SIEGE! - PSD available - [Quenched]

[hulmey]

Thats quite a good idea...It would solve the arrows which i never liked and remove the too many borders the walls have!!

You could move the drawbridge just a fraction inside the wards so that you can see thats its connected and im sure the map would look even nicer

[DiM]

i think you should add a sperm room that connects to nothing.

[mibi]

Thats quite a good idea...It would solve the arrows which i never liked and remove the too many borders the walls have!!

You could move the drawbridge just a fraction inside the wards so that you can see thats its connected and im sure the map would look even nicer

it wouldnt solve the arrows, see above.

[AndyDufresne]

Hm, I agree that the numbers on the walls could be a bit darker, and perhaps in the Swamp the numbers could have more of a green glow around them to distinguish them a little more.

I also feel like the Gate is a little congested. Would it be possible to simply lengthen the gate a little south, and then splitting it up like it currently is, just with a little more room? I think it would feel a little less chaotic with the numbers and the army shadows and the arrows. You might have to play around with the moat a little, because it might look odd if the drawbridge went too far onto the land. But something to consider!


--Andy

[mibi]

Hm, I agree that the numbers on the walls could be a bit darker, and perhaps in the Swamp the numbers could have more of a green glow around them to distinguish them a little more.

I also feel like the Gate is a little congested. Would it be possible to simply lengthen the gate a little south, and then splitting it up like it currently is, just with a little more room? I think it would feel a little less chaotic with the numbers and the army shadows and the arrows. You might have to play around with the moat a little, because it might look odd if the drawbridge went too far onto the land. But something to consider!


--Andy

i'll update later tonight.

[DiM]

ok. here's what i suggest for the wall and moat issue.
add a territory to the wall that connects to the moat. and add a barbican.
no need for any arrows.

[Ruben Cassar]

I still believe the legend is too cluttered and complicated. I think it should be simplified and perhaps the number of continents (or whatever you call them in this case) should be reduced or grouped together.

Of course this is only my opinion. Apart from this issue I think the map looks great.

[Coleman]

I still believe the legend is too cluttered and complicated. I think it should be simplified and perhaps the number of continents (or whatever you call them in this case) should be reduced or grouped together.

I personally find the legend swatches unnecessary, same goes for the "Enter walls via bridge or stairs". This maps design is pretty intuitive because of the level of detail that's gone into it. That's just my opinion though and if others feel it's necessary, then I guess it is.

So we have people that think the legend is too complex and others that think it is so intuitive we should just straight up eliminate most of it.

I think keeping it as is would be a great compromise.

[mibi]

ok. here's what i suggest for the wall and moat issue.
add a territory to the wall that connects to the moat. and add a barbican.
no need for any arrows.

uh... how does the wall attack the drawbidge? and how does the drawbidge not attack the wall? and how does the player move 'through' the wall.

thats not going to work DiM

[hulmey]

The point is the drwabridge cant attack the wall as in a real battle, the army would ram the draw bridge and enter into the courtyard and up the stairs immediately to your left or right....

The need for the drawbridge to be in 2 segments would then npt be needed thus advoiding the possibility of some one complaining they have the drawdridge and the camp but didnt get the bonus!!!

I think its worth it just to have alook to see if you can do it

You can already attack the walls from the other 2 locations located outside...

[mibi]

The point is the drwabridge cant attack the wall as in a real battle, the army would ram the draw bridge and enter into the courtyard and up the stairs immediately to your left or right....

The need for the drawbridge to be in 2 segments would then npt be needed thus advoiding the possibility of some one complaining they have the drawdridge and the camp but didnt get the bonus!!!

I think its worth it just to have alook to see if you can do it

You can already attack the walls from the other 2 locations located outside...

I dont understand. see if i can do what?

[DiM]

The point is the drwabridge cant attack the wall as in a real battle, the army would ram the draw bridge and enter into the courtyard and up the stairs immediately to your left or right....

The need for the drawbridge to be in 2 segments would then npt be needed thus advoiding the possibility of some one complaining they have the drawdridge and the camp but didnt get the bonus!!!

I think its worth it just to have alook to see if you can do it

You can already attack the walls from the other 2 locations located outside...

I dont understand. see if i can do what?

do the graphic implementation of the idea i presented and see if people like it. i think that's what he's saying.

[mibi]

Hm, I agree that the numbers on the walls could be a bit darker, and perhaps in the Swamp the numbers could have more of a green glow around them to distinguish them a little more.

I also feel like the Gate is a little congested. Would it be possible to simply lengthen the gate a little south, and then splitting it up like it currently is, just with a little more room? I think it would feel a little less chaotic with the numbers and the army shadows and the arrows. You might have to play around with the moat a little, because it might look odd if the drawbridge went too far onto the land. But something to consider!


