Conquer Club

MonteKiffin wrote:I don't like it.

God bless constructive criticism

the names for each continent should be darker but otherwise else i think its very good.

e_i_pi wrote:

MonteKiffin wrote:I don't like it.

God bless constructive criticism

you can't make all the people happy all of the time!

Version 8.3
Several small changes, everything suggested since 8.22 has been implemented. Large version is up, haven't reduced to small yet, awaiting more nitpicking.
[bigimg]http://i285.photobucket.com/albums/ll71/e_i_pi/Antarctica83l.jpg[/bigimg]

Oh yeah, looking good, I have a bit of trouble reading some of the titles where they go over more than terrain type, (most noticeably on peninsula). And i think i like the itallic font from the v7.5 map for the names, i just find it a bit easier to read, then agaun, maybe i need glasses

reggie_mac wrote:Oh yeah, looking good, I have a bit of trouble reading some of the titles where they go over more than terrain type, (most noticeably on peninsula). And i think i like the itallic font from the v7.5 map for the names, i just find it a bit easier to read, then agaun, maybe i need glasses

I've just found a good fonts site, and downloaded maybe 20 recently. I'll scour their fonts for a sans serif font that has reasonable strength in stroke

OK, here's funny thing... I was staring at south pole, trying to figure out why it could now attack OUT only instead of attacking IN only. If you look at the negative space between the in-arrows, you've got Escher-esque out-arrows... you may want to tweak that somehow.

Anyway, back to gameplay specifics; have you settled on +2 for boats, +1 for ports, or is that discussion still being bounced about?

oaktown wrote:OK, here's funny thing... I was staring at south pole, trying to figure out why it could now attack OUT only instead of attacking IN only. If you look at the negative space between the in-arrows, you've got Escher-esque out-arrows... you may want to tweak that somehow.

Anyway, back to gameplay specifics; have you settled on +2 for boats, +1 for ports, or is that discussion still being bounced about?

Bounce it about all you can... I like +2/+1, it stops stagnation and will always allow at least 1 3v2 attack a round, provided you haven't whittled all your troops down to singles. The biggest problem I see at the moment is fitting all the gameplay rules in there. I may need a third ticker

The arrows... sigh, and sigh again. If it's not the colours, it's the arrows I'll do something, it's just really a matter of smudging the inside of the South Pole continent and rounding off those borders I think, not much effort, just enough to give it a slightly different look.

e_i_pi wrote:

oaktown wrote:have you settled on +2 for boats, +1 for ports?

I like +2/+1, it stops stagnation and will always allow at least 1 3v2 attack a round, provided you haven't whittled all your troops down to singles.

I tend to agree, which is why I'm going to drop a little more snow on this thread.

e_i_pi wrote:The biggest problem I see at the moment is fitting all the gameplay rules in there. I may need a third ticker

Or, a scrolling ticker as suggested earlier. If the ticker is moving across the sceen you won't need to have everything visible at once.

If there are any additional visual elements that negatively impact gameplay, I'll be able to catch them when this comes under my eye inthe Forge period.

oaktown wrote:Or, a scrolling ticker as suggested earlier. If the ticker is moving across the sceen you won't need to have everything visible at once.

If there are any additional visual elements that negatively impact gameplay, I'll be able to catch them when this comes under my eye inthe Forge period.

I'm fine with doing this, but it can't be done on the map image itself, otherwise you're looking at one hell of a big gif. The ticker would need to be separate from the map, and overlaid somehow, which I'm not sure is possible with html. It would also require special code from lack. Scrolling a ticker would require (for smoothish animation) maybe 100 frames? A gif of this image is like 500k, so 100 of them is like a 50Mb download :/ I don't think people want to wait that long to play their game.

If I had the ticker on only a portion of the screen, it could be cut down to maybe 20 frames for smooth scrolling, but this is still too big. Might just have to bite the bullet and have the stagnant ticker. Or I could better manage the space in Imassables One Way Attacks screen, and include a little 1-3 provs = 1 army, 4-6 provs = 2 armies, etc in there.

Thank you for the gameplay stamp, the snow is much appreciated I would like to continue talking about gameplay though, I would rather be 100% sure it's good on my end than the 99% I am at the moment If it's 1 deployable army per 2 territories, is that going to be enough for people to break others continents? 2 autodeploy on a ship, plus say 1-2 deployed on the ship, plus maybe 2 already on there, that's 5 v whatever is on shore. With continents worth 4+ armies, it could tip the scales quickly. Or maybe I'm just worrying for no reason. Thoughts?

Whoa, very nice, it's been a while since I've seen the map and I'm lovin' it.

e_i_pi wrote:SUGGESTIONS
[list]
Legend:
[list]
[*]Add station to South pole - community consultation reqd - will it cramp the centre of the map too much?

