Conquer Club

The New World [Quenched]

Care to peruse completed maps? Take a stroll through the Atlas.

Moderator: Cartographers

Forum rules
Please read the Community Guidelines before posting.

Postby Coleman on Wed Jan 02, 2008 11:06 am

I didn't think it was thread jacking, I am just demonstrating that this isn't our reality. I'm assuming superposition is true and this is an alternate universe to allow for our inconsistencies in quantum theory.

Anyway, there will be extensive gameplay testing but I'm sure it will be hard to comment on gameplay right now since we haven't shown you starting neutrals yet.
Warning: You may be reading a really old topic.
User avatar
Sergeant Coleman
 
Posts: 5402
Joined: Tue Jan 02, 2007 10:36 pm
Location: Midwest

Postby bryguy on Wed Jan 02, 2008 11:09 am

Coleman wrote:I didn't think it was thread jacking


But i like thread jacking :(

Coleman, the guy who wont let me jack this thread wrote: I am just demonstrating that this isn't our reality. I'm assuming superposition is true and this is an alternate universe to allow for our inconsistencies in quantum theory.


I assume that all the time
Corporal bryguy
 
Posts: 4381
Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2007 8:50 am
Location: Lost in a Jigsaw

Postby Coleman on Wed Jan 02, 2008 11:23 am

We're (well okay I'm, I think gimil's decide on his own what starting neutrals ought to be) open to people suggesting starting neutral values.
Warning: You may be reading a really old topic.
User avatar
Sergeant Coleman
 
Posts: 5402
Joined: Tue Jan 02, 2007 10:36 pm
Location: Midwest

Postby bryguy on Wed Jan 02, 2008 11:33 am

100 each!!
Corporal bryguy
 
Posts: 4381
Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2007 8:50 am
Location: Lost in a Jigsaw

Postby Coleman on Wed Jan 02, 2008 11:35 am

bryguy wrote:100 each!!
Okay... We're open to people suggesting useful starting neutral values.

Our current thought process is 2's inside natives, with 5 on borders. Europe not fully decided yet. Probably 4 on landing zone, maybe more maybe less.
Warning: You may be reading a really old topic.
User avatar
Sergeant Coleman
 
Posts: 5402
Joined: Tue Jan 02, 2007 10:36 pm
Location: Midwest

Postby gimil on Wed Jan 02, 2008 11:38 am

Coleman wrote:We're (well okay I'm, I think gimil's decide on his own what starting neutrals ought to be) open to people suggesting starting neutral values.


thats hurtful, ive not decided, i jsut didnt like your suggestion :D

for a frame of reference colman wanted 10 on ALL the boarders hehe
What do you know about map making, bitch?

natty_dread wrote:I was wrong


Top Score:2403
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class gimil
 
Posts: 8599
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 12:42 pm
Location: United Kingdom (Scotland)

Postby bryguy on Wed Jan 02, 2008 11:48 am

Coleman wrote:
bryguy wrote:100 each!!
Okay... We're open to people suggesting useful starting neutral values.

Our current thought process is 2's inside natives, with 5 on borders. Europe not fully decided yet. Probably 4 on landing zone, maybe more maybe less.


how about 10 on all borders, and 20 on all the inside ones?
Corporal bryguy
 
Posts: 4381
Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2007 8:50 am
Location: Lost in a Jigsaw

Postby gimil on Wed Jan 02, 2008 11:56 am

bryguy wrote:
Coleman wrote:
bryguy wrote:100 each!!
Okay... We're open to people suggesting useful starting neutral values.

Our current thought process is 2's inside natives, with 5 on borders. Europe not fully decided yet. Probably 4 on landing zone, maybe more maybe less.


how about 10 on all borders, and 20 on all the inside ones?


bryguy enought with hte stuppid sugestions, wasting my time reading alot of bull . . .
What do you know about map making, bitch?

natty_dread wrote:I was wrong


Top Score:2403
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class gimil
 
Posts: 8599
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 12:42 pm
Location: United Kingdom (Scotland)

Postby bryguy on Wed Jan 02, 2008 11:59 am

gimil wrote:
bryguy wrote:
Coleman wrote:
bryguy wrote:100 each!!
Okay... We're open to people suggesting useful starting neutral values.

