Poker Club [Quenched]

[TaCktiX]

No Territory Bonus is rather hard to make out on the patterned cloth of the table. Could you bring that out more?

[MrBenn]

You've got a really good look to this now, although there's something about the perspective/patterned cloth that makes me feel a little dizzy...

[gimil]

No Territory Bonus is rather hard to make out on the patterned cloth of the table. Could you bring that out more?

I feel the legends text is all a little groggy. It may be because its presepected, or it may be the texture making it a little difficult to look at. Im not sure of a solution thou.

[DiM]

You've got a really good look to this now, although there's something about the perspective/patterned cloth that makes me feel a little dizzy...

i have the same dizzy feeling but i don't think it's the cloth. i think it's the sheer volume of numbers and shapes on the cards. that makes them really hard to follow.

i'd like to see a more toned down version of the cards.

[WidowMakers]

Thanks for the input everyone. These suggestions will go into the next version. But aside from graphics, are there any gameplay issues you see? We want to get these figured out and agreed upon first before I spend lots of time tweaking the images.

WM

[rocky mountain]

there is a straight worth 7 armies right next to each other.
on the bottom right, a bit up from the bottom, A-5...if some one starts there they will have a bit of an advantage...
and those 3 2's are quite close together for a bonus of 6...

[oaktown]

are you looking for connected stuff like the straight that Rocky mentioned? Because there's a connected spades flush in the top right corner. in fact, there are six connected spades there. And five connected clubs on the left side, center of the table.

I'm really, really nervous about stamping this one fellas. I predict a Schloss repeat, in which somebody realizes there's an easy full house someplace that we missed and every game goes to whoever starts there. That said, I think this clearly the best approach to a poker map that we've seen - we need to bring many eyes in on this one.

[oaktown]

agreed, nice start. I get the sense that the cards in the foreground aren't using the same perspective as the ones in the back, giving the sense that the table isn't flat.

They are the same, the table is flat. I am not doing this in photoshop. it is done in after effects. Every card is a 3D layer and they are all located in 3D space. It is all the same perspective trust me.

Alright, then the cards in the back are too small... something about the scale just isn't right.

[Riazor]

Thanks for the input everyone. These suggestions will go into the next version. But aside from graphics, are there any gameplay issues you see? We want to get these figured out and agreed upon first before I spend lots of time tweaking the images.

WM

Yes, when i look at the bonus structure... does only the player with the best hand get the appropriate bonus, or does every player get a bonus for whatever he owns (even if its just a high card). If its the first case, it would be hell to have no territory bonus also. Btw, is it just thehighest bonus that counts, or are they cumulative?
Maybe clarify it in the legend? I dont know whether other people have the same question?

[yeti_c]

are you looking for connected stuff like the straight that Rocky mentioned? Because there's a connected spades flush in the top right corner. in fact, there are six connected spades there. And five connected clubs on the left side, center of the table.

I'm really, really nervous about stamping this one fellas. I predict a Schloss repeat, in which somebody realizes there's an easy full house someplace that we missed and every game goes to whoever starts there. That said, I think this clearly the best approach to a poker map that we've seen - we need to bring many eyes in on this one.

This is exactly what we're looking for...

C.

[yeti_c]

are you looking for connected stuff like the straight that Rocky mentioned? Because there's a connected spades flush in the top right corner. in fact, there are six connected spades there. And five connected clubs on the left side, center of the table.

I'm really, really nervous about stamping this one fellas. I predict a Schloss repeat, in which somebody realizes there's an easy full house someplace that we missed and every game goes to whoever starts there. That said, I think this clearly the best approach to a poker map that we've seen - we need to bring many eyes in on this one.

This is exactly what we're looking for...

C.

Ah - I see what's happened - I fixed those 2 problems in Pokershuffle3... but I think WM - took his layout from pokershuffle2...

WM - can you tweak to fix?

C.

[WidowMakers]

agreed, nice start. I get the sense that the cards in the foreground aren't using the same perspective as the ones in the back, giving the sense that the table isn't flat.

They are the same, the table is flat. I am not doing this in photoshop. it is done in after effects. Every card is a 3D layer and they are all located in 3D space. It is all the same perspective trust me.

Alright, then the cards in the back are too small... something about the scale just isn't right.

