[Abandoned] - Galactic Conquest

ApophisNL · Post by **ApophisNL** » Fri Oct 26, 2007 4:22 pm

Ninjastar13 wrote:some of the planets are a little too similar in color and can be confusing for colorblind ppl like me..... i have a hard time with the army colors i dont need it in maps. Otherwise this map looks absolutey a blast to play on. Great job.

I have difficulty with the army colors too... which is why I have the colour letters turned on for myself. But as for the planets... I'm not sure what else I can do to differentiate them... THe +0's are the big jupiter and saturn ones... the +2's are the light ones with the light glows. Everything else is +1.

Aerial Attack · Post by **Aerial Attack** » Fri Oct 26, 2007 6:13 pm

If you are going to make holding all star gates a win scenario, you need to do the following:

Under "Stargates connect to all other stargates" text add the following [left aligned]:

"(Hold all stargates to win OR
Conquer your opponents)"

Not sure how that will fit on the Small map - I guess if you drop Asomin (and the asteroid text) down a couple of pixels. Also - don't crowd Suibor system name

jako · Post by **jako** » Fri Oct 26, 2007 7:28 pm

can we get a poll and see support for this scenario?

i personally hate it, adn just want to see if the majority of players feel the same.

ApophisNL · Post by **ApophisNL** » Fri Oct 26, 2007 9:03 pm

jako wrote:can we get a poll and see support for this scenario?

i personally hate it, adn just want to see if the majority of players feel the same.

I thought it only ended a couple of game types?

Coleman · Post by **Coleman** » Sat Oct 27, 2007 1:07 am

jako wrote:can we get a poll and see support for this scenario?

i personally hate it, adn just want to see if the majority of players feel the same.

I don't like the scenario, I like the map though.

ApophisNL · Post by **ApophisNL** » Sat Oct 27, 2007 12:54 pm

Well it was just an idea anyway... it certianly doesn't have to stay.

yamahafazer · Post by **yamahafazer** » Sun Oct 28, 2007 3:34 pm

Coleman wrote:
jako wrote:can we get a poll and see support for this scenario?

i personally hate it, adn just want to see if the majority of players feel the same.
I don't like the scenario, I like the map though.

I would have to go with Coleman here... sorry but it would make it just too easy to win I think

yamahafazer · Post by **yamahafazer** » Sun Oct 28, 2007 3:44 pm

Aerial Attack wrote:yamaha,

The +0 for the Gas giants is so he can easily say "all other planets +1." That would be difficult w/o the +0 gas giants comment. Besides the red glow is important.

jako,

The XML is possible, you just need to code something like this (I don't know the appropriate win terminology):
Code: Select all
<win_scenario>
// maybe required tag starts here - with no terr count?
<territory>Secunda 1</territory>
<territory>Suibor 2</territory>
<territory>Asomin 4 1</territory>
<territory>Qyis 1</territory>
<territory>Fikwi 3</territory>
<territory>Eallah 3</territory>
<required>6</required>
</win_scenario>
That is sort of what it would look like. As I said, I don't know the specifics - but it's the same as holding all the castles for Age of Realms: Age of Might

I think it will look very similar to the Pearl Harbor and Italy partial bonuses code.

Ok thanks for that...

Aerial Attack · Post by **Aerial Attack** » Wed Oct 31, 2007 8:33 am

Figured I'd give this a bump - seeing as how it's the last day of the poll.

Hopefully those who didn't vote yes, will provide some feedback as to why they didn't.

ApophisNL · Post by **ApophisNL** » Wed Oct 31, 2007 12:03 pm

Well I took out the win condition for map. Unless there's any other problems, I'll get the coordinates set and then the XML's ready.

Optimus Prime · Post by **Optimus Prime** » Thu Nov 01, 2007 3:57 pm

Final Forge anyone?

bloknayrb · Post by **bloknayrb** » Thu Nov 01, 2007 4:05 pm

Yeah, I don't see any reason why the admins should hold this back, looks ready to me.

Aerial Attack · Post by **Aerial Attack** » Fri Nov 02, 2007 3:28 pm

I guess the questions are:

1) Were there enough total eyeballs/votes? 41 is kind of a small sample size.

2) Were there enough yes votes? 56% is pretty decent, but 60% would have been better.

3) Were there too many no votes? Doubtful as no one left ANY explanations as to why they voted no, or what issues they found in the game play or graphics.

4) Did my usage of the thumbnail [and link] in my signature help or hurt? Probably both - hopefully more of the former

5) This is the important one - does the mapmaker feel it's ready?

