Poker Club [Quenched]

[WidowMakers]

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

I am going to do this in teh next update.

Next Update:

• Make legend text yellow
• remove graphics from inside of cards for clarity
• remove the lines under the 6's and 9's

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?

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

Tell me one thing the bonus distribution is the same of poker right?

If so, I think, it will be fairer if each player begins only with 2 territoties...

[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

Tell me one thing the bonus distribution is the same of poker right?

If so, I think, it will be fairer if each player begins only with 2 territoties...

Like I said. I don't think XML allows variable starting territories.
I.E. If you want 8 player games to start with 2 terts each (16 terts total) then 4 player games will have 4 each and 6 player with 3. That is the way XML works.

Can someone confirm that.

WM

[cicero]

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

It doesn't have to be yellow of course, but yes please do try some alternatives.

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

Other people - do you find the underlines necessary/helpful?

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.

Ships? WTF?
(It's ok - I know what you mean, but nice one - lol )

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

Removing everything including the rectangle would be good. I think that for style it might be nice to keep some of the J, Q, K graphics in ...

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

You are of course right re everyone not having a five card hand (doh!) and so the "+ X unrelated card(s)" part can be omitted in every case. With a couple of further modifications as below this makes them short enough to work well and fit:

• (Full House) : 3 of a card 2 of another > 3 cards of same value + 2 cards of same value > 3 of a kind + 1 pair
• (High Card) : no definition > 5 unrelated cards > no related cards

If space is still tight you could replace " in " and " of " with ", ".

[zimmah]

What if the attacking works like this. You can attack across suit or same number. So a 7 of hearts can attack any other 7 or heart.

Another idea is that you can attack same number or number higher or lower of same suit. So the 7 of hearts can attack any other 7 or 6 or 8 of hearts.

That way map layout order is not really important.

would be way too easy to get a flush

You are of course right re everyone not having a five card hand (doh!) and so the "+ X unrelated card(s)" part can be omitted in every case. With a couple of further modifications as below this makes them short enough to work well and fit:

* (Full House) : 3 of a card 2 of another > 3 cards of same value + 2 cards of same value > 3 of a kind + 1 pair
* (High Card) : no definition > 5 unrelated cards > no related cards

If space is still tight you could replace " in " and " of " with ", ".

i think you should write the XML so it will look at the best possible hand, i think it won't even be too hard to write. i'll see if i can find a good sollution for it and post it here. don't know if anyone is doing the XML already though.

anyways i think the you should make it so that only the best possible hand of 5 cards will count, no matter if you held 7 territories or 50. it will really make this map have unique gameplay. everyone will try to get the best hand possible.

[yeti_c]

i think you should write the XML so it will look at the best possible hand, i think it won't even be too hard to write. i'll see if i can find a good sollution for it and post it here. don't know if anyone is doing the XML already though.

anyways i think the you should make it so that only the best possible hand of 5 cards will count, no matter if you held 7 territories or 50. it will really make this map have unique gameplay. everyone will try to get the best hand possible.

This is exactly how the XML will work - I made a post earlier about the XML - and how it will be written - check that out for full details... (And hands off - this XML is mine!!!)

C.

[zimmah]

i think you should write the XML so it will look at the best possible hand, i think it won't even be too hard to write. i'll see if i can find a good sollution for it and post it here. don't know if anyone is doing the XML already though.

anyways i think the you should make it so that only the best possible hand of 5 cards will count, no matter if you held 7 territories or 50. it will really make this map have unique gameplay. everyone will try to get the best hand possible.

This is exactly how the XML will work - I made a post earlier about the XML - and how it will be written - check that out for full details... (And hands off - this XML is mine!!!)

C.

don't worry, i have plenty of other XML to write anyways

and i guess you don't need my help either,

[yeti_c]

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

No - that would put 5 clubs connecting each other.

Swapping with the 10 of Spades would be better.

C.

[WidowMakers]

So are there no more suggestions or issue with this map in its current gameplay layout?

If not then I can finish the graphics and start the large map. i don't want to spend a lot of time tweaking stuff (mainly army circle centering) if I am going to need to change it all over again.

WM

[yeti_c]

So are there no more suggestions or issue with this map in its current gameplay layout?

If not then I can finish the graphics and start the large map. i don't want to spend a lot of time tweaking stuff (mainly army circle centering) if I am going to need to change it all over again.

WM

I reckon the layout is set... so I'd go for it.

C.

