[Vacation until Dec] Clash of Kings - [14.03.14] - V18.1

[DiM]

Even Tisha's map, it has empty space and Indian images only because of the shape of the land mass. It doesn't have supersize just to add extra graphics to the map, but the extra graphics are added to the empty spaces between land areas.

actually that whole unused space could have been used better by changing the orientation of the continents. something similar to what you did in eurasia.

[DiM]

Here's the same in 80% size, which is a 760 * 776:

http://img684.imageshack.us/img684/1227/cokmocks.jpg

yeah and my small is 800*800 so for just 40 pixels you cut a portion of my castle and made the text more squishy. great.
well i bet i can make any image smaller by cropping pieces of the map.
hey, look at classic. who needs that title with the pointless lines and all. cut it and move it some place else and make it in a smaller font.
then take all the continents and bring them closer, the oceans don't need to be that big, it's a waste of space. do that and you'll shrink the classic by at least 25%.
as you said:

map images should only be as big as necessary to portray the gameplay clearly.

right?

[DiM]

Would it really hurt to have a two way bombardment there? I don't think it changes that much.

i think it would give the attacker too much power.
perhaps i could remove the bombardment on the ammo depot and make a 2 way bombardment with the caravan. it would add more realism while maintaining a ballance.

[natty dread]

Oh come on, you're just being purposefully obtuse now.

You don't have to crop the castle, you don't have to make the text squishy. You know this. I had to do it because I don't have access to your layered files and I only made a quick mock-up to show how to save some space.

This is starting to be a common theme in this thread... I make a suggestion and you exaggerate it way out of proportions and then act like I suggest something totally ridiculous so you can easily dismiss it. If you don't want to consider my ideas, fine, but don't claim they are something impossible or ridiculous.

Classic isn't comparable. Classic is already a very nice, compact size and shrinking it would serve no purpose. This map however has about the same number of territories as Classic, yet it is way larger, and the only reason it is that large is that you have to fit in so much graphics. I mean seriously, your current map image is about the same size as Eurasia, although Eurasia has 130 territories and this has what, a third of that?

[DiM]

There's plenty of former restrictions that have been loosened in the spirit of making more involved maps. There's no reason to restrict something solely on previous guidelines. DiM's small seems like a perfectly reasonable size to me and everything is clear. Thats all that matters, imo.

in my opinion if a map uses its space in a balanced manner and fills it nicely then it's ok to supersize.

this map doesn't have empty areas, i have either terits, text or artwork going from edge to edge.
the terits aren't needlessly large, the text is just above the legibility minimum and the artwork isn't extensive.

true i could cramp all the ships together, squish all the troops against the castle walls, cut a piece of the castle like natty did, reduce the size of the streets and houses, get rid of the fancy title and legend and replace it with a simple box and i could probably save 200px on either side for the large image. but that would look nothing like a siege and would have zero feeling to it.

small at 800*800 with a large at 1000*1000 are reasonable dimensions within which i can keep the feel of the siege, the legibility of the text, the clarity of the gameplay and visual theme.

[DiM]

Classic isn't comparable. Classic is already a very nice, compact size and shrinking it would serve no purpose. This map however has about the same number of territories as Classic, yet it is way larger, and the only reason it is that large is that you have to fit in so much graphics.

actually you're wrong. cut away the huge legend and i can make this the same size as classic.
so it's not about the artwork it's about the long explanations in the legend.

[BadgerJelly]

I think the artwork is worth the extra space anyway!

I'd rather play a VERY nice looking map like this than a lot of maps here.

I can understand why it looks the way it does because the more realistic looking maps are more difficult to plan out. I am having the saem issue with my map Polderand (Barely made a start yet!). Some regions are connected on it and some are not so you have to spread things out more, use one way borders and work the map around the image and not an image around a map.

Anyway I do like having info on the map and for me I find maps here very cluttered looking compared to what I am used too. I am guessing there used to be a set size limit? If there was then I guess there isnt anymore?

If it fits the screen its the right size. With even bigger maps I personally dont mind scrolling a tiny bit if the maps worth it.

[isaiah40]

small at 800*800 with a large at 1000*1000 are reasonable dimensions within which i can keep the feel of the siege, the legibility of the text, the clarity of the gameplay and visual theme.

+1

After discussing DiM's supersize application with thenobodies80, we have come to the conclusion that the map can be cut down on the sides by moving the ships to the left a tad, and moving the decorative legend areas so they are touching. This is all we ask, and if you can post the small and large versions, we can then get the map moving.

