Conquer Club

I

Gilligan wrote:Perhaps we can have the eight pieces scattered on boards, but they can ONLY attack Go and have no affiliation with the space they are located on.

If that becomes confusing, we can just throw them somewhere on the board that isn't on a space.

Then, perhaps Free Parking can attack the pieces directly.

I like that idea Gilligan, implementing this as well

This map had better get finished because I've wanted it for a long time.


Don't through capitals on the map just because it's available. This map should focus on standard gameplay without gimmicks just for the sake of having it.

Yes Night Strike.

If you do implement the pieces on squares, that means you'll need two army circles for each one. It's doable. But the pieces should have no effect on the piece they are on. Personally, I think the pieces would work better in the center part of the board and not on spaces.

Perhaps this:

Pieces can only attack Go
Something (Perhaps Jail and Free Parking?) can only attack pieces
Go resets to Neutral after every round

Hmm wait.

That doesn't sound gameplay sound at all.

It would just be a giant race to all of the Monopolies and that sounds bad.

Maybe this would be better.

Pieces can attack any corner space
Decks can attack pieces

This will be ten times as fun to play and less like Circus Maximus if you integrate the aspect of building houses.

Just as a suggestion, you could add three ('three' being 'as many as you want') 'houses' to each region - you'll have plenty of space to do this if you shrink the giant 'CONQUEROPOLY' text and move the card decks closer together. The houses could start as neutral attack the region they are on (and vice versa), and holding all three houses could grant a bonus.

Also, the sideways text is just a pain to read - perhaps you could try some different fonts, or even just turn those sideways spots the 'correct' way up. I know it doesn't match the theme of monopoly so well this way, but it would make me happy. And that's all that matters.

Perhaps you could change the name of 'Attack multis' to something more fun ? I'm thinking 'Busted' or 'King Achilles'.

You're the map-maker...

Gilligan wrote:If you do implement the pieces on squares, that means you'll need two army circles for each one. It's doable. But the pieces should have no effect on the piece they are on. Personally, I think the pieces would work better in the center part of the board and not on spaces.

Perhaps this:

Pieces can only attack Go
Something (Perhaps Jail and Free Parking?) can only attack pieces
Go resets to Neutral after every round

Hmm wait.

That doesn't sound gameplay sound at all.

It would just be a giant race to all of the Monopolies and that sounds bad.

Maybe this would be better.

Pieces can attack any corner space
Decks can attack pieces

Gilligan, I don't think im going to implement the pieces, ill try and keep the gameplay as standard as possible.

ManBungalow wrote:This will be ten times as fun to play and less like Circus Maximus if you integrate the aspect of building houses.

Just as a suggestion, you could add three ('three' being 'as many as you want') 'houses' to each region - you'll have plenty of space to do this if you shrink the giant 'CONQUEROPOLY' text and move the card decks closer together. The houses could start as neutral attack the region they are on (and vice versa), and holding all three houses could grant a bonus.

Also, the sideways text is just a pain to read - perhaps you could try some different fonts, or even just turn those sideways spots the 'correct' way up. I know it doesn't match the theme of monopoly so well this way, but it would make me happy. And that's all that matters.

Perhaps you could change the name of 'Attack multis' to something more fun ? I'm thinking 'Busted' or 'King Achilles'.

You're the map-maker...

1. I like the idea of houses, but may put it on to-do list and review it after this gets through to gameplay.

2. im not sure about the sideways text, in earlier incarnations of this map it was done that way then changed because people didnt like the look of it. another to put on the to-do at a later date.

3. Attack Multi's is being changed to busted multi's

4. I know I am but any input is welcome.
4a. Dont forget gilligan.

New Update Up.

I'm still going for having one piece per player with the pieces on GO. I don't think it will make game play more complicated; in fact, I think it will make it simpler.

I feel like you really need to rethink the region names and their associative group.

Profile & Rank are good I'd say. So are Join, Start, and Game Finder.

Student, Teacher, SoC---I like the sentiment, but I don't feel like these are as effective as the first grouping.

