Conquer Club

pamoa wrote:

Ruben Cassar wrote:The title should be Imperium Romanum Sacrum in Latin.

sorry but I just conrolled it on wiki and it says Sacrum Romanum Imperium

Really? Check again my friend: http://la.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperium_Romanum_Sacrum

That's the link from wikipedia Latin.

Apart from that keep in mind that wikipedia is not a reliable source.

Edit: I checked some other sites and both seem to be used from time to time although Imperium Romanum Sacrum seems to make more sense in Latin to me.

Ruben Cassar wrote:....
Edit: I checked some other sites and both seem to be used from time to time although Imperium Romanum Sacrum seems to make more sense in Latin to me.

Word order in Latin is unimportant as regards meaning though normally adjectives would follow the noun they qualify. Any change in order would be for sake of emphasis or art.

So the usual Latin would be Imperium Romanum Sacrum; Sacrum Romanum Imperium would be used if emphasis on Holy were required.

Ruben Cassar wrote:

pamoa wrote:

Ruben Cassar wrote:The title should be Imperium Romanum Sacrum in Latin.

sorry but I just conrolled it on wiki and it says Sacrum Romanum Imperium

Really? Check again my friend: http://la.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperium_Romanum_SacrumThat's the link from wikipedia Latin.Apart from that keep in mind that wikipedia is not a reliable source. I checked some other sites and both seem to be used from time to time although Imperium Romanum Sacrum seems to make more sense in Latin to me.

http://www.britannica.com/eb/topic-2698 ... man-Empire
http://www.heraldica.org/topics/national/hre.htm
http://xenophongroup.com/montjoie/hre-isu.htm

It's not to be pedant but to me it seems that Encyclopædia Britannica is some "reliable source"

It's your map at the end of the day. Personally I would go with Imperium Romanum Sacrum.

Out of curiosity, why are you using Latin? Wasn't the empire using German by the time of the map or not?

Ruben Cassar wrote:It's your map at the end of the day. Personally I would go with Imperium Romanum Sacrum.
Out of curiosity, why are you using Latin? Wasn't the empire using German by the time of the map or not?

It's true that their was a written german which was used at that times but "common" people were using their own dialect which most of them were germanic but for example a prussian could almost not understand a bavarian and to add complexity french was the international language that most of the noble family was speaking.
The latin title is because the name itself is a revendication of the hertiage of roman empire in occident and as it was "invented" in 1254 when latin was the written language for the whole occident.

Version 25 by pamoa thanks to grayhawke & Unit_2
[bigimg]http://i295.photobucket.com/albums/mm126/pamoa_ch/HRE1648v25.jpg[/bigimg]

Here we are guys!
The black and white legend need more work and sea routes are yet not so convincing. The bonus structure also need a re-evaluation.
All constructive comments are warmly welcome. If you do not like something please tell me in what way you want it to be changed!

I'll be on vacation from may26 to june15 , so no update until then. But I'll try to read posts

i dislike the eggtimer shaped bridges they just don't suit the map at all in my opinion

the colour of the east and west bodering states is too similiar on the main map

i would like some names for the continents perhaps Greyhawke's system of spliting into H.R.E. and bodering states and just using directions like North, South ect.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/3f/Banner_of_the_Holy_Roman_Emperor_%28after_1400%29.svg
maybe you could find room in legend for the crest of Empire, the legend is full enough as it is so maybe not

multiplayertim:

I dislike the eggtimer shaped bridges they just don't suit the map at all in my opinion
- I do not understand the qualificative you used, could you be more precise about it?
the colour of the east and west bodering states is too similiar on the main map
- I'll fix it
i would like some names for the continents perhaps Greyhawke's system of spliting into H.R.E. and bodering states and just using directions like North, South ect.
- I called bordering states Europe west, south and east but where should I write them not adding confusion?
maybe you could find room in legend for the crest of Empire, the legend is full enough as it is so maybe not
- what is that?

Good job but can you lightin the outer territorys just a pinch? They seem like they arn't part of the map.

Unit_2

Good job but can you lightin the outer territorys just a pinch? They seem like they arn't part of the map.
- You mean to get a stronger contrast between HRE and rest of Europe?

