[Abandoned] - Danelaw

[thenobodies80]

I think that there's a lot to do on this map, both graphics and gameplay could be improved...
But, you are on the right way and after all these good updates it's time to move this map in the main foundry, where you can focus on your new gameplay

Welcome to the foundry proper!



Have a nice day
thenobodies80

[el-presidente]

Thanks!

@naxus- could you put up a pol that askes how would you like your nuturals? with the options higher the same and lower.

[naxus]

Thanks!

@naxus- could you put up a pol that askes how would you like your nuturals? with the options higher the same and lower.

Polls up.

If we do keep the ships as a one way then a autodeploy will needed to be added to the denmark lands and also we'll need to make the map objective.

To make this objective we could have it hold all cities or 4/5 maybe?

[captainwalrus]

I think you messed up the poll. why is "nordic nations", "Denmark alone" and "nothing" an option?

[el-presidente]

I think you messed up the poll. why are "nordic nations", "Denmark alone" and "nothing" an option?

those are from the last poll I think.

[el-presidente]

Small version test.
sucsess?

[naxus]

polls jacked up.Im workin on it.Keeps throwing up random options from old poll

[Teflon Kris]

If you wish to keep the current gameplay set-up (i.e. attack any killer-neutral boats one-way)then you would need to either:

(a) Make the map onjective-based
(b) Have a boat which travels the other-way (the return ship?) - this would be a bit like Naval Superiority in Eastern Hemisphere. It would possibly tricky to work out how it would work so that players dont just aim to go there at the beginning of the game to take out opponents. A high value killer-neutral perhaps? In terms of being logical - this return ship would be accessed from either the attack ships or the landing points?
(c) A combination of (a) and (b). This would mean that a high-value killer-neutral return ship wouldn't become an obective in itself and would become an additional feature, sometimes-used.

[captainwalrus]

You really need to make the text that says "you win if you hold all cities" bigger. It is not noticeable at all.

[naxus]

If you wish to keep the current gameplay set-up (i.e. attack any killer-neutral boats one-way)then you would need to either:

(a) Make the map onjective-based
(b) Have a boat which travels the other-way (the return ship?) - this would be a bit like Naval Superiority in Eastern Hemisphere. It would possibly tricky to work out how it would work so that players dont just aim to go there at the beginning of the game to take out opponents. A high value killer-neutral perhaps? In terms of being logical - this return ship would be accessed from either the attack ships or the landing points?
(c) A combination of (a) and (b). This would mean that a high-value killer-neutral return ship wouldn't become an obective in itself and would become an additional feature, sometimes-used.

Possibly make the route 8 boat into the return boat?With say 20 killer nuetrals?

[Teflon Kris]

Maybe 20 might be a bit high - the whole debate about neutral values is best undertaken once the overall gameplay structure has been addressed - i.e. being able to attack Denmark / objective.

On the subject of an objective - getting a balance so that an objective is the right level of difficulty is not easy. Make it too easy and the game becomes a pure race to the objective. Too difficult and it will only be achieved by a player who would have been about to eliminate all his opponents anyway (as in Peloponnesian War in its current Beta format). Normally, a map can function if the balance errs a little in the direction of pointless (e.g. Peloponnesian War works well even though the objective is pretty pointless). However, if there is no way of attacking Denmark then the balance has to be pretty perfect to enable the map to work (as the objective is the only way of a game ending rather than being an almost eternal stalemate).

Let's imagine that the map could work with no way of attacking Denmark and an objective. Players move in to the mainland then battle it out over the cities and settlements to win. Some skill is required at the beginning to time when to move in, and where, and to fend off opponents as they come through the boats. Previous discussion suggests some people think it may even be an advantage not to go first (although players who have understood this logic and do go first would have an advantage as they would deploy and wait). Then there would presumably be a bit of consolidation as players take and build on the auto-deploys (this is where we analyse neutral values) - then battles between the cities. If this is how you wish to proceed then we can move straight on to bonus and neutrals discussion (with a correct poll up or no poll) to see if we can achieve the right balance - i.e. check and ensure that there wont be a stalemate or that a player doesn't win by being first to grab a city/settlement. Imagine the scenario where several players have a city and settlement each - as far as I can imagine this would be similar to many games where several players have auto-deploy bonuses - they would then ensure they keep them and have skirmishes to prevent one another grabbing area bonuses (which we can analyse). We need to be sure that eventually somebody would start attacking someone else's cities / settlements and the battles would produce a winner. If not we have stalemate. By analysing bonuses and neutral values we can address this question. If we can be sure of this then the perceived problem of not being able to attack Denmark may not matter - only if it is very unlikely that an almost defeated player who only has a Denmark Kingdom left can attack again through the neutrals to prolong the game. I'm not sure we can address this - a player on Denmark could build with his 3 armies for a couple of rounds then attack. In a no spoils game the attack may not be effective enough to stop someone winning but in a flat rate game, even though a player with only a Denmark Kingdom is extremely unlikely to win they may be able to seriously disrupt two (or more) players battling to achieve the objective and therefore prolong the game - annoyingly. Build-up games progress when one of the players is gradually weakened then eliminated which cant happen here. I feel we need to analyse this a great deal if Denmark remains un-attackable. We may conclude we have to come back to the discussion of making Denmark attack-able.