Nope the scale for every card is the same. It is just the perspective. Trust me Oak, all of the cards are the same size It is the perspective that makes them look bigger and smaller.

Ah - I see what's happened - I fixed those 2 problems in Pokershuffle3... but I think WM - took his layout from pokershuffle2...

WM - can you tweak to fix?

C.

Where is shuffle 3?

WM

[yeti_c]

Page 1...

I can send it to you if you like?

C.

[WidowMakers]

Page 1...

I can send it to you if you like?

C.

Sorry I will look at it there then.
As long as this layout did not change too much I don't think it will take me long to adjust.

WM

EDIT: Ok you just switched card locations. Easy fix. I am about to go to work and have stuff going on tonight. I will try to get it back out though. Until then everyone look here and discuss the gameplay.

Yeti's Pokershuffle 3 layout

[yeti_c]

Page 1...

I can send it to you if you like?

C.

Sorry I will look at it there then.
As long as this layout did not change too much I don't think it will take me long to adjust.

WM

I'm pretty sure it's a case of swapping a couple of cards around here and there... The layout itself is still the same.

I've got a PSD if you want it too?

C.

[WidowMakers]

Page 1...

I can send it to you if you like?

C.

Sorry I will look at it there then.
As long as this layout did not change too much I don't think it will take me long to adjust.

WM

I'm pretty sure it's a case of swapping a couple of cards around here and there... The layout itself is still the same.

I've got a PSD if you want it too?

C.

See my post edit above.
and I will not need the PSD. I just need to move them in my after effects file.

WM

[yeti_c]

Good stuff...

So comments on poker shuffle 3 for runs and so forth that we can fix...

WM will fix the cards to how I had them there...

WM -> I think I moved about 4 cards - but I can't quite remember.

C.

[WidowMakers]

Version 4 (updated to yeti_c's poker shuffle 3 gameplay image in first post)

No Territory Bonus is rather hard to make out on the patterned cloth of the table. Could you bring that out more?

Is that better?

You've got a really good look to this now, although there's something about the perspective/patterned cloth that makes me feel a little dizzy...

i have the same dizzy feeling but i don't think it's the cloth. i think it's the sheer volume of numbers and shapes on the cards. that makes them really hard to follow.

i'd like to see a more toned down version of the cards.

I made the reds in the cards less bright. is that better as well?

Changes:

• 1) Edited Legend to show "No territory Bonus" text easier to see.
  2) Toned down the Red int eh cards
  3) Edited the layout to yeti_c's poker shuffle 3 layout.
  4) Added an underline for the 6's and 9's to make them easier to distinguish.

WM

[cicero]

WM/yeti

Looking really good. I've been away a while, but this is really coming on well!
Looking at WM V4 ...

Graphics:

• The 'hand titles' and bonuses currently in red ["Royal Flush=15", "4 of a kind=11" etc] don't work on a green background for us colour-blinders ... it takes a lot of effort for me even to read them. I would suggest the same colour as is used for "no territory bonus" - perhaps putting this last element in brackets to separate it.
• I think the underlines on 6s and 9s just confuse the issue. Anyone who has ever seen a playing card knows which way up the numbers are surely ? Anyone who has never seen a playing card ... well this will be the least of their worries on this map!
• WM mentioned further back in the thread that he was considering more chips, ashtray, player hands etc ... I think this is great as is - the sigs on a chip is a nice touch. Any additional clutter will be just that - clutter.
• Finally, not so sure about this, perhaps lose the graphics inside the rectangle in the centre of each card? Perhaps selectively so ... ie not all of them ...

Text:
The 'hand definitions' currently in white are slightly awkward. May I suggest the following replacements:

• 10-Ace in 1 suit > 10 J Q K A - same suit
• 5 cards in a row in 1 suit > 5 card sequence in same suit
• All 4 of same card > 4 cards of same value + 1 unrelated card
• 3 of a card 2 of another > 3 cards of same value + 2 cards of same value
• 5 cards of same suit > 5 cards in same suit
• 5 cards of any suit in a row > 5 card sequence in any suit
• Any 3 of same card > 3 cards of same value + 2 unrelated cards
• A pair of any 2 of the same card > 2 pairs + 1 unrelated card
• Any 2 of the same card > 2 cards of same value + 3 unrelated cards
• no definition > 5 unrelated cards

Some might prefer to drop the "+ X unrelated card(s)" part ...

