Conquer Club

Posted: **Tue Feb 02, 2010 4:36 am**

captainwalrus wrote:Thanks for the names. I fixed the ones you told me (now I just need a helpful latvian and lithuanian), is it better? For the two islands, which one should the name be over?

I'll work on Latvian and Lithuanian when I have time (my main attention goes to tournaments and time gets consumed in there).

The name should be over bigger island (bottom one). If you want the "troop dot" geographically correct then close to where the biggest peninsula in the south begins.

Posted: **Tue Feb 02, 2010 9:52 am**

You know... I'd like to see both Estonian Islands playable. And what exactly tells us which territory they are connected to?

Posted: **Tue Feb 02, 2010 10:05 am**

Industrial Helix wrote:You know... I'd like to see both Estonian Islands playable. And what exactly tells us which territory they are connected to?

I second both points.

Posted: **Thu Feb 04, 2010 3:19 pm**

Since this isn't in the gameplay section yet, does anyone have any first thoughts on the graphics?

Posted: **Thu Feb 04, 2010 3:58 pm**

Graphics are, generally speaking, quite nice. What software are you using?

I'd suggest trying some different fonts. IMO that handwritten font is not doing the map any favors... also a white drop shadow / glow around the text, if you insist on using black text, will do wonders to legibility.

The colours are nice. Not sure on the dotted lines for borders though... they look a bit weird IMO. Guess I could get used to them, but...

Posted: **Thu Feb 04, 2010 4:57 pm**

natty_dread wrote:Graphics are, generally speaking, quite nice. What software are you using?
GIMP, as always. It is the best value (it's free) for a high quality product. I know you always insist paint.net is great, but have you ever tried GIMP?

I'd suggest trying some different fonts. IMO that handwritten font is not doing the map any favors... also a white drop shadow / glow around the text, if you insist on using black text, will do wonders to legibility.
I don't insist on using black, what do you suggest would be better?
The colours are nice. Not sure on the dotted lines for borders though... they look a bit weird IMO. Guess I could get used to them, but...
Yeah, I might get rid of them, or make them thinner.

Posted: **Thu Feb 04, 2010 5:04 pm**

captainwalrus wrote:GIMP, as always. It is the best value (it's free) for a high quality product. I know you always insist paint.net is great, but have you ever tried GIMP?

I tried it, a long time ago. It was so slow on my computer, I got frustrated with it... I don't know, maybe the current versions are better, but I'm so used to working with paint.net.

I don't insist on using black, what do you suggest would be better?

I'm not saying black is bad necessarily. It's just that since you have such a dark background (sort of) it's hard to read unless you add some kind of white glow around it.

Black with white glow, or white with black drop shadow or outline. Either works IMO.

Yeah, I might get rid of them, or make them thinner.

Thinner? Hmm. I'd have to see how it looks, but I don't think it would be much better.

PS. the upper right corner is missing a piece of outline on the neutral area.

Posted: **Sun Feb 07, 2010 10:07 am**

So, made some research with Latvian map and here are Latvian cities that I'd use (moving from left to right, top to bottom):

Ventspils
Liepāja
Talsi
Tukums
Limbaži
Riga
Jelgava
Bauska
Valmiera (previously Vatka)
Ogre
Gulbene (previously Batvi)
Madona
Jēkabpils (previously Preiji)
Rēzekne (previously Ludza)
Daugavpils (previously Keastava)

I changed a few and added most of top 10 cities and in some cases I wasn't sure because I'm not too familiar with Latvian geography and best would be if some Latvian took a look at it but I think it's quite accurate at using biggest/more important cities. BTW, all the wiggly thingies in the names - very important for correct way of writing

Sorry, I'm not much help with graphical/gameplay suggestion, just don't get that part

Posted: **Sun Feb 07, 2010 11:44 am**

Thanks a ton! I will try to make it more accurate soon.
I might have an update tonight, if I do this during commercials of the superbowl.

Posted: **Thu Feb 18, 2010 7:12 pm**

I will update this once it gets into the gameplay section. I have some small changes I made, but it is on my other computer. I hope that it will soon be moved.

Posted: **Mon Feb 22, 2010 9:09 pm**

[bigimg]http://i615.photobucket.com/albums/tt238/Captain_walrus/Balticstatesv20.png[/bigimg]

If this doesn't move soon, I will probably just give up. I don't have the patience to sit around and wait for it.

