Conquer Club

Bigfalcon65 wrote:just another plain space map to me usinag our solar system only, i wanna get some star trek battles goin on, inter galactic

http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=541822

Bigfalcon65 wrote:just another plain space map to me usinag our solar system only, i wanna get some star trek battles goin on, inter galactic

Then play Space map, or make your own Star Trek map.

As for this map; the design itself is a little confusing. Maybe a top down view of the Solar System would be a better idea. You wouldn't be able to get in more than 1 region per planet, but it would be much simpler.

Actually, come to think of it, you could probably expand this map to include Alpha Centauri and maybe a few other nearby stars. This will allow you to keep a large number of regions and not be quite as confusing.

I do like the idea of the warp portals being more than a transit system. The instability bonus thing would stop people claiming then until they are fully ready to take all (or at least an even number) of them at once. Though, you would have to make them all neutral with more troops than normal on them to prevent someone starting off with a cripling (or negative) bonus.

I think the graphics are quite good, but those connecting lines are way too thick; they obscure most of the detail on the map.

Overall, quite a good map with a lot of potential, but it is very confusing. Changing the view to top-down will help alleviate the problem.

P.S. I've heard of the Trojan asteroids, but not the Greek ones. Why are the Trojan ones so much more famous?

Neutrino wrote:P.S. I've heard of the Trojan asteroids, but not the Greek ones. Why are the Trojan ones so much more famous?

Trojan asteroids are clusters that lead and trail Jupiter in its orbit. The ones ahead are the greek camp and the ones behind are the trojan camp (I think i have that right). the asteroids themselves have names from the correct camp example: Hector is in the Trojan camp. All together they are called Trojans

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trojan_asteroid

-Max

Neutrino wrote:As for this map; the design itself is a little confusing. Maybe a top down view of the Solar System would be a better idea. You wouldn't be able to get in more than 1 region per planet, but it would be much simpler.

Actually, come to think of it, you could probably expand this map to include Alpha Centauri and maybe a few other nearby stars. This will allow you to keep a large number of regions and not be quite as confusing.

I could see needing to sacrifice and make the switch to the overhead view but I want to try some of the obvious stuff first before i ditch this version. I think thinning the lines, reducing the contrast and perhaps dropping the planet size bey 25% or so will go a long way. When that fails I'll do the top down like you suggest.

I'm reluctant to incorporate other stars. I think the scales just don't work. What I am considering is a proper real life Milky Way map.

Hmm, I like the idea of a Milky Way galaxy map. It lets you get in as many regions as you want and will be nowhere near as confusing.

The only problem that I can see is that most of the discovered/named stars are clustered fairly close together. If you want the map to not be completly focused on onepart, then you will probably have to make up some stars.

I love the map now, but the lines really block off too much - make them thinner. The lines also connect sloppily with some of the circles.

I think you should include some special effect or picture for jump gates. The bonuses should also be much smaller and/or not there as you'd only need to take the jump gates evenly to win the map.

I've made some improvements. I won’t bore you with them.

I’m tracking the following issues.

The Jump Gates might require an additional graphic. Though I don’t know where I would put it.
The Title is still lame looking. (and kinda lame sounding)
The moon and kiuper belt objects need to be changed to look cooler.
I should make a symbol key in the sun
I’m still looking for suggestions on the region and jump gate bonus.

south polar region, please

The lines on Jupiter look fine, the ones on the others (especially Saturn) don't. It looks like there's a jump gate territory on the Sun.

The tilts on the labels of Uranus and Neptune look messy, they should be more even like on Jupiter and Saturn.

61 Territories, 7 regions, 5 sub regions, Alternating Jump Gate Bonus

I need to make a symbol key
I need to work with the army circles and text to reduce the cluttered look.

How do y’all feel about the current region bonuses.

This map in really messy and crapped. can u try and do something without the army circles? jsut to try and savesome space.

the jump gate bonus is really strange. i mean -3 for owning 6 ???

in a 1vs1 game if i start with 1 jump gate and the other player starts with 6. there's a 4 army difference from the beginning. he's sure to lose badly.


and yes the map has a cluttered feeling. all the text and lines and army circles

DiM wrote:in a 1vs1 game if i start with 1 jump gate and the other player starts with 6. there's a 4 army difference from the beginning. he's sure to lose badly.

all jumpgates should start with a nutral or 1 or 2 to solve this problem

gimil wrote:

DiM wrote:in a 1vs1 game if i start with 1 jump gate and the other player starts with 6. there's a 4 army difference from the beginning. he's sure to lose badly.

all jumpgates should start with a nutral or 1 or 2 to solve this problem

I can certainly start all the gates at neutral.

The bonus is strange. on purpose. The most powerful travel method on the board has an additional strategic consideration. It may not be to your advantage to take an additional gate (or perhaps to your great advantage).