Our current thought process is 2's inside natives, with 5 on borders. Europe not fully decided yet. Probably 4 on landing zone, maybe more maybe less.


how about 10 on all borders, and 20 on all the inside ones?


bryguy enought with hte stuppid sugestions, wasting my time reading alot of bull . . .


well the 10 was a real one


ok how about this, 5 on ports, 4 on borders, and the rest 2 or 3
Corporal bryguy
 
Posts: 4381
Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2007 8:50 am
Location: Lost in a Jigsaw

Postby Coleman on Wed Jan 02, 2008 12:01 pm

4 on borders is too low I think, especially if you end up making ports more as it would discourage people from ever using them. I still say 5-6 for natives, possibly more for Europe since their round 2 count will be higher if they have any manner of luck at all.
Warning: You may be reading a really old topic.
User avatar
Sergeant Coleman
 
Posts: 5402
Joined: Tue Jan 02, 2007 10:36 pm
Location: Midwest

Postby bryguy on Wed Jan 02, 2008 12:03 pm

Coleman wrote:4 on borders is too low I think, especially if you end up making ports more as it would discourage people from ever using them. I still say 5-6 for natives, possibly more for Europe since their round 2 count will be higher if they have any manner of luck at all.


true
Corporal bryguy
 
Posts: 4381
Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2007 8:50 am
Location: Lost in a Jigsaw

Postby gimil on Wed Jan 02, 2008 12:04 pm

bryguy wrote:
gimil wrote:
bryguy wrote:
Coleman wrote:
bryguy wrote:100 each!!
Okay... We're open to people suggesting useful starting neutral values.

Our current thought process is 2's inside natives, with 5 on borders. Europe not fully decided yet. Probably 4 on landing zone, maybe more maybe less.


how about 10 on all borders, and 20 on all the inside ones?


bryguy enought with hte stuppid sugestions, wasting my time reading alot of bull . . .


well the 10 was a real one


ok how about this, 5 on ports, 4 on borders, and the rest 2 or 3


The ports need a lower number to encourage people to use them, my thoughts where 3

like i said to coleman having rather large numbers on the boarder makes for boaring gameplay.

Id rather keep this conversation to one side till the next update with proposed starting neutrals on it.
What do you know about map making, bitch?

natty_dread wrote:I was wrong


Top Score:2403
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class gimil
 
Posts: 8599
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 12:42 pm
Location: United Kingdom (Scotland)

Postby bryguy on Wed Jan 02, 2008 12:05 pm

ok
Corporal bryguy
 
Posts: 4381
Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2007 8:50 am
Location: Lost in a Jigsaw

Postby Sir. Ricco on Wed Jan 02, 2008 12:18 pm

I really like how you did this. It is a really good looking map.
Here a suggestion. Maybe you could have six or eight European countries and that would be were you start. You could only attack the new world and you objective are to conquer your colony and one other.
Image
Image
Image
User avatar
Captain Sir. Ricco
 
Posts: 4555
Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2007 2:33 pm
Location: Making kingdoms burn and bloodshed start.

Postby gimil on Wed Jan 02, 2008 12:22 pm

Sir. Ricco wrote:I really like how you did this. It is a really good looking map.
Here a suggestion. Maybe you could have six or eight European countries and that would be were you start. You could only attack the new world and you objective are to conquer your colony and one other.


It essentail means reworking the whole map. (wasting a nights work) and changing the idea coleman is going for. He wants an oppertunity to change history. What if the aztecs suppressed the european colonies?
What do you know about map making, bitch?

natty_dread wrote:I was wrong


Top Score:2403
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class gimil
 
Posts: 8599
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 12:42 pm
Location: United Kingdom (Scotland)

Postby Coleman on Wed Jan 02, 2008 12:28 pm

More to the point, I don't think it's any fun to get the same exact experience every time with a player count. Like in the current 6 player conquest maps everyone has the exact same gameplay at first. And the fact that it's 6 player you can be sure somebody started at each start location so the mystery in fog is diminished.

