Malta [Quenched]

[Marvaddin]

Why dont you post the current version, and a version with most unpassable borders, so people can vote more properly?

If the poll changes again (like happened already some times), will you restart to think about that? Or change the map while its live? Do both versions and post to vote... its my suggestion. So nothing to change later.

[Ruben Cassar]

Why dont you post the current version, and a version with most unpassable borders, so people can vote more properly?

If the poll changes again (like happened already some times), will you restart to think about that? Or change the map while its live? Do both versions and post to vote... its my suggestion. So nothing to change later.

I think we must respect the poll even though some people think the wording was not right. After all if people want more borders they will just vote for it irrespective of what I say although I still believe that with less borders you have to defend more. However I promise that once the map is live I will open a thread to fine tune it and I will check on the borders issue again. It doesn't take much to add some borders after all. I have also added some different graphics for the borders but no one commented on them apart from Keyogi and he preferred the original ones.

[Ruben Cassar]

Is the post on page 12 the most updated version of the map?


--Andy

Yes the one on page 12 is the latest update, however on the first page there are three versions of the map. I asked people to tell me which one they prefer. I didn't get much feedback about that, but version 14c (the one on page 12) seems the one they prefer. What do you think?

[Ruben Cassar]

Latest update - Version 4.13d

1. Changed legend coloured shapes to square as for some strange reason although the properties in Photoshop were the same for everyone rounded rectangle before some of them were less rounded than others. (Wisse this is the issue you raised)
2. Added more transparency to some of the images.
3. Added a kind of layer border for each of the nine regions to differentiate them more from each other. To check if it's better this way go to page 1 and compare Version 14c (old) with Version 14d (new).
4. Still waiting for feedback on impassable objects' graphics and which ones to use (circles, trees, hills or mixture of them). Perhaps I will put a poll for this one.

[Guiscard]

I like the trees and the hills the most, the circles seem a bit pointless to me. Other than that its looking good!

[Marvaddin]

Maybe you can at least do something usefull with your unpassable. Most of them are completely useless... like Paola - Luqa... both countries are still border countries. Same to Mgarr - bahrija (this one is inside a continent, how useless!) and at least 2 more.

[Ruben Cassar]

Maybe you can at least do something usefull with your unpassable. Most of them are completely useless... like Paola - Luqa... both countries are still border countries. Same to Mgarr - bahrija (this one is inside a continent, how useless!) and at least 2 more.

Paola - Luqa, no they are not border countries because the impassable border divides them!
Mgarr - Bahrija. As I said earlier that is not a real border. It's there to show the impassable trees graphics so that people let me know which ones they prefer. Can you give me some input on that while we are at it?

Regarding the borders let me know where you would like them to be placed exactly so that I can evaluate your suggestions better.

[Marvaddin]

They are border countries when we consider their continents. For what unpassable borders that dont affect the number of territories you need defend to hold a continent?

Great, Valletta and Qormi cant attack each other, but Valletta can be attacked from Xaghra, and Qormi can be attacked from San Giljan, Zebbug and Kirkop, and Paola and Sliema. So, for what that barrier there? You need defend the countries anyway, so they can defend against each other. If you use just a few barriers, but they were making any difference, at least... like Victoria - Xlendi.

[Wisse]

nice job i like the hills and trees

[Ruben Cassar]

They are border countries when we consider their continents. For what unpassable borders that dont affect the number of territories you need defend to hold a continent?

Great, Valletta and Qormi cant attack each other, but Valletta can be attacked from Xaghra, and Qormi can be attacked from San Giljan, Zebbug and Kirkop, and Paola and Sliema. So, for what that barrier there? You need defend the countries anyway, so they can defend against each other. If you use just a few barriers, but they were making any difference, at least... like Victoria - Xlendi.

Sorry but I did not understand what you meant in the first part of your post. If you can explain better or if some understood what he meant let me know.

From what I gather you don't like the position of the barriers. As I said before let me know where you would place them instead so that I can evaluate your suggestion and maybe change the borders. I would need something like border between Birkirkara and Mosta as a suggestion for example.

[Ruben Cassar]

nice job i like the hills and trees

Thanks Wisse. I think I will use a mixture of both.

[Marvaddin]

I dont care too much about where unpassable will be (at least for now), but they are useless.

Example: Mellieha to San Pawl. Mellieha is still a border country of its continent, and San pawl is still a border country of its continent. If you block Mgarr to San Pawl, so San Pawl is no more a border country of its continent, and the unpassable border is being usefull to the gray continent. If a unpassable border just block a route but dont make any territories non borders ones (considering their continents), its almost completely useless, because in fact players holding those continents will still need to defend those territories. If so, for what unpassable borders?

Mdina - Mosta is an example of usefull unpassable, because Mdina is no more a border country... Im suggesting you to make each unpassable to completely block attacks to at least one territory, so they wont be pointless.