Now we all can agree that a map is more fun to play on if everything is clear, readable, and understandable. Now, I see and understand both sides here, as there has been some valid points brought up. Now I know that compromises can be made here, and I'm sure DiM will look at every way and make those compromises. This is what all mapmakers should be doing, not saying out right or by beating around the bush by saying something along the lines of "This is my map and I'm going to do it my way", or "This is the right and only way to do this" attitude. So please let's just end this on move on.

[DiM]

V5:
*reduced large to 1000*1000 and small to 800*800
*moved around a few terit names
*fiddled with the legend text size and artwork.
*removed bombardment of the ammo depot and added a 2-way bombardment with the caravan.

keep in mind the small is just a straight resize. i normally start work on the small after i have the gameplay badge. this is just to get an idea on how it would look.

large:

Click image to enlarge.

small:

Click image to enlarge.

[lostatlimbo]

Supply Ship 2 text is cut off a bit.

I like the bombardment switch for gameplay as well as theme, since it is a little easier to get to the ammo from the front gate and would have been hard to get to the caravan otherwise. Good call.

[natty dread]

If it fits the screen its the right size.

Good thing all the monitors in the world are exactly the same size, then.

[BadgerJelly]

If it fits the screen its the right size.

Good thing all the monitors in the world are exactly the same size, then.

[bryguy]

[As forewarning, all comments made are made from viewing the small map.Some issues mentioned may not be applicable to the large version]


- I know this may be irrelevant and unchangeable, but the cannons that aren't on ships are simply massive. If you go off of their scale in relation to other objects of known size, one is roughly the size of a house. This isn't especially an issue for the ships, and maybe not that much of an issue for the towers, but overall it just seems weird to have such giant artillery at the 3 artillery spaces. Perhaps scale these down a bit?

- I do admit that there are is a lot of empty space. I love that you've done so much for graphics, but it could cause issues. If you'd like to cut down on size a bit, there are some areas that could probably be modified. The tip above and to the right of Ship 1 is one spot that I can see right off the bat. There were significant others, but sadly I'm not seeing them again at this time.

- Many of the attack and/or bombard connections don't make logical sense. How does one attack an artillery from a tower? Wouldn't that be bombardment? Also, why is it the artillery that is attacking the gate tower? Wouldn't that also be more of bombardment? If you think it through, artillery doesn't move all that easily. Troops on the other hand could possibly do so. Would it be possible to somehow add troops (For both sides) in between the areas attacking each other?

I apologize, but I probably should not have been typing this up at 1 am after a tiring night. I hope you are able to understand at least what I mean from my comments. If possible, I'll try to take a look at a comment again on this either later today or tomorrow. I love the idea for it. Good luck to you, sir!

~Bryguy

[grifftron]

The Idea and look of the map is brilliant, good job DiM..

[J_Indr]

This is probably my first proper comment in the Foundry.

I absolutely love the idea of this map - especially thematically and graphically, but the gameplay also seems rather promising It simply looks cool to have attacking armies and little soldiers on the map rather than anonymous territories. But I think others are right - the map would, I think, look even better and more 'dramatic' if you could condense it a bit.

For example, the attacking army (despite the fact that I am certainly up for the preservation of the idea of a supply chain) could surround the town more. You would save space vertically and, as I said, it would look more dramatically. I can imagine e.g. putting the 1st army on boats on the lake. The connections might be preserved.

As bryguy mentioned, it would make even logically sense to have some infantry in front of the artillery. That could lead to

[DiM]

- I know this may be irrelevant and unchangeable, but the cannons that aren't on ships are simply massive. If you go off of their scale in relation to other objects of known size, one is roughly the size of a house. This isn't especially an issue for the ships, and maybe not that much of an issue for the towers, but overall it just seems weird to have such giant artillery at the 3 artillery spaces. Perhaps scale these down a bit?

sometimes, some things need to be exaggerated or minimized depending on the effect desired. i realize the cannons are too big compared to various other elements but if i made them smaller then much of the detail would be lost. most maps change real world borders to suit their purpose and people rarely complain about that so i'm not sure that a slightly larger cannon is such a big problem. but if it is and more people consider it so then i can make them smaller.

- I do admit that there are is a lot of empty space. I love that you've done so much for graphics, but it could cause issues. If you'd like to cut down on size a bit, there are some areas that could probably be modified. The tip above and to the right of Ship 1 is one spot that I can see right off the bat. There were significant others, but sadly I'm not seeing them again at this time.

you mean the land there? that piece of land completes the natural bay in that region. the bay along with the lake and river are the main reasons the citadel was built there. so just because it's not a terit it does not mean it is pointless. the lake, the river and the bay make the city what it is. i could remove them all and save some pixels but then the city wouldn't look like it should.
anyway don't worry about it, i shall add an infantry division there too.

