Conquer Club

"Pittsburgh: Neighborhoods & Bridges"
Map developed by League and ckdoeswork.

This map contains:
-79 Territories
-9 Continents
-15 conquerable bridges

Uniqueness: This would be the first Conquer Club map of Pittsburgh,
PA. This map uses Pittsburgh's neighborhoods as playable territories
and the troop bonus structure is based on the city's actual city
council districts. Bridges are playable territories which allow troop
movement between several neighborhoods. Furthermore, the map image
uses actual images of the actual bridges, making it all the more
realistic. While most bridges allow troop movements between nearby
territories, the Veterans Bridge - Crosstown Boulevard - Liberty
Bridge territories model Pittsburgh in two ways that make game play
interesting - first these bridges allow troop movement between
relatively distant territories on the map. Also, the crosstown
boulevard serves as an impassable between dahntahn and the hill
district, similar to the impact it has on the downtown area in
Pittsburgh. Also, the famous three rivers serve as impassables
between the major areas of the city. In reality, Pittsburgh is
nestled in the Appalachian mountains, and therefore we use mountains
as impassables in between some of the neighborhoods as well. Because
the bridges are so important, a player holding several of them
receives bonus troops.

Is that comic sans?

..no, it's not...

Ok, anyway, the font you have in the lower edge sucks. I suggest changing it.

The bridges... where did you get the bridge images from? Are they public domain?

You also need territory labels.

Do you have anything in mind to make this map stand out gameplay-wise?

Also, what graphics software are you using?

We realize the individual neighborhoods need labels, but we thought some of them may change a bit based on gameplay issues, so we wanted to wait until we got some feedback to apply those labels.

As far as making gameplay stand out - we felt that having the 15 playable bridges which aren't part of any of the territory bonuses was unique (although it is similar to the lakes on the Great Lakes map). Like that map, we were going to give bonuses for owning a certain number of bridges.

In addition to that, we felt that the yellow territory which is part of the Southside bonus area, but not directly touching it was interesting, (and it models the real city council district!)

We are alright with changing fonts.

What graphics software are you using? There's a lot of pixelation on the map... depending on what software you use I may be able to give some tips to fixing it.

And what about the bridges? If you didn't draw the bridge images yourself, you need to find out if the original images are copyrighted... if they are you can't use them.

As for gameplay... the gameplay should play together with the theme. When you have a map with a theme like this, a city which a relatively small number of players will be familiar with, you need something to make the map interesting for those who don't live in Pittsburgh... because a majority of CC members do not live in Pittsburgh.

So I would suggest looking into features that are inherent to Pittsburgh, things that represent your city well, and incorporating them on the map in some way, not just as territory names, but actual gameplay features. Look at existing city maps to see how others have accomplished this. Chicago is a good example. Vancouver too. Also, the Portland map which is currently in gameplay workshop is a very good example.

The program I used was Corel Paintshop Pro. I realize it's not exactly a high end product but I thought it did a pretty good job. When you say it has a lot of pixelation, do you mean the map as a whole or just certain aspects such as the bridges?? The photos of the bridges are a combination of public images that were photographed from on top of Mt. Washington in Pittsburgh. The others were taken from Google Maps.

I appreciate the input and I'm certainly not arguing with you on any points, but what about this map would not interest people outside of Pittsburgh? Are there any examples you could list as examples? I'm just curious because to me, that seems like this could be something fun for folks. Maybe for them to try a map that sort of gives you a feel for what the city is like (ie a TON of bridges and really hard to get to different locations).

You mentioned that you might have pointers to sort out all the pixelation. I'm all ears!

Oh, and its not Comic Sans LOL!! But yes, I agree, it does kind of suck. But more or less we were looking to get this map posted up so all of this is good. Im glad to see you offering opinions

I do appreciate the feedback Natty, and I understand the desire to push gameplay ideas forward. And I am certainly alright with considering some options.

At the same time, we liked the idea of making the game play about the neighborhoods and the bridges - the boundaries of neighborhoods and the conenctions made by the bridges are what define how players move around the board. I think it is similar to, but a different twist on the Great Lakes map for example.

