Proteins 101 <v.24 - new gameplay? *POLL!*> p1, p13

[natty dread]

Thanks nobodies for fixing the thread. The poll is now in effect!

By the way I noticed a minor glitch in the latest version (19a). So here's v20 with the shadow fixed - it was contradicting the lighting on the molecule!

Click image to enlarge.

[thenobodies80]

About the map:

I think that the version 19a/20 is much better.
It's clean and it reminds me of my beloved chemistry lessons at school, when the teacher wrote all those big schemes of molecules on the blackboard.
Stop working on graphics (really good for this stage).
I think that the biggest problem with this type of map is the theme. It's difficult to find a real good support for a map based on a protein/molecule.
There was another attempt for a map like yours a while ago (with a different theme) and it suffered for the same problem.http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewto ... 42&t=85196
Work a bit more on your theme, maybe adding a text or moving the "memorize this....." because now it is hidden between all information of your legend.
I read "light green.....to both amino acids", but i don't read anywhere what the amino acids are.I don't think that everyone knows what they are. If you move the "memorize this..." text you have the space to make a sort of title for your bonuses:

Amino Acids:
V Isoleucine +5
V Proline +4
etc.

GT/TH/HA/IP/PG (amide nitrogens) color is almost the same you used for Glutamate, the difference isn't so clear, maybe try another color could be a good choice.
The same for oxigens/alanine....
Why 4 nitrogens give only +1? Maybe i missed the explanation through the pages...
Bonuses look good, only the Histidine looks a +6 but the two nitrogens (+1) balance the +5 you've given to it.

Connections, they are clear except for a5/h9/t13/g8/p6. Can you find a way to make them more visible?

Finally colors are clear for me (except for regions with shared colors (the two letters help ) but maybe they could create some problems for colorblind people, try a test with vischeck, it simulates the colorblind vision. ==> http://www.vischeck.com/

Have a nice day
Nobodies

[natty dread]

I think that the version 19a/20 is much better.
It's clean and it reminds me of my beloved chemistry lessons at school, when the teacher wrote all those big schemes of molecules on the blackboard.
Stop working on graphics (really good for this stage).

I would've stopped the graphics work earlier, but everyone kept giving more ideas and feeback just on the graphics... not much gameplay suggestions received. Perhaps a draft stamp would help with that?

I think that the biggest problem with this type of map is the theme. It's difficult to find a real good support for a map based on a protein/molecule.

Yeah, I've noticed. Thanks to Andy who pointed out that I need a better theme for the map. Although it was a bit sad to leave behind the cool spacey theme I'd been working on in the beginning, this new theme is starting to look really nice if I say so myself. The testosteron/estrogen map was also pointed out earlier, and I was thinking, if the author accepts it I could maybe make it as the sequel for this map...

Work a bit more on your theme, maybe adding a text or moving the "memorize this....." because now it is hidden between all information of your legend.
I read "light green.....to both amino acids", but i don't read anywhere what the amino acids are.I don't think that everyone knows what they are. If you move the "memorize this..." text you have the space to make a sort of title for your bonuses:

Amino Acids:
V Isoleucine +5
V Proline +4
etc.

Good idea. Will do for the next version.

GT/TH/HA/IP/PG (amide nitrogens) color is almost the same you used for Glutamate, the difference isn't so clear, maybe try another color could be a good choice.

I thought it was different enough...? I'm not sure what other colour I could use, I'm running out of unique colours already... anyway there are lots of maps that have many really similar colours even between continent bonuses (see First nations of north america for example, I have slight trouble finding which continent gives which bonus on that map) but here this is between the colour of an atom vs. the colour of a whole amino acid. The difference should be clear enough IMO. However, I'll see what I can do to this.

Why 4 nitrogens give only +1? Maybe i missed the explanation through the pages...

This is a gameplay feature... when you have 3 nitrogens giving you +2, you'll have to think if you want to take another nitrogen, because it hurts your bonus... I feel it adds a strategy element, you'll need to strategize how you go from holding 3 nitrogens into holding all 5... If you get stuck in between, tough

Bonuses look good, only the Histidine looks a +6 but the two nitrogens (+1) balance the +5 you've given to it.

Yes, it was +6 before, but like you say it contains 2 nitrogens, and that's why I changed it to +5 so it actually still gives that +6.

Connections, they are clear except for a5/h9/t13/g8/p6. Can you find a way to make them more visible?

Yeah this is a glitch which has to do with moving the molecule layer higher than all the text on the blackboard... since the molecule is now in front of the board instead of painted on it. Will be fixed in next version.

Finally colors are clear for me (except for regions with shared colors (the two letters help ) but maybe they could create some problems for colorblind people, try a test with vischeck, it simulates the colorblind vision.

I actually already ran it through vischeck. It should work for the colourblind, the continent glows are not that clear but then there's no way to make them clear for the colourblind. The territory names should help here. Then the different atoms, they seemed distinct enough in the colourblind simulation.

Have a nice day
Nobodies

The same to you, I'm sure
And thanks for all the great feedback. This has given me some stuff to do again.

[natty dread]

Nobodies: how about something like this?

