Conquer Club

cairnswk wrote:

RjBeals wrote:Okay - how about these colors? Is this more in the direction that you (all) like?

[bigimg]http://www.rjbeals.com/ironcurtain/IronCurtain_Rev-02.jpg[/bigimg]

Assignment - Graphic Stamping.

I'm very much for these colours - quite irontastic i'd say.
Great start RjBeals, i'll follow this closely.

Yea, these colors are ten times better than the ones you had before. Now it looks like the Soviet Union.

thanks guys. However I can't stand the title. It will be changed.

RjBeals wrote:thanks guys. However I can't stand the title. It will be changed.

The font or the name? I rather like "The Iron Curtain," though I'm totally in favor of changing the font.

The color scheme for Usinsk area and Samara Area look similar to me. Also are you going to add the Berlin Wall?

The font or the name? I rather like "The Iron Curtain," though I'm totally in favor of changing the font.

I agree with Zeak, the name should stay the same

instead of red, could you make all the surrounding red a cold grey color?
so it is more "iron", to fit with the title.

Wow, 96 territory no inter-rupted gameplay... Now thats a map RJ

I think Iron Curtain sounds good - better than the "Warsaw Pact". So I would like to keep the title. I just hate the font and style of it now. Also - I'm wondering what to do about the impassable borders. I could look into rivers I guess... or maybe just iron-like walls? That might be kind of cool - even though they would not represent true borders - but you have to make sacrifices for gameplay.

I'm open for suggestions.

I've also tried grey background, and adding some snow effects - but the grey was really bad. And the snow just made it look too cluttered - which I'm trying to avoid. As the map progresses, I'll be tweaking colors. It just depends on my mood that day as to what I try.

Also - Ruben PM'ed me letting me know how very busy he has been with his new job, but he'll be around soon.

For impassables: iron walls could be cool, if they're pulled off in a graphically coherent manner. I'm sure you could make them look good

The question, though, is where to add them. And I'm not sure that is a discussion worth having without also talking about bonuses and whatnot, in which case you may want to wait until after the gameplay is passed to do pretty versions of the impassables, and just use thick lines or something for now.

ZeakCytho wrote:For impassables: iron walls could be cool, if they're pulled off in a graphically coherent manner. I'm sure you could make them look good

The question, though, is where to add them. And I'm not sure that is a discussion worth having without also talking about bonuses and whatnot, in which case you may want to wait until after the gameplay is passed to do pretty versions of the impassables, and just use thick lines or something for now.

excellent point.

In fact at this point - I think we should focus on gameplay rather than graphics. I will speak to Ruben (Hopefully tomorrow) and post some ideas.

Alright, there is only one thing I really have a concern with at the moment.

I spent a good couple hours staring at the map this evening and I'm noticing that the continent bonuses seem to favor the east side of the map far more than the west side of the map. On the east there are several continents with 2 or 3 bonus armies, but all up the western side are a bunch of continents with 1 bonus army.

The only time this really becomes a problem in my mind so far is that once the game gets down to only 2 players remaining if they are battling east->west or west->east the player coming from the eastern side is going to have a pretty decent advantage.

Solution? Perhaps combine one of the 1 bonus continents and make it a 2 or something, but that might mean using continent borders that don't flow with country borders, which may be something you are concerned about RjBeals, I'm not sure.

If you want, I can stare at the map a little longer (it's awful fun to look at) and see if I have some suggestions for where to combine, or where to split apart or something.

Then again, I could be completely off base here.

Please have at it OP. I noted that that the couple of +1 areas on the west side need to be changed. I need to combine like west geermany or czech with something else.

As far as the colors - at this point, I wasn't intending to make each a unique color. Especially since I was going to have the minimap. I was just trying to make them different shades so you could differentiate the different bonus regions (I also have thick borders around them).

Do this map really need impassibles? i think its fine as it is:O

I think it does. Every territ has multiple borders to defend. Some have like 10 (Moscow) territs attacking it!

RjBeals wrote:I think it does. Every territ has multiple borders to defend. Some have like 10 (Moscow) territs attacking it!

kk im sure you will show something breatakeing^^

[bigimg]http://www.rjbeals.com/ironcurtain/IronCurtain_Rev-02-borders.jpg[/bigimg]

Here is what I propose for bonus regions. All I really did was combine some areas in the far west. It evens out the board more. Especially in a East vs. West battle. Theres also a 3 and a 10 region on each side.

Any comments on this layout?

I will start thinking of some impassables soon.

I haven't posted in here yet, so first think I'd like to say is well done . This looks awesome and I think will be a great map to play. Personally though, I preferred the version with more continents. Makes it seem like a "bigger" map, which is one thing that really appealed to me.

Ethitts wrote:I haven't posted in here yet, so first think I'd like to say is well done . This looks awesome and I think will be a great map to play. Personally though, I preferred the version with more continents. Makes it seem like a "bigger" map, which is one thing that really appealed to me.

It just appears different because I took off the names, 88's and title.. and colors. Those bonus of +1's had to go. It's not right for a map this big. World 2.1 doesn't have any +1 bonuses ! !

The newest update is awesome.

Just a little thing I noticed, that the territory name "Estonia" is written in black. all the other names are grey.
I don't see any other problems right now.

wcaclimbing wrote:Just a little thing I noticed, that the territory name "Estonia" is written in black. all the other names are grey.
I don't see any other problems right now.

Hmm.. strange. It'll be fixed.

RjBeals wrote:

wcaclimbing wrote:Just a little thing I noticed, that the territory name "Estonia" is written in black. all the other names are grey.
I don't see any other problems right now.

Hmm.. strange. It'll be fixed.

i actully think the colours in Estonia looks much better than in grey tough.

Try to adjust the kaliningrad outer glow, all other blend softly into background.

Rjbeals,you will definitly have problems like i do.I also start map with that dimension,and maybe is good for you to show version in 630px,to see how that look.

Could you rename Sachsen-Anhalt (in East Germany) as Leipzig? Since you named the northern half Berlin, I think in would be best to name the southern section as a city as well. And besides Berlin, Leipzig is the largest city in what was East Germany.
Cool map RJ. I'm looking forward to playing this one.

pepperonibread wrote:Could you rename Sachsen-Anhalt (in East Germany) as Leipzig? Since you named the northern half Berlin, I think in would be best to name the southern section as a city as well. And besides Berlin, Leipzig is the largest city in what was East Germany.
Cool map RJ. I'm looking forward to playing this one.

You got it pep.


And Qwert - I haven't started the small map yet, but I feel I left myself enough space to cram everything in there. I'm sure some territ names will overlap some borders, but I can place them so it will be (hopefully) obvious where they belong. I've also tilted this map so it's not true north, but rather at an angle so I use more board playing space. Nobody seems to care here though?