WWII-Stalingrad [QUENCHED]

[cairnswk]

So the XML is OK now.

[cairnswk]

Click image to enlarge.

Files

http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s282 ... d_V36S.jpg

http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s282 ... d_V36L.jpg

http://h1.ripway.com/cairnswk/_stalingrad_220510.xml

[lt_oddball]

Above picture is an OLD picture of last year.

woah, woah..I noticed something:
The R01 arrow over the river is not bidirectional anymore..as it was some long time before.

Was this intentionally removed ?

[cairnswk]

....
woah, woah..I noticed something:
The R01 arrow over the river is not bidirectional anymore..as it was some long time before.
Was this intentionally removed ?

Yes lt_oddball.
When i was re-doing/checking the xml, i noticed that R01 could not be conquered.
I don't think that was the intention, was it.
I should at least be conquerable from the Russian 62nd.
Those arrows are inidicating one-ways.

[pamoa]

I think the problem is that you can enter the russian side only by gen chuikov

[cairnswk]

I think the problem is that you can enter the russian side only by gen chuikov

so should R01 to Golodny Island have no arrow on that dotted line?
so one can enter also from that end?

[lt_oddball]

I think the problem is that you can enter the russian side only by gen chuikov

so should R01 to Golodny Island have no arrow on that dotted line?
so one can enter also from that end?

Yes, yes..that was the idea.
So then you'd have to remove the arrow tip on R01 on the map, so that one can "invade" the soviet east-bank from the "german" west bank over the two flanks (and the "soviet" player can invade the other direction in the center of the river/map).

[cairnswk]

I think the problem is that you can enter the russian side only by gen chuikov

so should R01 to Golodny Island have no arrow on that dotted line?
so one can enter also from that end?

Yes, yes..that was the idea.
So then you'd have to remove the arrow tip on R01 on the map, so that one can "invade" the soviet east-bank from the "german" west bank over the two flanks (and the "soviet" player can invade the other direction in the center of the river/map).

OK please refresh, that should be fixed,
and the border has been added to Golodny Island in the xml.

Click image to enlarge.

http://h1.ripway.com/cairnswk/_stalingrad_220510.xml

[ender516]

After the discussion of the arrows, I started looking more closely at the river, and I wonder if the crossing of the route between R03 and R04 with the one between R05 and R06 is going to lead to whining. The picture does not unambiguously convey what the XML defines. Is the crossover vital to gameplay? If R03 and R06 were connected and R04 and R05 were, there would be no chance for confusion about the possibility of everyone attacking everyone else. Similarly, it might be better if the route from R07 to R08 and the one from R07 to R09 were separate along their entire length, so that no one thinks there is a direct route between R08 and R09.

[lt_oddball]

If R03 and R06 were connected and R04 and R05 were, there would be no chance for confusion about the possibility of everyone attacking everyone else. Similarly, it might be better if the route from R07 to R08 and the one from R07 to R09 were separate along their entire length, so that no one thinks there is a direct route between R08 and R09.

I have no problem with either view (as-is and proposal).
I always found the crossed crossing a bit strange ; the crossings R3-R4 and R5-R6 seem unnecessary long (being under fire etc.), but I supposed it had to do with the historical correct crossings of those days ?
Rationally I think the proposal of ender516 makes more sense.

[cairnswk]

If R03 and R06 were connected and R04 and R05 were, there would be no chance for confusion about the possibility of everyone attacking everyone else. Similarly, it might be better if the route from R07 to R08 and the one from R07 to R09 were separate along their entire length, so that no one thinks there is a direct route between R08 and R09.

I have no problem with either view (as-is and proposal).
I always found the crossed crossing a bit strange ; the crossings R3-R4 and R5-R6 seem unnecessary long (being under fire etc.), but I supposed it had to do with the historical correct crossings of those days ?
Rationally I think the proposal of ender516 makes more sense.

I am happy to proceed to BETA with this as is.
I think the crossings will stir the gameplay, if someone doesn't understsand too well, i can't imagine it being an issue since most people wouldn't want to play this anyway due it's complexity.
The map has been out there for a year now, and that should have afforded plenty of opportunity for people to examine and ask questions.