So, what do you think? Denmark return route or not?

[captainwalrus]

You also have to remember that if the return route is too easy to take, the game will just be people racing to get to the return route and be able to eliminate people, at least in assasin games.
I say yes return route but heavy nuturals.

[el-presidente]

Well, we have a close tie between keep it the same and keep it the same, so we will wait a bit for more results.


naxus, is it that hard to fix the poll?

How many nuturals for the return ship? 15?

Should there be autodeploy on the denmark teritories?

[el-presidente]

OK, so I am working on a new version but I have to fix some things that weren't accurate before. It will take a bit, hang in there.

[Teflon Kris]

The Return Ship

Maybe 15on the return territory is a bit high - ideally it should be set so that a player that is nearly dead can be finished-off without the killer having to throw everything at it - but at the same time, as discussed, not too low so that players can eliminate each other early doors - maybe 10? The exact value can be adjusted at a later stage if need be.

[thenobodies80]

[Deleted poll]

When your poll ends, send always a pm to one of the foundry moderators.
Only mods can collect results and reset your poll.
If you try to take the poll down yourself, the record of votes gets lost or messed up.

[el-presidente]

I still have to put in the return ship, but so far, I can't find space.

[naxus]

I still have to put in the return ship, but so far, I can't find space.

We could take out the scotland part and put it up there maybe?

10-15 sounds a little low considering the bonuses, 20 possibly?

[porkenbeans]

Nice map, I was wondering why the example in your sig is richer in color and also has the lat. and long. lines. ?
I like that version of this map more. It reminds me of an antique globe.

[captainwalrus]

Nice map, I was wondering why the example in your sig is richer in color and also has the lat. and long. lines. ?
I like that version of this map more. It reminds me of an antique globe.

I liked the lat/long lines better, but I think someone pointed out that they weren't invented untill after this map would take place, so it seemed pointless. Possible now that I am not the only one supporting the idea they will consider it more closely.

[naxus]

Nice map, I was wondering why the example in your sig is richer in color and also has the lat. and long. lines. ?
I like that version of this map more. It reminds me of an antique globe.

My sig is from a much earlier version

Nice map, I was wondering why the example in your sig is richer in color and also has the lat. and long. lines. ?
I like that version of this map more. It reminds me of an antique globe.

I liked the lat/long lines better, but I think someone pointed out that they weren't invented untill after this map would take place, so it seemed pointless. Possible now that I am not the only one supporting the idea they will consider it more closely.

Also some people pointed out that it was kinda wierd on the eyes

[porkenbeans]

Maybe if they were thinner and faded a little, they could work. Anyways, I would like to see the colors pumped back up, to what they are in the sig. I rather like this map. The fonts are perfect, and I like the simplicity of the non-beveled land. There are however a few inlets that could use the same shading treatments that you are using. Also, since you are not using any texture on the land, maybe a water texture would work to contrast that. Just an idea, would need to see it before I could say. All in all, I like where its going. good luck on this one.

[el-presidente]

OK, we could go back to the old graphics, but I don't really like moving back in progress like that. There were many people who liked the new graphics and how it looks like an old faded atlis. In my opinion, adding texture to the water and making the colors more rich would make it just another conquerclub map, and not at all look like an old map from some big book in an attic somewhere. Just my opinion, but if more people want them back, I will bring rich color back.

Also, I will post a few old maps from atlises to show you where I am coming from, but I have no time to find them now.

[Teflon Kris]

I quite like the faded graphics style. Oak's Indian Empire is a good example of how it is possible to have the attic style and get away with a bit of colour. I'm no graphics expert though.

How about a poll?

[porkenbeans]

If you wanted to go with the old "attic" parchment paper look. It might be cool. You would need to tweak around with the colors a bit though. I'm thinking a touch darker overal, for the land, and, some subtle color changes to better distinguish the bonus areas.

Click image to enlarge.

Also I found something that might interest you. Check out the wave action on the shore. And those killer mountains. Very true to the period.

Click image to enlarge.

Check out Cab's map, if you haven't already.
http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewto ... 7#p2197987