--Andy

update to andys changes, a bit more space in the gate area. but yeah, its a bit congested, but i think that works on a psychological level. I mean. your on the gate, vulnerable from all sides, two large walls and a moat box you in, i would feel a little congested too.

[hulmey]

yep i agree with dim s sated before...can you make adjustments...I think it would look much nicer

[Marvaddin]

1) the midlands are still a wasteland, you could think about reduce it to 4-5 territories to make it a bit more playable.

yes the midlands are a wastleland. there are right in front of the gate and surely the site of many battles. is there some rule that every area has to be defendable? if you are fortunate to hold it you get het highest bonus on the map, good luck

In fact, Im a fan of defendable areas, arent you? Whats so bad about remove some territories or borders? Maybe you can give us a good reason for having a wasteland in front of the castle (as if it wouldnt be hard enough in contact with so many other areas).

2) the east ward still has 4 borders, while the west one has 3. Its easy to correct... Give to the territory 2 the area with stairs of territory 1. So t1 would be non border, like t2 of the west ward. Change the names if you want.

yes the wards are not exactly the same. are they supposed to be? I am not a fan of symetrical maps as it reduced variability.

Again, are you a fan of wastelands? You are the one designing the map. If you want design both wards different, you can, but I think you should avoid continents with 4 borders out of 4 territories. In fact, doing what I suggested they wouldnt be graphically symetric, just about playability. But again, you can find another option. I had realized already you like variability, having bonuses for 1 territory, and pretty easy continents, but also keeping completely useless areas. Its just good avoid poorly designed continents, mate.

3) the throne + walls dont seem to be even playable, I think it could be removed, even why the legend is incredibly crowded.

not playable? i think its certainly possible given the thrown+hall will expand outward and can even by pass the wards by taking the tunnel

Yes, not playable. If I remember well, you were the guy saying that the wood camp and the gate was very difficult to hold, and it would deserve a bonus of +5 (its now reduced to 4, and its still high, by the way). So, wood camp + gate is difficult for you, and throne + walls is something "certainly possible"? Trust me, its not playable.

4) some bonuses are too high, like the forest one. Same with the plains... river camp + plains gives a bonus of +6 and just have 2 borders...

the bonus have been discussed and refined many times. is a bonus of +6 out of line for 10 territories? i dont think so.

Yes, a bit out of line when you have just 2 borders to defend. 5 would be a great bonus already. Even why there is no other relevant continent near it to prevent it from being held.

I also think the enter walls text is unnecessary.

About the great hall, its a bit high the bonus of 3 having just a border (wall 2), but maybe you are doing it on purpose... anyway, maybe you should allow the tunnel attack, but Im not sure about this.

The forest and swamp bonuses are also high.

Plus, I would suggest to remove the connection between the outer wall 1 and 2.

[mibi]

yep i agree with dim s sated before...can you make adjustments...I think it would look much nicer

that would require reducing the gate to one territory, making a total of 55, which would then have neutrals on every map. not going to work.

[mibi]

1) the midlands are still a wasteland, you could think about reduce it to 4-5 territories to make it a bit more playable.

yes the midlands are a wastleland. there are right in front of the gate and surely the site of many battles. is there some rule that every area has to be defendable? if you are fortunate to hold it you get het highest bonus on the map, good luck

In fact, Im a fan of defendable areas, arent you? Whats so bad about remove some territories or borders? Maybe you can give us a good reason for having a wasteland in front of the castle (as if it wouldnt be hard enough in contact with so many other areas).

2) the east ward still has 4 borders, while the west one has 3. Its easy to correct... Give to the territory 2 the area with stairs of territory 1. So t1 would be non border, like t2 of the west ward. Change the names if you want.

yes the wards are not exactly the same. are they supposed to be? I am not a fan of symetrical maps as it reduced variability.

Again, are you a fan of wastelands? You are the one designing the map. If you want design both wards different, you can, but I think you should avoid continents with 4 borders out of 4 territories. In fact, doing what I suggested they wouldnt be graphically symetric, just about playability. But again, you can find another option. I had realized already you like variability, having bonuses for 1 territory, and pretty easy continents, but also keeping completely useless areas. Its just good avoid poorly designed continents, mate.

3) the throne + walls dont seem to be even playable, I think it could be removed, even why the legend is incredibly crowded.

not playable? i think its certainly possible given the thrown+hall will expand outward and can even by pass the wards by taking the tunnel

Yes, not playable. If I remember well, you were the guy saying that the wood camp and the gate was very difficult to hold, and it would deserve a bonus of +5 (its now reduced to 4, and its still high, by the way). So, wood camp + gate is difficult for you, and throne + walls is something "certainly possible"? Trust me, its not playable.