[Ruben Cassar]

I dont care too much about where unpassable will be (at least for now), but they are useless.

Example: Mellieha to San Pawl. Mellieha is still a border country of its continent, and San pawl is still a border country of its continent. If you block Mgarr to San Pawl, so San Pawl is no more a border country of its continent, and the unpassable border is being usefull to the gray continent. If a unpassable border just block a route but dont make any territories non borders ones (considering their continents), its almost completely useless, because in fact players holding those continents will still need to defend those territories. If so, for what unpassable borders?

Mdina - Mosta is an example of usefull unpassable, because Mdina is no more a border country... Im suggesting you to make each unpassable to completely block attacks to at least one territory, so they wont be pointless.

So if I am understanding you correctly you mean I should extend the San Pawl-Mellieha border to protect San Pawl from Mgarr as well?

[Marvaddin]

Yeah, but thats just an example... All unpassable should block ALL routes to at least one territory, or they are not needed.

[Ruben Cassar]

Version 14.4 with improved impassable borders:

[Guiscard]

They look much better but could you make them sharper? They look very blurred.

[Ruben Cassar]

They look much better but could you make them sharper? They look very blurred.

Ok I refreshed the map. Check it out now.

[Guiscard]

Better but they still look out of focus in comparison to the rest of the map.

[Marvaddin]

Due to the reasons I already said, most unpassable borders are still pointless.

And your sea routes are bad placed, I think.
Why is Xlendi connected? If you change the route, Xlendi is no more a border country, so the continent is not 3 countries and 3 borders.
Valletta to Xaghra... so both Xaghra - Nadur and Valletta - Qormi unpassable are useless... How about Nadur - Sliema?

[Ruben Cassar]

Due to the reasons I already said, most unpassable borders are still pointless.

And your sea routes are bad placed, I think.
Why is Xlendi connected? If you change the route, Xlendi is no more a border country, so the continent is not 3 countries and 3 borders.
Valletta to Xaghra... so both Xaghra - Nadur and Valletta - Qormi unpassable are useless... How about Nadur - Sliema?

I have already asked you twice and I will ask you a third time to pinpoint in detail which borders you would change. As you might note I followed your advice and extended the San Pawl border and also added the Mgarr border. I also extended the Zebbug and Luqa borders if you didn't notice. Keep in mind that I can't focus only on your demands though and that there was a poll on this issue as well.

Sea routes where discussed intensively earlier in the thread and in fact I added at least one of those sea routes because other members told me to do so. Check the previous posts about them if you want. I think they are fine as they are.

[Marvaddin]

Ok, Im tired of this. I told you what to do, but if you dont want, its not my problem. Keep the useless unpassable. I could point all to you, but for what? You are acting like you didnt understand the suggestion because you disliked it.

And about sea routes: in a map where just 10 of 42 territories are not border countries of their continents, you still put sea routes that make border ones 3 territories that wouldnt be that if you could adjust your routes (Xlendi, Valletta and Xaghra). Keep the routes, please. Its always good having maps less played than yours.

Some more suggestions: remove all unpassable, lets still add more borders and unpredictable results. And add sea routes like Filfla to Marsaxlokk to make accessible the few countries that wouldnt be border ones after removing all the unpassable. Move the helipads to Siggiewi and Marsalforn. Now we will have something really unpredictable. PERFECT!

And Andy, please quench this one once he adds more borders... I think 41 of 42 countries as border countries is good enough.

Ok, just dont attack me and I will ignore this map completely. I dont care, its just a Malta map. Agreed?

[qeee1]

Marv the sea routes are necessary to reduce the power of Gonzo, I agree with you about the unpassable borders though, I've been campaigning for more for quite a while.

[Ruben Cassar]

Ok, Im tired of this. I told you what to do, but if you dont want, its not my problem. Keep the useless unpassable. I could point all to you, but for what? You are acting like you didnt understand the suggestion because you disliked it.

And about sea routes: in a map where just 10 of 42 territories are not border countries of their continents, you still put sea routes that make border ones 3 territories that wouldnt be that if you could adjust your routes (Xlendi, Valletta and Xaghra). Keep the routes, please. Its always good having maps less played than yours.

Some more suggestions: remove all unpassable, lets still add more borders and unpredictable results. And add sea routes like Filfla to Marsaxlokk to make accessible the few countries that wouldnt be border ones after removing all the unpassable. Move the helipads to Siggiewi and Marsalforn. Now we will have something really unpredictable. PERFECT!

And Andy, please quench this one once he adds more borders... I think 41 of 42 countries as border countries is good enough.

Ok, just dont attack me and I will ignore this map completely. I dont care, its just a Malta map. Agreed?

Honestly I wasn't attacking you. Calm down man. I thought you had noticed that I put our previous quarrels behind us so I don't know why you are getting so angry. You need to control your nerves mate.

