Conquer Club

Now you can test the map, cairnswk.
Let me know if you need any quick update for it while testing.

Gilligan wrote:

Code: Select all

<minreinforcement>3</minreinforcement>
<reinforcements>
   <reinforcement>
      <lower>1</lower>
      <upper>114</upper>
      <divisor>5</divisor>
   </reinforcement>
</reinforcements>

This gives min 3.

2p = 5 armies
3p = 5 armies
4p = 4 armies
5+ = 3 armies

do you think that is okay? your deploy would go up to 4 when you hit 20 regions.

for reference...if we do 1 for each 4,

Code: Select all

<minreinforcement>3</minreinforcement>
<reinforcements>
   <reinforcement>
      <lower>1</lower>
      <upper>114</upper>
      <divisor>4</divisor>
   </reinforcement>
</reinforcements>

2p = 7 armies
3p = 7 armies
4p = 5 armies
5p = 4 armies
6p+ = 3 armies

your deploy would go up to 4 when you hit 16 regions.

okay so i was wrong about this, it uses all positions and doesn't assign any to neutral, and give 44 regions in 2p game.
I will think more on what it should be tomorrow.

Gilligan wrote:...
I will think more on what it should be tomorrow.

Gilligan.
I started a Game 13504606 in BETA testing...
went second and got 5 troops for 27 regions.
previous player received 5 troops for 29 regions.

After conquering one region...now showing 6 troops for 28 regions.

how does that work? on ...
<lower>1</lower>
<upper>114</upper>
<divisor>5</divisor>

surely i shouldn't get 6 troops until i reach 30 regions if the divisor is 5 ?

are you sure it isn't a hat bonus?

Gilligan wrote:are you sure it isn't a hat bonus?

Duh, stupid me.

Gilligan wrote:...
I will think more on what it should be tomorrow.
Gilligan.

Any more thoughts on this Gilligan

i'm not sure about gilligan's thoughts, but i feel that a divisor of 5 fails to reward aggressive play enough, with the shape of the map potentially leading to a 3-cornered stalemate in multiplayer games unless someone takes a large bonus unchallenged early on.

have u given any thought to removing all of the reinforcement tags and simply capping the initial positions at 23, as below? this gives initial deployments as below. only 7-player games will yield an undesirable number of initial stations (12) per player, but the effect is probably least noticeable in 5-player or 7-player games, both of which are relatively rare.

2p: 23 stations, 7 troops
3p: 23 stations, 7 troops
4p: 22 stations, 7 troops
5p: 17 stations, 5 troops
6p: 14 stations, 4 troops
7p: 12 stations, 4 troops
8p: 11 stations, 3 troops

Code: Select all

<minreinforcement>3</minreinforcement>
<positions max="23">
   <position>
      <territory>TGU Tegucigalpa H</territory>
   </position>

uruaguayan in the xml and uraguayan in the legend both ought to be uruguayan.

ian.

XML fixed to include UYU C in the Chilean bonus.

updated for testing.

iancanton wrote:...
have u given any thought to removing all of the reinforcement tags and simply capping the initial positions at 23, as below? this gives initial deployments as below. only 7-player games will yield an undesirable number of initial stations (12) per player, but the effect is probably least noticeable in 5-player or 7-player games, both of which are relatively rare.

No, there is only 10 games in test and only 4 of those are in play....6 waiting to be filled.
Until I get more feedback ....

uruaguayan in the xml and uraguayan in the legend both ought to be uruguayan.
ian.

Thanks, this will be changed.

tnb80...images and xml for update please....to fix ian's adjustments for "Uruguayan" above.

Man I can't wait to try this Been looking forward to it for a long time.

Rail Maps ♥♥♥

I like it for the most part. My only issue is the embedded pictures of trains and the city, they look.. tacky, for lack of a better word.

great job on this one cairns.
the land is neat and the rails are excellent.
an overall nice feel to the map.


however i do have 2 things:

1. the bowler hat in UYU station looks weird and out of place. which is strange because the one in the legend looks perfect. i'm not sure if it's the glow of the number on it or it lost some quality when you made it bigger. i can't exactly put my finger on it.


2. the brasilia and buenos aires stations. i think you wanted to achieve a pop-out effect, which is great but i think it's not quite there. you have bevel on the brown-gray base leading up to the hexagon with the image, but the hexagon is flat. could you try a bevel or a shadow to the hexagon with the image of the station? alternatively i'd love to see a version with no bevel at all on the brown-gray column. it might fit better with the overall crispness of the land.

