Moderator: Cartographers
Kaplowitz wrote:I think the steering wheel is fine.
*Yah! 800th Post *
yeti_c wrote:DiM wrote:my thoughts exactly. but i'll pm lack to be sure.
Any reply from Lack?
C.
yeti_c wrote:Most excellent news...
C.
DiM wrote:Suggestion Idea: One-time Bonus
Description: you receive a one time bonus when you conquer a terit. after that the terit gives no other bonus regardless if somebody else takes the terit.
DiM wrote:Suggestion Idea: Modifiable bonus for number of owned terits
Description: normaly you get 1 for every 3 terits you own (minimum 3 troops if you have less than 12). well, i'd preatty much like to regulate these numbers. for example get +1 for each terit. or +3 for every 2 terits, or why not? get absolutely nothing regardless of the terits you have
DiM wrote:Suggestion Idea: Converting Territories
Description: a territory can be converted to another player if certain conditions are met. let's say we have a green territory surrounded by blue. if blue's troops are ten times stronger the green teritory becomes blue with just one army
DiM wrote:Suggestion Idea: Variable Attack Range
Description: we have ranged attacks but those are predefined ranged attacks and can only be applied to set territories. i want those attacks to be variable. so you have a catapult in territory A and it can attack at a certain range (let's say 3 territories in any direction) but in time that catapult becomes a cannon and thus it should be able to attack at a longer range.
or perhaps you get a certain territory that while it is held it provides a boost in catapult range and if you lose it you return to normal range.
DiM wrote:Suggestion Idea: Conditions for xml features
Description: let's say we have a cannon terit that has ranged attack. but i don't want that ranged attack to be available unless the owner also has another terit called ammo depot. so can the cannon terit lose his ranged attack if the owner loses the ammo depot?
DiM wrote:Suggestion Idea: Win condition - number of armies
Description: can a specific number of armies be added as a wining condition? let's say you must have terit x & y but also have 100 armies in those terits.
DiM wrote:Suggestion Idea: Multiple ownership of a terit
Description: some terits are not attackable but more players can move into the same terit.
let's say we have terit A -> B <- C
with the arrows being one way moving. not attacking just moving. green is in terit A and he moves his troops to B. he selects attack but no dice are rolled he just moves. then red has terit C and also moves into terit B. now both red and green have their armies in the same terit. it's multiple ownership. since the teit is move only there's not the problem of someone attacking it to see who defends and such
DiM wrote:Suggestion Idea: Random assigned xml features
Description: let's say i have a map where some terits give bonuses. i want those terits to be random every time a new game starts
DiM wrote:Suggestion Idea: Motion detectors
Description: i want triggers in the xml for certain actions done by the players. let's say a players moves from terita A to B. if he moves 10 troops it's ok but if he moves 100 troops a motion detector is triggered and a xml feature is applied (like an impassable border or decay or something)
DiM wrote:Suggestion Idea: Starting positions by colour
Description: i don't know how i forgot this one but i did. luckily i remembered
so i want to be able to write in the xml where will each player start depending on the number of players. something like:
- Code: Select all
if 2 players -> red terit A green terit H (the rest neutral)
if 3 players -> red terit A green terit H and blue in terit D (the rest neutral)
......
Teya wrote:Ruben, those things have been mentioned... but they are just ignored. Good thing Andy is doing his job properly.
yeti_c wrote:2 questions?
1) How are the contient colours not indistinguishable? I perfectly see 6 different colours edging the islands? Are you sure you're looking at the correct image?
2) The legend is tricky I agree - but this is the best that has been refined over a period of time... can you suggest a way of making it easier?
C.
AndyDufresne wrote:Just making sure, are the above links ready to go?
--Andy
Ruben Cassar wrote:The legend is uber complicated and unattractive and the continent colours are virtually indistinguishable to me...
I have just looked at this map now, but is it possible that no one has commented on these two issues before it reached final forge?
Ruben Cassar wrote:Teya wrote:Ruben, those things have been mentioned... but they are just ignored. Good thing Andy is doing his job properly.
So if they have been mentioned before and the problem hasn't been rectified I honestly cannot see how this map can be quenched. The font is barely legible as well...
Dim can these issues be addressed?
Teya wrote:All the way back on page 36 KEYOGI mentioned all the things you mentioned Ruben. I dont think DiM provided much of an excuse though.
Ruben Cassar wrote:I cannot imagine a new player playing on this map.
DiM wrote:Ruben Cassar wrote:The legend is uber complicated and unattractive and the continent colours are virtually indistinguishable to me...
I have just looked at this map now, but is it possible that no one has commented on these two issues before it reached final forge?
the color theme of the map has been discussed several times. since there's no bonus for holding a continent there was really no reason to make each continent very different. keyogi asked for some coloring around the borders something like he thought of at some point for middle east and i provided that. i added some slight colors different enough to tell what continent is what. but again, they are not really that important. you can see the resources and that's the most important part.
the legend part was the trickiest work on this map. because it has a whole new gameplay the legend wording is a very delicate matter and i assure you i put all my effort into making it as easy to understand as possible. if you have the time to read the entire thread you'll see how many posts about the legend have been and how extensively it has been modified. until i reached the current form and people agreed it is much better and understandable. believe me, there were times i thought i'd go insane with all the modifications
DiM wrote:Ruben Cassar wrote:I cannot imagine a new player playing on this map.
actually i'm sure a new player won't join his first game on AoM. he won't do it on USApocalypse or Space either because these are maps with a higher degree of difficulty than the other maps. the nuclear bonuses on apocalypse or the multi ownership terits on space provide confusion for a beginner. but for an experienced user they represent no difficulty. so bare in mind, a new player comes and joins classic in his first few games or the more adventurous types join maps similar to classic.
i never designed this map thinking of beginners. i did it as an alternative for people that are tired of the same old gameplay.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users