Conquer Club

The Bison King wrote:That being said I don't think ports or Auto-deploys are all that weird.

I don't disagree, particularly about ports. Auto-deploys, however, depend on the usage. Sometimes they make sense, and fit the map; other times, they seem forced. In this particular map, ports make sense (Detroit is a major port, after all), auto deploys, maybe not as much.

I really don't think a map needs crazy gameplay to get through..
Prefer more basic gameplay myself.

I have long been saying that standard gameplay maps shouldn't be made anymore. What's the point of having a million maps where the only difference is the graphics and maybe some variation in how the territories are arranged? They provide nothing new to CC.

Note that I'm not saying that all new maps should have some "crazy" gameplay (like someone so eloquently expressed himself) or that all new maps should be extremely complex. But some variation from the classic gameplay would be good, even if that's just one extra feature. At least gives the map some flavor.

However, this is just my opinion, and since a lot of people disagree with me, they're welcome to keep making standard gameplay maps.

yeah but new standard gameplay maps could be better than the old ones, meaning that it is the old one that is obsolete not the new one being created

natty_dread wrote:I have long been saying that standard gameplay maps shouldn't be made anymore. What's the point of having a million maps where the only difference is the graphics and maybe some variation in how the territories are arranged? They provide nothing new to CC.

Note that I'm not saying that all new maps should have some "crazy" gameplay (like someone so eloquently expressed himself) or that all new maps should be extremely complex. But some variation from the classic gameplay would be good, even if that's just one extra feature. At least gives the map some flavor.

However, this is just my opinion, and since a lot of people disagree with me, they're welcome to keep making standard gameplay maps.

I agree on most of your points here. In some cases, I think it's acceptable to kick it old school gameplay-wise, as long as it's a geographical area that is largely ignored/not focused on in all of the current CC maps (such as Bruce's Baltics map). Michigan? No... Michigan already has gotten enough attention, so there has to be something besides the stale geography that would make me want to play this. The truth hurts sometimes. This is not one of those times.

-Sully

standard gameplay maps aren't bad if they are of a geographic area. I like them because they "teach" geography (depending on how much you look at it). But yeah, if a map is not geographic it's main point might as well be some of its special features

Victor Sullivan wrote:

natty_dread wrote:I have long been saying that standard gameplay maps shouldn't be made anymore. What's the point of having a million maps where the only difference is the graphics and maybe some variation in how the territories are arranged? They provide nothing new to CC.

Note that I'm not saying that all new maps should have some "crazy" gameplay (like someone so eloquently expressed himself) or that all new maps should be extremely complex. But some variation from the classic gameplay would be good, even if that's just one extra feature. At least gives the map some flavor.

However, this is just my opinion, and since a lot of people disagree with me, they're welcome to keep making standard gameplay maps.

I agree on most of your points here. In some cases, I think it's acceptable to kick it old school gameplay-wise, as long as it's a geographical area that is largely ignored/not focused on in all of the current CC maps (such as Bruce's Baltics map). Michigan? No... Michigan already has gotten enough attention, so there has to be something besides the stale geography that would make me want to play this. The truth hurts sometimes. This is not one of those times.

-Sully

they provide very nice places for escualting maps. I

Who decides when CC has enough standard gameplay maps? As long as they are of different places & the mapmaker makes it through the long road of the foundry I say get er done!

I mean... is there really a limit of maps CC will have in the future? If not, why would we want to cut down the number? The more maps, the more money the big man is making, who can complain?

Make all 50 states while your at it rds, I like the way it looks now, keep it up

natty and Victor seem to be outnumbered, so I'll continue the map.

Now, THIS:

rdsrds2120 wrote:

The Bison King wrote:

To put it bluntly right back - I, for one, am sick and tired of all the stupid maps that are being pumped out right now. I love basic gameplay maps, and if anything ever manages to drive me off this site, it will be a glut of nonsensical, "different for the sake of being different", crazy must-read-a-book-to-understand insane maps. Adding stupid features for the sake of adding them are annoying and as pointless as you feel basic maps are.

Amen! A lot of people like the basics! Every map is unique on it's own right. Some maps will require unique features by their natures and others won't. This one won't IMO. Granted this probably won't be one of the busiest maps on the site, but that's alright too. Some maps appeal to only a small nitch group.

That being said I don't think ports or Auto-deploys are all that weird.

I actually have ports and one ways on a new map draft, but the arrows are horrible graphically, so I hadn't uploaded it yet

I'm going to get a hold of griff for some photoshop help. Also, a question for all of you, any recommended textures? I don't know if the one I have currently is all that nice. Someone gave me an idea to do something similar to Route 66 (map on a table), and I wasn't sure on how it would be perceived.

-rd

If I do that, I'll go ahead and start new in photoshop and try something new. If not, I might try to keep what I have in GIMP up.