[zimmah]

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?

i like the idea but i don't think you can make the XML like that yet, there is no such thing as 'random starting territories' it's either a starting territory or it's not.

[zimmah]

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

Tell me one thing the bonus distribution is the same of poker right?

If so, I think, it will be fairer if each player begins only with 2 territoties...

Like I said. I don't think XML allows variable starting territories.
I.E. If you want 8 player games to start with 2 terts each (16 terts total) then 4 player games will have 4 each and 6 player with 3. That is the way XML works.

Can someone confirm that.

WM

yes, you're right, and i don't know if we can ask a changeup for this map. because then a whole lot of maps need their XML updated also. the idea is nice but don't count on it. since it probably won't come in play anytime soon.

btw. if you get a 'high card' does that mean you'll get only the 3 'usual' armies, or do you get 6 total (the 3 usual armies + 3 for having a high card) since that would basicly mean you'll always have at least 6 armies?

[yeti_c]

yes, you're right, and i don't know if we can ask a changeup for this map. because then a whole lot of maps need their XML updated also. the idea is nice but don't count on it. since it probably won't come in play anytime soon.

btw. if you get a 'high card' does that mean you'll get only the 3 'usual' armies, or do you get 6 total (the 3 usual armies + 3 for having a high card) since that would basicly mean you'll always have at least 6 armies?

High card = 3.

All the bonuses equate to what you will get as a standard -> point of note - the minreinforcement will be set to 1 (lowest value) and the bonus received will be 1 less than the Legend. (Therefore equalling what you are expected to get)

C.

[zimmah]

yes, you're right, and i don't know if we can ask a changeup for this map. because then a whole lot of maps need their XML updated also. the idea is nice but don't count on it. since it probably won't come in play anytime soon.

btw. if you get a 'high card' does that mean you'll get only the 3 'usual' armies, or do you get 6 total (the 3 usual armies + 3 for having a high card) since that would basicly mean you'll always have at least 6 armies?

High card = 3.

All the bonuses equate to what you will get as a standard -> point of note - the minreinforcement will be set to 1 (lowest value) and the bonus received will be 1 less than the Legend. (Therefore equalling what you are expected to get)

C.

thanks, that's clear to me.

[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?

i like the idea but i don't think you can make the XML like that yet, there is no such thing as 'random starting territories' it's either a starting territory or it's not.

Oh... But see, for example in a Classic map, there are normally some neutral territories at the beginning if you increase that number in this map, so that there are a lot of neutral territories that makes every player starts only with two territories, you can make this... Don't know how XML works... but I'll study on that!

[yeti_c]

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?

i like the idea but i don't think you can make the XML like that yet, there is no such thing as 'random starting territories' it's either a starting territory or it's not.

Oh... But see, for example in a Classic map, there are normally some neutral territories at the beginning if you increase that number in this map, so that there are a lot of neutral territories that makes every player starts only with two territories, you can make this... Don't know how XML works... but I'll study on that!

It will never be 100% correct...

As say you have 16 starting territories (enough for an 8 player game)

Then in a 2 player game - everyone will have 5 territories.

C.

[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?

i like the idea but i don't think you can make the XML like that yet, there is no such thing as 'random starting territories' it's either a starting territory or it's not.

Oh... But see, for example in a Classic map, there are normally some neutral territories at the beginning if you increase that number in this map, so that there are a lot of neutral territories that makes every player starts only with two territories, you can make this... Don't know how XML works... but I'll study on that!

It will never be 100% correct...

As say you have 16 starting territories (enough for an 8 player game)

Then in a 2 player game - everyone will have 5 territories.

C.

Yep... I've already checked some XML's and in fact it seems not possible to make territories random... That's bad in fact :'( It would turn the game more intersting...

[yeti_c]

Yep... I've already checked some XML's and in fact it seems not possible to make territories random... That's bad in fact :'( It would turn the game more intersting...

Not sure what you mean by that - the territories are random?

C.

[zimmah]

Yep... I've already checked some XML's and in fact it seems not possible to make territories random... That's bad in fact :'( It would turn the game more intersting...

Not sure what you mean by that - the territories are random?

C.

he means there is no way you could get the XML to give every player 2 random territories and leave the rest neutral, no matter how many players will play the map.

ie. 6 players play the map and each of 6 player gets 2 fully random territories and the rest will start neutral, while if 3 persons plays they will also each get 2 random cards.

in current XML i don't believe that's possible, and i think that's what he's trying to say.

[zimmah]

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?

i like the idea but i don't think you can make the XML like that yet, there is no such thing as 'random starting territories' it's either a starting territory or it's not.