Beta - Quenching

---The development period has concluded for the Rail South America Map. All objections have had their time. The Foundry and I hereby brand this map with the Foundry Beta Brand. Let it be known that this map is now ready for BETA Play. After an extended period of time in BETA and once all quirks and issues have been resolved, the map will be put into Full Play (barring any Admins or Foundry Foreman vetoes).

Conquer Club, enjoy!

While the map is in BETA Play, there are a couple of administrative tasks that are required of the mapmaker(s) in addition to the initial gameplay testing:

1. Please ensure that the first post of the thread contains all the necessary information to help future visitors to the development thread; it's particularly important to ensure the most recent images are there, along with any helpful guides (such as gameplay quirks/nuances or the location/size of any starting neutrals etc.)
2. It is the responsibility of the mapmaker(s) to ensure that they respond to further feedback in a timely and constructive manner.
3. Write a "creative" map description and send it to the Foundry Foreman via PM. You're encouraged to post it into the first post of the thread as well; the description will be used to populate the maps database.

Gilligan

Congratulations on map #250!!!!

Really like it so far!

So nothing happens with the misfit train and city images that have been superimposed onto the map? And no, I am not too late to bring this up, as I already have done and others have too.

iAmCaffeine wrote:So nothing happens with the misfit train and city images that have been superimposed onto the map? And no, I am not too late to bring this up, as I already have done and others have too.

what is your problem with them?

Gilligan wrote:

iAmCaffeine wrote:So nothing happens with the misfit train and city images that have been superimposed onto the map? And no, I am not too late to bring this up, as I already have done and others have too.

what is your problem with them?

The building actually looks clean. The rest all look like they've had a cutout filter applied several times, and the streetscape image looks pixelated too.

Gilligan wrote:Congratulations on map #250!!!!

i was under the impression that in order to go live a map must have all its issues fixed.
as i see it there are 2 posts (this and this) that bring up several issues of graphical nature, that not only haven't been fixed but the mapmaker hasn't even bothered to respond despite 2 whole months passing by.


PS: if this rule is no longer valid then i apologise, but nevertheless i feel a response should have been given. we keep complaining that the foundry is dead and that nobody gives feedback but when feedback arrives we ignore it for 2 months then move the map forward. and while the map maker is free to do whatever he wants i feel like the CAs should not allow and encourage this. if a CA sees a map maker is not responsive he should gently prod him, remind him from time to time about the map and explain he needs to address all issues if he wishes the map to move forward.

U CSS seems to be in a different font as well

DiM, I saw the posts. The reason I put this on Beta anyway is that we can't say the map can't be played and what you suggested can be done and fixed with very few effort.
It's not up to us to find a solution for this so untill you don't receive an answer about this from the mapmaker I don't want to create a mess for nothing.
If cairnswk will not respond for too long I will get in touch with him, but honestly right now I just think he is busy with other things (probably more important)

In any case, after a long discussion with bw, we are going to change the process and the way we do maps and things will be different in the near future.
At least we will try to suit the foundry needs with a process that makes more sense than what we do now.
The foundry is not dead imo. Is the way we do maps today and the way me and my team manage them that has no longer a reason to exist on this site.
However this discussion belongs more to foundry discussion than a map topic...we will discuss about this there very soon.

For now we have just to wait for cairnswk, always thinking that Beta maps are NOT finished and I will not let the map come out of beta stage without an answer for your concerns/feedback.

Nobodies

high five on this map!! as a "rail" map fan thank you@ bout to launch my first game on this map.

I think you have a misspelling on the map. You have "Uraguayan" and it should be "Uruguayan". I don't know where else it might show up, but the country is properly spelled "Uruguay", not "Uraguay".

correct! although cairnswk fixed it in december (version 10a), the current playable map and xml do not reflect this. another one for the baron to send to bigWham!

Code: Select all

<continent>
   <name>G - Uruguayan</name>
   <bonus>3</bonus>
   <components>
      <territory>BUA Buenos Aires G</territory>
      <territory>MVD Montevideo G</territory>
      <territory>STY Salto G</territory>
      <territory>POA Porto Alegre G</territory>
   </components>
</continent>

ian.