Page 2 of 13
Posted: Mon Mar 17, 2008 9:15 pm
by WidowMakers
OK here is Version 2
-I tweaked the wording of the legend
-I edited the bonuses for holding the entire color set (they are now greater than the best possible bonus combination of connected territories per color)
for example BLUE has the best possible combination of holding 9 connected and 6 connected for a bonus of +9. The overall bonus for holding the entire thing is higher and set to +11
-Changed "Attacked" in legend to "Conquered" when describing the way the killer neutral borders reset
Posted: Mon Mar 17, 2008 9:29 pm
by lanyards
How is this connected territories bonus going to work? How can you code the XML so your bonuses do not overlap, as stated in the legend?
--lanyards
Posted: Tue Mar 18, 2008 1:05 am
by Skittles!
yeti_c wrote:Yep... At the start of your turn - your armies get replaced with X neutrals.
C.
Ah okay.. So if someone had like, let's say 86, armies on a neutral spot.. They'd lose it all for 5 neutrals.
Poor them.
Posted: Tue Mar 18, 2008 1:23 am
by edbeard
lanyards wrote:How is this connected territories bonus going to work? How can you code the XML so your bonuses do not overlap, as stated in the legend?
--lanyards
very carefully.
Well basically you'd have to code a whole lot of continents and a whole lot of overrides.
Figuring out what has to override what is probably the hardest part. The XML will be so huge though.
It might be easier to code it backwards. Code all the four connected for one colour. Code all the five connected and override as necessary.
One thing I don't know is if I code a six connected, and it overrides a five connected continent, do I have to override the four connected continent that the five connected continent already overrides. To be a bit simpler.
B overrides A.
C overrides B.
Does C also automatically override A, or do I need to code that into the C continent?
Posted: Tue Mar 18, 2008 3:51 am
by paulk
looks like a cool map. good luck.
Posted: Tue Mar 18, 2008 3:59 am
by yeti_c
edbeard wrote:lanyards wrote:How is this connected territories bonus going to work? How can you code the XML so your bonuses do not overlap, as stated in the legend?
--lanyards
very carefully.
Well basically you'd have to code a whole lot of continents and a whole lot of overrides.
Figuring out what has to override what is probably the hardest part. The XML will be so huge though.
It might be easier to code it backwards. Code all the four connected for one colour. Code all the five connected and override as necessary.
One thing I don't know is if I code a six connected, and it overrides a five connected continent, do I have to override the four connected continent that the five connected continent already overrides. To be a bit simpler.
B overrides A.
C overrides B.
Does C also automatically override A, or do I need to code that into the C continent?
This is a very complicated question Ed... in short yes. (I asked Lack this very question a few months ago)...
However - the beauty of this is you can do some quite funky things with the overrides...
i.e. consider this.
Code: Select all
<continent>
<name>4 reds
<bonus>2
<components>
<territory>Red 1
<territory>Red 2
<territory>Red 3
<territory>Red 4
</components>
</continent>
<continent>
<name>4 reds
<bonus>2
<components>
<territory>Red 2
<territory>Red 3
<territory>Red 4
<territory>Red 5
</components>
</continent>
<continent>
<name>4 reds
<bonus>2
<components>
<territory>Red 3
<territory>Red 4
<territory>Red 5
<territory>Red 6
</components>
</continent>
<continent>
<name>4 reds
<bonus>2
<components>
<territory>Red 4
<territory>Red 5
<territory>Red 6
<territory>Red 7
</components>
</continent>
So lets say that's all the red 4 combos.
Now we can do this...
Code: Select all
<continent>
<name>5 reds
<bonus>3
<components>
<territory>Red 1
<territory>Red 2
<territory>Red 3
<territory>Red 4
<territory>Red 5
</components>
<overrides>
<override>4 reds
</overrides>
</continent>
<continent>
<name>5 reds
<bonus>3
<components>
<territory>Red 2
<territory>Red 3
<territory>Red 4
<territory>Red 5
<territory>Red 6
</components>
<overrides>
<override>4 reds
</overrides>
</continent>
<continent>
<name>5 reds
<bonus>3
<components>
<territory>Red 3
<territory>Red 4
<territory>Red 5
<territory>Red 6
<territory>Red 7
</components>
<overrides>
<override>4 reds
</overrides>
</continent>
Why can we do this?
The overrides will only trigger on the continents that are already owned by the player...
