Eight Thoughts [Quenched]

[DiM]

how did you make the impassable borders?? is that an image or did you draw it?

[joystickgenie]

I’m a little confused with the bonuses with this map. For the nations with two colors, are their bonuses going to be exclusive to one color or will the give bonuses for both. For example if I control all of love and all of war do I get both bonuses or do I only get the bonus for war and not love because passion has already been used to give me the bonus for war.

Other then that I think hat the image is a little too busy for my taste. Maybe it’s the black background or the fact that everything on the map has its own texture and shape but it seems very chaotic to me.

[boberz]

thats exactly what i love it is just like the mind but i think the texture in places could be toned down a little

[WidowMakers]

how did you make the impassable borders?? is that an image or did you draw it?

Like I said before. All of the graphics were made with the paintbrush ( Ithink the impassible boardes ranged from 4-8 pixels). I then right clicked on the layer and selected Blending Options. Under this dialog there are the following options:
General Blending
Drop Shadow
Inner Shadow
Outer GLow
Inner GLow
Bevel and Emboss
___Contour
___Texture
Satin
Color Overlay
Gradient Overlay
Texture Overlal
Stroke

I think for the impassible Boarders painted the shape I wanted with a black paint brush (again 4-8 pixels in diameter). I then used the Blendign options and selected Outer glow/Inner Glow/Bevel and Emboss (with texture) /Color Overlay and Gradient overlay. The parameters of these options were tweaked. It outputed a textured glowing silvery looking metal boarder.

Everything else was done with this preocess also (However each layer doesn't use every Blending option).

I’m a little confused with the bonuses with this map. For the nations with two colors, are their bonuses going to be exclusive to one color or will the give bonuses for both. For example if I control all of love and all of war do I get both bonuses or do I only get the bonus for war and not love because passion has already been used to give me the bonus for war.

If you occupy Compassion and War you will get +8 for holdign all of 2 thoughts. Since you own all of the territories that allow for the bonus.

But if one player owns Compassion and another War whoever has the Passion will be the one that gets the +4 bonus.

[Coleman]

I’m a little confused with the bonuses with this map. For the nations with two colors, are their bonuses going to be exclusive to one color or will the give bonuses for both. For example if I control all of love and all of war do I get both bonuses or do I only get the bonus for war and not love because passion has already been used to give me the bonus for war.

Other then that I think hat the image is a little too busy for my taste. Maybe it’s the black background or the fact that everything on the map has its own texture and shape but it seems very chaotic to me.

To control all of war you need the purely red territories and Tech and Passion, to control all of compassion you need the purely pink territories and Freedom and Passion, if you have all of those you'll get the bonuses for both. It is like the two color territories (space station) on the space map.

EDIT: For some reason the book seems like it would make more sense for knowledge and the scales would make more sense for Law.

[WidowMakers]

EDIT: For some reason the book seems like it would make more sense for knowledge and the scales would make more sense for Law.

SHOOT! I messed up. OK that will be fixed. As long as people feel sthis map is good.

[DiM]

how did you make the impassable borders?? is that an image or did you draw it?

Like I said before. All of the graphics were made with the paintbrush ( Ithink the impassible boardes ranged from 4-8 pixels). I then right clicked on the layer and selected Blending Options. Under this dialog there are the following options:
General Blending
Drop Shadow
Inner Shadow
Outer GLow
Inner GLow
Bevel and Emboss
___Contour
___Texture
Satin
Color Overlay
Gradient Overlay
Texture Overlal
Stroke

I think for the impassible Boarders painted the shape I wanted with a black paint brush (again 4-8 pixels in diameter). I then used the Blendign options and selected Outer glow/Inner Glow/Bevel and Emboss (with texture) /Color Overlay and Gradient overlay. The parameters of these options were tweaked. It outputed a textured glowing silvery looking metal boarder.

Everything else was done with this preocess also (However each layer doesn't use every Blending option).

10x.

i use fireworks 8 and i have no clue on photoshop but i really like what you did so i'll learn photoshop.

[MonRepos]

Looks real good to me, and the playability is appealing, graphically i love it, but some to continent territories(like passing away) could look better while passion looks great.

[hecter]

I love it! I hope Andy does to.

[EvilOtto]

Does anyone have any suggestions. I am going to stop working on this map until we can agree on the gameplay.