I seem to be getting alot of confused input on these JG bonuses. I know the concept of an alternating bonus is new. But not so new. The USApocalypse map has negative bonuses. And while its a bummer to start with only 2 reinforcements its manageable.

I like the alternating bonus structure because it adds an interesting strategic consideration, especially in team play. In Team play you could in theory be in a situation where one player gets a penalty and the other a loss. It would be good for that team then to swap ownership of that gate every turn to ensure each gets a bonus. Lossing a gate can become an annoyance for you or a total disaster for your opponent (or either or both). The loss of a gate that would hurt your opponent probably needs to be defened less that a gate that would benifit your opponent.

All sorts of interesting angles emerge from this alternating bonus

gimil wrote:This map in really messy and crapped. can u try and do something without the army circles? jsut to try and savesome space.

I hear you. It is a bit crowded. I'll experiment with losing the army circles, but I'm concerned with not being able to see the number especially in space and on Jupiter. Also The routes wont have anywhere to neatly terminate. But I'll make a test.

I could also try down playing the circles so they aren't as visibly over stimulating. The same treatment can be given to the text (which is probably the core problem).

Considering i love the topic of space, im going to try to follow this map very closely and give some opinions.

Someone suggested not using army shadows, i like that idea but dont think its possible, the dark blue numbers on the black space would be hard to see.

As mentioned numerous times, the map is very crowded, and i dont think shrinking everything would help that much. It has 61 territories, and thats a lot, I think you would be able to get rid of some territories. In my opoinion, the high orbits and low orbits arent necessary.

Saturns glow looks too bright.

maxdetjens wrote:The bonus is strange. on purpose. The most powerful travel method on the board has an additional strategic consideration. It may not be to your advantage to take an additional gate (or perhaps to your great advantage).

I seem to be getting alot of confused input on these JG bonuses. I know the concept of an alternating bonus is new. But not so new. The USApocalypse map has negative bonuses. And while its a bummer to start with only 2 reinforcements its manageable.

I like the alternating bonus structure because it adds an interesting strategic consideration, especially in team play. In Team play you could in theory be in a situation where one player gets a penalty and the other a loss. It would be good for that team then to swap ownership of that gate every turn to ensure each gets a bonus. Lossing a gate can become an annoyance for you or a total disaster for your opponent (or either or both). The loss of a gate that would hurt your opponent probably needs to be defened less that a gate that would benifit your opponent.

All sorts of interesting angles emerge from this alternating bonus

According to the statistics, USApocalypse is one of the most unpopular maps. The problem I personally have with it and why I rarely play on it is that if you start owning a nuclear zone or two, you can only deploy 2, and if you don't start with it you get a major advantage. It doesn't seem that big, but if the dice hate you with a 5 on 3 attack in round 1, you're gone.

I agree that USApocalypse isn't a favorite map. It isn't one of mine either. But if i understand correctly a territory can be designated as starting neutral. I would do that with the jump gates (seems only fair)

Bad Speler wrote:Considering i love the topic of space, im going to try to follow this map very closely and give some opinions.

Excellent! Then you probably also agree that space seems under represented. Especially considering is pretty much everywhere.

Someone suggested not using army shadows, i like that idea but dont think its possible, the dark blue numbers on the black space would be hard to see.

Agreed, but I'm still open any suggestions on how to loose the army circles.

As mentioned numerous times, the map is very crowded, and i dont think shrinking everything would help that much.

Agreed (though for the small version some of that will be necessary). I think I can help the problem by changing the text. The plan is to loose the double border and make the text body the region color (or white) phisiclay i will free up some pixels and aesthetically it will be less cluttered. So in the next version watch for that.

It has 61 territories, and thats a lot, I think you would be able to get rid of some territories. In my opoinion, the high orbits and low orbits arent necessary.

I can structurally drop the low orbits and connect the equatorial territories to the moons, gates and high orbits directly. That will indeed save space. I Don't think i can loose the high orbits. They are the only non jump gate way to traverse the outer solar system. I think its important to preserve this longer and more arduous second route as a complement to the expeditious but strategically perilous (in terms of bonus) jump gates. I further can see directly connecting planets or connecting them with routes between moons (I actually tried that in an early draft) The number of route lines needed makes the map even more cluttered. I also cant see providing a free expressway through the solar system.

So I'll drop the low orbits and then lets reevaluate.

Saturns glow looks too bright.

Agreed. Added to the list.

i jsut looked at the map again realsing it was teh lareg version and to bne honest i dont think there would be an hard in increasing the distance by a few hundred pixals to helpp you spread the map out a little more.

it's 800x600 now. I was under the impression that that was the maximum recommended size. Am I mistaken?

its only a guideline. there some push space if your really want it. my map jsut now is 800x1100

lol