Conquer Club

lol i did not mean you should put it in every post

it's like this. you make a sketch and post it in a new thread.
then someone comes and tells you to make the image brighter. you post the brighter image in the answer post and also edit the first post to include the latest image. then somebody else comes and says he wants pink panties in the image. you answer again and include the new image in the post and again edit the first post to include the latest image.

this way the first post will always have the latest update and by browsing the thread you can see various stages of development, before pink panties, after pink panties. sometimes you'll simply come back a few pages and look at how the map developed and maybe revive a better idea or realise you strayed to far and decide on some modifications, etc.

i hope you understand.

Graphics have come along nicely since I last took a peek. It's probably too much to ask that the castle elements have have some 3-D depth, to go along with the texture of the land. just a thought.

The tunnel seems a bit long to me... if it's not going to have a bonus, it wouldn't be worth the effort to fight through seven territories to get to the great hall.

edit: On second thought the tunnel shouldn't be an easy way in or out, or else the battle would be waged in there instead of outside. And I don't think it deserves a bonus. The tunnel is problematic for me.

But my big problems are with the walls. In a real siege, the walls would be the easiest places to hold - on this map they look like the hardest.
- It seemes like there should be fewer places from which the walls could be attacked, but more places they can hit. Maybe just one attack point from the outside of each outer wall, and one fewer attack point from within?
- Holding the outer walls should be of greater strategic value than the one army bonus.
- The left and right outer wall could have a bridge to each other over the gate.
- The gate could access the wards, but not the walls directly. Who would scale the walls from the drawbridge? Yet the walls should be able to attack forces in the gate.

oaktown wrote:Graphics have come along nicely since I last took a peek. It's probably too much to ask that the castle elements have have some 3-D depth, to go along with the texture of the land. just a thought.

The tunnel seems a bit long to me... if it's not going to have a bonus, it wouldn't be worth the effort to fight through seven territories to get to the great hall.

But my big problems are the walls. In a real siege, the walls would be the easiest places to hold - on this map they look like the hardest.
- It seemes like there should be fewer places from which the walls could be attacked, but more places they can hit. Maybe just one attack point from the outside of each outer wall, and one fewer attack point from within?
- Holding the outer walls should be of greater strategic value than the one army bonus.
- The left and right outer wall could have a bridge to each other over the gate.
- The gate could access the wards, but not the walls directly. Who would scale the walls from the drawbridge? Yet the walls should be able to attack forces in the gate.

I agree but I think that the tunnel should have some vallue other than being able to attack the great hall. if you don't put at least a small bonus make it like 3 areas instaed of seven

I'd like to see much better graphics, but that may be beyond hope. Most of the stuff inside the castle is overvalued, and I'm definitely on board with all of oaktown's points above.

It's probably too much to ask that the castle elements have have some 3-D depth, to go along with the texture of the land. just a thought.

Agreed. I really love, LOVE, this idea for a map. I think that having a 3-D depth to it will help accentuate the role that castle walls play in strategic warfare. I think that the more realistic the castle, the better.

The ideal of having a castle map, opens up a whole bunch of possibilities for maps on here. It would be cool to see this map succeed and maybe see some castle maps based on actual castles follow its example like, the Blarney castle in Ireland, or The Alamo, ect.

One idea that I think can be incorporated (in future castle maps) would be to have certain areas of the grounds in front of the cast be designated as "Trebuchet" ares, that have a one way attack to the castle walls.

luckiekevin wrote:One idea that I think can be incorporated (in future castle maps) would be to have certain areas of the grounds in front of the cast be designated as "Trebuchet" ares, that have a one way attack to the castle walls.

lol. i said the exact same thing in the previous page. unfortunately it can't be done in the current xml (see this explanation also on previous page)

DiM wrote:

luckiekevin wrote:One idea that I think can be incorporated (in future castle maps) would be to have certain areas of the grounds in front of the cast be designated as "Trebuchet" ares, that have a one way attack to the castle walls.

lol. i said the exact same thing in the previous page. unfortunately it can't be done in the current xml (see this explanation also on previous page)

one way attacks absolutely 100% can be done in the current xml...

OK, I thunk on it and I'd like to see each square of the tunnel be able to attack in the outward directon only. This would make it play as a secret escape route from the great hall, and keep the action out on the walls where it should be. I'd also knock it down to five territories, because it would suck to open with three or four territories there and be handcuffed from the start.

bedplay wrote:

DiM wrote:

luckiekevin wrote:One idea that I think can be incorporated (in future castle maps) would be to have certain areas of the grounds in front of the cast be designated as "Trebuchet" ares, that have a one way attack to the castle walls.

lol. i said the exact same thing in the previous page. unfortunately it can't be done in the current xml (see this explanation also on previous page)

one way attacks absolutely 100% can be done in the current xml...

here's what i said in the explanatian from the first page:

DiM wrote:

Guiscard wrote: wrote:
What do you mean b ranged attack for trebuchetes?

it's a very nifty thing i wanted to implement and will do it in a future map but not exactlt as i want it.


lets say you have territory A <-> B <-> C and they connect like the arrows show (so no connection between A and C)

what i want is territory A to atack territory C (one way) this is possible. but not conquer it. allways stop when C is at 1. (this is not possible) the best use is for strategic defence points.

i think this explains clearly

a bunch of changes
the castle area is a bit bigger, the walls are more of a top down view. I added an extra Thrown area. Tunnel has 5 areas in stead of 7 and bonus of 2. The outer wall can be breached from 2 territories but can attack 7 territories. The wall cannot be breached from the gate and both halfves of the outer wall are connected.
Added 1 to plains bonus and took 1 from GreatHall.

maybe the thrown plus great hall is too much bonus?

