Conquer Club

New Bonus Concept

Have an idea for a map? Discuss ideas and concepts here.

Moderator: Cartographers

Forum rules
Please read the Community Guidelines before posting.

Worth While?

 
Total votes : 0

New Bonus Concept

Postby stringybeany on Sat Sep 01, 2007 7:33 am

What we've learned so far:

A.Symmetrical and highly interconnected maps do not play well with current bonus.

B.This proposed bonus system will only work on highly interconnected maps.

A+B. This bonus system may make symmetrical maps more fun to play, and I'm betting it will.





Please note! This "map" is NOT a proposed gameplay map! It is only and example to demonstrate the bonus calculation concept! Please vote on the concept, not this "map"!


Image

in the above example:

Red= 3+1(b8.) =4
Green= 4+1(e6)+1(f6)+1(h4) =7
Blue= 3+1(g2) =4
Yellow=4+1(b40+1(c4)+1(d4)+1(e4) =8

You'll not that every node is connected to four others.

(I think this can develop into a completely new set of interesting maps!)
Last edited by stringybeany on Wed Sep 05, 2007 5:43 am, edited 5 times in total.
Image
User avatar
Captain stringybeany
 
Posts: 551
Joined: Mon May 28, 2007 10:28 am

Postby Qwert on Sat Sep 01, 2007 8:52 am

wrong place for begining map>move to map idea
Image
NEW REVOLUTION-NEW RANKS PRESS THESE LINK viewtopic.php?f=471&t=47578&start=0
User avatar
Major Qwert
SoC Training Adviser
 
Posts: 9262
Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 5:07 pm
Location: VOJVODINA

Postby t.e.c on Sat Sep 01, 2007 9:46 am

i really dislike maps that are too symmetrical, like chinese checkers or the US senate maps. if you could make it a little less balanced then it could be interesting
Corporal t.e.c
 
Posts: 298
Joined: Sat Dec 09, 2006 10:55 am
Location: aichi, japan

Postby Balsiefen on Sat Sep 01, 2007 10:26 am

t.e.c wrote:i really dislike maps that are too symmetrical, like chinese checkers or the US senate maps. if you could make it a little less balanced then it could be interesting


I agree.

I also dislike maps with unimaginative territory names like d2 and a6
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class Balsiefen
 
Posts: 2299
Joined: Wed Aug 30, 2006 6:15 am
Location: The Ford of the Aldar in the East of the Kingdom of Lindissi

Postby stringybeany on Sat Sep 01, 2007 5:02 pm

Balsiefen wrote:I ... dislike maps with unimaginative territory names like d2 and a6


I agree also! The sample was included to describe the bonus concept, and give a sample system of interconnections, not as a proposed background.

The actual game play map (or maps) would look quite different. I'm no artist. I'm more of the bit-basher type. Somebody else will have to create the actual maps.
Last edited by stringybeany on Sat Sep 01, 2007 5:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Image
User avatar
Captain stringybeany
 
Posts: 551
Joined: Mon May 28, 2007 10:28 am

Postby stringybeany on Sat Sep 01, 2007 5:06 pm

qwert wrote:wrong place for begining map>move to map idea


I see that. I followed the lead thread in the foundry which gave a format then when it was moved here I read sub-forum announcement.

Andy it might help if you made a note in the foundry announcement to that effect. It might save on housekeeping time.
Image
User avatar
Captain stringybeany
 
Posts: 551
Joined: Mon May 28, 2007 10:28 am

Postby stringybeany on Sat Sep 01, 2007 5:13 pm

t.e.c wrote:i really dislike maps that are too symmetrical, like chinese checkers or the US senate maps. if you could make it a little less balanced then it could be interesting


yes there are definitely those that will dislike symmetrical maps, but what's the spread? Chinese checkers remains a viable map here with plenty of happy users. Is there enough appeal for more symmetrical maps?
Last edited by stringybeany on Sun Sep 02, 2007 5:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Image
User avatar
Captain stringybeany
 
Posts: 551
Joined: Mon May 28, 2007 10:28 am

Postby oaktown on Sat Sep 01, 2007 8:57 pm

stringybeany wrote:yes there are definitely those that will dislike symetrical maps, but what's the spread? Chinese checkers remains a viable map here with plenty of happy users. Is there enough appeal for more symmetrical maps?


