Conquer Club

Pick, vote and will get on the case.

Central Command assault for sure.
I had a similar idea back in 2011 - viewtopic.php?f=63&t=156590

I like the age of man idea, though I have one problem with it. Didn't people migrate into the america's through Alaska?

I like age of man, but needs a lot of work.

Also, I don't think you can have two different winning conditions, only one.

FOOTBALL!!!

Seamus76 wrote:Also, I don't think you can have two different winning conditions, only one.

You absolutely can have multiple win conditions - see All Your Base, for example.

sempai

I'm not sure I would work on any at the moment. Until the plans for the foundry are made clear by the current admin, it might all be for naught. It would be a shame to see you put a lot of time and effort into a map to only have the foundry shut down permanently.

Age of Man.

@Butters: that's unlikely.

Butters1919 wrote:I'm not sure I would work on any at the moment. Until the plans for the foundry are made clear by the current admin, it might all be for naught. It would be a shame to see you put a lot of time and effort into a map to only have the foundry shut down permanently.

That would be a big mistake. The feeling of expectation is a very powerful tool used all over the gaming industry.

waauw wrote:I like the age of man idea, though I have one problem with it. Didn't people migrate into the america's through Alaska?

Apparently, tens of thousands of years before 500BC

Thanks for looking-in everyone.

Seamus76 wrote:I like age of man, but needs a lot of work.

Also, I don't think you can have two different winning conditions, only one.

My favorite too, although somehow feels like a lot less potential work than the others.

Any suggestions for the next few steps with that one?

Teflon Kris wrote:Thanks for looking-in everyone.

Seamus76 wrote:I like age of man, but needs a lot of work.

Also, I don't think you can have two different winning conditions, only one.

My favorite too, although somehow feels like a lot less potential work than the others.

Any suggestions for the next few steps with that one?

I feel like you will have to ask for supersized map permissions.

waauw wrote:

Teflon Kris wrote:

Seamus76 wrote:I like age of man, but needs a lot of work.

Any suggestions for the next few steps with that one?

I feel like you will have to ask for supersized map permissions.

Yeah, trying to fit to normal size makes it all a bit squashed, so licence to have a little more width would be cool, maybe not that much extra room needed to reduce the crowded areas though?

Teflon Kris wrote:

waauw wrote:

Teflon Kris wrote:

Seamus76 wrote:I like age of man, but needs a lot of work.

Any suggestions for the next few steps with that one?

I feel like you will have to ask for supersized map permissions.

Yeah, trying to fit to normal size makes it all a bit squashed, so licence to have a little more width would be cool, maybe not that much extra room needed to reduce the crowded areas though?

Crowded areas shouldn't be too much of a problem. Merging is always an option, not to mention you left immense amounts of space for the legend(especially once you expand your map's width.

waauw wrote:Crowded areas shouldn't be too much of a problem. Merging is always an option, not to mention you left immense amounts of space for the legend(especially once you expand your map's width.

Merging? You mean merging the inset and main map? See below if that is what you mean.

Certainly some room can be saved in the width , cutting-out some unused Pacific and the little spaces between the eatern and western edges of the main map and the border (which I will have to change as the pre-draft border has been 'borrowed' from another map). Maybe that might enable me to reduce the width to the required 630px.

Height-wise, the inset could be smaller, but, saving room there and fitting the nether-worlds and legend in any spaces, might not give a massive saving, maybe taking me down to a height of around 630px. I'm not sure 600px is entirely obtainable height-wise?


Reducing the size of the main map for a little more room?

The problem here would be with the various tribal regions in west africa being even closer together, plus, difficulties in making it clear that that the Azores-Rome connection goes through the Gibraltar straight, not connecting with the Berbers or CT3.

I dont feel there is any leeway to remove any regions where things are a touch crowded (i.e. a West African region) as this would unbalance that starting position: Each starting position (blue 7s) has 3 local regions (including a +1 'centre') for players to get going before they travel to the central mediterranean area through a 3-neutral, or risk trying to hit another starting area though a 7 killer neutral (red 7).

Hmmm. Unless, either, the shape of the main map were a little warped to give greater area in the centre, which is not aesthetically ideal.

Or maybe the inset area could be expanded horizontally to include the Berbers/CT3/Gibraltar straight area? Hmmm, I may have a look at that option.

Teflon Kris wrote:

waauw wrote:Crowded areas shouldn't be too much of a problem. Merging is always an option, not to mention you left immense amounts of space for the legend(especially once you expand your map's width.

Merging? You mean merging the inset and main map? See below if that is what you mean.

Sorry, what I meant was that you merge territories together. For instance if Australia ever got too crowded you could always merge those 3 into 1(hypothetical example).
And by expanding the map's width I was referring to you asking for supersized map permissions.

waauw wrote:

Teflon Kris wrote:

waauw wrote:Crowded areas shouldn't be too much of a problem. Merging is always an option, not to mention you left immense amounts of space for the legend(especially once you expand your map's width.

Merging? You mean merging the inset and main map? See below if that is what you mean.