Hrm....
What about an east wall/west wall each with a bonus of one? Holding the wall without the ward seems unlikely.
I think the great hall + throne bonus is too high.
Seems like some of the other bonuses need tweaking, although I can't really say how. Maybe some impassable borders outside? between parts of swamp and forest maybe?

Liking it more every update, and you are doing them rather quickly too!
Cheers,
Gozar

Why don't you have the great wall and throne as one for a bonus of 4 or 5?

I still say the walls should be one solid section. I think you're really missing out on a chance to make this play like a castle.

I don't like the Throne, it doesn't really fit. There's nothing strategic about regions of 1 or 2 territories, just the luck of who starts there. And it certainly isn't worth +3.

The Gate should give no bonus, it's just one territory and it has great strategic importance, meaning people will want to hold it anyway.

Samus wrote:I still say the walls should be one solid section. I think you're really missing out on a chance to make this play like a castle.

I don't like the Throne, it doesn't really fit. There's nothing strategic about regions of 1 or 2 territories, just the luck of who starts there. And it certainly isn't worth +3.

The Gate should give no bonus, it's just one territory and it has great strategic importance, meaning people will want to hold it anyway.

I could see the outer wall being two sections, but not one, that would be confusing and too easy to dump fotifications there, 2 sections sounds like a good idea.

I like the throne and great hall, it creates a centralized power house, but im going to reduce the bonus on them.

I also think the great hall and throne should be combined. Plus someone mentioned that the escape rout should be one way. The problem with that is you never need to keep any armies at the entrance to the grass area. If you keep the throne room exit built up with troops you can never lose it.
I really like this map. The picture that DiM posted was one I found on Google. I was working on one similar to this before my King of the Mountains and several others. Game play for this map would be great.

As I was reading I think that the walls maybe should be 2 territories per side instead of 3. There is a great advantage being able to attack but not be attacked.

Hope this map makes it!

WidowMakers wrote:I also think the great hall and throne should be combined. Plus someone mentioned that the escape rout should be one way. The problem with that is you never need to keep any armies at the entrance to the grass area. If you keep the throne room exit built up with troops you can never lose it.
I really like this map. The picture that DiM posted was one I found on Google. I was working on one similar to this before my King of the Mountains and several others. Game play for this map would be great.

As I was reading I think that the walls maybe should be 2 territories per side instead of 3. There is a great advantage being able to attack but not be attacked.

Hope this map makes it!

Do you mean the Great Hall and Throne should be combined into one territory, or there should be a bonus for holding both?

Do you mean the Great Hall and Throne should be combined into one territory, or there should be a bonus for holding both?

1 territory 1 bonus

This IS nice! keep working on it. i can't wait to give it a spin.

ok more changes,

the outer wall is now 2 territories, joined. I think this will work well since the outer wall will be heavily hit as well as enough armies to take pot shots across the moat. I also changed the texture of the wards, and the great hall.

i like the great hall and throne being separate, combined they are worth 5 but its split so someone doesnt get both on a lucky deployment. I reduced the bonues on them and the gate.

it looks pretty balanced to me, 50 terriroties, 25 ourside the wall, 25 inside including the tunnel.

just some graphic updates, shadows, better sidebar, and the midlands are now blending a bit. im not so sure about the midlands, but those shadows are sweet! and some light for the tunnel, i hope its not too distracting

How about defender's die on the wall get a bonus(+1 for example).

Considering that, by holding the great hall, there is no effort to defending the throne, I think that the thrones bonus should be a 1, maybe. Its hard to see where the passage and the hall meet, also..
And the lighting in the tunnel likes kinda bad.. maybe it could be a bit moe.. subtle.. Maybe you could blend it a little..

I think the areas around the castle are very unbalanced.. you could probably add natural barriers to make certain areas easier to hold.

As for the outside textures, I don't think they're terrible.. You could probably make the plain's texture look.. I don't know how to put it.. smaller?.. Further away.. and the trees a bit closer.. then they'll look like they're on a relatively similar scale. The texture of the swamps is all wrong, in my oppinion.. it seems out of place..
and the transition between areas aren't terrible.. but they're a bit rough. I don't know how you would improve them though.

I like the concept, but the graphics I agree with Evil Pope.
Keep up the good job!

Grtz
Marval

new textures...

also im not sure the outside areas are so imbalanced. they may be difficult to hold in 6 player, but shouldnt be too hard in doubles or triples.

New graphics are a great improvement.

Couple of ideas, though:

I love the trees but I think it would look better if you erased the borders where the trees cross them. You may have to fiddle around a bit so there are fewer trees crossing the borders themselves (so none are completely erased) but it would make them look more 3D.

Also, with the throne the corners could get a bit confusing: can the south throne territory attack the northernmost great hall? (I'm assuming not, but people get confused by borders meeting at a point).