Well, I MADE Chinese Checkers and even I don't play it. :?

I think there is a place for symmetrical maps, as it puts players on more even footing from the start than when one player starts with, say, half of Australia, or the Throne and half of the Great Hall (game over, Siege players). But it's a tough sell, which requires a really original idea and graphics that wow people into looking past the straightforward gameplay.
User avatar
Captain oaktown
 
Posts: 4451
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 9:24 pm
Location: majorcommand

Postby stringybeany on Sun Sep 02, 2007 4:37 am

oaktown wrote:
stringybeany wrote:yes there are definitely those that will dislike symetrical maps, but what's the spread? Chinese checkers remains a viable map here with plenty of happy users. Is there enough appeal for more symmetrical maps?


Well, I MADE Chinese Checkers and even I don't play it. :?

I think there is a place for symmetrical maps, as it puts players on more even footing from the start than when one player starts with, say, half of Australia, or the Throne and half of the Great Hall (game over, Siege players). But it's a tough sell, which requires a really original idea and graphics that wow people into looking past the straightforward gameplay.


So far the poll is running about even, but I wonder if people are focusing on the concept or the sample map?

It's the discussion about the bonus calculation concept that interests me.

The strategies employed on these types of maps would be quite different, which is what is encouraged in the development announcements:

"don't just make another classic risk clone if you want success"

This bonus calculation style can apply to many maps and nodal configurations, not just symmetrical ones.

For instance on the classic map holding japan kamchatka and mongolia would get you a bonus of one. So would holding south africa, east africa, and madagascar.

Holding siam and all of australia would give you a bonus of four which would be far too much, which gives you an easy example of the limitations of the concept. Maps with long connected strings (some of the island maps) don't work well either.

so the maps have to stay open with lots of nodal connections, but they certainly don't need to be symmetrical.
Image
User avatar
Captain stringybeany
 
Posts: 551
Joined: Mon May 28, 2007 10:28 am

Postby oaktown on Sun Sep 02, 2007 6:03 pm

OK Stringy, I've read your last post and re-read your opening post, and I don't get what you're suggesting; still, I'd like to hear more. Please revise your original descrption to give us a better idea of what you're getting at... I thought i had it for a second, but the math in your example didn't work for each color.

It sounds like you're proposing a map in which there aren't set bonus regions, but bonuses are granted for holding clusters, and these clusters can be found anywhere on the board. If so, people have played with similar ideas - Deck of Cards being one example that isn't exactly the same but has a similar idea - but they've been abandoned due to the complexities of the XML. The recent changes to the XML options at the site may make this easier.
User avatar
Captain oaktown
 
Posts: 4451
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 9:24 pm
Location: majorcommand

Postby stringybeany on Mon Sep 03, 2007 3:03 am

oaktown wrote:...

It sounds like you're proposing a map in which there aren't set bonus regions, but bonuses are granted for holding clusters, and these clusters can be found anywhere on the board. If so, people have played with similar ideas - Deck of Cards being one example that isn't exactly the same but has a similar idea - but they've been abandoned due to the complexities of the XML. The recent changes to the XML options at the site may make this easier.


Yes, I figured people weren't getting me, so I modified the post but there is still a gap in understanding.

listen: I've tested this concept out thoroughly with real dice on a classic map. It does work extremely well.

The play style is definitely fast and different.

Somebody please get me sample files and XML code set and I'll build a test board.

I get the idea that the process here for new maps requires the artwork first. This concept needs to have working code first, I think.

I probably shouldn't have posted this here (actually, the thread was moved here)

Get me the samples, and let me do what I do best. The artwork will have to come later.

