Moderator: Cartographers
JJ41375 wrote:Looks like a great idea. My only comment would be there are 10 auto-deploys of +1, so unless there 2 or 5 players, or some are neutral to start, there may be an advantage to a player(s).
Other than that I would love to see this map and be able to play it.
Good luck.
JJ
DJ Teflon wrote:Nice idea - I think you might still need to make it clearer what the attack routes between rings are.
Will the auto-deploy territories start neutral?
Keep going - I see you have good support for this .
sinctheassasin wrote:It would be pretty funny and fresh to have the outer territs be the names of our mods, then closet to the center, our admin, and then lack in the center.
Just a thought
iceco wrote:I love the idea, but graphics wise, I think you've overdone the arrows now
The circles are a bit lost in all the arrows. Also, adding an obstacle here and there where normally a route would go, could make it more strategic to posses certain areas over others.
iceco wrote:I love the idea, but graphics wise, I think you've overdone the arrows now
The circles are a bit lost in all the arrows. Also, adding an obstacle here and there where normally a route would go, could make it more strategic to posses certain areas over others.
Anyway it is not so strange to see itsinctheassasin wrote:I don't really think that would work with the idea of the map. An obstacle would be a real mess actually, clogging up gameplay like a turd clogs a toilet... I like my comparisons!
DJ Teflon wrote:Hi
I like the progress on this map, nice graphics - there are a few things I dont understand though.
Clockwise or anticlockwise rings: There are often arrows showing one-way attacks - this makes sense for the sideways attacks but isnt it already one-way for the clockwise /anti-clockwise attacks.
yes, they are the points were you can attack both directions (that is way the puddle ). The movement is clockwise or anti-clockwise these indicate the points where you can still advancing (in both sides) , so movement allowed.DJ Teflon wrote:The puddle shapes - do they indicate where sideways attacks can or cant take place.
DJ Teflon wrote:The Medius-Fuscina bonus. Where is Fuscina?
DJ Teflon wrote:I like the fact that there are rings in opposite directions - it will make players have to carefully plan moves around the board.
The Scutum neutral values may be a bit high though - I can imagine many games where players aim for the gladiators and the centre but ignore the scutums perhaps. Maybe a lower neutral value and correspondingly lower bonus value?
To be considered a Working Draft a project must be more than just an idea; a Draft should have a clear thematic focus, a plan for how the gameplay will work, and a basic image which should include:
1. Territory Labels - temporary names or numbers will suffice, and are always open to change.
2. Borders/Paths/Impassables - it should be made clear where territories do/do not connect.
3. Bonus Areas - where combinations/groups of territories will award a bonus, this should be indicated on the map.
4. Legend - speculative bonus values and explanations of any attack rules or gameplay features.
Draft images should not be larger than 630x600px (small image) or 840x800px (large image).
iceco wrote:It still doesn't work 100%, but it's getting better.
What I see:
- You still have to replace some "U"s with "V"s. done
- The Gladiusses shouldn't all be horizontal on the map, make them point in the direction they will be attacking.done
- I don't know how much work it would be, but maybe the lines between territories on the same ring should be slightly curved to hint at what direction you move in, I think that would make it feel a bit more "natural".I agree but I dont like and also it is a lot of work, mainly because the efact is similar to make the lines wider (I mean you need more space) I even tried with angles and doesnt work ... But I keep in mind the good idea
- The graphics for the helmets and shields are quite nice, but they don't really blend in with the rest of the map. While I wouldn't know anything really helpful, I do have experienced myself that making them only slightly transparent (between 70 and 90%) really helps sometimes.I made with shields, ...
- The blood stains to symbolise two-way attacks don't really look like much. Maybe just remove the border at these places, while making it more visible everywhere else (otherwise these openings will be hard to detect.) I prefer the stains
- The arrows indicating two one-ways from the same territory should be replaced by smaller, less intrusive, arrows, like the small ones that now show single one-ways on some places. (Which themselves could be left out, as those one-ways follow the normal rules.) I made them a bit smallers
- Maybe territory rounds should be added as well. Try it. I dont see it
I hope that's helpful and not too discouraging.
iceco wrote:A quick suggestion I forgot to add last time:
Save it in .png instead of .jpg, if you can. Normally it will look better (no pixellation in places like between the arrows on the minimap), just try it and tell me if it looks better.
Conan29 wrote:Definetly getting better. I like it. Do some tweaking... make sure people arnt going to have questions, and maybe drop a few of the bonous icons. Keep up the good work.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users