E-ticket, C&A Forum, C&A Team also feels pretty weak. If I were you, consider eliminating the 'Team' and just go with something that represents a team (like Map Foundry, Tournaments, Live Chat, Tools, etc). Let the "Mods/Admins" take over the role of all the individual 'Teams'

Forums, Live Chat, Tournys---forums doesn't even make sense here I think. Moreover, this grouping doesn't seem as associative as say Profile/Rank and the Game/Start/Join.

Tools, Suggs & Bugs, Tech Team---weak again. I like the inclusion of Tools though, but this area needs a reworking I think.

Map Foundry, Clans, CC Dispatch. This group also seems just mashed together, though I feel like each of these should be on the map somewhere.

The areas without text---the online community and the luck---look strange without any text. I'd give those areas text, so they match other areas with Icons---namely Free Troop, Multis, Bust Multis, etc.

Moreover, though I like the sentiment behind MrMoody, I don't think it is effective in conveying information. I.E. in the legend there is mention to "Mr Moodys one way attack" though it isn't really mentioned what MrMoody is. I think a Computer---either a Laptop or an old fashioned big monitor screen would be more effective and communicative.

I also don't know about the Car Service named after myself and the others. Though I'd like to think we're a big part of CC, I think there must be something else that would be more fitting than selecting individuals like this.


--Andy

I also believe that some of the names reworking, but I think that should come later after we fix up gameplay.

AndyDufresne wrote:I feel like you really need to rethink the region names and their associative group.

Profile & Rank are good I'd say. So are Join, Start, and Game Finder.

Student, Teacher, SoC---I like the sentiment, but I don't feel like these are as effective as the first grouping.

E-ticket, C&A Forum, C&A Team also feels pretty weak. If I were you, consider eliminating the 'Team' and just go with something that represents a team (like Map Foundry, Tournaments, Live Chat, Tools, etc). Let the "Mods/Admins" take over the role of all the individual 'Teams'

Forums, Live Chat, Tournys---forums doesn't even make sense here I think. Moreover, this grouping doesn't seem as associative as say Profile/Rank and the Game/Start/Join.

Tools, Suggs & Bugs, Tech Team---weak again. I like the inclusion of Tools though, but this area needs a reworking I think.

Map Foundry, Clans, CC Dispatch. This group also seems just mashed together, though I feel like each of these should be on the map somewhere.

The areas without text---the online community and the luck---look strange without any text. I'd give those areas text, so they match other areas with Icons---namely Free Troop, Multis, Bust Multis, etc.

Moreover, though I like the sentiment behind MrMoody, I don't think it is effective in conveying information. I.E. in the legend there is mention to "Mr Moodys one way attack" though it isn't really mentioned what MrMoody is. I think a Computer---either a Laptop or an old fashioned big monitor screen would be more effective and communicative.

I also don't know about the Car Service named after myself and the others. Though I'd like to think we're a big part of CC, I think there must be something else that would be more fitting than selecting individuals like this.


--Andy

Andy,

I completely agree with you, the names are a bit weak and do need a lot of reworking, however although they are important I agree with Gilligan that this map needs to put a lot of work into the gameplay before we even think about changing the names around, which can happen in graphics, I will put it on the to-do list though so we don't forget about it.

Thanks

Alright guys, I'm gonna need some help here. Is this the same map as the one in the recycling bin? Because I think merging the threads might be appropriate.

Font is a bit blocky and unpleasant to read.

Right now, the map is quite plain in gameplay and graphics and resembles monopoly in graphics only. The big thing you're missing is the ownership aspect. What if each territory had two territories, one which designates ownership and awards a bonus accordingly, and the other which is a transport territory around the board. I wonder if there is a way to penalize a player for occupying a transport territory and not holding the ownership territory....

OR you could have the houses (ownership territories) as the random deployment and then perhaps neutral 1s on the transport territories. Houses auto deploy 1, the territories they sit on give a -1 bonus. So the the effect is that players are inclined to own the territories, like in monopoly, rather than to pass along on a square shaped board.

