- Click image to enlarge.
Moderator: Cartographers
natty_dread wrote:Sorry I awas gonna post this way earlier but fell asleep... :p
Just to clarify: the rockets are starting points. All other territories start neutral...
neanderpaul14 wrote:natty_dread wrote:Sorry I awas gonna post this way earlier but fell asleep... :p
Just to clarify: the rockets are starting points. All other territories start neutral...
The landing sites can attack their rocket right??
Captain_Scarlet wrote:you are not actually indicating the actual landing sites for each country so its not meant to be an actual representation correct?
Evil DIMwit wrote:The gameplay looks decent, at a rough glance, though I'm not sure why you'd want separate bonus values for holding 12 and 13 seas; by the time you hold 12, you've probably got enough of the map that two more wouldn't matter much to you.
The weakest point of this map is probably that the connections around the seas and sinuses are really unclear. You have lines for some connections, borders for others -- and some are just plain confusing.
As far as theme, I think you're going in a good direction. If you're going to have Chinese and Japanese landing, though, I'd include Europe and India, too -- they've got their own lunar exploration programs going on.
cairnswk wrote:1. the first thing that struck me was the purple Rocket instructions...it blurrs into the black and is not immediately legible.
2. you've got two different icons for the Chinese yet the others all appear consistent.
3. I had to look up Sinus for its reference for the moon as i think of it as tissue cavities in the body. Can you place a small reference as to what a sinus is below those three indicators for those of us who are unfamiliar with this as lunar term, not just myself.
4. looking at the overall map, for me it's not immediately clear or instructions evident about how seas connect to craters and what sinuses do?????
5. and i think you'll have to look at the overall use of fonts and colours.
Captain_Scarlet wrote:you are not actually indicating the actual landing sites for each country so its not meant to be an actual representation correct?
Evil DIMwit wrote:The gameplay looks decent, at a rough glance, though I'm not sure why you'd want separate bonus values for holding 12 and 13 seas; by the time you hold 12, you've probably got enough of the map that two more wouldn't matter much to you.
The weakest point of this map is probably that the connections around the seas and sinuses are really unclear. You have lines for some connections, borders for others -- and some are just plain confusing.
As far as theme, I think you're going in a good direction. If you're going to have Chinese and Japanese landing, though, I'd include Europe and India, too -- they've got their own lunar exploration programs going on.
Finally, are there particular reasons for the one-way connections?
Looking better natty!! Though the text on the right side still seems a bit blurry. Anyway you can maybe make it metallic like you have the rocket labels??
natty_dread wrote:
As for the bonuses, I was thinking... when two players start from the same country, it will become a bloody competition of who gets the landing sites... I would suggest splitting tha landing site bonus in two as well:
+2 for 3 landing sites of a country
+5 for all landigns sites of a country
As for the seas, how about this:
5 seas +5
7 seas +8
10 seas +11
13 seas +16
isaiah40 wrote:As far as theme, I think you're going in a good direction. If you're going to have Chinese and Japanese landing, though, I'd include Europe and India, too -- they've got their own lunar exploration programs going on.
Thank you! As natty also mentioned, unfortunately there isn't room for everything. Would you suggest maybe changing maybe either Japan or China say, for the EU?
isaiah40 wrote:Finally, are there particular reasons for the one-way connections?
No particularly. Would you rather see everything be two attacks? We are open to suggestions, please let your voice be heard, we are just the makers, you are the players!!
Evil DIMwit wrote:I'd recommend splitting up Japan and China's rockets so each of China, Japan, India, and the EU have one rocket. The U.S. and Russia each having two makes since given their history -- though I'd also recommend making each of those countries' sets of landing sites visually distinct somehow -- maybe stripes for the second U.S. set and the Russian tricolor for the second Russian set?
I like this idea. Eight starting positions is good for all numbers of players.
And Sinus is Latin for Bay. I think you should either use all English or all Latin, with my vote for Latin, as it is equally accessible and understandable worldwide. In that case, the legend should talk about maria, not seas, and sinii, not bays. Of course we could put translations into the legend:
natty_dread wrote:I like this idea. Eight starting positions is good for all numbers of players.
We already have 8 starting positions. Each rocket is a starting position.
As for adding more countries or splitting japan & china into 2 countries each, I'm not very keen on it. It would screw the bonus system for one thing. I'll have to discuss this with isaiah, but I think we'd rather keep the 4 countries we have now.And Sinus is Latin for Bay. I think you should either use all English or all Latin, with my vote for Latin, as it is equally accessible and understandable worldwide. In that case, the legend should talk about maria, not seas, and sinii, not bays. Of course we could put translations into the legend:
Good idea. I will fix the legend in the next version.
ender516 wrote:I like the flags in V5. It might be better to put those flags on the rockets as well, rather than below, with the old icons still on the rockets.
I suppose trying to divide the landing sites into eight groups would lead to very small bonus zones, so you are right to leave India and the EU out of this.
Typos: maria, Aristellus
drunkmonkey wrote:I'm filing a C&A report right now. Its nice because they have a drop-down for "jefjef".
natty_dread wrote:I'll redraw the rockets for the next version.
Any latin experts here? I want to make sure all the names will be right.
So it's Maria instead of Marie (makes sense), and Aristillus = Aristellus?
The legend has "Aris. = Arstillus"
Users browsing this forum: No registered users