Western Fur Trade V3.6, Pg.7

[natty dread]

Just a minor nitpick about the water routes: in some places the dots and army circles overlap. I think it'd look better if they didn't.

[SuicidalSnowman]

I actually think this is a cool idea, and a neat part of history, that isn't yet represented on the site.

I have read through about half the pages, but did you state why you did the west and not the northeast? Is this from a later period of fur trading? I thought this was more of a New England, French Canada, Great Lakes, Dutch New York kind of thing? I'll go read the three other pages I skipped and see if maybe I just missed it. *EDIT* OK, I think the history aspect needs some further research. I will look around a bit, but I think this is just an awesome period of early American/Canadian history that always gets ignored.

I think graphically, it would be very cool if you could somehow emphasize that some of these are small trails in the woods and some are better traveled. I am almost thinking like how the USA map pack has lots of roads, and special bonuses for major highways.

Also, I vote for random drop.

If the water routes are historically accurate, then I think they add to gameplay.

Currently, the graphics are oddly "orangish-pink" in my opinion. I think you should either move towards parchement/old trail map style or adjust the colors of the map for some more contrast. *EDIT* Still think this is just odd, although I DO agree with Neon Peon's comment that it is a bold, and different, choice.

*EDITS*
I also am a huge fan of the beaver outlines, I thought the darker ones worked better. I think the "Voyagers" are out of place. I vote for something else done with that space.

I'm going to go read the other posts and then embarrassedly edit the stuff out that has already been addressed, but this is a cool idea. *EDIT* I just did!

[isaiah40]

WOW this is one of the better posts in this thread! Thank you!

I think the history aspect needs some further research. I will look around a bit, but I think this is just an awesome period of early American/Canadian history that always gets ignored.

This possibly the first of two maps dedicated to the fur trade. If this one makes it all the way through, then I will do one of the eastern part of Canada and the US.

I think graphically, it would be very cool if you could somehow emphasize that some of these are small trails in the woods and some are better traveled. I am almost thinking like how the USA map pack has lots of roads, and special bonuses for major highways.

The problem with something like the USA pack is that the majority of the routes were by rivers, so I would probably have to include a lot ore of he rivers on the map which then would become terribly cluttered The routes as they are are more for game play than anything else.

Also, I vote for random drop.

YEs random drop it will be!

If the water routes are historically accurate, then I think they add to gameplay.

The water routes if you think about are accurate because when you have a post on a river or large body of water, are they technically connected? Some of the forts are fudged a little for game play, but for the most part they are close to where they actually were. As far as the routes on the Pacific Ocean, Hudson's Bay and the great lakes well, they are for game play.

Currently, the graphics are oddly "orangish-pink" in my opinion. I think you should either move towards parchement/old trail map style or adjust the colors of the map for some more contrast. *EDIT* Still think this is just odd, although I DO agree with Neon Peon's comment that it is a bold, and different, choice.

Yes as I think I have stated earlier, the colors are from a map from the 1800's I found. I wanted a different map color wise as well as era wise that was diffidently unique, so they will stay.

I think the "Voyagers" are out of place. I vote for something else done with that space.

So why are they out of place? Weren't the voyaguers also fur traders? I think they fit in nicely with the map, so if the majority think the same way then yes I will change it.

[SuicidalSnowman]

This possibly the first of two maps dedicated to the fur trade. If this one makes it all the way through, then I will do one of the eastern part of Canada and the US.

Great glad to hear.

The water routes if you think about are accurate because when you have a post on a river or large body of water, are they technically connected? Some of the forts are fudged a little for game play, but for the most part they are close to where they actually were. As far as the routes on the Pacific Ocean, Hudson's Bay and the great lakes well, they are for game play.

Well, I think fudging is fair. And I think they add a lot to the gameplay.

Yes as I think I have stated earlier, the colors are from a map from the 1800's I found. I wanted a different map color wise as well as era wise that was diffidently unique, so they will stay.

Fair enough!