Click image to enlarge.

ps. who's colour blind? I know vischeck, but I'd really like the opinion of a real colour blind person, if this map is legible to him/her?

[ender516]

The graphics are looking great, but if people still have a problem with all those grey atoms, perhaps they could be slightly tinted with the colour being used for the amino acid of which they are a part, as if they are under a coloured spotlight.

I will be getting underway with the XML post haste.

[natty dread]

I've tried the coloured tint on the atoms before, you can find it if you browse some old versions. I personally think it looks better this way. Are they really so hard to tell apart now?

Here's the latest update, v21:

Click image to enlarge.

[natty dread]

OK, I know Nobodies said to stop with the graphics for now, but I might as well do something with them until I get some feedback on the gameplay.

So, I experimented with outlining the molecule for a bit. Here's 2 versions, what do you think?

Click image to enlarge.

A more subtle approach:

Click image to enlarge.

I also lightened the blue nitrogens a bit, because blue troops were kinda hard to see on them.
Also added to legend the 3-letter codecs for the amino acids. There's a purpose for them, having to do with the XML and some territory names...

But, what do you think of the outlines? Don't worry, they're easy to remove if you think they suck.

[ender516]

I've tried the coloured tint on the atoms before, you can find it if you browse some old versions. I personally think it looks better this way. Are they really so hard to tell apart now?

Not for me. I was just making a suggestion because I thought I remembered some complaints. Sorry I didn't check back.
As far as the outlines go, they should. Go, that is. They are a 2D construct which spoils the 3D effect of the shading.

[natty dread]

Yeah, I don't know what I was thinking last night. I'll remove the outlines.

As much as I can, you know there's a slight outline that's left from anti-aliasing after rendering...

Here, I hope this looks better...

Click image to enlarge.

[natty dread]

Hmm, so far it seems that most like the newest version best. There's 1 vote for the old version even, and 2 votes for the middle version... the newest has 10 votes.

I'll let the poll be up for a couple of days still, and then it's final.

[natty dread]

I think I can now safely say I'll be using the latest version... the poll can stay up for a day or two in case I get a massive influx of votes on the last moment.

I just can't figure out what to do next with this map. Nobodies said to concentrate on the gameplay, but I have no idea what would need to be done with the gameplay, I keep trying to find flaws from the gameplay but I can't think of any.

Please, it's your feedback that keeps this map alive.

[the.killing.44]

Sorry to be blunt, but chemistry isn't exactly a niche I think is needed to be filled. You can continue if you wish, but I'm just warning you protein isn't a very appealing theme for a map.

[natty dread]

Sorry to be blunt, but chemistry isn't exactly a niche I think is needed to be filled. You can continue if you wish, but I'm just warning you protein isn't a very appealing theme for a map.

I'm sorry you feel that way. I seem to have gathered plenty of support for the map regardless. But thank you for your opinion, all feedback is appreciated.

[thenobodies80]

Poll result


Which graphic theme do you prefer?


Old theme (see: v.18).....1......5%

New theme, blackboard with molecule painted on (see v.19).....3.....15%

New theme, blackboard with 3d molecule in front of it (see v.19a).....15.....75%

Other / can't decide.....1......5%


Total votes : 20

[natty dread]

Poll result speaks for itself, so we'll be going with the latest version.

I will be posting an update soon...

[natty dread]

Click image to enlarge.

There's not much more I can do... Added another connection, between alanine and proline. Mods, how about a preliminary review for this? I have a draft that meets the standards of main foundry in terms of graphics, and I have community support as you can see from the thread.

I'm mainly asking because it would be so much easier to get feedback for the gameplay if I had the draft stamp.

[AndyDufresne]

I'd review the community support, and see how much there really is. Sometimes the lack of comments (or a plethora of comments by a small minority of people), means that the map isn't picking up enough steam to go onto the next level.


--Andy

[natty dread]

Hey, read through the thread. I've had lots of replies in a short amount of time, lots of people are interested in the map. It's just, not that many people seem to frequent the drafting room. I'd say this map has as much support as some other maps that are currently in the main foundry.

Problem is, I'm a new mapmaker and I don't know that many people on CC, so I can't recruit my friends to blow the horns for my map here... so I'm fighting an uphill battle, I know, but so far I've managed to do quite well, I think.

[natty dread]

Community support?

Proteins 101 <v.22 Just Another Update> p1, p10
by natty_dread » 17 Oct 2009, 21:52
142 Replies
791 Views

by isaiah40 on 18 Oct 2009, 05:28
Good first draft! V5 is the better one by far. I really don't see any glaring problems except maybe reducing the opacity on the background. It is making the Histidine molecules seem fuzzy. Maybe you could also put a little bit of an outer glow around the molecule names to make them stand out a little more. That's all I see for now, looking forward to your next update!

by danoprey on 18 Oct 2009, 21:10
Yup, the one in the first post is the best so far, although I'd turn down the spread of the glow and turn up the opacity a bit.

Good work.

by khazalid on 20 Oct 2009, 00:39
i see you've added a few extra linking territories based on previous critique, but to me it really looks like it could be done with having at least another 2.