I don't really like the idea of a station on the South Pole, it already looks good as is.

e_i_pi wrote:Gameplay:
[list]
[*]Open to community whether or not there should be -1 per turn on South Pole, and possibly all of Polar Plateau - community consultation ongoing

Unless the beta testing reveals that it's a too easy map to play, I think it would be better to have -1 on just the south pole.

e_i_pi wrote:[*]Neutrals: 7 on South Pole, 5 on Bordering provinces, 2 on landing points, 3 elsewhere - community consultation ongoing

I think u decided to just have 3 everywhere except for on the ports right?
I know I supported having more troops as you got closer to the pole, but 3 everywhere seems to work.
I still think that there should be 5ish on the Polar Plateu, but it's not something that is make or break.

e_i_pi wrote:[*]Autodeploy 3 instead of 2 - community consultation ongoing

Personally, just trying to work out a game, when u started out, it would be 3 starting in the boats, 2 auto on the boats, +1 from territory bonus. The first attack would be 6v1.
After that, it would be +2 from boats (which u would fortify to front lines), +1 from ports (again fortified to front lines), +2 or 3 depending on # of terits.
Sounds like an excellent deploy amount.

e_i_pi wrote:[*]No armies for province count, no 3 armies per turn, armies only from autodeploys and continents - community consultation ongoing

instead of 3 armies per turn from terits it's 1 army per turn from terits.
I like that, it makes u rely more on autodeploys and continent bonuses, but without the possibility of stalemates and at the same time, not leaving u stranded in adjacent reinforce games.

Just my take on the community consultations you have posted, again, excellent map, glad to see you got the gameplay stamp.
One step closer to NUKING POLAR BEARS!!!!

joe cool 360 wrote:Whoa, very nice, it's been a while since I've seen the map and I'm lovin' it.

Cheers, much appreciated.

I think u decided to just have 3 everywhere except for on the ports right?
I know I supported having more troops as you got closer to the pole, but 3 everywhere seems to work.
I still think that there should be 5ish on the Polar Plateu, but it's not something that is make or break.

Actually, 3 everywhere, but 1 on the ports, so people can access the mainland easily.

I like that, it makes u rely more on autodeploys and continent bonuses, but without the possibility of stalemates and at the same time, not leaving u stranded in adjacent reinforce games.

Just my take on the community consultations you have posted, again, excellent map, glad to see you got the gameplay stamp.
One step closer to NUKING POLAR BEARS!!!!

Actually, it's going to be 1 army per 3 provinces, but a minimum of 1 army per turn, not 3 as usual.

Mini Vacation again, while I work on the map comp more.

e_i_pi wrote:Mini Vacation again, while I work on the map comp more.

Make it quick

InsomniaRed wrote:

e_i_pi wrote:Mini Vacation again, while I work on the map comp more.

Make it quick

Yes ma'am :salute:

e_i_pi wrote:

oaktown wrote:OK, here's funny thing... I was staring at south pole, trying to figure out why it could now attack OUT only instead of attacking IN only. If you look at the negative space between the in-arrows, you've got Escher-esque out-arrows... you may want to tweak that somehow.

The arrows... sigh, and sigh again. If it's not the colours, it's the arrows I'll do something, it's just really a matter of smudging the inside of the South Pole continent and rounding off those borders I think, not much effort, just enough to give it a slightly different look.

I wonder if using arrows like these:


Will be better than ones like this:

MrBenn wrote:

e_i_pi wrote:

oaktown wrote:OK, here's funny thing... I was staring at south pole, trying to figure out why it could now attack OUT only instead of attacking IN only. If you look at the negative space between the in-arrows, you've got Escher-esque out-arrows... you may want to tweak that somehow.

The arrows... sigh, and sigh again. If it's not the colours, it's the arrows I'll do something, it's just really a matter of smudging the inside of the South Pole continent and rounding off those borders I think, not much effort, just enough to give it a slightly different look.

I wonder if using arrows like these:


Will be better than ones like this:

The first arrow is one I used originally, and it was poo-pooed. Arrows are something I'll be addressing next update, as well as borders (which I have identified as being shoddy)

Perhaps try the 'success' one?

On the border-front, RjBeals posted this helpful comment when I was working on Europa, which may (or may not) be useful:

RjBeals wrote:

MrBenn wrote:I want to redraw the territory borders, as I want them to look fresh and crisp. At the moment I think they look a bit jaggedy and distorted (as well as inaccurate in 1 or 2 places like N Ireland).... I think this will be a major major task, as my couple of attempts at redoing the border have taken ages, and not been overly successful... Any suggestions on how to do this quickly, easily and efficiently would be warmly received.

I like to use a solid black 2-pixel brush with a hardness of 100% (Opacity 100% & Flow 100%). This gives a good well defined smooth border. I will sometimes outline the entire bonus region in a 3 or 4 pixel brush also, just to keep it separated even more. Zoom in close on your original map and trace the borders. Yes it will take a while, but most likely not as long as you think. How accurate you keep it is up to you.

Thanks Benn, but I think my latest forays into Photoshop have hit the nail on the head as far as borders and smoothing goes Correct pen settings and a graphics tablet do the world of good

Closeup



Snapshot

I can't wait until the next version comes out, and I'd like to echo what Joe Cool said about the gameplay as those are exactly the same way I feel.

wow, this is looking great e_i_ep

well done so far

Maps being retired

EDIT: Map is being abandoned for good

What for Good?

samuelc812 wrote:What for Good?

That's what abandoned means

e_i_pi wrote:

samuelc812 wrote:What for Good?

That's what abandoned means

You never said abandoned Retirement you can come back from

e_i_pi wrote:Maps being retired