So why are they out of place? Weren't the voyaguers also fur traders? I think they fit in nicely with the map, so if the majority think the same way then yes I will change it.

What I mean is that the graphic itself seems out of the place. It doesn't fit with the overall style of the rest of the map. Like I feel the colors are a harsh contrast? Or it looks like it was cut out and pasted on? I am not sure, I think it is a photoshop kind of thing.

The point is, the CONTENT of the voyagers isn't necessarily out of place, but that particular graphic seems to be laid over the rest of the map. When my eyes glance at the map, everything is nice but the canoe jumps out, and not in the best way.

Sorry, I am trying to articulate something I don't think I have the vocabulary for...

But it remains that I think this map is very cool and would be a good addition to the site.

[isaiah40]

So why are they out of place? Weren't the voyaguers also fur traders? I think they fit in nicely with the map, so if the majority think the same way then yes I will change it.

What I mean is that the graphic itself seems out of the place. It doesn't fit with the overall style of the rest of the map. Like I feel the colors are a harsh contrast? Or it looks like it was cut out and pasted on? I am not sure, I think it is a photoshop kind of thing.

The point is, the CONTENT of the voyagers isn't necessarily out of place, but that particular graphic seems to be laid over the rest of the map. When my eyes glance at the map, everything is nice but the canoe jumps out, and not in the best way.

Sorry, I am trying to articulate something I don't think I have the vocabulary for...

But it remains that I think this map is very cool and would be a good addition to the site.

Ok, I see what you mean. I will play around with it a little and see if I can get it subdued a little and/or change the appearance of it and blend it in a bit better.

[MrBenn]

Would this map be playable?
Poll ended at Mon Apr 14, 2008 4:35 am

Yes... 3... 25%
No... 4... 33%
Possibly... 5... 42%

Total votes : 12

I've taken down the (very old) poll for you

[MrBenn]

Map Name: The Fur Trade
Your aims/design style: A map of what is now western Canada and northwestern US fur trade during the 1700's through the 1800's. Looking to do a graphically pleasing but simple map that is outside of the box.
Uniqueness: What sets this map apart ... Well I would say what sets it apart from the other maps on CC is that this there are no other maps based on this subject, and only the second map of Canada (if I looked properly).
Relevant Experience: I currently have my first map waiting for beta, so that is the limit of my experience right now.

You've made a good start here, but I get a distinct feeling that while you have opted on a "fur trade" theme for the map, you haven't got much of a solid idea about how that might best translate into a playable map - bear with me while I explain....

You state that you want to achieve a simple map; but the multitude of connections (along rivers, trails and interjoining rivers/trails) actually makes things quite complicated to get your head around. I'm not too sure what your first (old) draft looked like, but I image that some of the complexity has carried over from then?

With such an open map (connection-wise), then I would be inclined to do away with bonus regions altogether, and go for something more simply based on territory expansion, and resource collection. I don't know too much of the history the map refers to, but I imagine that this aspect would reflect the early fur-traders who are discovering the value of fur, and seeking to "harvest" as much of it as possible.

The second option is to go down the trader-route, whereby each company is trying to establish control of the market. If you're going to play the trader game, then there's an opportunity to require specific groups of resources (ie traps, tools, pelts, traders, alcohol, native villages, markets etc). In a similar way to Age of Merchants, the bonuses could increase as your business becomes more successful.

Starting positions? I see you toyed with the idea of starting positions a little while back. If you're going to go down that route, then the starting positions need to be one of the first things you think about, with balanced (not necessarily equal) opportunities from each position. You could choose to allocate a central "HQ" to each player, with everything else neutral (a la AoR/New World), or allocate a defined start with random deployment elsewhere, or full-on random deployment... The set-up that you choose should be a result of the type of gameplay you have in mind, and how you want to turn the theme into a playable map.

The idea as it stands is a good one, and once you have a solid grasp of what you want to achieve, you'll find it a lot easier to work out how to balance out the gameplay to achieve it. For now though, I think the concept needs a bit more thought and definition.

