Conquer Club

TroyMcClure wrote:Who can I ask about this?

100% can't be done.

Basic rule is if you can't see it in a current map it can't be done at the moment.

Other than that, the map doesn't look too shabby. Good start.

DiM wrote:

TroyMcClure wrote:

fireedud wrote:Andy.[size=0]AndLack[/size]

I didn't see this username. can you give me more info

the username is AndyDufresne.

but it's not possible. i'm 100% sure.

Dang. OK, I guess I'll go with the "own 2 attractions get +1 unit, own 3 attractions get +2,...

Guiscard wrote:

TroyMcClure wrote:Who can I ask about this?

100% can't be done.

Basic rule is if you can't see it in a current map it can't be done at the moment.

Other than that, the map doesn't look too shabby. Good start.

I guess the playing card bonuses are part of a fixed foundation program?

along with bonus changes, I added some 3-D effects
*** Version 1.3 ***


*** Older Version 1.2 ***

Dang. OK, I guess I'll go with the "own 2 attractions get +1 unit, own 3 attractions get +2,...

just so you know...Im pretty sure the only way to do this is...

1 attractions - +0
2 attractions - +2
3 attractions - +3
4 attractions - +6
5 attractions - +10
6 attractions - +15

the problem is setting them up in groups of two, if you give a bonus for 'any two' youre have to give a bonus for 'every single pair' a person has...

i cannot see the attraction of the map unless you live in this area it seems rather boruing the graphics a below average and the gameplay seems average, i dont see the wow factor yet, sorry

boberz wrote:i cannot see the attraction of the map unless you live in this area it seems rather boruing the graphics a below average and the gameplay seems average, i dont see the wow factor yet, sorry

boberz try not to be so negative in your posts. Simple dismissals don't help anyone. Try and comment on how the things you don't like could be improved.

As for the map, I do like the twist of the armies being cash and I don't think the graphics are all that bad to be honest. I like the 'official tourist map' feel with the highways as impassable, and I like the 'park' icon but perhaps not the beach, zoo and golf ones so much. Could you try and find equally 'iconic' symbols for them in keeping with the park? One colour and pretty simple geometric shapes? Perhaps just a sun for the beach, a golf club for golf and I dunno what for the zoo. As for the nightclub, maybe a cocktail glass.

What you do have, however, is a huge amount of unused space in the sea. Perhaps you could minimise this by taking away most of the left edge where the legend is now. You'd still have more than enough space for the title and legend in the ocean off the coast of mexico. Try and make the border of the map pretty close to La Jolla.

boberz wrote:i cannot see the attraction of the map unless you live in this area it seems rather boruing the graphics a below average and the gameplay seems average, i dont see the wow factor yet, sorry

I'll try to add more wow.

Guiscard wrote:...a huge amount of unused space in the sea. Perhaps you could minimise this by taking away most of the left edge where the legend is now. You'd still have more than enough space for the title and legend in the ocean off the coast of mexico. Try and make the border of the map pretty close to La Jolla.

I see what you mean. I trimmed off quite a lot on the left and moved the legend down. I'll look for icons like the park and see what that looks like.

your attraction bonuses are still impossible (see previous post)...

-$ should go in front of the number, not after...
-i dont really like the emboss effect on the text in the legend
-i think the regions need a bit of texture on them or something

I could do the xml for any of the bonus possibilities mentioned in this post. It is very doable. You all fail at math and programming.

WARNING: The programming student is angry.

TroyMcClure do anything you can dream up. I'd be willing to do your xml for you if you want.

johloh wrote:

Dang. OK, I guess I'll go with the "own 2 attractions get +1 unit, own 3 attractions get +2,...

just so you know...Im pretty sure the only way to do this is...

1 attractions - +0
2 attractions - +2
3 attractions - +3
4 attractions - +6
5 attractions - +10
6 attractions - +15

the problem is setting them up in groups of two, if you give a bonus for 'any two' youre have to give a bonus for 'every single pair' a person has...