I must say that Tittle and terittory names is in diferent language,mine opinion is that you use one language for map.

Name Imperium Romanum Sacrum can confuse people with Imperium Romanum.

I mena its too grey, take The Spanish Netherlands and Denmark, they are dark grey and I didn't know that they were part of the mak untill I really looked at it.

I really dig the style of this map.... nice work so far.

Since it's what I do around here, let's talk about regions and bonuses. For starters, ask yourself where you would choose to start on your map (if you had a choice) and if the answer is too obvious then there's a problem. As I see it, HRE South is the most advantageous start, since it is the only region with as few as three territories it has to defend yet it gives a healthy +4 bonus.

Sure, most players will try to start in a corner because that's what you do on most maps and it seems like you should, but with all of the four-border regions along the outside of the map any player who does so is screwed.

Of course, with the influence bonuses maybe it would be suicide to go after any region right off the bat. The traditional play of nabbing a region and forting up your borders doesn't hold here, which is fine with me. Alright, I'm just thinking out loud now, you need specifics.

It took me a while to figure out that the Netherland and Denmark were part of Europe West - perhaps the color of that particular region should be something more eye-catching so you put them together at first glance.

Visually the borders seem to have too many right angles; I suspect that a few hundred years ago borders weren't quite so precise. And if they were stroked one pixel wider it wouldn't hurt either - soften them up a bit.

Bridges would also look a bit more natural if they weren't perfectly perpendicular.

I dislike the eggtimer shaped bridges they just don't suit the map at all in my opinion
- I do not understand the qualificative you used, could you be more precise about it?i ment that the bridges are in a particulary contrasting shape to the map and i think they could be changed to suit map more

maybe you could find room in legend for the crest of Empire, the legend is full enough as it is so maybe not
- what is that?

its the symbol of the empire that would have been on flags. kind of like a modern countries flag

i would like some names for the continents perhaps Greyhawke's system of spliting into H.R.E. and bodering states and just using directions like North, South ect.
- I called bordering states Europe west, south and east but where should I write them not adding confusion?

the legend is almost full so maybe it is better just to leave them out i think the mini-map might be enough.

multiplayertim:
I dislike the eggtimer shaped bridges they just don't suit the map at all in my opinion
i ment that the bridges are in a particulary contrasting shape to the map and i think they could be changed to suit map more
oaktown:
Bridges would also look a bit more natural if they weren't perfectly perpendicular.
- I will work on it

multiplayertim:
maybe you could find room in legend for the crest of Empire, the legend is full enough as it is so maybe not
its the symbol of the empire that would have been on flags. kind of like a modern countries flag
- I put the bicephal Eagle under the title. I have also to re-elaborate the black and white legend and try also to add the empire crown. But it is very delicate not adding too much confusion

Unit_2:
Good job but can you lightin the outer territorys just a pinch? They seem like they arn't part of the map.
I mena its too grey, take The Spanish Netherlands and Denmark, they are dark grey and I didn't know that they were part of the mak untill I really looked at it.
oaktown:
It took me a while to figure out that the Netherland and Denmark were part of Europe West - perhaps the color of that particular region should be something more eye-catching so you put them together at first glance.
- I will work on something for it

oaktown:
Visually the borders seem to have too many right angles; I suspect that a few hundred years ago borders weren't quite so precise. And if they were stroked one pixel wider it wouldn't hurt either - soften them up a bit.
- Since middle ages all cultivated piece of land and all forest did have a landlord (church or noble family) and if you want to have an idea of the mess it was at that percise moment click here
- But I can also try something more soft for border I'm not sure about that but i'll try

pamoa wrote:multiplayertim:

I dislike the eggtimer shaped bridges they just don't suit the map at all in my opinion
- I do not understand the qualificative you used, could you be more precise about it?
the colour of the east and west bodering states is too similiar on the main map
- I'll fix it
i would like some names for the continents perhaps Greyhawke's system of spliting into H.R.E. and bodering states and just using directions like North, South ect.
- I called bordering states Europe west, south and east but where should I write them not adding confusion?
maybe you could find room in legend for the crest of Empire, the legend is full enough as it is so maybe not
- what is that?