Please.
Image
User avatar
Captain stringybeany
 
Posts: 551
Joined: Mon May 28, 2007 10:28 am

Postby stringybeany on Mon Sep 03, 2007 3:09 am

qwert wrote:wrong place for begining map>move to map idea


Actually, this isn't a map idea, and moving it here just added to the confusion.

It's a bonus concept.
Image
User avatar
Captain stringybeany
 
Posts: 551
Joined: Mon May 28, 2007 10:28 am

Postby yeti_c on Mon Sep 03, 2007 3:51 am

oaktown wrote:Deck of Cards being one example that isn't exactly the same but has a similar idea - but they've been abandoned due to the complexities of the XML.


PS The complexities of the XML aren't the problem now the new code is in - the problem with the Poker map is that the site would choke on it... as it would have too much XML for the server to cope with well!!!

C.
Image
Highest score : 2297
User avatar
Lieutenant yeti_c
 
Posts: 9624
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2007 9:02 am

Postby Xyl on Mon Sep 03, 2007 6:41 am

Your "concept" might as well be gibberish, I don't understand a bit of it. :? All I see is a map and some numbers with no explanation of what they mean or how they were derived. Perhaps you should try just saying what your idea is, preferably in complete sentences.
Major Xyl
 
Posts: 68
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2007 2:43 am
Location: Seattle, WA

Postby DiM on Mon Sep 03, 2007 7:22 am

here is the easiest explanation for this new bonus system:


Safe Territory bonus:

you get +n for every safe territory you own.
a safe territory is a territory that only borders territories that you own.

like in the image above if yellow takes c3 and e3 then d3 becomes a safe territory.

i'm not sure if this is possible to code. it could be but analyzing each and every possible combination would make for a huge xml that would put even AoM to shame :lol:

aside from the xml issue i think the gameplay would be interesting but rather difficult especially on a geographical map.

for example let's take classic. you get australia and defend it on siam. 1 border 5 terits and 4 safe terits which would bring a bonus of 4. kinda strange.

let's go over to europe. 7 terits 4 borders and just 3 safe terits for a bonus of +3.

with this kind of bonus system choke points like siam would destroy the gameplay.

or imagine the indochina map where with just 2 terits you can defend half of the map for a HUGE bonus.

i guess the only map where this gameplay would work would be a symmetrical map where each terit has the exact same number of borders. otherwise the gameplay would be skewed badly and people with a lucky deployment behind a choke point would clearly win.


but overall i like the idea. perhaps if chinese checkers would have this bonus system i'd play it.
“In the beginning God said, the four-dimensional divergence of an antisymmetric, second rank tensor equals zero, and there was light, and it was good. And on the seventh day he rested.”- Michio Kaku
User avatar
Major DiM
 
Posts: 10415
Joined: Wed Feb 14, 2007 6:20 pm
Location: making maps for scooby snacks

Postby stringybeany on Mon Sep 03, 2007 9:30 am

DiM wrote:....

but overall i like the idea. perhaps if chinese checkers would have this bonus system i'd play it.


Thank you! Well said!

Maps without your "choke points" and this bonus system work well together.

What will it take to get a test map built?
Image
User avatar
Captain stringybeany
 
Posts: 551
Joined: Mon May 28, 2007 10:28 am

Postby oaktown on Mon Sep 03, 2007 4:28 pm

thank you DiM... Stringy, you may want to include that explanation in the opening post.

As creating a "test map," what is there to test? It wouldn't be at all difficult to code - it'll just take some time to work out all of the possibilities.

The question isn't whether or not it will work, the question is will people play it. Somebody will have to design and develop a map that uses this system, explain it thoroughly, and take feedback via the Foundry process. If you can map out a rough draft with the basic mechanics, and if it survives the slings and arrows of this site, somebody will step up to help with the graphics. :)
Image
User avatar
Captain oaktown
 
Posts: 4451
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 9:24 pm
Location: majorcommand

Postby stringybeany on Tue Sep 04, 2007 4:38 am

oaktown wrote:... somebody will step up to help with the graphics. :)


It's a challenge because the tone of this site seems to be "graphics first".

