Conquer Club

Definitely not the camo... too hard to read the numbers. I'm not fond of the others either, although I don't mind the idea... perhaps some sort of gray camo? My other thought was a texture of some sort colored gunmetal... I think the old straight grey isn't bad.

I quite like the colour scheme being Blue, like the old Connect 4 but I guess if it creates difficulties seeing the armies, it needed to change. How about this kind of thing, Keyogi?

Is it just me or has other people posted more maps then KEYOGI? Anyways, i think the camo texture wouldnt be to bad as long as the colours were changed to look more CC-ish

I like the original CC style Keyogi posted, but Wisse's first texture is alright also.


--Andy

qwert wrote:Wisse you have very interesting textures
Second its better

i am just good at effects and texture options

I still prefer the original clean CC style image without texture, but since everyone's having fun with texturing my map I thought I'd do the same.

I also added a Sherman Tank diagram in the background from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:M4A4_cutaway.png.

I've removed the Bonus Guide and game description because I'm considering redoing these to try and help clarify the gameplay and bonus system.

You can put simple bonuses like 2-4-6-8, bigger bonuses dont have sence like 10-12-14-20.

Well, since everyone else is helping Keyogi with map images, i guess i will too . Just something i quickly did in paint. I basically tried to make it look like the games page. Is it any good?

Interesting idea Bad Speler, I kind of like it, but I prefer the original layout. I'm kind of not sure where I should be looking with that setup.

im not exactly sure either, just throwing an idea out there.

I think its best without any textures.

I liked it best when it looked like the plastic connect four 'board', except grey to give it the army feel.
I don't see the need for texture, but if I had to pick 1 I'd pick the first one that Wisse put up.
I think the tank outline detracts from that simple plastic frame look.
Of your two textures Keyogi, I like the first one more.

Captain Crash wrote:I liked it best when it looked like the plastic connect four 'board', except grey to give it the army feel.

I completely agree.

I think clean "plastic" is best...

C.

option 2

i vote clean without texture.

I think everyone prefers the CC style way back towards the start. I know I do anyway, Andy seems to, the author likes it best.

Update - March 14



Changes made this update:
- Back to the old clean CC style
- Changed Bonus Guide
- Changed attack description
- Removed bonus description from under title

Comments:
I hate the new Bonus Guide with a passion, I just thought I'd offer something new to try and clear up the confusion. The saying goes that "a picture is worth a thousand words" and I tend to think that theory worked well for the Bonus Guide. I've taken an alternative option of trying to explain the system in plain English, but now we don't have the space to demonstrate a wide range of bonuses. I feel this is just going to create more problems.

Simple, and normal bonuses, these good

You're still going to get a bonus of +20 for a 4x4 block, it's just not shown in the Bonus Guide.

the old bonus guide is much better

The old bonus guide is better in my opinion, plus you made a mistake on the new one. The 1 vertical, 1 diagonal has a dot in the wrong place.

yup second column dot should be one row down

KEYOGI wrote:I hate the new Bonus Guide with a passion, I just thought I'd offer something new to try and clear up the confusion. The saying goes that "a picture is worth a thousand words" and I tend to think that theory worked well for the Bonus Guide.

I agree you should use graphics, but you still need to simplify. You have just two rules: 1) you need four-in-a-row to get a bonus. 2) two bonuses cannot share more than one territory.

I had something like this in mind:

It is important that you show examples of how NOT to get a bonus.

Maybe someone can improve on this further?

i like what otto has done. Giving the bonus a name adds clarity, and the arrows make attack routes obvious at a glance.

The line about how two lines may intersect but only have one common circle is odd, in that two intersecting lines would only be able to share one point anyway. It's really only there to explain how two groups of four on teh same line can't overlap, so it's redundant to also have the piece at the bottom about no bonus for 5 or 6.

Maybe this has already been discussed, but will every bonus and negative have the same name in the xml? It would be great to knock the bonuses down to just one line. You know...
Keyogi receives 2 armies for holding Conquer-4s
or
Keyogi receives 16 armeis for holding Conquer-4s.