chapcrap wrote:Is this the same: https://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewt ... 1&t=154636
If so, can I merge?
yes
Moderator: Community Team
chapcrap wrote:Is this the same: https://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewt ... 1&t=154636
If so, can I merge?
saxitoxin wrote:Serbia is a RUDE DUDE
may not be a PRUDE, but he's gotta 'TUDE
might not be LEWD, but he's gonna get BOOED
RUDE
Dukasaur wrote:I think this is a duplicate, but just in case it isn't, yes I'm in favour.
agentcom wrote:Dukasaur wrote:I think this is a duplicate, but just in case it isn't, yes I'm in favour.
It is. I think it's been called "limited random" in the past if anyone wants to search for it.
Queen_Herpes wrote:The Hive Strikes again! I concur. Though perhaps would be easier to just select ten maps that are ridiculous like THE HIVE, and some others and eliminate them entirely from random.
Vid_FISO wrote:Well past time for a bump.
It's a very simple addition, no-one is against it, it benefits many, just sort it out!
IcePack wrote:Interesting, can you put together a list of maps that fall under each of your categories?
Random (small) - maps with less than 25(?) terits
Random (large) - maps with more than 80(?) terits
Random (medium) - maps that fall between (small) and (large)
Random (Conquest) - Conquest maps
Random (standard) - classic type maps with regional/ continental bonuses
Random (complex) - the weird and the wonderful
Random (Beta) - for current beta maps
possibly a couple more obvious categories that don't spring to mind right now
IcePack wrote:Interesting, can you put together a list of maps that fall under each of your categories?
Random (small) - maps with less than 25(?) terits
Random (large) - maps with more than 80(?) terits
Random (medium) - maps that fall between (small) and (large)
Random (Conquest) - Conquest maps
Random (standard) - classic type maps with regional/ continental bonuses
Random (complex) - the weird and the wonderful
Random (Beta) - for current beta maps
possibly a couple more obvious categories that don't spring to mind right now
Vid_FISO wrote:IcePack wrote:Interesting, can you put together a list of maps that fall under each of your categories?
Random (small) - maps with less than 25(?) terits
Random (large) - maps with more than 80(?) terits
Random (medium) - maps that fall between (small) and (large)
Random (Conquest) - Conquest maps
Random (standard) - classic type maps with regional/ continental bonuses
Random (complex) - the weird and the wonderful
Random (Beta) - for current beta maps
possibly a couple more obvious categories that don't spring to mind right now
Whoever has control of the site should be able to do that a lot easier than I can, using this page as the base, it just needs a few more sort columns added for yes/ no flags and its done.
IcePack wrote:
My point was, if things are community agreed upon and spelt out its a lot easier to get implemented then if it's half done or the coder has to figure stuff out. Nobody wants to implement itand then have the community say it should have been 75 instead of 80, or they got the complex maps "wrong" etc
Swifte wrote:IcePack wrote:
My point was, if things are community agreed upon and spelt out its a lot easier to get implemented then if it's half done or the coder has to figure stuff out. Nobody wants to implement itand then have the community say it should have been 75 instead of 80, or they got the complex maps "wrong" etc
The truth is in there!
IcePack wrote:Swifte wrote:IcePack wrote:
My point was, if things are community agreed upon and spelt out its a lot easier to get implemented then if it's half done or the coder has to figure stuff out. Nobody wants to implement itand then have the community say it should have been 75 instead of 80, or they got the complex maps "wrong" etc
The truth is in there!
I don't know what the admin stance on this is, but I do know without it being a full suggestion it doesn't have much of a shot
Vid_FISO wrote:IcePack wrote:Swifte wrote:IcePack wrote:
My point was, if things are community agreed upon and spelt out its a lot easier to get implemented then if it's half done or the coder has to figure stuff out. Nobody wants to implement itand then have the community say it should have been 75 instead of 80, or they got the complex maps "wrong" etc
The truth is in there!
I don't know what the admin stance on this is, but I do know without it being a full suggestion it doesn't have much of a shot
How about this lot get together and sort it out? The knowledge and expertise is in there (or at least should be).
IcePack wrote:...
I dont consider DS a true conquest style map. More complex then conquest. But if you do have it on this list, then stuff like Conquer 500, maybe World Cup's, etc also belong here. District of Alaska too is similar to DS. AYB as well. All ????'s Actually i think monsters belongs in this catagory too, you aren't starting with 1 territory but have one main and then several throughout the map. And poker club. and salem switch. and route 66. i think it just kinda adds to many that aren't true conquest? but for now, maybe mark as ???
KC II should definitely be conquest.
You have Feudal War, but you need to add feudal epic
Add labyrinth
Add baseball
Add clandemonium
I think betas like Promontory Summit and Krazy Kingdoms also fall under here eventually if the get quenched
Donelladan wrote:If we were to implement it, I think the random small/medium/large map should exclude the conquest map.
First because conquest map have their own category.
Donelladan wrote:second because I believe if someone want to play small/medium/large map they are expected "normal map".
I feel the strategy on conquest map is not really influence by the size of the map. While map like FNA or Eurasia are totally different because of their size, than map like doodle, luxembourg, or than medium "normal" map, because of their size.
Donelladan wrote:On the random "standard" :
-Siege! -> it has one way attack, and some special bonus combination. ( throne + wall, camp + gate). Though quite simple it's not really standard. If it was only a 1-way attack I may want to leave it in standard, but I think you are right I will ?? it. I did not know about that bonus, been a while for that map with me I guess
-Wales -> I never find the connection on this map to be that obvious. Plus there is 2 different kind of bonus. Wow didn't realize about this... yea that looks interesting i forgot about this map cool lol. I will ?? it... but note that it really doesn't need ??, it is definitely not standard
-Age Of Merchants -> you put it in the complex, but forgot it in the standard Gah, my bad, taking out of standard
-Bamboo Jack -> To me, connections aren't easy to get because of the Prisoner of war regions on the left side Hm your right, I'll add to complex and ?? mark in standard
-Draknor - Level 1 -> there is basically only one way attack on this map. ( you pit it in complex ) I don't understand what you mean by that? Arrows are all over the place, territories are different size and shapes, making the arrows more confusing. Many terrrits have 2-3 options which way to go, and to figure out which path is the right one to choose, takes a decent amount of time. If you elaborate on this i'll ?? mark it, but for now it stays in complex. *EDIT*: OH I see. I put it as complex because it is, but I also put it in standard whoops
-Egypt: Valley Of The Kings -> some one way attack, and all the scarabs connecting each other, plus some weird bonus. Erm I used to love this map how did I forget about connecting scarabs, and the bonus *le sigh*. ??marked and added to complex
-Forbidden City -> emperor have some special connections. Also I find it very difficult to understand the border system of this map. Bonus aren't that easy either. ( Note you put it in complex as well) Yea wasn't supposed to be in standard my bad... I need to go thru this list again meh. Sorry! deleted from standard
-Treasure of galapagos -> you put it in complex see above
-Imperium romanum -> you put it in complex *echo*
-madness -> connections aren't straightforward I can see where your coming from. ?? marking and going to complex
-Space -> some special connections only special connections are wormholes/warp gates, which if they were standalone and had no lines I would agree with, but since there are pretty clear lines connecting them, I wouldn't say they are special connections. I'll ?? mark it tho cause I can see others possibly thinking the same way as you, lets find out
-Sydney metro -> some special connections. Yup your right. Adding to complex and ??marking. I think for some sections while I was doing this I was harsher than on other sections when deciding between standard and complex. Really think the complex needs to be split. I'll work on that soon.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users