Sorry, what I meant was that you merge territories together. For instance if Australia ever got too crowded you could always merge those 3 into 1(hypothetical example).
And by expanding the map's width I was referring to you asking for supersized map permissions.

Sorry too, I was editing my above post to explain about removing any regions whilst you were posting:

I dont feel there is any leeway to remove any regions where things are a touch crowded (i.e. a West African region) as this would unbalance that starting position: Each starting position (blue 7s) has 3 local regions (including a +1 'centre') for players to get going before they travel to the central mediterranean area through a 3-neutral, or risk trying to hit another starting area though a 7 killer neutral (red 7).

With conquest-style maps with more regions in each starting 'kingdom', there can be slight variations in numbers but I think it would be too imbalanced in this case if there were any less anywhere?

Anyway, I think we are probably agreeing that the first step is to reduce size, then ask for supersize if still over the 600x630 limit?

Teflon Kris wrote:
Anyway, I think we are probably agreeing that the first step is to reduce size, then ask for supersize if still over the 600x630 limit?

Don't ask me that question. Everybody has their own methods and way of ordering tasks. Just do what you feel you got to do.

I am only a game player, not a map maker, not a producer.zero tech skills, I really appreciate all the poduct produced, , what the foundry provides CC. I voted for the Age of Man map and suggest you lobby around this map (and other ideas), Bring them to the bargaining table with BigvWham. Consumer surveys show the people like this model, bring the product to market.

and the players should back the producers.

Appreciate all that you have done are doing and will do.

waauw wrote:

Teflon Kris wrote:
Anyway, I think we are probably agreeing that the first step is to reduce size, then ask for supersize if still over the 600x630 limit?

Don't ask me that question. Everybody has their own methods and way of ordering tasks. Just do what you feel you got to do.

Although, you have helped me make my own mind up.

Fewnix wrote:I am only a game player, not a map maker, not a producer.zero tech skills, I really appreciate all the poduct produced, , what the foundry provides CC. I voted for the Age of Man map and suggest you lobby around this map (and other ideas), Bring them to the bargaining table with BigvWham. Consumer surveys show the people like this model, bring the product to market.

and the players should back the producers.

Appreciate all that you have done are doing and will do.

Thanks dood

Command Centre is the one that has promise.

I really don't like Age of Man. It's basically another World 2.1, except as hard to understand as Dawn of Ages. Would soon become just another farming map -- the normal player wouldn't take the time to figure it out.

Dukasaur wrote:Command Centre is the one that has promise.

I really don't like Age of Man. It's basically another World 2.1, except as hard to understand as Dawn of Ages. Would soon become just another farming map -- the normal player wouldn't take the time to figure it out.

OK, thanks mate, although Age of Man isn't all that complex, its a conquest map - players start on the blue 7s, each with their own corner of the world - all meet in the middle.

Cold War is complex though.

;:-)

Updated Age of Man, showing starting positions (next update will have icons not 'borrowed' from other maps):

looks better already, however the two americas starting positions seems so close to each other as compared to other starting positions.

Again, my comments for what they are worth, from a game player rather than a map maker.

I like Age of Man as I like conquest style maps, medium to large size, with a bit of complexity - some special features (like some terts with auto-deploy), the possibility of winning by seizing and holding some objectives, things like that mean it would take a few games on a few different settings to see what are winning strategies. Not one of those maps everybody first time says: " "Oh, I know how to play it, it's a conquest styte map", nor one of those maps that people say " It's too complicated, I don't want to play" "Age of Man seems like it could be one of the just right" Goldilocks" style maps.

Probably after a few gameson age of Man I and others see it as a map that is fun to play on several different settings , a map I/we can rack up some points and medals on and we are happy to play moderately frequently.

rough guesses:
Age of Man could work for me as a standard game or terminator, assassin not really my thing but for those who like it Age of Man could work.
Could work with no spoils, flat rate or escalating spoils,sunny or foggy nuke and zombie not my thing but could work for some, . any type of fort could work
Some good possibility for team play, I would like to try it trips or quads, and clans could like it for clan wars, CCUP6, CL7, things like that.

On the big picture question, the future of the foundry, Your call but my sense is rather than letting maps that shows some potential languish in the Foundry, maybe die without any testings, while the map maker goes through different fixes and gets discouraged for various reasons, is it possible to get rough version out in beta form soon, or maybe alpha testing?

Typically, software goes through two stages of testing before it is considered finished. The first stage, called alpha testing, is often performed only by users within the organization developing the software. The second stage, called beta testing , generally involves a limited number of external users.

So if the alpha or beta testers see a problem with some feature not working, like an auto-deploy or conditional border, that could be brought to the attention of the map maker to fix.,

OR If beta testers like it as a map to play, but see some improvements needed in things like hard to read the legend, too few starting points or the boni zones are wrong size or hard to figure out, this could be brought to the attention of the map maker to fix, with the big CC community hearing the positiive reviews eagerly anticipating the finished product.

worst case scenario the map maker hears what alpha or beta testers says and figures it not worth it proceeding any further.


something like that?

appreciate all that you do, have done and will do.



,

It is definitely looking cleaner.