I get where you are coming from here, but you may want to check with CA's before you go too far ahead, not having all 8 player positions available may hold you up on getting stamped. I'd hate to see a whole bunch of work having to be re-done because of it.
It doesn't only remove 7 and 8 player single games but also quad games, so you've basically dropped 3 styles of play.

You can not create some kind of restriction for 7 and 8 player games. Its better for you to stop these poll,and start thinking how to put all 8 players on map.

I am curious though, I just attempted to start a game on Feudal War with 8 players, and a message came up stating it could only have 6.

Is this because it is old? Can someone make an official statement, or did that come from Qwert (no disrespect, I am just new and don't know what sets off staff from volunteers)?

I think this map is awesome, and best suited at 6 players, at least as it stands now. I also think it would be worthwhile to allow it as 6.

-Snowman

I am more than happy just to have 6 players on the map - hell it was my idea - because the gameplay is so epic that there just isn't the space to do it justice... if we get size increases in the future - then a redux with 8 is in order... but I think it is fine for 6 right now.

And my choices... 4 definitely - and then a toss up between 3 & 7... I was leaning more towards 3 - but am equally happy to see 7 gone too.

C.

I say get rid of 4 and 3, and move 7 slightly northwest so there isn't too big a void between 7 and 1

so we can make limited numbers maps?

The debate about limiting players here is a direct consequence of trying to get the best experience while working to the current guidelines/restrictions.

Attempting to make the concept of the map work for 8 players, while adhering to the size restrictions, is going to be incredibly difficult, and so reducing the available starting positions to 6 is a compromise that will allow for a better implementation of the idea.

Feudal War, and the Age of Realms series are not eligible for 8 player games, as the maps are set up with 6 designated starting positions - which sets the precedent for limited player maps to be allowed. Additionally, this map has not been designed with a specific game-type in mind...

My personal opinion is that this map should be allowed to go ahead with 6 starts (6 tech-trees/castles), given that the real discussion about limited-player maps is about creating maps for 1v1 games... Before taking this as gospel, however, I'll solicit a wider view, behind-the-scenes

i can understand,when map have small number of territory to be for 6 player map,but these map who have over 100 territory,to be limited for only 6 players?! You realy dont have any good reason to these map be for only 6 players.
If i have any right i will not alove these,but again if Feudal war map have these privileges to be for 6 player,then i dont see any reason why will someon not alove that these map also be for 6 player.
For me is not normal that any map who have big number of territory,have some player limitation.

qwert wrote:i can understand,when map have small number of territory to be for 6 player map,but these map who have over 100 territory,to be limited for only 6 players?! You realy dont have any good reason to these map be for only 6 players.
If i have any right i will not alove these,but again if Feudal war map have these privileges to be for 6 player,then i dont see any reason why will someon not alove that these map also be for 6 player.
For me is not normal that any map who have big number of territory,have some player limitation.

Qwert, with all respects, I don't see any good reason to FORCE this map to be 8 players other than "just because".

As Mr.Benn pointed, is not that we decided from the begining to make it for 6 players. We started making it for 8 players, then noticed that due to space limitations, it would be better to cut it down to only 6 players in order to ensure a good experience. Believe me, I would love this map to be for 8 players, but I prefer a good map with only 6 players that a flawed map with 8 players. The reasons? First that in order for this concept to work, we need a lot of territories. And second, that with only 6 players we can better create the lab area.

If you are going to spoil someone else's work, please provide at least a good reason for it other than "I don't want you to do it".

I am sorry if I look so hard, but it's not nice to see that someone wants to spoil your job with no good reason. As you know, I am very opened to suggestions and try to encourage them. But I think that in this case this is only destructive criticism with nothing to add. You want it to be 8 players? Fine then. But please tell me how are you going to solve the space limitations.

Feudal War was made when the max was 6 players, so thats that one sorted.

As for size, limit the tech tree and make it vertical. Remove as many extra pixels as you can and you should be able to fit all 8 in. (im assuming that it is the tech tree space that is causing problems)

I don't really enjoy being 'king dick' here, but QWERT is right, with the number of territories you have on the map it seems bit of a waste making it only 6 players, i think more focus should be spent on making it 8 players, and trying to gather suggestions for how to work it that way rather than trying to go for 6 players.

my ideas, make the tech tree white so you don't need the army circles (but you will need more left-right pace anyway to fit in the letters for color blind letter options) and maybe look at making the border size a bit smaller to get some more pixels.

Its not mine job to explane people why map with "248 territories" must be for 8 players.
Its your job to explane people why these map must be limited for 6 players, I just say what i think,and these is mine oppinion,that any map who have these number of territory can not be limited,because you dont have any valid reason to do that.
Sorry for causing any problems, now i will just step back,and move out from these topic.

qwert wrote:Its not mine job to explane people why map with "248 territories" must be for 8 players.
Its your job to explane people why these map must be limited for 6 players, I just say what i think,and these is mine oppinion,that any map who have these number of territory can not be limited,because you dont have any valid reason to do that.
Sorry for causing any problems, now i will just step back,and move out from these topic.

Yup, i agree. Why would this map be better as a 6 player map than an 8 player map?

Also after re-reading the whole thread, im i right in understanding that you cannot attack and take over someone else's tech tree? if this is so, how can you play an assassin game on this map?

qwert wrote:Its not mine job to explane people why map with "248 territories" must be for 8 players.
Its your job to explane people why these map must be limited for 6 players, I just say what i think,and these is mine oppinion,that any map who have these number of territory can not be limited,because you dont have any valid reason to do that.
Sorry for causing any problems, now i will just step back,and move out from these topic.