The colours of the bordering states are fine in my opinion. They are not similar.

I also don't mind leaving the bridges as they are right now.

oaktown
As I see it, HRE South is the most advantageous start, since it is the only region with as few as three territories it has to defend yet it gives a healthy +4 bonus.
Sure, most players will try to start in a corner because that's what you do on most maps and it seems like you should, but with all of the four-border regions along the outside of the map any player who does so is screwed.
Of course, with the influence bonuses maybe it would be suicide to go after any region right off the bat. The traditional play of nabbing a region and forting up your borders doesn't hold here, which is fine with me. Alright, I'm just thinking out loud now, you need specifics.

Here is a new bonus structure proposition, maybe more equilibrated for continents. I'm also proposing to enhance the inflence bonus so their is no clear strong point and you have to built up a strategy out of your starting position.

- HRE north.....territories=9.....border=7.....bonus(9+7)/3 = 5
- HRE west......territories=7.....border=4.....bonus(7+4)/3 = 4
- HRE south.....territories=5.....border=3.....bonus(5+3)/3 = 3 was 4
- HRE east.......territories=8.....border=7.....bonus(8+7)/3 = 5 was 7
- Europe west...territories=4.....border=4.....bonus(4+4)/3 = 3
- Europe south..territories=5.....border=4.....bonus(5+4)/3 = 3
- Europe east...territories=4.....border=4.....bonus(4+4)/3 = 3

- 1 set of influence...territorries=3..border=3..bonus(3+3)/3 = 2 was 1
- 3 sets of influence..territorries=9..border=9..bonus(9+9)/3 = 6 was 4

The hold all = win came out of a simple reflection: it is like holding an 18 territories 18 borders continent so I can give something like (18+18)/3 = +12 bonus.
But it is almost impossible, if you can get it it means you are controlling the entire map, so you win!
It's a bit like in age of realms: magic if you can attack the stack pile up in the sanctuary, something like 75 or 175, I don't remember exactly, nobody is able to fight back so you win by Knock Out.
There is also an historical reason doing so, if you can control all the powers that inflences the empire you become The Emperor, you win!

Using the spreadsheet by Oaktown and deducting 0.5 for each area of influence within a region, I get the following

--------Region----------------Spreadsheet------------Suggested(see above)
........HRE North......................4......................5
........HRE West ......................3......................4
........HRESouth ......................3......................3
........HRE East.......................5......................5
........Europe West...................3......................3
........Europe South..................3......................3
........Europe East....................2.....................3

The suggested influence bonus can be expressed as simply 2 per set.
I'm also gradually warming to the hold-all = win condition.

grayhawke wrote:Hi, must say I like your map - a vast improvement on my attempts! Hope you don't mind the following suggestions:

possibly remove England or maybe colour it a dark-grey
- i'll do something about it
stop the river at Wurzburg and extend the mountains to divide Strasburg from Wurtemberg and Hohenzollern. I think the geography supports this and it removes the need for bridges.
- really? I'm not sure about that as Rhine is one of the major river of europe and i wanted to avoid having mountains everywhere
consider opening the border between Salzburg and Austria
- I closed it to have some protected territory in HRE south
Have a good vacation. Cheers. G.

As map graphic editor I will be on vacation until june 15

Hi, back from vacation, lot of work at the office so it may take me a week to post an update!

v26

MODIFICATIONS:
regions & influence bonuses
bordering states, regions & england "colors"
region & sea borders thickness
sea routes
bridges with color

OPEN QUESTIONS:
legend graphics, any ideas

[bigimg]http://i295.photobucket.com/albums/mm126/pamoa_ch/HRE1648v26.jpg[/bigimg]

I think you should make the colors a little stronger, its kind of hard to tell what is what.

I like this - first time I'd popped in here in a while - but the new GFX are really coming along.

I also like the simple - gameplay - with an objective too.

Great stuff.

C.

im not too keen on the glow on the influences and things like that.
maybe change the ocpacity to be lower, or take some of the spread of the glow off, or find a new way to do the same job as the glow but would make it better