Could I see the code logic for this somewhere? I see other maps doing different amounts like the USA Apacolypse and the new monopoly map. I'd like to understand the logic more.

ok here goes...you will set up continents of two...

beach/park
beach/zoo
beach/golf
beach/nightclub
beach/sea world

park/zoo
park/golf
park/nightclub
park/sea world

zoo/golf
zoo/nightclub
zoo/sea world

golf/nightclub
golf/sea world

nightclub/sea world

each set will be worth +1

so lets say you own beach, park, golf...
you get bonuses for beach/park beach/golf and park/golf....3, fine.

but if you own beach, park, golf, nightclub...
beach/park, beach/golf, beach/nightclub, park/golf, park/nightclub, golf/nightclub....you get 6.

and so on....

does that make sense?

This is going to be a long post...

To do the +1 bonus for two you'll have to make every combination of two of the bonus territories +1. Which I will refer to as S, B, P, Z, G, and N for this post.



Okay, done. Now to make 3 +2 you have to realize that there will always be 3 combinations of 2 in that group of 3. This is where it gets hard to explain. The map will want to give +3 for a group of 3 by default without anymore code. So to counteract you will need to make all combinations of 3 worth '-1'.

This way say if you have SBP:

That contains SB, SP, and BP for +3 but SBP in code will be worth -1 giving 3 - 1 = 2 for the group.



Now the +3 takes care of itself.

When you get SBPZ, which will contain SB SP SZ BP BZ & PZ for +6, but will also contain SBP SBZ BPZ for -3. so 6 - 3 = 3. Done!

The +4 does too.

SBPZG will contain SB SP SZ SG BP BZ BG PZ PG & ZG for +10 and also SBP SBZ SBG BPZ BPG PZG for -6 which will give you your 4 (10 - 6 = 4).

Finally if you have them all you'll have +15 for all the 2 combos, and -10 for all the 3 combos. In a sense you are done. Because 15 - 10 = 5.

So to do this really you just have to be creative and make all the ways 2 can form as continents worth +1 and all the ways 3 can form as continents worth -1.

PS. This is cake compared to the dance mibi is planning on having me do with xml later this year when he starts his next map. But I'm not allowed to talk about it further.

Hmmm, I'm from San Diego, so the idea of a San Diego map is exciting. The city motto is "America's Finest City," so it should stay. However, my biggest problem with the map is its somewhat creative rendering of geography...

1.) The area including the Gaslamp District, Old Town, Balboa Park, Mission Beach, and Mission Valley need reworking so they fit the actual geography better.

2.) What in the world is Hollywood Park? I have never heard of it and it doesn't appear on the map. You should rename that territory either North Park or Normal Heights.

Edit: Ok, finally found Hollywood Park, you have it placed way far away from its actual location, and it is a small little neighborhood, not as large as Normal Heights. I really do suggest a change.

3.) Your North County Geography is a little off, but most disturbing, you have basically left off what is really called North County, that is, everything north of Miramar, including Mira Mesa, Scripps Ranch, Rancho Bernardo, Poway, Carmel Mountain, Escondido, Del Mar, Encinitas, San Marcos, Vista, Carlsbad, etc. The map just really needs expanding to include the North County.

Thanks

i see coleman...well said...

Lt. Valerian wrote:Hmmm, I'm from San Diego, so the idea of a San Diego map is exciting. The city motto is "America's Finest City," so it should stay. However, my biggest problem with the map is its somewhat creative rendering of geography...

1.) The area including the Gaslamp District, Old Town, Balboa Park, Mission Beach, and Mission Valley need reworking so they fit the actual geography better.

2.) What in the world is Hollywood Park? I have never heard of it and it doesn't appear on the map. You should rename that territory either North Park or Normal Heights.

Edit: Ok, finally found Hollywood Park, you have it placed way far away from its actual location, and it is a small little neighborhood, not as large as Normal Heights. I really do suggest a change.

3.) Your North County Geography is a little off, but most disturbing, you have basically left off what is really called North County, that is, everything north of Miramar, including Mira Mesa, Scripps Ranch, Rancho Bernardo, Poway, Carmel Mountain, Escondido, Del Mar, Encinitas, San Marcos, Vista, Carlsbad, etc. The map just really needs expanding to include the North County.