Posted: **Tue Feb 23, 2010 5:54 am**

Have you put up a design brief?

edit: I see you have. PM MrBenn, he might have forgotten to evaluate it. It happened with our Lunar map as well.

Posted: **Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:37 pm**

Hi captainwalrus,

Sorry for the delay in responding here - your design brief is one of a handful that got skipped over when I last checked up on them - I can only apologise for that :oops:

As far as the map goes, you're definitely ready to move to the gameplay workshop; although there are serious concerns about the gameplay schema which looks like giving a serious first-player advantage with little obvious signs for how to reduce it.

The first task will be to work out how to ensure balanced gameplay - I had hell trying to get it balanced equitably on England; you may need to switch from the completely open gameplay to something slightly more traditional - particularly as you find the balance between geographical accuracy and solid gameplay.

[moved] to the gameplay workshop

Posted: **Wed Feb 24, 2010 6:33 pm**

I find the rail mechanic of this map a little confusing. It may just be the wording in the legend. Lets say I have Rapla, Pamu, & Limbazi, but do not have Tallinn or Riga. Do I receive that +4 bonus? If so isn't it far too likely that someone might start the game with one of those bonuses?

Also from a gameplay standpoint it is hard to play a map that has nameless territories. Granted on this map there is only one, the island territory between Pamu & Hulu, so that helps, but I think you'll want to name it soon anyway.

Posted: **Wed Feb 24, 2010 7:10 pm**

Coleman wrote:the island territory between Pamu & Hulu

I think that's Saaremaa.

Have you ever drank Saaremaa Vodka?

Posted: **Thu Feb 25, 2010 4:31 am**

Sorry for finding this out so late. One word, NICE! I like this map. However, I should once again remind you that there are some wrong spellings. Such as Kaunus is mis-spelled as Kanus, and Alytus is mis-spelled as Alutus.

Posted: **Thu Feb 25, 2010 4:39 am**

I think you should label Kaliningrad as Kaliningrad, as it is now labeled Russia... it is Russian territory, sure, but Kaliningrad would be a bit more specific and make more sense.

Make it Kaliningrad Oblast, I think that's the official name of the territory.

Posted: **Thu Feb 25, 2010 2:35 pm**

natty_dread wrote:I think you should label Kaliningrad as Kaliningrad, as it is now labeled Russia... it is Russian territory, sure, but Kaliningrad would be a bit more specific and make more sense.

Make it Kaliningrad Oblast, I think that's the official name of the territory.

Is it that much of a difference? It is still Russia. I put the country name for the other borders, why not that one?

Also, bonuses, might need to change to higher values but more territories to prevent unfair drops. That would mean that no longer can two people hold a bonus in one country, but it should still be Okay.

Railroads: You need to hold the capitals too. Anyone have any ideas as to how to word that better?

Posted: **Thu Feb 25, 2010 3:31 pm**

captainwalrus wrote:Is it that much of a difference? It is still Russia. I put the country name for the other borders, why not that one?

Well, it's not a big deal. Just an idea. If you want to keep it as Russia then keep it as Russia.

captainwalrus wrote:Railroads: You need to hold the capitals too. Anyone have any ideas as to how to word that better?

Hold 2 capitals with all rail territories between them: +x
Hold all 3 capitals with all rail territories between them: +y

It's a bit long, but at least it should be fairly idiot-proof

Posted: **Thu Feb 25, 2010 3:42 pm**

I am a little confused at the rail situation. Do railroads only connect to capitals or to every territory they pass through? Graphically, it looks as though it's the former, but I just can't image why there would be a +4 bonus for only holding two territories, so I'm assuming it's the latter. My suggestion would be to literally connect the rail to each of the territory army bubbles that it passes through in the same way as you do with the capitals. I realize this is more of a graphical concern, but I bring it up because, for me at least, it confounds comprehension of the gameplay.

My other suggestions, as others have mentioned, would be to add some impassibles. Where and what kind will obviously have to be determined mostly by how you want the map to play out and partially on geographic realities. I say just color some lines where you would like to put them and we can discuss them then. Once they're finalized you can work on real graphics for them.

Also, why not connect the southern Estonian island to Talsi in Lativia? They feel a bit like dead ends right now.

Overall, this map is looking good. It's a unique and interesting area and I'm glad to see it paid attention.