4) some bonuses are too high, like the forest one. Same with the plains... river camp + plains gives a bonus of +6 and just have 2 borders...

the bonus have been discussed and refined many times. is a bonus of +6 out of line for 10 territories? i dont think so.

Yes, a bit out of line when you have just 2 borders to defend. 5 would be a great bonus already. Even why there is no other relevant continent near it to prevent it from being held.

I also think the enter walls text is unnecessary.

About the great hall, its a bit high the bonus of 3 having just a border (wall 2), but maybe you are doing it on purpose... anyway, maybe you should allow the tunnel attack, but Im not sure about this.

The forest and swamp bonuses are also high.

Plus, I would suggest to remove the connection between the outer wall 1 and 2.

update the wards so they are symetrical, and 3 borders.

as for your other comments on the bonuses, i think its hard to say whats playable and whats not at this point.

[Coleman]

In fact, Im a fan of defendable areas, arent you? Whats so bad about remove some territories or borders? Maybe you can give us a good reason for having a wasteland in front of the castle (as if it wouldn't be hard enough in contact with so many other areas).

The infamous bonus calculator says that 6 is dead on for the way it is. I guess while it is possible that some borders and things could be thrown in to Midlands we would then need to delete the tunnel. I like the tunnel.

Yes, not playable. If I remember well, you were the guy saying that the wood camp and the gate was very difficult to hold, and it would deserve a bonus of +5 (its now reduced to 4, and its still high, by the way). So, wood camp + gate is difficult for you, and throne + walls is something "certainly possible"? Trust me, its not playable.

I never really thought the camp + gate thing was difficult. All three would be, but just one camp and the gate not so much. Throne + All Walls seems possible to me, but whatever. I guess we have to just Trust you that it isn't.

Also, all your silly bonus talk at the end flys in the face of the bonus calculator. Every bonus on the map is significantly close to the formula results.

( ( ( Territories * 1.5 ) + ( Border Territories * 4 ) + ( Neighbor Territories / 2 ) + Neighbor Regions ) / 6 ) ) - 1

Now while you could argue the formula is wrong, or shouldn't always be followed I think you'll find most of the good maps have their bonuses spot on with it.

[Samus]

I really think this map might end up needing an update like World 2.1. I can imagine plenty of different army layouts, but I honestly can't be sure how they'll play out on this map. I think it's about as balanced as we could possibly predict it to be right now. There's a good chance we could be wrong, and a bonus is too high or too low, or something just doesn't work out right, but I would be rather surprised if there was any major issue which caused big problems in a lot of games.

[mibi]

I really think this map might end up needing an update like World 2.1. I can imagine plenty of different army layouts, but I honestly can't be sure how they'll play out on this map. I think it's about as balanced as we could possibly predict it to be right now. There's a good chance we could be wrong, and a bonus is too high or too low, or something just doesn't work out right, but I would be rather surprised if there was any major issue which caused big problems in a lot of games.

i agree.... it really all depends on HOW the map will be played. and we wont know that until it gets some play.

[mibi]

large and small

[DiM]

yep i agree with dim s sated before...can you make adjustments...I think it would look much nicer

that would require reducing the gate to one territory, making a total of 55, which would then have neutrals on every map. not going to work.

you reduce the gate to one terit but you add the barbican

[mibi]

yep i agree with dim s sated before...can you make adjustments...I think it would look much nicer

that would require reducing the gate to one territory, making a total of 55, which would then have neutrals on every map. not going to work.

you reduce the gate to one terit but you add the barbican

well how would i depict that the gate cannot attack the brarbican or walls, the barbican can attack the gate, and the gate goes under the barbican and can attack the wards?

[Tommy Hobbes]

I feel that this map is both visually stimulating and practically playable. It is for this reason that you should just publish it, because I really want to play it. Forget the barbican, forget the portcullis, forget the trebuchets and merry men. Nothing more is necessary. Simply publish this work of art, this polished gem, that we might enjoy it further.

[DiM]

yep i agree with dim s sated before...can you make adjustments...I think it would look much nicer

that would require reducing the gate to one territory, making a total of 55, which would then have neutrals on every map. not going to work.

you reduce the gate to one terit but you add the barbican

well how would i depict that the gate cannot attack the brarbican or walls, the barbican can attack the gate, and the gate goes under the barbican and can attack the wards?

why shouldn't the gate attack the walls or the barbican?