We did discuss one idea. In Pittsburgh there is the Gateway Clipper - you take boat rides up and down the river. people rent it out for parties. We could add that to the river, and you could use the gateway clipper to travel around. But we felt like this might be a little cheesy and make the gameplay a bit dishonest to real life... folks dont actually use the gateway clipper to cross rivers, most of the time.

We could also add a bunch more impassables as mountains. Terrain is really steep all around the city. if that would make gameplay better, that's cool.

And we're all about considering other ideas.

...Also, Natty, to your point about not everyone on CC living in Pittsburgh - I've never been to Montreal or San Francisco, but I enjoy playing on both of those maps. And this is even though I don't remember anything being particularly unique about the gameplay in those maps. They are just a different map, another option that is fun to play. I think folks are generally alright with that...

I think this Pittsburgh map looks pretty good and would be fun to play. I would like to see it added as a playable map on CC.

ckdoeswork wrote:We did discuss one idea. In Pittsburgh there is the Gateway Clipper - you take boat rides up and down the river. people rent it out for parties. We could add that to the river, and you could use the gateway clipper to travel around. But we felt like this might be a little cheesy and make the gameplay a bit dishonest to real life... folks dont actually use the gateway clipper to cross rivers, most of the time.

No, I think something like that would be a good idea.

We could also add a bunch more impassables as mountains. Terrain is really steep all around the city. if that would make gameplay better, that's cool.

I think you have enough mountains, actually.

...Also, Natty, to your point about not everyone on CC living in Pittsburgh - I've never been to Montreal or San Francisco, but I enjoy playing on both of those maps. And this is even though I don't remember anything being particularly unique about the gameplay in those maps. They are just a different map, another option that is fun to play. I think folks are generally alright with that...

Well sure, but those maps were made a long, long time ago, when CC has a LOT less maps. It's not exactly fair, but these days the standards are different... a lot of the old maps that are already in play would not necessarily make it through as they are today. You need something more these days, something to make your map stand out from all the other standard gameplay geographical maps.

Of course, there are people who disagree with me, who wouldn't mind more standard gameplay maps. And you could probably get your map through with a standard gameplay, but it would end up as just one more standard gameplay map along lots of other standard gameplay maps... I think, at this point, if you want to make a popular map, you want to offer something new in the gameplay.

League wrote:The program I used was Corel Paintshop Pro. I realize it's not exactly a high end product but I thought it did a pretty good job. When you say it has a lot of pixelation, do you mean the map as a whole or just certain aspects such as the bridges?? The photos of the bridges are a combination of public images that were photographed from on top of Mt. Washington in Pittsburgh. The others were taken from Google Maps.

Ok, if the images are public domain, then they're ok to use. But you have to make sure of this. If you don't know if the images are public domain, then they probably aren't.

Anyway... Paintshop Pro? Almost everything in the map has pixelation. You can see it yourself. Borders, land area, bridges, background.... pretty much everything except the text, army circles and mountains.

I suggest getting GIMP, it's free and easy to use. I don't think anyone is able to help you if you keep using PSP...

I think the map looks like it would be fun to play. I don't care for the gateway clipper idea its not a huge thing that when I think Pittsburgh I'm thinking hey the gateway clipper. The first thing most folks think of when you hear Pittsburgh is either bridges or football that's about it. I like the bridges how you have the different coloration and sizes to make it some what realistic. All and all looks like a decent map and would like to see some game play soon once some minor tweaks that were suggested about the territories w/ name tags is done.

dontizzy wrote:I think the map looks like it would be fun to play. I don't care for the gateway clipper idea its not a huge thing that when I think Pittsburgh I'm thinking hey the gateway clipper.

That's not the point.

Wow.. those bridges do not fit at all. Try something simpler, take a look at the current Philadelphia map for what I'm thinking.


Also, territory name. you need territory names.

Ok we know we need territory names. Those were intentionally left out until we got some feedback on here as stated in one of the first few posts by ckdoeswork. Our thought process was "why waste time naming them if we are going to end up changing some things?". So on that note, the names will probably be one of the last things to go on once we get some things sorted out.