My ideas you can take or leave or do as you please. But I don't want to pass the map on without it more closely resembling monopoly in terms of gameplay. What you guys have is a good start, I like the use of the various aspects of CC on the map, but the gameplay needs to be more dynamic. So give it some thought and see what you guys come up with.

Industrial Helix wrote:Right now, the map is quite plain in gameplay and graphics and resembles monopoly in graphics only. The big thing you're missing is the ownership aspect. What if each territory had two territories, one which designates ownership and awards a bonus accordingly, and the other which is a transport territory around the board. I wonder if there is a way to penalize a player for occupying a transport territory and not holding the ownership territory....

OR you could have the houses (ownership territories) as the random deployment and then perhaps neutral 1s on the transport territories. Houses auto deploy 1, the territories they sit on give a -1 bonus. So the the effect is that players are inclined to own the territories, like in monopoly, rather than to pass along on a square shaped board.

This idea is golde- no, platinum!!! Brilliant, brilliant, brilliant, IH!!! I agree 10,000% with these ideas.

Victor Sullivan wrote:

Industrial Helix wrote:Right now, the map is quite plain in gameplay and graphics and resembles monopoly in graphics only. The big thing you're missing is the ownership aspect. What if each territory had two territories, one which designates ownership and awards a bonus accordingly, and the other which is a transport territory around the board. I wonder if there is a way to penalize a player for occupying a transport territory and not holding the ownership territory....

OR you could have the houses (ownership territories) as the random deployment and then perhaps neutral 1s on the transport territories. Houses auto deploy 1, the territories they sit on give a -1 bonus. So the the effect is that players are inclined to own the territories, like in monopoly, rather than to pass along on a square shaped board.

This idea is golde- no, platinum!!! Brilliant, brilliant, brilliant, IH!!! I agree 10,000% with these ideas.

agreed, i will get down to it straight away, I think manbungo and ih's houses is going to be the best option to make the gameplay more like m*nopoly.

Hopefully then we can get this map through to gameplay

Thanks

Guys ive got a problem, working on the map i found that I can only fit one army space into a corner, can anyone think of a way around this at all?

Thanks

in the board game... when you have the ownership , you get the card and tuck them underneath the edge of the board.



so you can add some cards... and even the "bank"

And industrial is right... this is awesome but get ready to work your booooties off to get this through.

The yellow legend is really hard to read. Looks like a 2, but a different shade of yellow could make it easier on us.

This is taking me longer than I thought.

Draft up by tomorrow night...

I look forward to it, especially if you have the rudiments of IH's idea.


--Andy

New Draft up.

with 15mins to spare...

Cool! You're right about the possible confusion with the legend though. I think you need to change it, because currently it shows that you have to take that color in order to get the bonus. This would lead to a lot of confusion, since the territs that are actually on the properties are not the ones that grant bonuses.

Gilligan, you probably already know this,but I'll point it out anyway; If the map is going to be done with house territs on one side of the property, and ownership territs on the other side, (or actually no matter how you guys do this) you will have to be careful with the XML so that you can't get bonuses from the houses without having a monopoly.

Super Nova wrote:Cool! You're right about the possible confusion with the legend though. I think you need to change it, because currently it shows that you have to take that color in order to get the bonus. This would lead to a lot of confusion, since the territs that are actually on the properties are not the ones that grant bonuses.

Gilligan, you probably already know this,but I'll point it out anyway; If the map is going to be done with house territs on one side of the property, and ownership territs on the other side, (or actually no matter how you guys do this) you will have to be careful with the XML so that you can't get bonuses from the houses without having a monopoly.

Super so your saying that the houses have to be taken with the transports to give a bonus?

or do the houses get bonuses on their own?

If it were an actual board game, I would play it.

Ok So things that have been pointed out to me by the incumbents of live chat...

1. Are Cars Suitable, there will be a poll going up with options.

2. The legend definitely needs to be changes as cars are not battleships.

3. Nobody knows what the houses do.

4. should it be 1 way or not? personally i dont think so but all views welcome.