Thanks

Sorry for taking artistic liscense on the map. I was afraid someone would not like the boundaries. I just wanted to highlight some of the big areas. As you know many people live in North County, but it's not the tourist destination in San Diego, and I'm afraid making the map ultra realistic may make it not playable... and and I'll stop on pointing out that no CC map is a real map (except maybe that new SF map).
I will rename Hollywood to Normal Heights and change borders as long as the areas stay where they are relative to other areas. If you want to give me more details of which borders to change, I'll try to adjust them.

that no CC map is a real map (except maybe that new SF map)

booyah! no my map isnt even fully real...the background is real (except alcatraz is enlarged) and there is definitely artistic license applied to the shapes of the districts...

you gotta do what you have to do...and just try your best to make it as real as possible...

Nevermind.

Guiscard wrote:

boberz wrote:i cannot see the attraction of the map unless you live in this area it seems rather boruing the graphics a below average and the gameplay seems average, i dont see the wow factor yet, sorry

boberz try not to be so negative in your posts. Simple dismissals don't help anyone. Try and comment on how the things you don't like could be improved.

I see no problem in someone stating a map doesn't appeal to them. I often state my distaste for a map and usually get ignored anyway.

I personally have no interest in a San Diego map, it's nothing agaisnt the map, it's just the location doesn't appeal to me. I'm from Australia and Cairns Coral Coast doesn't appeal to me either. I have a tendancy to not like maps of such specific areas. I guess my concern is if one person makes a map of the city/state they live in then everyone will want to. Bigger cities that are well known or have some historical significane are more appealing to me. That's just my opinion though, so good luck Troy, I'll be back with more helpful comments in future.

KEYOGI wrote:...I see no problem in someone stating a map doesn't appeal to them. I often state my distaste for a map and usually get ignored anyway.

I personally have no interest in a San Diego map, it's nothing agaisnt the map, it's just the location doesn't appeal to me. I'm from Australia and Cairns Coral Coast doesn't appeal to me either. I have a tendancy to not like maps of such specific areas. I guess my concern is if one person makes a map of the city/state they live in then everyone will want to. Bigger cities that are well known or have some historical significane are more appealing to me. That's just my opinion though, so good luck Troy, I'll be back with more helpful comments in future.

Fair enough. I see this as part of the process of map development. It's part artwork and part functionality. There are plenty of maps I wonder myself why they were created. And to be a little blunt, as a creator I sort of have to just keep trudging ahead even if some people hate it. That's how new ideas get out there, right?

Here's a question for everyone: do you think having more maps is bad or good for CC? Are many maps a draw to this website or does having many maps push people away? As an entrepreneur, I have seen that giving people options when it's pretty much cost free is a very good thing. So, just saying you personally dont like something, are you considering just your opinion or the community. Would you have it that a select few people choose all the maps?

I would think the ideal way to judge maps is put them out there, after the development process of course, and see which are being played the most. Let the market decide. CC is trying to make money, last I checked.

as a creator I sort of have to just keep trudging ahead even if some people hate it.

yup. if you like your map just keep putting effort into it...if you take a look back at the first few pages of almost any completed map, they almost never start off looking good...

and, besides...there isnt a map in CC that some person doesnt 'hate' for some reason or another...you dont have to make a map that everyone likes, just one that enough people like to make it worth having...

TroyMcClure wrote:Here's a question for everyone: do you think having more maps is bad or good for CC? Are many maps a draw to this website or does having many maps push people away?

More maps is better as long as the Foundry continues to work as it has done and the good maps get through and the bad ones don't. I don't think there should ever be a limit on the number of maps, but I'd prefer to see 100 maps of quality rather than 500 substandard maps.

KEYOGI wrote:

TroyMcClure wrote:Here's a question for everyone: do you think having more maps is bad or good for CC? Are many maps a draw to this website or does having many maps push people away?

More maps is better as long as the Foundry continues to work as it has done and the good maps get through and the bad ones don't. I don't think there should ever be a limit on the number of maps, but I'd prefer to see 100 maps of quality rather than 500 substandard maps.

panda speaks truth.