Also, as far as the bridges not fitting, does anyone think that it might be better to do straight down overhead views of the bridges instead of from a downward/sideways view? Since the current "real" ones have a lot of pixelation, this would make it easy to freehand the bridges thus making it blend into the map better??? Dunno, just bouncing ideas around.

No, you're going to need territory names before you get to the gameplay forum. It's pretty much impossible to discuss gameplay without territory names. So what if they have to be changed... you are going to have to make lots of changes anyway.

Alright, we can get on the territory names and post them soon.

Natty, I did have another game play idea for this map, but felt it may complicate things too much. But maybe not. I'm interested to know what you think about this:

The idea is: Mayoral Campaign. Your goal is to hold the Mayor's seat for a whole year.

How do you get to the Mayor's seat? Somewhere to the side of the map are 9 City council seats. They have like 20 neutral troops on them. You can attack them from any territory in a City Council District, but only once you hold the entire city council district. Then, you can use the City Council seat to get to the Mayor's seat, which has like 50 neutral troops on it. If you hold the Mayor's seat for a whole year, you win.

My idea was - do this straightforward Pittsburgh map first. Then do a Pittsburgh map 2: Mayoral Campaign. So folks who like traditional maps could play the neighborhoods and bridges, and then folks who wanted a unique gameplay experience could play Mayoral Campaign.

That sounds good. Obviously it needs to be so that you win if you hold the mayor's seat for one round, not one year...

Oh and this part:

You can attack them from any territory in a City Council District, but only once you hold the entire city council district.

Not possible... just make it so you can always attack the seats from the council territories but make them high in neutrals so you'll need the bonus to get to them.

I actually really like this idea. Yeah, it's just another geography map, but I think Pittsburgh has an interesting layout that you could do a lot of fun things with.

However, I agree that the bridges look a little out of place. I also recommend GIMP. It's good and it's free. That's really all you need to know about it.
Also, I would consider simplifying some of the geography. The South Hills isn't necessary, and you could eliminate some of the West End territories. However, to compensate, you might actually want to add more of the Northside.

Those are just my two cents.

The bridges, I think, do not fit thematically. You havea very animated looking map and then these photorealistic bridges. It clashes.

I went online to download GIMP, however, I was reading that it is not compatible with Windows 7 - 64 bit (which is what I'm running). Does anyone have any further knowledge on this matter or a link for a patch or something??

League wrote:I went online to download GIMP, however, I was reading that it is not compatible with Windows 7 - 64 bit (which is what I'm running). Does anyone have any further knowledge on this matter or a link for a patch or something??

What? Sure it is. It doesn't have explicit 64-bit OS support, but it doesn't mean that it can't be run on a 64-bit system.

Here's the windows installer:

http://downloads.sourceforge.net/gimp-w ... etup-1.exe


edit. actually, I found out gimp does have 64 bit support now - it's just included in the same installer, and the installer will automatically detect if your system is 32 or 64 bit.

here's the one that has 64 bit support:

http://gimp-win.sourceforge.net/stable.html (look at the bottom of the page)

Either should work for you, though.

Thank you very much

Ok this is an update of how things are going. I wanted to put this up and get more feedback before I continue in case I'm still not going down the right path. I feel like I have fixed the pixelation problems that everyone was talking about.

Also, I replaced pictures of the bridges with hand drawn look-alikes. Again, I did that by hand so naturally, not all of the bridges are in place yet (again, I didn't want to waste my time doing all of them if it still doesn't look right).

How do you get to the red island?

There will be a bridge. I purposely left out several bridges for the fact that I wanted you to tell me if the bridges that I drew and provided on this update were sufficient enough before I went ahead and finished the remaining bridges. If they still aren't good enough then I'd rather only have to fix a few of them instead of all of them.

Ok... well... it's hard to say about the pixelation since the image seems to be a really low quality jpeg. Could you save the map in png so we could see what is pixelation and what is just jpeg artifacts?