[natty dread]

I think it's fine as is... put it in beta, then if you get complaints about the connections you can always change them.

Let's just hope this won't be in beta as long as schloss

[MrBenn]

Hey there Cairns.

If you want some comments - I can provide an info of how Russian names and places should be spelled. I can see some misspells (should be kuporosnaya, Mameev). Also, you have an inconsistency in namings. For example, Zaitsev and Sheykin. Both have the same sound (well, I can't insert the sound here) and you spell it through 'y' one time and through 'i' another time - that is wrong.

Also, some terrs have mix of Russian and English. I think it is better to decide how you want to name them - full Russian or full English. For example, Rynok means marketplace. Mameev hill is Mameev Kurgan in Russian. On the other hand you have Hospital instead of Bolnitsa (or just Gospital).

So if you would like to have perfect namings here - please say so and I will comment each terr name .

^^ I'm happy with the current combination of names.
It is not my intention to seek perfection.

Dako has raised a legitimate concern, and you can't refute it with some gubbins

If R03 and R06 were connected and R04 and R05 were, there would be no chance for confusion about the possibility of everyone attacking everyone else. Similarly, it might be better if the route from R07 to R08 and the one from R07 to R09 were separate along their entire length, so that no one thinks there is a direct route between R08 and R09.

I have no problem with either view (as-is and proposal).
I always found the crossed crossing a bit strange ; the crossings R3-R4 and R5-R6 seem unnecessary long (being under fire etc.), but I supposed it had to do with the historical correct crossings of those days ?
Rationally I think the proposal of ender516 makes more sense.

I am happy to proceed to BETA with this as is.
I think the crossings will stir the gameplay, if someone doesn't understsand too well, i can't imagine it being an issue since most people wouldn't want to play this anyway due it's complexity.
The map has been out there for a year now, and that should have afforded plenty of opportunity for people to examine and ask questions.

[/quote]
More gubbins cairns

While this is my favourite map you've worked on for a long time, it needs to be clear. Confusion and complexity are different sides of the same coin... I'm happy with complex, but am not happy with confusion!

[MrBenn]

Seeing as there have been no further comments, I was going to have another look at the river-crossing paths - but it's difficult to do so when you've taken the images down.

If there are any typos that need correcting then let's get them fixed (I'm not going to push for an overhaul of the naming schema, but can see how I may have misrepresented myself). As for the connections, I can no longer see them but as long as you are convinced they are as clear as possible (and I think we're only talking about where the river lines cross each other?), then I'll be satisfied to see if there is any outcry during Beta.

What you do next is up to you cairns. I'd like to see this finished, but if you walk away from it now, it wouldn't be the first practically-completed map to be abandoned/recycled.

[cairnswk]

Seeing as there have been no further comments, I was going to have another look at the river-crossing paths - but it's difficult to do so when you've taken the images down.

If there are any typos that need correcting then let's get them fixed (I'm not going to push for an overhaul of the naming schema, but can see how I may have misrepresented myself). As for the connections, I can no longer see them but as long as you are convinced they are as clear as possible (and I think we're only talking about where the river lines cross each other?), then I'll be satisfied to see if there is any outcry during Beta.

What you do next is up to you cairns. I'd like to see this finished, but if you walk away from it now, it wouldn't be the first practically-completed map to be abandoned/recycled.

Yes, images were taken down because of your last comments.
Basically i am not interested in doing anything more to this map...so it goes as is, to beta, or not at all.
Call me what you want, i simply don't care anymore.
XML is finished.
Get this thing stamped and out for test play.

[lt_oddball]

I am for bèta play as well.
Let's go .

[ender516]

I am for bèta play as well.
Let's go .

Although I am not pleased with the "I'm taking my ball and going home" tactic of taking down images, I too think it is time for beta.

[cairnswk]

Click image to enlarge.

Files

http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s282 ... d_V36S.jpg

http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s282 ... d_V36L.jpg

http://h1.ripway.com/cairnswk/_stalingrad_220510.xml

[MrBenn]

I know you're going to think I'm a pain for asking...