I think this is a poor stance to take! You raise a very valid point: if eliminating two players, why not remove some territories? It would make it easier on everyone's eyes, and some might be extraneous. While I agree that this map needs more territories than say, Feudal, because the tech tree is going to cause increased bonuses that necessitate more territories, it already is very crowded.

I also have to say that this is over my head, I do not have the experience to be useful here, as I don't generally get that involved in map balance issues on this level of depth.

reggie_mac wrote:Feudal War was made when the max was 6 players, so thats that one sorted.

But none of the AOR maps were... - so there's that one definitely unsorted.

Personally I think you are arguing for arguings sake... the number of territories is key to this map - it needs to be large - else the USP will not be used - what's the point in hosing all your armies on research - when someone can just stroll over and kick your ass without doing any...

It's NOT just the tech tree space - it is the proximity of the cities to each other that makes the player numbers crucial.

qwert wrote:I just say what i think,and these is mine oppinion,that any map who have these number of territory can not be limited,because you dont have any valid reason to do that.

As mentioned above - the idea of the map is that the players have to play a fine balance between research - and expansion in order to win the game - if the cities are too close to each other - then there will be no point in research... if the neutrals are too high - then their will be no point in expansion - if the Instructions are not clear - then the map won't pass gameplay... Oliver is walking a fine line - which we are attempting to help him walk - and as discussed earlier in the thread - it would be a lot easier to balance this map with 6 players than 8 - therefore the concept of the map will be able to progress further for a future 8 player map when we know more about it...

Hell - I'd even go so far as saying that this map could be cut down to just 4 cities (1 in each corner) and then we really would get the map we want - making it for 6 is a compromise - making it for 8 isn't possible.

reggie_mac wrote:Also after re-reading the whole thread, im i right in understanding that you cannot attack and take over someone else's tech tree? if this is so, how can you play an assassin game on this map?

This is still in discussion at the moment - your rereading obviously wasn't as accurate as you think... probably the red mist clouding your vision... There are several ideas that those game types available - not least the Objective "only" idea which makes the game suitable for Termy & Assassin (see Das Schloss) - although I would suggest that objective only is not the best method (see Das Schloss!).

The current suggestions are
a) Make tech trees bombardable.
b) Make tech labs attackable from the capital.

Of - these suggestions - I would say that B is the best although it does mean that killing someone can become quite a huge bonus (but then again - isn't that a good thing?)

C.

yeti_c wrote:Personally I think you are arguing for arguings sake

not really, but you have answered my question in another forum, probably should have only asked it there, but i didn't my bad.

I thnk oliver is onto a winner here, and its something i'd like to play. i also mention in a earlier post

I'd hate to see a whole bunch of work having to be re-done because of it.

which, after spending some time trying to find out i came across nothing either way so i was just trying to get an answer, which i got. No red mist, just looking for some opacity of higher than 50%

but on topic, would making the tech tree vertical open up more space, it could possible allow you to stretch the map a bit so its not so cramped.

reggie_mac wrote:but on topic, would making the tech tree vertical open up more space, it could possible allow you to stretch the map a bit so its not so cramped.

I'm not sure - it may work... - that's something that Oliver and the GFX guy will have to look at.

C.

qwert wrote:Its not mine job to explane people why map with "248 territories" must be for 8 players.
Its your job to explane people why these map must be limited for 6 players, I just say what i think,and these is mine oppinion,that any map who have these number of territory can not be limited,because you dont have any valid reason to do that.
Sorry for causing any problems, now i will just step back,and move out from these topic.

I disagree. This thread is for posting comments and suggestions. If you are making a suggestion, you should back your suggestion. As far as I know, your main argument is "it has to be that way because the rules say so". I certainly dislike this kind of arguments. I apprecite arguments such as "I certainly believe that this map deserves to be 8 players" or "if you do this and this you can fit 8 players in the map". Those are constructive criticisms. Saying "you are the one who has to explain why my suggestion is not good" is a VERY POOR argument.

You are welcome to stay in this topic. I don't want anyone to leave. But I would be very grateful if your next comments were a bit more reasoned and constructive. I am not saying you cannot disagree. I am suggesting you to do it in a constructive way.

yeti_c wrote:

reggie_mac wrote:but on topic, would making the tech tree vertical open up more space, it could possible allow you to stretch the map a bit so its not so cramped.

I'm not sure - it may work... - that's something that Oliver and the GFX guy will have to look at.

C.

We will try to change the tech tree following your suggestion and see if that helps. Thanks for the idea!

yeti_c wrote:As mentioned above - the idea of the map is that the players have to play a fine balance between research - and expansion in order to win the game - if the cities are too close to each other - then there will be no point in research... if the neutrals are too high - then their will be no point in expansion - if the Instructions are not clear - then the map won't pass gameplay... Oliver is walking a fine line - which we are attempting to help him walk - and as discussed earlier in the thread - it would be a lot easier to balance this map with 6 players than 8 - therefore the concept of the map will be able to progress further for a future 8 player map when we know more about it...

Hell - I'd even go so far as saying that this map could be cut down to just 4 cities (1 in each corner) and then we really would get the map we want - making it for 6 is a compromise - making it for 8 isn't possible.

I couldn't have explained it better. Thanks for puting it so clear, Yeti_c

SuicidalSnowman wrote:I also have to say that this is over my head, I do not have the experience to be useful here, as I don't generally get that involved in map balance issues on this level of depth.

All comments are useful and welcome. So please don't refrain from commenting just because you think you haven't got the experience. I am sure you can contribute a lot of good ideas (in fact you have already done!)

Another idea for the tech tree, if they dont have to be grouped together, you could lay them around the outside of the map, kind of like a border, but not, and if done right they could be near enough to the starting citys as not to be confusing, this could help to open up a bunch of space in the middle, i can't remember where i've seen it (bet it was hasbro game), but if i get some time today i will try to draw up/find what i mean.