[Keredrex]

I think this map idea is great... But Personally i feel that the overall look is a "Cluttered"...I understand the layout but it is kind of a headache... Maybe if you took out the center graphics of the cards and just left the corner Number And Suit with the Army circle it would be cleaner... Easier to read. Otherwise I love the angle and the concept... Great Job

[fireedud]

Would you mind swithing the two of clubs and ten of diamond. They're fairly close to other tens and twos.

[WidowMakers]

WM/yeti

Looking really good. I've been away a while, but this is really coming on well!
Looking at WM V4 ...

Graphics:

• The 'hand titles' and bonuses currently in red ["Royal Flush=15", "4 of a kind=11" etc] don't work on a green background for us colour-blinders ... it takes a lot of effort for me even to read them. I would suggest the same colour as is used for "no territory bonus" - perhaps putting this last element in brackets to separate it.
  I will see what i can do. I am not sure the yellow text will look that good. I will do that and we can compare
• I think the underlines on 6s and 9s just confuse the issue. Anyone who has ever seen a playing card knows which way up the numbers are surely ? Anyone who has never seen a playing card ... well this will be the least of their worries on this map!
  We decided to do that because there was a 6 and 9 connected. That layout has since changed. If there are not objections, I can take the underlines off
• WM mentioned further back in the thread that he was considering more chips, ashtray, player hands etc ... I think this is great as is - the sigs on a chip is a nice touch. Any additional clutter will be just that - clutter.
  I agree, the map already has a bunch going on it. I plan only to add some ships at the top over the title, several in the top left and some on the bottom middle. Just a few.
• Finally, not so sure about this, perhaps lose the graphics inside the rectangle in the center of each card? Perhaps selectively so ... ie not all of them ...
  Several people have commented on this. I can just remove everything including the rectangle, then we can compare

Text:
The 'hand definitions' currently in white are slightly awkward. May I suggest the following replacements:

• 10-Ace in 1 suit > 10 J Q K A - same suit
• 5 cards in a row in 1 suit > 5 card sequence in same suit
• All 4 of same card > 4 cards of same value + 1 unrelated card
• 3 of a card 2 of another > 3 cards of same value + 2 cards of same value
• 5 cards of same suit > 5 cards in same suit
• 5 cards of any suit in a row > 5 card sequence in any suit
• Any 3 of same card > 3 cards of same value + 2 unrelated cards
• A pair of any 2 of the same card > 2 pairs + 1 unrelated card
• Any 2 of the same card > 2 cards of same value + 3 unrelated cards
• no definition > 5 unrelated cards

Some might prefer to drop the "+ X unrelated card(s)" part ...

I think there might be some issue making these fit. Plus your definitions are based on a 5 card hand. Since players will own more than 5 terts, the definitions you give are actually wrong. All of you +X unrelated is not needed


WM

[Beko the Great]

One idea... I found that in you example in a game with 8 players, each gets 6 cards... I found that the probability of 5 of that 6 cards be of the same suit is not that small, but just imagine a 2 player game, each one with 26 territories! A straight flush will be usual! So my idea is this, each player (no matter the number of players) receives only 2 random territories, like, in a poker game you receive 2 cards... All the other territories must be neutral with equal distribution or by rank...

What do you think of this?

[WidowMakers]

Would you mind swithing the two of clubs and ten of diamond. They're fairly close to other tens and twos.

Sounds OK to me but I will wait until yeti responds. He owns the gameplay and concept

WM

[WidowMakers]

One idea... I found that in you example in a game with 8 players, each gets 6 cards... I found that the probability of 5 of that 6 cards be of the same suit is not that small, but just imagine a 2 player game, each one with 26 territories! A straight flush will be usual! So my idea is this, each player (no matter the number of players) receives only 2 random territories, like, in a poker game you receive 2 cards... All the other territories must be neutral with equal distribution or by rank...

What do you think of this?

Actually of the 52 cards, 12 start neutral to keep bonuses down in the beginning (no unfair drops). So for a 8 player game (52-12=40 & 40/8 = 5) 5 cards per person.

A 2 player game is (52-12 = 40 & 40/3 =13 ) divide by 3 for neutral

Plus I am not sure the XML will allow distribution of armies based on the number of player game.

WM