[isaiah40]

You've made a good start here, but I get a distinct feeling that while you have opted on a "fur trade" theme for the map, you haven't got much of a solid idea about how that might best translate into a playable map - bear with me while I explain....

You state that you want to achieve a simple map; but the multitude of connections (along rivers, trails and interjoining rivers/trails) actually makes things quite complicated to get your head around. I'm not too sure what your first (old) draft looked like, but I image that some of the complexity has carried over from then?

A whole lot more cluttered and confusing! If you think about it, the rivers were the major routes the fur traders used to transport their furs on, along with the trails between rivers. I could if that is the consensus just utilize the trails as the connections between the posts. That should make it a little more user friendly!

With such an open map (connection-wise), then I would be inclined to do away with bonus regions altogether, and go for something more simply based on territory expansion, and resource collection. I don't know too much of the history the map refers to, but I imagine that this aspect would reflect the early fur-traders who are discovering the value of fur, and seeking to "harvest" as much of it as possible.

This was my original idea. Though others wanted bonuses, so it went in that direction just a wee (okay, maybe quite a bit) bit!

Starting positions? I see you toyed with the idea of starting positions a little while back. If you're going to go down that route, then the starting positions need to be one of the first things you think about, with balanced (not necessarily equal) opportunities from each position. You could choose to allocate a central "HQ" to each player, with everything else neutral (a la AoR/New World), or allocate a defined start with random deployment elsewhere, or full-on random deployment... The set-up that you choose should be a result of the type of gameplay you have in mind, and how you want to turn the theme into a playable map.

Yes I originally wanted 8 starting positions and the rest starting at the normal 3 neutral. Although right now I kind of like the fur and trapline combos along with the above two suggestions. How does that idea sound?

The idea as it stands is a good one, and once you have a solid grasp of what you want to achieve, you'll find it a lot easier to work out how to balance out the gameplay to achieve it. For now though, I think the concept needs a bit more thought and definition.

Thank you, I will be posting a new version soon!

Edit! Changes made:
- Changed title to Western Fur Trade (in anticipation of possibly doing an Eastern Fur Trade)
- Moved voyaguers to bottom of map
- Removed bonuses except for holding Furs and Traplines
- Added in a couple extra trails
- Removed rivers as connections (for clarity)

Here it is!!

Click image to enlarge.

[SuicidalSnowman]

I like what you did with the voyagers in the canoe. It looks a lot better.


As for the river/attack routes, I might suggest a little more needs to be done. Here is the thing:

Fort Astoria, Fort NEz Pierces, and Spookane House (for example) are all along the same river, but ALSO have trails connecting them. I am assuming that historically, it would be accurate to say that the river was used instead of forest trails, and that you have included the trails for clarity.

But does that then mean that Severn and Trout Lake DON'T connect? There is only a river connecting them. I would say for consistency, forts near rivers either need to connect by river, or by ONLY by trail. And if it is only by trail, I think graphically you are going to have to make it more clear somehow.

Like for instance, Fort Pitt and Turtle Fort. Do they connect? It sure looks like it. But it is impossible to know for sure.

Also Fort Churchill, York Factory, and Severn, going around the lake there, is that the outline of the lake and they do not connect, or is it a connection but also the outline of the lake? If it is a connection, I would suggest changing it to black instead of the pink there, for clarity.

[isaiah40]

I like what you did with the voyagers in the canoe. It looks a lot better.


As for the river/attack routes, I might suggest a little more needs to be done. Here is the thing:

Fort Astoria, Fort NEz Pierces, and Spookane House (for example) are all along the same river, but ALSO have trails connecting them. I am assuming that historically, it would be accurate to say that the river was used instead of forest trails, and that you have included the trails for clarity.

But does that then mean that Severn and Trout Lake DON'T connect? There is only a river connecting them. I would say for consistency, forts near rivers either need to connect by river, or by ONLY by trail. And if it is only by trail, I think graphically you are going to have to make it more clear somehow.

