Conquer Club

I've added a bit of glow to the regions Benn pointed and raised Gibraltar a bit.

Version 37 large

[bigimg]http://i998.photobucket.com/albums/af105/Kabanellas/NapoleonicEurope_V36_Image-2.png[/bigimg]

Version 42 small

[bigimg]http://i998.photobucket.com/albums/af105/Kabanellas/NapoleonicEurope_V42h_Image_smal-1.png[/bigimg]

Ender, you can use this versions, so we can check some armies placement that might not fit perfectly

Okay, I will look at coordinate tweaks soon.

Right now, I believe that the winter territories are defined properly. Just as in the Dust Bowl, each decaying territory has a negative bonus which is applied to that territory directly.

The battle site continents are not completely correct: the 13 and 15 site continents have the wrong required value, which messes things up, but I will correct them. I will also try to arrange things a bit better so there are fewer pointless entries in the log like
and so on.

I have had the battle bonus work with capitals other than Berlin, (at least as far as it can with the messed up 13 and 15 site continents) but it seems like only one player is being awarded the bonus at a time, even though, for example, more than one player can easily have five sites and a capital. I hope this is merely a problem with the Wizard, and I have posted to the appropriate topic.

Thanks for looking into this. Yes, it does make sense with just one player getting awarded bonuses for battles - ie in terms of how errors "make sense". Hope we can work it out so anyone with a capital and 3 battles can get their bonus at the same time. And thanks for fixing the winter territories on the Dust bowl model.

The winter territories wasn't a fix, it was always that way. Not sure why you thought it was counting against your deployable bonus, unless you were looking at the summary line in the Wizard that says something like:

The Wizard log does show the decay applied to each winter territory.

The colors being used for Russian and the Ottoman empires are almost identical under vischeck, which really brings into question where Bessarbia goes bonus wise.

Yes, that's what i did. Thanks for clearing it up, ender.

RedBaron0 wrote:The colors being used for Russian and the Ottoman empires are almost identical under vischeck, which really brings into question where Bessarbia goes bonus wise.

They are distinct in my opinion.... But if any doubt remains, you can always read in the legend: 3 Ottoman empire + 1with Orient + 1 with Bessarabia

Agreed.

ender516 wrote: I will also try to arrange things a bit better so there are fewer pointless entries in the log like

Code: Select all

Player 1 received 0 for holding a Capital
Player 1 received 0 for holding 5 Battle Sites
Player 1 received 0 for holding 7 Battle Sites

and so on.

The game log doesn't show bonuses of 0. Just so you know

MrBenn wrote:

ender516 wrote: I will also try to arrange things a bit better so there are fewer pointless entries in the log like

Code: Select all

Player 1 received 0 for holding a Capital
Player 1 received 0 for holding 5 Battle Sites
Player 1 received 0 for holding 7 Battle Sites

and so on.

The game log doesn't show bonuses of 0. Just so you know

Thanks, MrBenn. I was wondering about that, or if it were possible to create a continent without a bonus clause, just to use as part of another continent. Maybe I will ask chipv to make those log messages about zero bonuses optional. They can be useful when debugging the XML organization but it would be nice to see a log just like the one in a game as well.

ender516 wrote:

MrBenn wrote:

ender516 wrote: I will also try to arrange things a bit better so there are fewer pointless entries in the log like

Code: Select all

Player 1 received 0 for holding a Capital
Player 1 received 0 for holding 5 Battle Sites
Player 1 received 0 for holding 7 Battle Sites

and so on.

The game log doesn't show bonuses of 0. Just so you know

Thanks, MrBenn. I was wondering about that, or if it were possible to create a continent without a bonus clause, just to use as part of another continent. Maybe I will ask chipv to make those log messages about zero bonuses optional. They can be useful when debugging the XML organization but it would be nice to see a log just like the one in a game as well.

The <bonus></bonus> tags are mandatory, so you'll need to set it at 0 if it's just a building block. For information, if you have multiple continents with the same name, the game log only shows the cumulative total (although you cannot then use those continents as components elsewhere in the XML).

