Egypt: Valley Of The Kings [Quenched]

DiM · Post by **DiM** » Tue Apr 24, 2007 3:55 pm

cairnswk wrote:]fixed in V6

but where's v6??

cairnswk · Post by **cairnswk** » Tue Apr 24, 2007 4:09 pm

DiM wrote:
cairnswk wrote:]fixed in V6
but where's v6??

Oh DiM...for goodness sakes...just wait and be patient....it will appear when I have those suggestion attended too!

mibi · Post by **mibi** » Tue Apr 24, 2007 4:15 pm

maybe the "robber" names can be names of actual people who explored or discovered the tombs.

cairnswk · Post by **cairnswk** » Tue Apr 24, 2007 4:18 pm

mibi wrote:maybe the "robber" names can be names of actual people who explored or discovered the tombs.

good suggestion Mibi, but then would it have the same appeal as the robber appeal, and also some of the names might be hard to fit.

DiM · Post by **DiM** » Tue Apr 24, 2007 4:18 pm

cairnswk wrote:
DiM wrote:
cairnswk wrote:]fixed in V6
but where's v6??
Oh DiM...for goodness sakes...just wait and be patient....it will appear when I have those suggestion attended too!

i thought you already did it

i'll wait

cairnswk · Post by **cairnswk** » Tue Apr 24, 2007 5:09 pm

Enigma wrote:the stars theme is brilliant

Wunderbar.

ditto dim, cant read ramesses vii

fixed.

maybe bring more red tones into the map via the scarabs, since they are the connectin to the afterlife

fixed

i totally forgot about the papyrus font. it looks very egyptian- it just seems a little crowded. however as dim can tell you i pretty much always like very simple fonts, so if others dont have a problem ignore me.

maybe that's a sacrifice in using a font like this!!

the bonuses font doesnt match the rest of the map, not consistent.

Fixed

i agree with freezie about the underworld being able to attack everyone- sounds like a major inbalance.

amended

the 1st 2 instructions in the legend are obvious- it is always possible to attack adjacent territories unless there are impassables.

that is something i hadn't considered..although with such small bonuses, do we need impassables in this map?

the 4th instruction is somewhat ambiguous, theres probably a better way of wording it but im not sure what it is.

being considered

if at all possible i think it would be better to put all the "robber" labels in their respective territories, which may mean adjusting some territory shapes. it would help to differentiate between the robbers and the tombs.

fixed

wheres cleopatra?

my quick readings say she was 'possibly' buried with Antony near/underneath/beside the sea in Alexandira, so she doesn't figure in this Valley of The Kings. And there seems to be some consensus that Nefertiti is not also buried in the Valley of the Kings.

im not sure how you picked which tombs should be connected to scarabs but it may be good to connect them to famous and/or very important pharohs/kings. for example tutankhamun and hatshepsut.

theyh were random, but can be done

title needs work

Mmmmm. OK. Considering what to do....

the underworld circle not being centered is annoying, though i know ur trying to fit in the symbol.

yes that annoyued me also, but again I think it is sacrifice that has to be made.

you have 2 different versions of the tomb icons, which is nice- but keep all the tombs in a single continent the same version. for example ramesses xi.
OK fixed
make sure words and lines are clearly distinguishable from their backgrounds. ok cant think of nething else right now

Phew!!

Hope wll this is fine.

DiM · Post by **DiM** » Tue Apr 24, 2007 5:28 pm

just one issue. where's your sig?

freezie · Post by **freezie** » Tue Apr 24, 2007 5:30 pm

Now the udnerworld state it can't attacks afterlife bonuses.

cairnswk · Post by **cairnswk** » Tue Apr 24, 2007 5:33 pm

DiM wrote:just one issue. where's your sig?

Oh it'll come when i get the title sorted out...if there is anything there to be sorted out

cairnswk · Post by **cairnswk** » Tue Apr 24, 2007 5:37 pm

freezie wrote:Now the udnerworld state it can't attacks afterlife bonuses.

Good pickup freezie...thanks

fixed in V6

Gozar · Post by **Gozar** » Tue Apr 24, 2007 7:57 pm

I have been watching your thread for awhile, cairnswk, thanks for asking for my input.

This map is coming along very quickly, and already looks leaps and bounds better than the original post.

The bonuses seem a little low. This could make for a very intense game, or just a very long one. I am sure you will get comments about the bonuses from more qualified minds than mine though!

I always thought it was Ramses...? (Please note I did no research to back this up)

Your title seems a little blurry to me. Also the yellow colour text and box on the black of space clashes to my eyes.

I really like the innovation of the gameplay on this map. Keep up the good progress!

Cheers!

Gozar

p.s when do we get to play cairns coast?

cairnswk · Post by **cairnswk** » Tue Apr 24, 2007 8:08 pm

Gozar wrote:p.s when do we get to play cairns coast?

yes i'm hoping very soon if there is no further changes this week then i'll take a day to adapt the large version and sharpen those mountains, then it might be all go.

cairnswk · Post by **cairnswk** » Tue Apr 24, 2007 8:12 pm

Gozar wrote: I always thought it was Ramses...? (Please note I did no research to back this up)

Jusst a quick google search and there appears to be various version...all telling me ramses, rameses and ramesses are correct depending on who you read. for space reasons if this is the case, the i migght change it to ramses, but i'll see.