Like for instance, Fort Pitt and Turtle Fort. Do they connect? It sure looks like it. But it is impossible to know for sure.

Also Fort Churchill, York Factory, and Severn, going around the lake there, is that the outline of the lake and they do not connect, or is it a connection but also the outline of the lake? If it is a connection, I would suggest changing it to black instead of the pink there, for clarity.

I did forget a few trails didn't I?

Yes for clarity, I added the trails along the rivers for clarity. I'll add in the ones I missed for further clarity, and that is also for the forts Churchill, York Factory and Severn.

[isaiah40]

Okay here is the newest version withe the trails I missed while half asleep very early this morning!

Click image to enlarge.

All territories where you see the 88's will be the starting 'HQs' and the 5's are the starting neutrals. The rest will be the normal 3 neutral.

[SuicidalSnowman]

Makes much more sense now!

[isaiah40]

Makes much more sense now!

I figured as much Now let's hope Mr.Benn thinks so as well!

[captainwalrus]

Why not make them both together, like what IH is doping with Italian and German unification. Not really a map pack, but still two maps one thread.

[isaiah40]

Why not make them both together, like what IH is doping with Italian and German unification. Not really a map pack, but still two maps one thread.

Well d'oh! Why didn't I think of that!? Can I get one of the BiB to merge my two fur trade maps into this one please?

[Mad-elph]

I just wanted to stop in and say that I like the map. Its a great addition and I wish you luck for completion.

I like the change with the canoe, but I wonder if it is instead possible to turn it into a black only pic to balance out the fuzziness of it. If it were me I'd make it 15-20% smaller and put it in there twice, such as one at the end of the top row of the title (above Trade) and leave one in the current position.

Then again that might feel too cluttered. I just think it would seem like a symbol of the map, rather than a decoration (like the circles behind TIde, if you know what i mean). Just a thought, one that could hit a dead end and I would not feel any worse about my life.

[isaiah40]

I just wanted to stop in and say that I like the map. Its a great addition and I wish you luck for completion.

I like the change with the canoe, but I wonder if it is instead possible to turn it into a black only pic to balance out the fuzziness of it. If it were me I'd make it 15-20% smaller and put it in there twice, such as one at the end of the top row of the title (above Trade) and leave one in the current position.

Then again that might feel too cluttered. I just think it would seem like a symbol of the map, rather than a decoration (like the circles behind TIde, if you know what i mean). Just a thought, one that could hit a dead end and I would not feel any worse about my life.

In regards to the voyageurs, I think that it looks better the way it is as it goes with the colors of the map. Yes it would be too cluttered. Every suggestion is taken, and thought over and tried. Sometimes I don't post the changes because they just don't look good, but I always give them a shot!

Anybody else have any ideas, suggestions, comments, etc., while we wait for the fortnightly reviews?

[natty dread]

Personally, I don't like how the canoe & voyageurs look now. Something about it just clashes with my aesthetical sense.

Perhaps it could look better as a black & white image overlaid on the picture. You could use either overlay or multiply blend modes...

Or how about as a watermark, or embossed on the image, or something.

[isaiah40]

Okay made a few changes:

- Changed voyageurs to B&W
- Removed army circles for furs and traplines
- Changed some of the starting posts around so the posts are further apart so no one gets knocked out in the first couple of rounds

So here is the new and improved V3.6!!

Click image to enlarge.

[natty dread]

The voyageurs look better now, but you should try playing with the blend modes & opacity a bit. Try putting them on overlay-blend mode. That way you can make it look like it belongs on the map. Multiply could also work, or colour burn, why not try them all and see which looks best.

[isaiah40]

The voyageurs look better now, but you should try playing with the blend modes & opacity a bit. Try putting them on overlay-blend mode. That way you can make it look like it belongs on the map. Multiply could also work, or colour burn, why not try them all and see which looks best.

I've played around and didn't like anything. Will continue to play around while I wait for the fortnightly review which should be very soon.

[isaiah40]

Gameplay ideas, suggestions, or any other suggestions, ideas etc .........