- Many of the attack and/or bombard connections don't make logical sense. How does one attack an artillery from a tower? Wouldn't that be bombardment? Also, why is it the artillery that is attacking the gate tower? Wouldn't that also be more of bombardment? If you think it through, artillery doesn't move all that easily. Troops on the other hand could possibly do so. Would it be possible to somehow add troops (For both sides) in between the areas attacking each other?

i know some attack lines might not be very realistic but for gameplay reasons, realism is trumped. if you have a suggestion to make it more realistic and at the same time keep the gameplay balanced and flowy i'm all ears.

i will add more troops for the attacker but the defender stays put. going outside the walls is a bad manoeuvre.

[DiM]

The Idea and look of the map is brilliant, good job DiM..

thanks mate.

[DiM]

This is probably my first proper comment in the Foundry.

hopefully the first in a long line

I absolutely love the idea of this map - especially thematically and graphically, but the gameplay also seems rather promising It simply looks cool to have attacking armies and little soldiers on the map rather than anonymous territories. But I think others are right - the map would, I think, look even better and more 'dramatic' if you could condense it a bit.

i'm glad that you like it. i will add more troops and hopefully you'll consider it more dramatic.

For example, the attacking army (despite the fact that I am certainly up for the preservation of the idea of a supply chain) could surround the town more. You would save space vertically and, as I said, it would look more dramatically. I can imagine e.g. putting the 1st army on boats on the lake. The connections might be preserved.

i'm planning on adding more troops on both sides .

As bryguy mentioned, it would make even logically sense to have some infantry in front of the artillery. That could lead to

could lead to...

[DiM]

V6:
*added 7th infantry division,
*changed some attack lines

Click image to enlarge.

[bryguy]

I apologize, but looking at my previous comments after having acquired some sleep I see now that most are irrelevant. I understand the points you made perfectly, and find that, apart from possibly some infantry in front of the artillery, think that most of my suggestions were pointless. My only concerns now are as follows:

- Would it be possible to modify some of the attack arrows that overlap the ships? Simply making them no longer overlap would increase their two-way visibility. Examples are Assault Ship 3 to Ship 3, Dock 2 to Ship 2, and Ship 2 to Ship 3 (As well as reverse)

- Just for curiosity's sake, but why is there a road that ends in the lake? Beneath Tower 2.

- Possibly rotate a few of the 3rd Artillery's cannons so that they face the Supply Caravan? Not sure how this would look

- Would it be possible to reduce the transparency of the lined texture behind the legend underneath the title? It may make for a bit easier readability of that legend.

- It seems odd to have blue cannons on a red side. Would they fit better for their side if red or at least red-ish?

[DiM]

- Would it be possible to modify some of the attack arrows that overlap the ships? Simply making them no longer overlap would increase their two-way visibility. Examples are Assault Ship 3 to Ship 3, Dock 2 to Ship 2, and Ship 2 to Ship 3 (As well as reverse)

yeah this was brought up before and i somehow forgot about it. will be done

- Just for curiosity's sake, but why is there a road that ends in the lake? Beneath Tower 2.

people need a road to go to the lake and fish. i'll add a small pontoon and a couple of small boats.

- Possibly rotate a few of the 3rd Artillery's cannons so that they face the Supply Caravan? Not sure how this would look

initially that artillery bombarded the ammo depot but i changed that. didn't change the canons' orientation cause i didn't know if the change will remain.

- Would it be possible to reduce the transparency of the lined texture behind the legend underneath the title? It may make for a bit easier readability of that legend.

will do.

- It seems odd to have blue cannons on a red side. Would they fit better for their side if red or at least red-ish?

actually the cannons aren't blue. it's the colour of the metal: http://www.parrots4parties.com/images/pirate_cannon_large.jpg

[DiM]

V7:
*moved some arrows around so they're more visible
*changed 3rd artillery orientation to face the caravan
*added a couple of fishing boats and a pontoon in the lake
*reduced the grunge texture in the legend

Click image to enlarge.

[zimmah]

much better allready but the tip of the arrow on ship 3 is still wrong.

[DiM]

much better allready but the tip of the arrow on ship 3 is still wrong.

will do

[bryguy]

Looks great, only one small thing I can think of at this time: The docks seem to "float" above everything. They don't seem to blend in with the ground or the water at all