Posted: **Thu Feb 25, 2010 4:20 pm**

If you need the rails and the capitals what is the point of those bonuses? If you could actually keep them you are already winning, is it just so the clear front-runner can win faster? Why is there a rail-road at all? Is there something about the history/culture/geography of this part of the world that makes the rail-road necessary? From a game-play standpoint I just don't see the need for it.

Posted: **Fri Feb 26, 2010 8:59 am**

Coleman wrote:If you need the rails and the capitals what is the point of those bonuses? If you could actually keep them you are already winning, is it just so the clear front-runner can win faster? Why is there a rail-road at all? Is there something about the history/culture/geography of this part of the world that makes the rail-road necessary? From a game-play standpoint I just don't see the need for it.

The rail makes it so there is more bonuses. If there were just three bonuses too much of it would be luck, as most people would just get 3 for most of the game. Also, +4 for 5 is not that big.
As for the significance, I am not from the Baltic, but I was under the impression from my (admittedly minimal) research that Rail was big there, and the rail line connecting the three would therefore be very useful to have is someone were to start fighting over the Baltic States.

Also,
New bonus structure?
Lithuania (10 territories 5 borders
+4 for 7
+ 6 for all

Latvia (15 territories 10 borders)
+5 for 7
+10 for all

Estonia (12 territories 4 borders)
+3 for 6
+6 for all

Posted: **Fri Feb 26, 2010 9:18 am**

Why not divide each country into a few smaller bonuses and make a regular bonus system? I don't think this current bonus style fits very well with a random drop map.

You have 37 territories. The smallest bonus is 6 territories. Or 5 if you count the rail bonuses. You don't have any small bonuses that are easy to take in the beginning of the game. Thus I fear the game would largely be decided by whoever gets the best drop & dice in the beginning.

Posted: **Fri Feb 26, 2010 3:50 pm**

natty_dread wrote:Why not divide each country into a few smaller bonuses and make a regular bonus system? I don't think this current bonus style fits very well with a random drop map.

You have 37 territories. The smallest bonus is 6 territories. Or 5 if you count the rail bonuses. You don't have any small bonuses that are easy to take in the beginning of the game. Thus I fear the game would largely be decided by whoever gets the best drop & dice in the beginning.

I agree with natty's assessment. Split it up into county bonuses perhaps. One thing I recall from my visit to the Baltic was the proliferation of ferry routes from one country/city to the next. While a cursive search via GoogleMaps shows no ferries connecting these countries together (only out to other countries) maybe you could find a way to incorporate that into the map. It could open up connections between the north and the south and possibly provide a new source for bonuses. If you don't feel this fits into your map, I can understand you turning it down.

Posted: **Fri Feb 26, 2010 4:24 pm**

Well, dividing the countries into bonus regions could be problematic. I only looked at Estonia, but it seems at least Estonia doesn't have any larger administrative divisions, than the counties that already are represented as territories. So I can see why you went with a more unorthodox bonus system. Hmm.. :-k

Well, I did find this historical map that shows some ancient divisions of Estonia, which could be used as a base for bonus regions:

[bigimg]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/97/Ducatuum_Livoniae_et_Curlandiae_Nova_Tabula%2C_1705.jpg[/bigimg]

But it gives little help to naming the bonus areas.

Latvia is a bit easier:

[bigimg]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/89/Latvia_planning_regions.png/350px-Latvia_planning_regions.png[/bigimg]

Also found this for Lithuania:

[bigimg]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f5/Liet-etno-regionai.png/800px-Liet-etno-regionai.png[/bigimg]

Conquer Club

Baltic States - Bonus discussion.

Re: Baltic States

Re: Baltic States

Re: Baltic States

Re: Baltic States

Re: Baltic States

Re: Baltic States

Re: Baltic States

Re: Baltic States V1

Re: Baltic States V1

Re: Baltic States V1

Re: Baltic States V1

Re: Baltic States V1.5

Re: Baltic States V1.5

Re: Baltic States V1.5

Re: Baltic States V1.5

Re: Baltic States V1.5

Re: Baltic States V1.5

Re: Baltic States V1.5

Re: Baltic States V1.5

Re: Baltic States V1.5

Re: Baltic States V1.5

Re: Baltic States V1.5

Re: Baltic States V1.5

Re: Baltic States V1.5

Re: Baltic States V1.5