Great work so far, huge progress from the beginning, but I think there is still a lot to do here. I mostly like the graphics... at least the map itself. The description on the right is a bit busy and confusing.

The names of the center territories in each pie slice are also the names of the continents? This could be a little confusing, but if true then it seems redundant to list them twice. Could the continent be called "Death" and the middle territory be called "Center of Death" or "Seat of Death" or something like that?

Also there are two different symbols related to each pie slice, a square textured symbol, and an icon... is there a way to just use the icon?

The chart of groupings in the bottom right is very distracting... could we just describe the rule here instead of showing all eight ways you can apply the rule. You get a bonus for holding a triangle: any "seat" and the seats on either side of the opposite seat... doesn't work well with just words but with a little octagon diagram it could be clear.

With the continents sharing territories, only a max of three players can hold continents at the same time (a fourth player can get a three territory "group bonus"). Also, these three players with the early lead are all separated from each other, so they don't have to fight (normally you want the strongest players to fight each other for balance). They 'can' fight through the center spot, but there is no pressure to do so, they are more likely to go after a neighboring slice.

Pie slices are referred to as "thoughts" but there is also a "thought" territory and a "central thought" territory. Awkward?

What if each continent only shared one territory with another (instead of two)? What if four of the impassible borders were shorter (so affluence could attack comfort, for example)?

The logo (8 central thoughts...) seems a bit bloody. Is that really the over-arching theme here? I would expect the "8" to match the color/texture of the "central thought" space...

Wow, sorry for the long post, but I didn't want to do eight posts... or maybe that would have been more appropriate!

[Coleman]

The names of the center territories in each pie slice are also the names of the continents? This could be a little confusing, but if true then it seems redundant to list them twice. Could the continent be called "Death" and the middle territory be called "Center of Death" or "Seat of Death" or something like that?

I think that may be a good idea. I like Seat of Death. I could bust out the god names from where I got the idea but then I would definitely be facing copyright issues. Also, people seem to be into the philosophical thing now more then the cult religious stuff I started with.

Also there are two different symbols related to each pie slice, a square textured symbol, and an icon... is there a way to just use the icon?

I have a slight fear that people will get confused and think they need the whole continents for the extra bonus instead of the one space with the icon in it. The texture seems to be a play on the World 2.0 way of explaining it where the boxes just have the standard boring color inside. Since these are textured the boxes don't just have the color, but the texture as well.

The chart of groupings in the bottom right is very distracting... could we just describe the rule here instead of showing all eight ways you can apply the rule. You get a bonus for holding a triangle: any "seat" and the seats on either side of the opposite seat... doesn't work well with just words but with a little octagon diagram it could be clear.

Yeah I have some graphic ideas for explaining it instead. I don't know if Widow would want to create another version and have a vote between them.

With the continents sharing territories, only a max of three players can hold continents at the same time (a fourth player can get a three territory "group bonus"). Also, these three players with the early lead are all separated from each other, so they don't have to fight (normally you want the strongest players to fight each other for balance). They 'can' fight through the center spot, but there is no pressure to do so, they are more likely to go after a neighboring slice.

In CCU people often fight over Quad and harass each other's bonuses with it. I did a play through with 2 of my friends on paper using risk armies and that is how it worked out. I could try to get a larger group to see how a 6 player game might play. We could maybe give a simple +1 for the center. Granted it may not seem fair as someone will usually start with it but there is the same thing in Montreal.

Pie slices are referred to as "thoughts" but there is also a "thought" territory and a "central thought" territory. Awkward?

Yeah, maybe Thought should be named something else. I originally just had the center territory called 'Center'. I almost called Thought 'Wisdom' instead but knowledge and wisdom aren't always the same thing, I guess I could ask WidowMakers to change it to Wisdom though, I agree that may be 'awkward'

What if each continent only shared one territory with another (instead of two)? What if four of the impassible borders were shorter (so affluence could attack comfort, for example)?

My department! Okay, you are the first person to think that and I don't want to just jump into your boat unless more people think that might be a better idea then the current set up.

The logo (8 central thoughts...) seems a bit bloody. Is that really the over-arching theme here? I would expect the "8" to match the color/texture of the "central thought" space...

I wasn't sure about that myself, but I am not an artistic person and I leave that to Widowmaker's to defend.