6) This is almost as important - does the foundry [the mods] feel that it's ready?

PS. I guess you can take the poll down now (it's after Nov 1).

ApophisNL · Post by **ApophisNL** » Sat Nov 03, 2007 7:08 am

Well I'm ready to go ahead and finish the XML.

I have no idea how to turn off the poll!

AndyDufresne · Post by **AndyDufresne** » Sun Nov 04, 2007 2:59 pm

I'm really liking this map. I'm glad to see more people are moving into the realms of outer space now.

I remember early early on in the thread, there was some talk about more variation in planets. I think you could still do a few minor touches to some of the brown planets...in at least perhaps terms of tone and shade, just so there don't seem to be as many carbon copies out there.

Nice work ApophisNL!

--Andy

cairnswk · Post by **cairnswk** » Sun Nov 04, 2007 5:24 pm

ApophisNL wrote:Well I'm ready to go ahead and finish the XML.

I have no idea how to turn off the poll!

Done for you...

Poll Results

What do you think about Galactic Conquest?
It's ready! - I like it, I want to play it! 56% [ 23 ]
Game Play has issues - work those out first. 14% [ 6 ]
Graphics has issues - fix those first. 7% [ 3 ]
I don't like it... 21% [ 9 ]

Total Votes : 41

ApophisNL · Post by **ApophisNL** » Wed Nov 07, 2007 2:25 pm

So is there anything else to do before the xml?

Aerial Attack · Post by **Aerial Attack** » Wed Nov 07, 2007 2:31 pm

AndyDufresne wrote:I'm really liking this map. I'm glad to see more people are moving into the realms of outer space now. :)

I remember early early on in the thread, there was some talk about more variation in planets. I think you could still do a few minor touches to some of the brown planets...in at least perhaps terms of tone and shade, just so there don't seem to be as many carbon copies out there.

Nice work ApophisNL!

--Andy

Andy did mention adding some variety in to the non-glow planets. I'm not sure what all you really can do. I guess you could make some icy (whitish) and some show vegetation (greenish). Just keep in mind to test with green, blue, and teal armies on greenish planets and gray and yellow on whitish planets.

wcaclimbing · Post by **wcaclimbing** » Wed Nov 07, 2007 7:02 pm

Two things:

1. where are the "tears in space-time" and "wormholes". Did i miss them? can you at least make it more clear what is what?

2. All your planets are the same copy-pasted image over and over again. It looks bad (IMO) and i think those will need to be changed later on in development.

everything else is pretty good. this will be an interesting map,

oaktown · Post by **oaktown** » Thu Nov 08, 2007 12:08 am

Join us as we spread the Foundry's good news to the world!

Post a description of your map at
http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=32474

Aerial Attack · Post by **Aerial Attack** » Mon Nov 12, 2007 11:10 pm

wcaclimbing wrote:Two things:

1. where are the "tears in space-time" and "wormholes". Did i miss them? can you at least make it more clear what is what?

2. All your planets are the same copy-pasted image over and over again. It looks bad (IMO) and i think those will need to be changed later on in development.

everything else is pretty good. this will be an interesting map,

wca -

1) the wormholes and space-time tears are right where you would think they are (next to their explanatory text). I guess the problem is that they could be confused for a part of the gas-giant planet they are next to.

1a) a potential solution would be to only have 2 space-time tears or only have 2 wormholes [on Junas and Devi - would have to alter the explanatory text slightly]

2) Andy has already mentioned this and I assume that Apophis will be making some sort of update.

yamahafazer · Post by **yamahafazer** » Tue Nov 13, 2007 6:33 am

I think it's looking ok myself... but hey thats me.

insomniacdude · Post by **insomniacdude** » Tue Nov 13, 2007 12:24 pm

Sorry if this has already been asked, but does the +1 for all planet's/+2 for earth-like planets apply per planet, or for holding all planets?

Aerial Attack · Post by **Aerial Attack** » Tue Nov 13, 2007 12:50 pm

The +1 is per planet. So that's a LOT of bonus planets.

I think I figured out how to handle wca's confusion. Right now the Jupiter type gas-giants have space-time tears - whilst the Saturn looking ones have wormholes. If you switch the Invey and Cylan gas-giants, then there would be a wormhole on each type and a space-time tear on each type. The "extra bits" wouldn't appear to be part of a specific planet type.

mibi · Post by **mibi** » Tue Nov 13, 2007 7:55 pm

I think you should put a spaceship in there somewhere.