Thanks for that. I don't think the multiple-continents-with-the-same-name trick will be of use to me here. Do you know of an existing map that makes good use of that feature, just so I can see a concrete example?

ender516 wrote:Thanks for that. I don't think the multiple-continents-with-the-same-name trick will be of use to me here. Do you know of an existing map that makes good use of that feature, just so I can see a concrete example?

The only one I know of is the World Cup map.

Kabanellas wrote:

RedBaron0 wrote:The colors being used for Russian and the Ottoman empires are almost identical under vischeck, which really brings into question where Bessarbia goes bonus wise.

They are distinct in my opinion.... But if any doubt remains, you can always read in the legend: 3 Ottoman empire + 1with Orient + 1 with Bessarabia

Ugh.... then why are we worried about vischeck anyways? Read the legend, that'll tell you what is what.

Anyone with colorblindness, as told to us be vischeck, will see the same bonus shading of brown for pretty much the right quarter of the map. Please tell me I'm not the only person who sees this as an issue.

but I did test it here:
http://www.vischeck.com/

and I find that Bessarabia's inside brown is pretty distinguishable from Russia's green.

If this is an issue, then what about these maps (to name a few):

The Eastern Hemisphere (The End of Empires), First Nations Of North America, The Indian Empire, The New World, Sydney Metro, Waterloo or even Rail Africa. They all use the same colour grades.

Please tell me I'm not the only person who sees this as an issue.

Actually, you are. Because what you say is just not accurate. The color difference is sharp enough to be perceived as clearly as on most other CC maps. So "please tell me" you're actually raising this issue for reasons other than your need to feel relevant...

This is some fine work gentlemen! keep it up, I really look forward to playing this one

I took a quick look through vischeck and Bessarabia seems fine given the rules are written out and and it appears there is something different than the usual bonus going on there. I see what RB is saying about the colors between Russia and Ottoman Empire... they're very similar in tone and perhaps a darkening of the Ottoman brown would do the trick.

Furthermore, being colorblind must suck. I can't imagine looking at all that brown throughout my life.

Okay, folks, here is version 1.7 of the XML:
http://www.fileden.com/files/2009/11/9/2644838/Napoleonic_Europe_V1.7.xml
Changes from the previous version include;

• London and Paris now starting at 3 neutrals
• Sussex has been renamed Wessex
• Malmo has been renamed Lund
• Greece has been renamed Morea
• the U.K. has been moved nine pixels north on the small map, and nearby battle sites have shifted as well
• Istanbul and Stockholm have been moved on both maps
• Brittany and Oporto have been moved on the small
• and corrections and enhancements have been made to the handling of the battle site bonuses.

I would run this through Map Inspect and post images, but my link is dreadful today. It took almost 45 minutes to get this XML into fileden.com.

After speaking with RedBaron0 about the map, we agreed that some significant changes were made to improve the playability of the map. We believe that the map presents some aspects of over-complexity that could create difficulties during the game and probably should have been taken into consideration earlier during the development, but we can not say, for as it is now, that the map is unplayable; It's certainly not easy, but not unplayable.
For all these reasons we decided to leave this topic stickied for a couple of days, if no one raises concerns, the map can be moved to the Final Forge.
However, we believe that other few small tweaks could be made.....we know that the desire to finish the map is great, but now you can choose to end the map and call it good map or to call it a masterpiece.

Anyway...stickied!

Thank you very much NB

Hi NB,

Thanks for your comments.

..we believe that other few small tweaks could be made...

Could you please (after talking to your team) provide a comprehensive list of the tweaks you refer to? This way, we can see specifically what you mean and examine what can be done.

Thanks,

R

Ok, here are the final versions after correcting some tweaks pointed out by Nobodies

Large - version 38
[bigimg]http://i998.photobucket.com/albums/af105/Kabanellas/NapoleonicEurope_V38_Image.png[/bigimg]

Small - version 43
[bigimg]http://i998.photobucket.com/albums/af105/Kabanellas/NapoleonicEurope_V43_Image_small.png[/bigimg]

I deserve a kick in the pills for bringing this up so late but all the focus on the small map totally diverted my attention from the large map... the large words on the map "Kingdom of Denmark" and "United Kingdom" are tough to read as they roll over those black borders.

Think you could lighten the border in that area or move the words or something. It's just where they cross a length of vertical border that it turns to jumbled nothingness.