With 9 locations in a lot of player counts you can't be sure if someone is there or not. And with 2 types you can get a different experience more so then a new start location. The natives and Europe feel different when you play them. Which for me is more of a draw then you get to be some Europe country going someplace always.
Warning: You may be reading a really old topic.
User avatar
Sergeant Coleman
 
Posts: 5402
Joined: Tue Jan 02, 2007 10:36 pm
Location: Midwest

Postby Coleman on Wed Jan 02, 2008 12:32 pm

Version 3:
Image

I think we need to show more popularity before a move, so 3 people need to show up and say something neat that haven't talked yet.
Warning: You may be reading a really old topic.
User avatar
Sergeant Coleman
 
Posts: 5402
Joined: Tue Jan 02, 2007 10:36 pm
Location: Midwest

Postby Lone.prophet on Wed Jan 02, 2008 12:55 pm

can the europe countries attack eachother?
Image
Captain Lone.prophet
 
Posts: 1467
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 4:37 pm
Location: Your basement Muahaha

Postby Coleman on Wed Jan 02, 2008 12:56 pm

Lone.prophet wrote:can the europe countries attack eachother?
No, they need to go through the other landing areas and then back up them.

This will be obvious when you are playing, but perhaps we should add something to the map saying that. Like Europe has a no crossing borders agreement.

gimil and I also had an internal argument over these current neutrals, they will be changing next version.
Warning: You may be reading a really old topic.
User avatar
Sergeant Coleman
 
Posts: 5402
Joined: Tue Jan 02, 2007 10:36 pm
Location: Midwest

Postby gimil on Wed Jan 02, 2008 1:07 pm

Coleman wrote:gimil and I also had an internal argument over these current neutrals, they will be changing next version.


we kissed and made up though :D
What do you know about map making, bitch?

natty_dread wrote:I was wrong


Top Score:2403
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class gimil
 
Posts: 8599
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 12:42 pm
Location: United Kingdom (Scotland)

Postby Coleman on Wed Jan 02, 2008 1:16 pm

First, I'm not gay. There was no kissing.

Second, Version 4:
Image

Um, we had a little accident in Mapuches, when it's coded the inlands will be 2 and the borders 4.
Last edited by Coleman on Wed Jan 02, 2008 1:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Warning: You may be reading a really old topic.
User avatar
Sergeant Coleman
 
Posts: 5402
Joined: Tue Jan 02, 2007 10:36 pm
Location: Midwest

Postby gimil on Wed Jan 02, 2008 1:17 pm

Coleman wrote:First, I'm not gay. There was no kissing.


there was lots of kissing . . .

(im not gay either, although coleman was rather tender)
What do you know about map making, bitch?

natty_dread wrote:I was wrong


Top Score:2403
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class gimil
 
Posts: 8599
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 12:42 pm
Location: United Kingdom (Scotland)

Postby Unit_2 on Wed Jan 02, 2008 1:21 pm

Can you please just change the name of the "Iroquois" to somethign else? it just buggs me so bad...lol
Image
User avatar
Cook Unit_2
 
Posts: 1834
Joined: Sun Jan 14, 2007 12:59 pm
Location: Pennsylvania, U.S.A, North America, Earth, Milky Way, Universe.

Postby Lone.prophet on Wed Jan 02, 2008 1:22 pm

i think the colors should be more clear to distiguish
Image
Captain Lone.prophet
 
Posts: 1467
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 4:37 pm
Location: Your basement Muahaha

Postby Coleman on Wed Jan 02, 2008 1:23 pm

Unit_2 wrote:Can you please just change the name of the "Iroquois" to somethign else? it just buggs me so bad...lol
Suggestions? Do you think Souix would be better?
Warning: You may be reading a really old topic.
User avatar
Sergeant Coleman
 
Posts: 5402
Joined: Tue Jan 02, 2007 10:36 pm
Location: Midwest

PreviousNext

Return to The Atlas

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users