Could you just clarify how the river attacks work - I only ask as there are no arrows from R01...

I'm assuming that R01 can be attacked by Golodny Island and R 64th 36th Division (and vice versa)

What about R02? The arrow clearly indicates it can one-way attack to Golodny Island. But what about the Grain Silo? Is it a one-way attack to R02 from the grain silo, or a two-way attack?

Can you attack R03 from R04? Or do the one-way attacks go all the way down the line?


This is the only question I have about the river crossings, and may have been what I was alluding to previously.

[cairnswk]

I know you're going to think I'm a pain for asking...
Could you just clarify how the river attacks work - I only ask as there are no arrows from R01...

.................between terrs has always to my knowledge been used as a link between terrs indicating that the attack is both ways.

..................> has always been used to indicate a one-way attack.

therefore if there are no arrows between either pieces of land and R01, then they are both way borders.

I'm assuming that R01 can be attacked by Golodny Island and R 64th 36th Division (and vice versa)

i would have thought that would be plain as daylight !

What about R02? The arrow clearly indicates it can one-way attack to Golodny Island. But what about the Grain Silo? Is it a one-way attack to R02 from the grain silo, or a two-way attack?

Working on the above the one-way attack is from R02 to Golodny Island.
R02 borders the Grain Silo bothways, since there are no arrows.

Can you attack R03 from R04? Or do the one-way attacks go all the way down the line?

Are there any onw-way arrows between those two terrs?

Which means troops from R 64th 36th Div Inf can transfer back and forths between that terr and R03 and R04 as much as they like but cannot come from the Refinery to R04 as that arrow is a one-way arrow from R04 to the Refinery.

Now the xml stamp please.

[MrBenn]

[MrBenn]

Beta - Quenching

---The Final Forge period has concluded for the WWII Stalingrad Map. All objections have had their time. The Foundry and I hereby brand this map with the Foundry Beta Brand. Let it be known that this map is now ready for BETA Play. After an extended period of time in BETA and once all quirks and issues have been resolved, the map will be put into Full Play (barring any Lack vetoes).

Conquer Club, enjoy!

While the map is in BETA Play, there are a couple of administrative tasks that are required of the mapmaker(s) in addition to the initial gameplay testing:

1. Please ensure that the first post of the thread contains all the necessary information to help future visitors to the development thread; it's particularly important to ensure the most recent images are there, along with any helpful guides (such as gameplay quirks/nuances or the location/size of any starting neutrals etc.)
2. Please update the Map Information Portal with details of your map
3. Finally, it is the responsibility of the mapmaker(s) to ensure that they respond to further feedback in a timely and constructive manner.

--MrBenn

[samuelc812]

Congrats Cairns

~Sam

[ender516]

Hooray! Time to try this out and probably get my ass kicked.

[cairnswk]

Beta - Quenching

---The Final Forge period has concluded for the WWII Stalingrad Map. All objections have had their time. The Foundry and I hereby brand this map with the Foundry Beta Brand. Let it be known that this map is now ready for BETA Play. After an extended period of time in BETA and once all quirks and issues have been resolved, the map will be put into Full Play (barring any Lack vetoes).

Conquer Club, enjoy!

While the map is in BETA Play, there are a couple of administrative tasks that are required of the mapmaker(s) in addition to the initial gameplay testing:

1. Please ensure that the first post of the thread contains all the necessary information to help future visitors to the development thread; it's particularly important to ensure the most recent images are there, along with any helpful guides (such as gameplay quirks/nuances or the location/size of any starting neutrals etc.)
2. Please update the Map Information Portal with details of your map
3. Finally, it is the responsibility of the mapmaker(s) to ensure that they respond to further feedback in a timely and constructive manner.

--MrBenn

Thanks MrBenn. I look forward to getting some action on this.

Congrats Cairns
~Sam

Thanks Sam. Long Journey.

Hooray! Time to try this out and probably get my ass kicked.

As soon as it's up, i send out some invites guys.