Wow, sorry for the long post, but I didn't want to do eight posts... or maybe that would have been more appropriate!

[WidowMakers]

I will read through the previous posts in the morning here are the updates with the symbols in the appropriate spaces (I switched the scales and book)

[Jedimika]

I
LOVE
THIS
MAP!

Game play looks great. My only complaint is that the texture need to be toned down a skooch.

[Keredrex]

I like it

[sully800]

Whoa, I have a problem with the bonus system, and I think its a pretty big deal. At first I thought the +3 bonus was an additional bonus if you owned 3 of those continents. That seemed a bit unneccesary to me since if you owned 3 continents you'd probably be winning anyway, but it was similar to the extra bonus in Chinese Checkers so I didn't question it.

However, I now realize that you only need one territory in each of the 3 continents to get a +3 bonus. That seems like its way too high of a bonus for only 3 territories, especially because it doesn't matter which 3 they are.

And take this into consideration: If a player starts with one country in each continent (which wouldn't be uncommon, even in a 6 player games) that player would recieve a bonus of 24 men, since they would have each of the 8 possible groupings. That is WAY too high of a bonus for something that is so simply achieved, even at the start of the game. In a 3 player game it should be expected that each player has a country on each continent. So whoever goes first gets a 24 man bonus and can probably win the game straight away.

If I am understanding this correctly, the bonus system will NOT work, and it ruins any potential playability of the map. I think at the very least you have to lower the bonus for the grouping of 3 territories down to a single man. Even then though, a bonus of 8 men would probably throw any games out of wack. So I would suggest either making it so you need 4 total territories (which reduces the possible bonuses down to 2 distinct groupings) or scrapping that bonus idea completely.

If you changed it to a grouping of 4 territories it would also make more sense with the 8 total (The groupings of 3 are not symmetric, then groupings of 4 would be). I think this would make it much easier to explain the bonus system, and it would save the playability of the map. It may not reflect the theme of the original source you are basing this map on, but the map simply won't work in its current state.

[Coleman]

Whoa, I have a problem with the bonus system, and I think its a pretty big deal. At first I thought the +3 bonus was an additional bonus if you owned 3 of those continents. That seemed a bit unnecessary to me since if you owned 3 continents you'd probably be winning anyway, but it was similar to the extra bonus in Chinese Checkers so I didn't question it.

However, I now realize that you only need one territory in each of the 3 continents to get a +3 bonus. That seems like its way too high of a bonus for only 3 territories, especially because it doesn't matter which 3 they are.

And take this into consideration: If a player starts with one country in each continent (which wouldn't be uncommon, even in a 6 player games) that player would receive a bonus of 24 men, since they would have each of the 8 possible groupings. That is WAY too high of a bonus for something that is so simply achieved, even at the start of the game. In a 3 player game it should be expected that each player has a country on each continent. So whoever goes first gets a 24 man bonus and can probably win the game straight away.

If I am understanding this correctly, the bonus system will NOT work, and it ruins any potential playability of the map. I think at the very least you have to lower the bonus for the grouping of 3 territories down to a single man. Even then though, a bonus of 8 men would probably throw any games out of whack. So I would suggest either making it so you need 4 total territories (which reduces the possible bonuses down to 2 distinct groupings) or scrapping that bonus idea completely.

If you changed it to a grouping of 4 territories it would also make more sense with the 8 total (The groupings of 3 are not symmetric, then groupings of 4 would be). I think this would make it much easier to explain the bonus system, and it would save the playability of the map. It may not reflect the theme of the original source you are basing this map on, but the map simply won't work in its current state.

This was the really massive confusion I've been worried about. You need to own the 3 territories with the symbols in them, and they need to be one of the 8 specific groups listed on the bottom right of the legend.

Example, Law/Knowledge/Wealth (the territories) is +3. Anything else in those continents in combination is not. In all these trinities the countries you need to own are the most buried within their continents making it very hard to get anyway.

The bonus system is best explained (in my opinion) with the 8 point star of dannan (although I can't call it that for copyright reasons) where each point is a seat of power and the points connected by lines in the star are allies of each other (the 3 point bonus).