-rd

Ive switched and have had to do files all over again too, i would say just do it over rds, your not that far into now, and the layers on Photoshop will help you out a lot.

-griff

You can save and load photoshop files in gimp. Just go to gimp, open your .xcf file, then save it as a .psd file, then open it in photoshop.

It's very easy.

natty_dread wrote:You can save and load photoshop files in gimp. Just go to gimp, open your .xcf file, then save it as a .psd file, then open it in photoshop.

It's very easy.

I tried that and a lot of things are missing. They're just not there, so I'm going to go ahead and start over.

-rd

shieldgenerator7 wrote:standard gameplay maps aren't bad if they are of a geographic area. I like them because they "teach" geography (depending on how much you look at it). But yeah, if a map is not geographic it's main point might as well be some of its special features

While the shape of the state is correct and the territories are actual Michigan counties and are roughly in the right spot right now, you won't learn much actual geography from this map in it's current form (even if you were trying to actually memorize Michigan counties ). There are way more counties than what are included and most that are included are way bigger than in real life. (most likely for a good terr count and to make areas unique, not a bunch of rectangles)

All that being said, I really like the map so far. I think anyone should be able to make any map they like, so long as it makes it through the foundry. Nobody has to play the map if they don't want to. While I enjoy some unique maps (like monsters) it gets cumbersome having to study a new map every month for hours on end just to figure out how the hell movement works. Keep it up rd.

P.S. I'm already starting to look like Brian Wilson (S.F. Giants - look it up) and it's only the end of the first round. I might look like I belong in ZZ Top if the Red Wings make the Stanley Cup Finals!

Michigan? No... Michigan already has gotten enough attention, so there has to be something besides the stale geography that would make me want to play this.

and yet this is one of the most commented maps in the drafting room at the moment.

rdsrds2120 wrote:natty and Victor seem to be outnumbered, so I'll continue the map.

Ho 'dere! I never said stop making the map, or that a map of Michigan was automatically bad due to its geography, I'm saying you just need something extra. I know Michigan is riddled with lakes, ponds, rivers, streams, and other bodies of water - maybe use that to make this map more unique.

-Sully
Michigan Native

how do you get to the pink portion of the upper peninsula?

WILLIAMS5232 wrote:how do you get to the pink portion of the upper peninsula?

It's drawn badly. Don't worry, I'm completely redoing this whole map on Photoshop since I have that. It'll take a couple weeks for an update maybe. End of the year, graduation stuff, etc. It's all coming close...

-rd

What about incorporating the great lakes... Michigan is the Great Lakes State after all.

Maybe making them killer neutrals or the ports could link to them?

Industrial Helix wrote:What about incorporating the great lakes... Michigan is the Great Lakes State after all.

Maybe making them killer neutrals or the ports could link to them?

I was thinking about something like that...still brainstorming (:

-rd

Industrial Helix wrote:What about incorporating the great lakes... Michigan is the Great Lakes State after all.

Maybe making them killer neutrals or the ports could link to them?

We allready have a great lake map. why would we make this like a close up of it?


sence people are complaining about the uniqueness and a lot of people are complaining about the dice, why dont we multiply all the bonuses by 100? that way it will be unige, and people can stop complaining about the god damn dice.

why dont we multiply all the bonuses by 100? that way it will be unige, and people can stop complaining about the god damn dice.

It's been already tried in city mogul and it doesn't really work too well on that one either.

natty_dread wrote:

why dont we multiply all the bonuses by 100? that way it will be unige, and people can stop complaining about the god damn dice.

It's been already tried in city mogul and it doesn't really work too well on that one either.

I fine the dice work awesome there.

i guess it will be unfair because the first person who goes wins.

also that map is very nice. I love to play it because the numbers get so high.

The bonuses will not be multiplied by 100. That doesn't fit the theme of the map, and doesn't make sense. Why would Michigan of all states be getting all of those troops? lol.

On another note, Michigan has a lot of resources. The north has a lot of timber, Grand Traverse is the Cherry capital of the nation, and we have fisheries along coasts. Anyone think I could put some of those around? If I did that, they would all start neutral at different values, and there would be a varied amounts of them across the map (i.e, there might be 5 fisheries but only 2 Timber Mills because the UP is smaller). OR, they don't have to start neutral. Who knows.

-rd

rdsrds2120 wrote:The bonuses will not be multiplied by 100. That doesn't fit the theme of the map, and doesn't make sense. Why would Michigan of all states be getting all of those troops? lol.

On another note, Michigan has a lot of resources. The north has a lot of timber, Grand Traverse is the Cherry capital of the nation, and we have fisheries along coasts. Anyone think I could put some of those around? If I did that, they would all start neutral at different values, and there would be a varied amounts of them across the map (i.e, there might be 5 fisheries but only 2 Timber Mills because the UP is smaller). OR, they don't have to start neutral. Who knows.

-rd

I like that idea. How would you get to them tho?

Hm, I'm thinking resource pairs.