So for instance the first "5 reds" will override all "4 reds" but will only in reality override the first 2 "4 reds"
Of course this will only work if there isn't a place where you can get 4 reds & 5 reds in 2 different locationsi.e. this won't work in this map... this map will most likely require each combination of reds to be defined in it's own continent...
Unless WM changes it to hold X of coloured territories...
C.
Posted: Tue Mar 18, 2008 4:30 am
by fumandomuerte
Maybe WM could make his work easier if he change the condition from "any X color terits" to "any X color adjacent terits".
There will be less combinations that way...
Posted: Tue Mar 18, 2008 5:28 am
by WidowMakers
fumandomuerte wrote:Maybe WM could make his work easier if he change the condition from "any X color terits" to "any X color adjacent terits".
There will be less combinations that way...
well currently it says ....
occupy X connected territories of the same type
so I guess it could say
occupy X adjacent territories of the same color...
BUT
The reason I am doing this X territory thing is to allow for smaller bonuses. The map is too large to easily get an entire group.
Are there any other suggestions for different bonus structures or methods for smaller groups?
Thanks
WM
Posted: Tue Mar 18, 2008 5:38 am
by edbeard
well like yeti_c said, holding X of a colour is quite a simple way to do it. It allows for smaller bonuses without the complexity of needing them to be adjacent.
The only problem is that everyone would surely start out with bonuses. So, I guess you'd have to increase the number needed to be held. Although, I believe this takes away from the idea of the map in the first place. Also, the minimum X needed for a colour would need to be quite high to avoid bonuses being held from a drop. So, this post was seemingly a bunch of running in a circle because I don't think doing it in the way I've described would be either fun or practical.
Posted: Tue Mar 18, 2008 5:50 am
by yeti_c
edbeard wrote:well like yeti_c said, holding X of a colour is quite a simple way to do it. It allows for smaller bonuses without the complexity of needing them to be adjacent.
The only problem is that everyone would surely start out with bonuses. So, I guess you'd have to increase the number needed to be held. Although, I believe this takes away from the idea of the map in the first place. Also, the minimum X needed for a colour would need to be quite high to avoid bonuses being held from a drop. So, this post was seemingly a bunch of running in a circle because I don't think doing it in the way I've described would be either fun or practical.
Perhaps have demarked areas of the continents in different shades!? but that's bad for CB people.
C.
Posted: Tue Mar 18, 2008 6:04 am
by WidowMakers
edbeard wrote:well like yeti_c said, holding X of a colour is quite a simple way to do it. It allows for smaller bonuses without the complexity of needing them to be adjacent.
The only problem is that everyone would surely start out with bonuses. So, I guess you'd have to increase the number needed to be held. Although, I believe this takes away from the idea of the map in the first place. Also, the minimum X needed for a colour would need to be quite high to avoid bonuses being held from a drop. So, this post was seemingly a bunch of running in a circle because I don't think doing it in the way I've described would be either fun or practical.
lol
I actually thought of that but decided not to do it this way for teh same reasons you just described. But now I don't need to post the reasons because you already did. Much appreciated.
yeti_c wrote:Perhaps have demarked areas of the continents in different shades!? but that's bad for CB people.
C.
I thought of that idea and it would be ok. We would all need to agree on the color and style of the outline. It would be easy to establish teh bonus groups (probably connected groups of 3 up to 7 or 8 for each color) Then we just have bonuses for group of 3, 4, 5... and such
I will try to setup a proposal tonight
Any suggestions (box around group, different colored outline around each territory in a group...?)
WM
Posted: Tue Mar 18, 2008 7:28 am
by yeti_c
Could you just have a stronger Border to seperate each Sub section?
i.e. | red1 | red 2 | red 3 | red 4 | red 5 | red 6 |
C.
Posted: Tue Mar 18, 2008 5:47 pm
by WidowMakers
yeti_c wrote:Could you just have a stronger Border to seperate each Sub section?
i.e. | red1 | red 2 | red 3 | red 4 | red 5 | red 6 |
C.
I like that idea. I will try that in a small portion and another style with a line connecting the territories in the sub groups under the group.
Then we can discuss the look of both
WM
Posted: Wed Mar 19, 2008 3:51 pm
by yeti_c
Bugger - I'm going to piss on your cornflakes...
The Killer Neutrals are defined as such...
Code: Select all
<territory>
<name>grey 1
<co-ords/>
<neutral killer="yes">5</neutral>
</territory>
Sadly - this means that the neutral starting and replenishing level is the same.
C.