I'd like to see a working model first. If the code is easy, then let's see some samples.
Image
User avatar
Captain stringybeany
 
Posts: 551
Joined: Mon May 28, 2007 10:28 am

Postby DiM on Tue Sep 04, 2007 4:49 am

first a theme is required. then you can build from that theme and make the graphics. at the same time have the gameplay in mind.

for the graphics part you will find plenty of cartographers interested to help you if you manage to find that theme and perhaps make a rough sketch.
“In the beginning God said, the four-dimensional divergence of an antisymmetric, second rank tensor equals zero, and there was light, and it was good. And on the seventh day he rested.”- Michio Kaku
User avatar
Major DiM
 
Posts: 10415
Joined: Wed Feb 14, 2007 6:20 pm
Location: making maps for scooby snacks

Postby stringybeany on Tue Sep 04, 2007 5:26 am

DiM wrote:first a theme is required. then you can build from that theme and make the graphics. at the same time have the gameplay in mind.

for the graphics part you will find plenty of cartographers interested to help you if you manage to find that theme and perhaps make a rough sketch.


You just proved my point. "first you need a theme".

Somebody please explain to me why the graphics need to come first? In my opinion you have it backwards...when you have a new concept you need to test it out before you go to the trouble of developing the color, or "theme".

Others haven't been so positive when it comes to the viability of the required code. so why don't we test some code first before spending a lot of effort developing color for a map that might never fly because of code constraints?

Let's please try out some code!
Last edited by stringybeany on Tue Sep 04, 2007 5:31 am, edited 1 time in total.
Image
User avatar
Captain stringybeany
 
Posts: 551
Joined: Mon May 28, 2007 10:28 am

Postby gimil on Tue Sep 04, 2007 5:29 am

stringybeany wrote:
DiM wrote:first a theme is required. then you can build from that theme and make the graphics. at the same time have the gameplay in mind.

for the graphics part you will find plenty of cartographers interested to help you if you manage to find that theme and perhaps make a rough sketch.


You just proved my point. "first you need a theme".


A theme is nothing to do with the graphics. the theme is what your going ot base the map around. Will it be a country? A symetrical map? abstract?
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 stringybeany on Tue Sep 04, 2007 5:33 am

gimil wrote:
A theme is nothing to do with the graphics. the theme is what your going ot base the map around. Will it be a country? A symetrical map? abstract?



That's all irrelevant until the code can be proved to be viable or not. Again, why waste time on all that if the coding problems can't be worked out?
Image
User avatar
Captain stringybeany
 
Posts: 551
Joined: Mon May 28, 2007 10:28 am

Postby gimil on Tue Sep 04, 2007 5:35 am

stringybeany wrote:
gimil wrote:
A theme is nothing to do with the graphics. the theme is what your going ot base the map around. Will it be a country? A symetrical map? abstract?



That's all irrelevant until the code can be proved to be viable or not. Again, why waste time on all that if the coding problems can't be worked out?


We ask an XML expert like coleman or yeti_c they'll tell everyone weather or not its possible without having to go through all this trouble.
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 DiM on Tue Sep 04, 2007 5:35 am

stringybeany wrote:

That's all irrelevant until the code can be proved to be viable or not. Again, why waste time on all that if the coding problems can't be worked out?


the coding is possible. it's hard but possible.
“In the beginning God said, the four-dimensional divergence of an antisymmetric, second rank tensor equals zero, and there was light, and it was good. And on the seventh day he rested.”- Michio Kaku
User avatar
Major DiM
 
Posts: 10415
Joined: Wed Feb 14, 2007 6:20 pm
Location: making maps for scooby snacks

Postby stringybeany on Tue Sep 04, 2007 5:36 am

At least I am serious about it.

Here's a message for all the XML monkey's out there. I will pay $500 for a fully working test map using this concept.

No joke, I'm serious. Paid in cash through paypal upon completion.

Maybe that will get some action.

PM me if you want to give it a shot.
Image
User avatar
Captain stringybeany
 
Posts: 551
Joined: Mon May 28, 2007 10:28 am

Next

Return to Melting Pot: Map Ideas

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users

cron