The fact is that I can't tailor make a map to cater for only your needs. I put a poll about the borders. If the results was the opposite I would gladly add more borders, but the majority don't want to add borders. I even offered to add more borders once the game was live if the majority after playing the game decided that it's better that way. What more do you expect from me? I feel that I have been as democratic as possible on this issue. I have also listened to your suggestions and extended the borders as I said in the earlier post...so why are you acting this way?

Also why are you bringing the sea routes issue up now? Read what I said above in the previous post. Sea routes were mentioned extensively in earlier posts if you would care to check them out. Originally I had less sea routes but once again the majority wanted me to add more. And again what do you expect me to do? Ignore the others and listen only to you? I am trying to do my best here and I would appreciate it if you stop attacking me. After all I am trying to make a map for the whole community here, for the benefit of all. I have dedicated a lot of time to this map and I would appreciate some respect.

I think your sarcasm at the end of the post is also unwarranted. I have been very polite with you and you are always getting angry at me. If you don't like the map and you don't want to play it, that's fine with me. But stop attacking me. It's not fair and it's not doing any good...

[Guiscard]

Ok. Marv I think your going a bit over the top but heres what i think about the borders and sea routes:

You could make Nofhinsar easier to hold. Definitely extend the unpassable border along the fontant / san lawrenz border and perhaps move the sea route to sannat not xlendi ( 3 territories / 1 or 2 border / bonus 2).

the trees are fine as they add a nice bottleneck making it interesting.

perhaps extent the Valletta border to encompass Paola so theres no access to the pink continent from the blue continent. Also I'd move the Paola / Luqa border along to be between Fgura and Zejtun. If you do this, however, you'll have to maybe adjust the pink bonus to be 3 as it will be 5 territories and 2 borders, plus the capital bonus of 1.

Maybe move the zebbug one to dingli as well. Zebbug is still a border country with an impassable border, but dingli would not be.

I'd get rid of the impassable at Mosta and perhaps boost the grey bonus up to 4.


The point people are trying to make (rather aggressivly, for some reason) is that it doesn't matter if impassables dont eliminate a country from being a border territory then they shouldn't be there. You're still going to have to leave a lot of men there to secure your territory whether theres 3, 2 or 1 neighbouring countries where people could attack from. This is something I've still got to perfect on my own map, and I hope I've been some help. I'm sure some of my suggestions are bollocks anyway.

[Marvaddin]

Honestly I wasn't attacking you. Calm down man. I thought you had noticed that I put our previous quarrels behind us so I don't know why you are getting so angry. You need to control your nerves mate.

The fact is that I can't tailor make a map to cater for only your needs. I put a poll about the borders. If the results was the opposite I would gladly add more borders, but the majority don't want to add borders. I even offered to add more borders once the game was live if the majority after playing the game decided that it's better that way. What more do you expect from me? I feel that I have been as democratic as possible on this issue. I have also listened to your suggestions and extended the borders as I said in the earlier post...so why are you acting this way?

Also why are you bringing the sea routes issue up now? Read what I said above in the previous post. Sea routes were mentioned extensively in earlier posts if you would care to check them out. Originally I had less sea routes but once again the majority wanted me to add more. And again what do you expect me to do? Ignore the others and listen only to you? I am trying to do my best here and I would appreciate it if you stop attacking me. After all I am trying to make a map for the whole community here, for the benefit of all. I have dedicated a lot of time to this map and I would appreciate some respect.

I think your sarcasm at the end of the post is also unwarranted. I have been very polite with you and you are always getting angry at me. If you don't like the map and you don't want to play it, that's fine with me. But stop attacking me. It's not fair and it's not doing any good...

You were not attacking me, and I didnt talk you were. But you did it already in the past. And I didnt attack you. If I did, show me where. On other hand, I think you can imagine how much I dislike THE MAP. Im talking about THE MAP all the time. Except for the part I said you are acting like you dont understand the suggestion, but this is true:

Yeah, but thats just an example... All unpassable should block ALL routes to at least one territory, or they are not needed.

Hard enough to understand?????? I explained the same thing, let me count... at least 4 times. Its still so difficult to understand? Why dont you try it by yourself? Because you dont want, you disliked it, but are still asking me to point EXACTLY what to do? My patience is over. But dont tell me I was being unpolite to you, I didnt attack anyone, unless Im attacked. So if you want etiquette classes, lets move the discussion to flame wars, this is not the place.

About what you called sarcasm, please consider those suggestions, once you want something new and unpredictable. I counted, classic map has 24 countries that arent in borders, and your has 10. Is your map supposed to be a classic copy? Of course no. But if you want something different, it dont need to be something really extreme, do it? Whats the problem having a mid term, like 15 non border countries? The idea is not tested (you know my personal opinion), and you want already do that? Why dont you do what I suggested then and we have 41 border countries? From 10 to 1 is a smaller step than what you already did.

Like I said, I dont want talk about the map anymore. I will act like it doesnt exist. But if you talk Im attacking you, I will ask you to prove yourself again.