Posted: Wed Mar 19, 2008 3:56 pm
by WidowMakers
So you cant have a territory both neutral and neutral killer?
Code: Select all
<territory>
<name>grey 1
<co-ords/>
<neutral>2</neutral>
<neutral killer="yes">5</neutral>
</territory>
Posted: Wed Mar 19, 2008 4:05 pm
by yeti_c
WidowMakers wrote:So you cant have a territory both neutral and neutral killer?
Code: Select all
<territory>
<name>grey 1
<co-ords/>
<neutral>2</neutral>
<neutral killer="yes">5</neutral>
</territory>
I'd assume not - as the "killer" bit is an attribute to the original neutral tag...
You *could* ask Lack to confirm this... XML can (obviously) cope with multiple versions of the same tag - but whether or not Lack has coded it to do that?
C.
PS ensure I know the answer as I will have to rework BOB slightly too!
C.
Posted: Wed Mar 19, 2008 9:30 pm
by Ditocoaf
perhaps if you put the <neutral killer=yes>5</neutral> tag first, then put the <neutral>2</neutral> tag... then again, I have no clue how XML works.
Version 2
Posted: Sat Mar 22, 2008 12:40 am
by laci_mae
I really like this map idea. It seems very promising and interesting to play.
My first impression is that the graphics are overwhelmingly bright. Possibly the gray/neutral territories could be changed to white and the grid lines to black so they would have less visual impact. The black and white bonus regions may need to be altered in color to coordinate with these changes.
LMR
Posted: Sun Mar 23, 2008 10:21 pm
by mibi
AndyDufresne wrote:Hm, I actually like the idea of the Killer Neutrals you have. It's like a real Hedge Maze...I.E. you can follow along the designated path, or if you feel like it...you can cut through the Hedge (though this grows back amazingly fast).
The graphics I'm not sure about. Top notch looking, but it looks more like an online arcade game...perhaps
Bejeweled.
Maybe consider going with a Hedge theme or a Field (as in corn, wheat, etc) maze.
--Andy
I have to agree, with a bejeweled arcade style map it seems like a remedial maze at best. However if it was a hedge maze, or corn maze, it would look pretty sweet since those mazes are generally more remedial anyways.
Plus its busy as sin and gives me a migraine.
Posted: Mon Mar 24, 2008 9:43 am
by WidowMakers
mibi wrote:AndyDufresne wrote:Hm, I actually like the idea of the Killer Neutrals you have. It's like a real Hedge Maze...I.E. you can follow along the designated path, or if you feel like it...you can cut through the Hedge (though this grows back amazingly fast).
The graphics I'm not sure about. Top notch looking, but it looks more like an online arcade game...perhaps
Bejeweled.
Maybe consider going with a Hedge theme or a Field (as in corn, wheat, etc) maze.
--Andy
I have to agree, with a bejeweled arcade style map it seems like a remedial maze at best. However if it was a hedge maze, or corn maze, it would look pretty sweet since those mazes are generally more remedial anyways.
Plus its busy as sin and gives me a migraine.
There were 2 reasons I made it this way
1) I figured if I did just plain colored squares that people would complain that it was too boring.
2) I needed to have bonus groups and bonus subgroups. Colors and shapes were teh best way to do this in that.
So if I make the gray squares "corn" or "hedge" I still need a way to separate teh bonus groups.
I am all for it I just need to make sure the people still understand that the maze portion can be attacked and separate neutral squares seemed the best thing.
I am open to all advice.
WM
Posted: Mon Mar 24, 2008 9:51 am
by TaCktiX
Small grammatical check: your map has "recieve" instead of "receive."
And I prefer the Bejeweled look. Doing a colorful enough hedge maze with all its numerous tones of green would be more difficult.
Posted: Mon Mar 24, 2008 3:31 pm
by WidowMakers
OK here is Version 3
Edits:
-Reworded the legend to better explain the bonuses
-added white borders to Subgroupings of territories per color. These now allow for smaller bonuses without the overlapping issue of the perivous design
-tweaked here and there.
Posted: Mon Mar 24, 2008 5:16 pm
by AndyDufresne
Too many things for my eyes to focus on...!
--Andy
Posted: Mon Mar 24, 2008 5:37 pm
by whitestazn88
this is gonna be intense for 2 player games
Posted: Mon Mar 24, 2008 5:50 pm
by WidowMakers
AndyDufresne wrote:Too many things for my eyes to focus on...!
--Andy
Then what do you suggest I do?
I will post a simpler version and see what everyone thinks
WM