Enigma · Post by **Enigma** » Tue Apr 24, 2007 8:46 pm

the 1st 2 instructions in the legend are obvious- it is always possible to attack adjacent territories unless there are impassables.
that is something i hadn't considered..although with such small bonuses, do we need impassables in this map?

sry- i wasnt implying that impassables are needed- only that those 2 instructions werent. i agree, i dont think this map needs them.

im rather concerned about the idea of only being able to attack the afterlifes from the underworld. if you control that one territory, you control the whole game- not only your bonuses but also everyone elses. sure it makes that territory competative, but it also makes for boring gameplay. i prefer maps with multiple ways of winning.

cairnswk · Post by **cairnswk** » Tue Apr 24, 2007 9:27 pm

Enigma wrote:
the 1st 2 instructions in the legend are obvious- it is always possible to attack adjacent territories unless there are impassables.
that is something i hadn't considered..although with such small bonuses, do we need impassables in this map?
sry- i wasnt implying that impassables are needed- only that those 2 instructions werent. i agree, i dont think this map needs them.

im rather concerned about the idea of only being able to attack the afterlifes from the underworld. if you control that one territory, you control the whole game- not only your bonuses but also everyone elses. sure it makes that territory competative, but it also makes for boring gameplay. i prefer maps with multiple ways of winning.

OK enigma...let me think on that one.

onbekende · Post by **onbekende** » Wed Apr 25, 2007 1:36 am

Ramesses is the now thought correct one, blame egyptologigst when they change it again

cairnswk · Post by **cairnswk** » Wed Apr 25, 2007 4:17 pm

I'm rather concerned about the idea of only being able to attack the afterlifes from the underworld. if you control that one territory, you control the whole game- not only your bonuses but also everyone elses. sure it makes that territory competative, but it also makes for boring gameplay. i prefer maps with multiple ways of winning.

Enigma....below is an adaption on gamelplay for your concern and provides multiple ways of winning.
In the centre of the Afterlife is now Eternal Life worth 5 bonuses.
Around that are the same Afterlife bonuses for each region.
Then surrounding that again is the Underworld worth no bonuses but one can leave and enter through the underworld territories.
You can attack the Underworld from Scarabs, and attack the Robber Eyes of Horus from the Underworld.
This means now there are 52 territories, but i don't see that as a problem as that will mean there are some neutral starters.
Also I have changed the font in the "destructions", as papyrus just wasn't cutting it there for me, the "destructions" need to be very easily read and with Shorthand font I think this is achieved.
See what everyone thinks!!

Gozar · Post by **Gozar** » Wed Apr 25, 2007 8:13 pm

Does that mean +5 if I start on eternal life?

freezie · Post by **freezie** » Wed Apr 25, 2007 8:49 pm

Gozar wrote:Does that mean +5 if I start on eternal life?

Seems so. BAD IDEA

cairnswk · Post by **cairnswk** » Thu Apr 26, 2007 5:33 am

Gozar wrote:Does that mean +5 if I start on eternal life?

ouch Gozar. and freezie...that's a big boo-boo. any suggestions?

t.e.c · Post by **t.e.c** » Thu Apr 26, 2007 5:50 am

isn't the +5 only if you hold the relevant tomb area though?

cairnswk · Post by **cairnswk** » Thu Apr 26, 2007 6:51 am

t.e.c wrote:isn't the +5 only if you hold the relevant tomb area though?

t.e.c. there is no relevent tomb area associated with eternal life....unless there is someway that if one holds a tomb area they get the bonuses for the tomb area and then also the +5 for holding eternal life. I would kind of like to see if eternal life could be battled over in this way...it would make it a very competitive territory to hold, and would switch the power of the gameplay to one region rather than 5 regions.
What do you think?

t.e.c · Post by **t.e.c** » Thu Apr 26, 2007 8:02 am

ah ok, i was a little confused because in the legend you have "afterlife bonuses", "afterlife bonuses only given if you hold the relevant tomb region" and "extra bonus for holding eternal life".

it's a little ambiguous. it could mean that you get the +5 bonus for eternal life just for holding it, or that you get it only if you are holding the relevant tomb region. maybe it would be better to have the eternal life bonus seperate from the afterlife bonuses? or would that confuse things even more.

hope that makes sense!

t.e.c · Post by **t.e.c** » Thu Apr 26, 2007 8:04 am

as to the game play itself, i like your idea, but if someone starts eternal life then they would have a huge advantage. is there any way to designate eternal life as a neutral territory for every game?

freezie · Post by **freezie** » Thu Apr 26, 2007 10:43 am

Maybe reduce eternal life to +3, and make it ONLY if you hold a tomb. If you don't, it gives a plain 0.

The way it is currently, starting on eternal life= victory.

Egypt: Valley Of The Kings [Quenched]

V6 - Many updates!!!

Re: V6 - Many updates!!!

Re: V6 - Many updates!!!

Re: V6 - Many updates!!!