Oh... But see, for example in a Classic map, there are normally some neutral territories at the beginning if you increase that number in this map, so that there are a lot of neutral territories that makes every player starts only with two territories, you can make this... Don't know how XML works... but I'll study on that!

i'm not sure how neutrals normally work, except for the 'given neutrals' (you can devine some territories that will always start neutral no matter what (you can even divine how many neutrals you want on them, either 1 or 99999999 or anywhere in between (you can in fact go higher then 9999999 but i don't see the point in going that high anyways, but i don't think there is a limit in army numbers here, as long as it's not 0 or a negative number off course, and it must be a whole number)

i guess normally the map will divide any territories that do not always start as a neutral between the players (so number of territories divided by number of players) and if it's a whole number ie. 6 then everyone will get that amount of territories (in this case, 6) but if the number of territories can't be divided by the number of players, the 'spare' territories will be neutral, to make it fair for everyone. the only exeptions are 2 player games (1/3 of the terries will be player 1, 1/3 will be player 2 and 1/3 will be neutral i believe, i don't really play much 1 vs 1 but i believe it's divided like this) and another exeption is if either the mapmaker divines neutrals himself on the map (the non-neutral territories will be divided like stated above) or creates player starting points. which will be divided.

if there are both player starting points and non-neutral territories, the map will first divide the official starting territories between the players, and if there aren't enough, the map won't load (like trying to start an 8 player game on feudal empire for example) and if it has any spare ones, they will become neutral. and after that it will divide the non-neutral territories like normal.

[WidowMakers]

Version 5


Edits:

1) Legend text changed to yellow. I think this is much easier to read now. Thanks for the suggestion cicero
2) Added the poker chips
3) Adjusted the legend text Thanks again cicero
4) Removed the lines from under the 6's and 9's
5) Removed the blue boxes and everything inside from eh cards (except the J, Q, K)
6) Switched the 2 od clubs and 10 of spades.

Comments

WM

[AndyDufresne]

I have a feeling like there should be a coaster on this table somewhere...maybe even a stain (unless this is one of those high class joints ).

Maybe add a divison line between "High Card" and "No Territory Bonus" so it is easy to tell they do not go together. Or perhaps it's own little outlined box.

Regarding the wording for "Two Pair"...perhaps change "another two cards" to: "2 cards of same value + 2 more cards of same value." or instead of more..."additional."

Up at the top of the image, is that a 10 of clubs? It's somewhat hard to make out.

Also, do you want there to be any "dead end" cards...I.E. only connected to one other card? The Jack of Diamonds at the bottom of the image only touches 1 other card, while it looks like all other cards touch atleast 2.


--Andy

[Ditocoaf]

What exactly determines whether you receive the "high card" bonus or not? Admittedly I haven't read through the thread, but this sort of thing should be apparent in the map itself, no?

Or maybe I'm just being dense...

[cicero]

What exactly determines whether you receive the "high card" bonus or not? Admittedly I haven't read through the thread, but this sort of thing should be apparent in the map itself, no?

Or maybe I'm just being dense...

If you have none of the other, higher, combinations then you have a "high card" by default. It could be more apparent from the map if WM included the definition - "no related cards" for high cards as suggested previously by yours truly ...

[cicero]

Maybe add a divison line between "High Card" and "No Territory Bonus" so it is easy to tell they do not go together. Or perhaps it's own little outlined box.

Adding the definition of "no related cards" to "High Card" as per my previous post will achieve this separation.

Again the use of red for "No Territory Bonus" makes it hard for us colourblinders to read. Also, when I first managed to read it I read it as "NOT erritory Bonus" which may just be another colourblind effect, but I think the spacing/kerning may be out?

Regarding the wording for "Two Pair"...perhaps change "another two cards" to: "2 cards of same value + 2 more cards of same value" or instead of more..."additional."

I like Andy's suggestion.

Up at the top of the image, is that a 10 of clubs? It's somewhat hard to make out.

Also, do you want there to be any "dead end" cards...I.E. only connected to one other card? The Jack of Diamonds at the bottom of the image only touches 1 other card, while it looks like all other cards touch at least 2.

That's a good point re dead end cards as that seems to weaken the map somewhat ... I'll admit I've not been focussing on gameplay recently on this map - what do others think?

Re the slightly difficult to read 10 of Clubs this could be corrected by putting it "the right way up" and at the same time disconnecting it from one of the two cards it's touching hence partly addressing the other point.