Law Example:


I have some weird mythology stuff with ways points are allies and enemies with each other for every point. Law is an enemy of death because death is the ultimate escape from the law (hard to make a dead man pay his debts), and it is an enemy of compassion because there is no room for compassion in law. It is an ally of money and knowledge because they fuel the agents of law.

I could do that for every point. I'm a crazy bastard. I'll stop editing this post now.

[sully800]

This was the really massive confusion I've been worried about. You need to own the 3 territories with the symbols in them, and they need to be one of the 8 specific groups listed on the bottom right of the legend.

Whew! So it only applies for the territories on the outer rim, with the symbols. Now I understand (at least I think ) and that makes much more sense.

However, I do think that it needs to be better clarified somehow. That is the second time in mere seconds that I completely misunderstood the bonus system. Now that I take a step back and reread whats on the map it seems clear, but I imagine there will be a lot of confusion when people try to figure it out for the first time.

[Coleman]

This was the really massive confusion I've been worried about. You need to own the 3 territories with the symbols in them, and they need to be one of the 8 specific groups listed on the bottom right of the legend.

Whew! So it only applies for the territories on the outer rim, with the symbols. Now I understand (at least I think ) and that makes much more sense.

However, I do think that it needs to be better clarified somehow. That is the second time in mere seconds that I completely misunderstood the bonus system. Now that I take a step back and reread whats on the map it seems clear, but I imagine there will be a lot of confusion when people try to figure it out for the first time.

Yeah, we are working on it. Thank you for your interest.

[WidowMakers]

here is the latest update.



Fixes:
-----------------------
1) The title "8" was not fitting with the theme of the map. I took out the red bloody "8" and replaced it with normal text and a diamond that represents all of the 8 colors of the thoughts. It seems more fitting.

2) The names of the territories that were duplicates of the entire thought (i.e. the red thought named War had a territory also named war. All of these were replace with appropriate names that reflect the aspects of each thought group.

3) The bonus for symbol territories has been changes as well. I tried to word it in away that would better explain that only the territories with symbols allow for the +3 bonus. The little diagram in the bottom shows the connection path between each symbol and their allies.

How does the new symbol bonus explanation work?

4) The center territory had the name "central thought" but this did not make sense. I wanted to convey that the center was an area that contained all of the attributes of each thought together. So I replaced it with infinite reason. Basically meaning that it contained everything.

Well let us know what you think.

[Bad Speler]

The text beside the red enemy line is a bit hard to read.

[Wisse]

i don't like tht you used so much differend textures and effects, it looks now likes its very bussy

[t.e.c]

^^^^ i agree. could you tone down the textures a little?

[Molacole]

a lot of shine in the middle, but really dark background!!!

I get impassable borders, but not terrtory divider in the top left corner. Not sure if it's needed. idc either way just saying....

any chance at seeing that sword point upwards instead?

the number 8 is too rainbowy to me along with the design under it.

To the left of the word enemy at the bottom right is a bit difficult to read along with your names in the left lower corner. small map.

The textures are kind of extreme. I like it though

I really like the names you've chosen to use as sharing borders! They fit perfectly along with the center piece name. Very wise selection.

[boberz]

looking at it i have a sneaky suspicion thet the numbers will be hard to read

[WidowMakers]

looking at it i have a sneaky suspicion thet the numbers will be hard to read

If you look on page 5, there are teh 4 old maps. 2 with numbers and 2 without. It is not bad but not great either.

a lot of shine in the middle, but really dark background!!!

I get impassable borders, but not terrtory divider in the top left corner. Not sure if it's needed. idc either way just saying....

any chance at seeing that sword point upwards instead?

the number 8 is too rainbowy to me along with the design under it.

1) I am going to lighten up the background when I reduce the contrast and texture of the territories
2) The territory divider will be eliminated
3) Sword is going UP!!
4) I will reduce the rainbow (I did not like it either but I wanted to see what everyone thought)

Coleman and I appreciate the input suggestions on the map. It has come along way since he first posted his idea. Now I would just like to ask everyone, graphic aside, DO YOU LIKE THIS? I can make the prettiest map in the world and everyone can help make it look better by giving advice, but in the end if the gameplay sucks we have nothing.

There are 41 territories which makes good games for 3,4,5 players. 6 player games will get 6 territories each with 5 neutral.

I really want to keep going but not if this map has a chance to make it.
Andy what is your take on this?