T8 - I1 and A5 - P3 would add a little more nuance imo.

very nice concept, i would definitely play for one.

by cyberyeti on 20 Oct 2009, 20:50
i love ti, make it, NOW!

by RedBaron0 on 21 Oct 2009, 06:06
Interesting map, I think something you can do to help those of the community without a scientific background is to to put onto the spheres the chemical symbol, not centered of course, since that'll be where the army numbers go. They won't even take up that much space since you've mostly got H, O, N, and C's to put in there.

by slowreactor on 25 Oct 2009, 23:26
Definitely like the new background, adds a new dimension to it.

by sexyflanders on 04 Nov 2009, 07:27
I Likey! look forward to playing it.

I bet you won't have to do very many more versions before you are done; it looks pretty good from where I sit.

by number five on 05 Nov 2009, 02:01
like it man

by Incandenza on 07 Nov 2009, 14:11

I really like what you're doing visually, I think the blackboard concept is dynamite. I'm not sure the gameplay is quite there yet, tho I'm currently lacking some sort of killer suggestion... one thing I'd recommend is to think about what game types you think this map would fit best, and perhaps tweak from there.

by thenobodies80 on 08 Nov 2009, 16:11
About the map:

I think that the version 19a/20 is much better.
It's clean and it reminds me of my beloved chemistry lessons at school, when the teacher wrote all those big schemes of molecules on the blackboard.
Stop working on graphics (really good for this stage).

I'd like to thank everyone who's taken the time to comment on my map, and offer their valuable suggestions. Without you, this project wouldn't have made it even this far.

[AndyDufresne]

Community support?

Proteins 101 <v.22 Just Another Update> p1, p10
by natty_dread » 17 Oct 2009, 21:52
142 Replies
791 Views

Right, I understand what you are saying. But you also have to keep in mind that 90 replies in this topic are of your own. View statistics are never a very good suggestion of popularity.

I think the lack of comments and direction you are experiencing is most likely due to lack of enthusiasm by at least a portion of those commenting on maps. Over the years, I've seen this scenario occur time and time again unfortunately. Sometimes maps just don't seem to make it because of that lack of enthusiasm. Sometimes vacationing a map and then coming back to it is better, than pressing on with minimal or little support.

Best of luck.


--Andy

[natty dread]

Right, I understand what you are saying. But you also have to keep in mind that 90 replies in this topic are of your own. View statistics are never a very good suggestion of popularity.

Well no, the point of my post was more about the quotes I posted.

I think the lack of comments and direction you are experiencing is most likely due to lack of enthusiasm by at least a portion of those commenting on maps.

I do get comments, and have been getting them all along. The thing here is that most comments have recently had to do with the graphics, and I should be concentrating on the gameplay now. To me it seems I'm not getting the feedback for gameplay because no one really has any ideas how the gameplay could be improved further. That's why I would like to get the attention of the people who frequent the main foundry, since it seems only a few of those people take the time to comment on new maps at the drafting room...

Still, it seems to me there are maps that get moved to the main foundry even with less apparent community support, when the maker is a known experienced mapmaker...

Sometimes maps just don't seem to make it because of that lack of enthusiasm. Sometimes vacationing a map and then coming back to it is better, than pressing on with minimal or little support.

I hear you on that. However, I know there are people who would like to see this map finished, and I wouldn't want to let those people down. I'm going to keep trying for now, hopefully we can convince the mods and the general public to support the development of this map.

[AndyDufresne]

I do get comments, and have been getting them all along. The thing here is that most comments have recently had to do with the graphics, and I should be concentrating on the gameplay now. To me it seems I'm not getting the feedback for gameplay because no one really has any ideas how the gameplay could be improved further. That's why I would like to get the attention of the people who frequent the main foundry, since it seems only a few of those people take the time to comment on new maps at the drafting room...

I'm not sure "no one has any ideas on how to improve it further" is the most accurate interpretation, but I do agree one can see it that way. There may be a lack of gameplay feedback because the gameplay isn't that interesting. Sometimes great graphics can prop up a map with marginal game play. Sometimes great gameplay can prop up a map with marginal graphics. But when any map falls to both categories, fate rarely shines good news.

Maps are kind of like headlines in a newspaper, on a website, etc. They often need a hook of some sort. And I think you are still trying to find that hook to push your map over the edge into a great map.

Best of luck again,


--Andy

[slowreactor]

I do get comments, and have been getting them all along. The thing here is that most comments have recently had to do with the graphics, and I should be concentrating on the gameplay now. To me it seems I'm not getting the feedback for gameplay because no one really has any ideas how the gameplay could be improved further. That's why I would like to get the attention of the people who frequent the main foundry, since it seems only a few of those people take the time to comment on new maps at the drafting room...

I'm not sure "no one has any ideas on how to improve it further" is the most accurate interpretation, but I do agree one can see it that way. There may be a lack of gameplay feedback because the gameplay isn't that interesting. Sometimes great graphics can prop up a map with marginal game play. Sometimes great gameplay can prop up a map with marginal graphics. But when any map falls to both categories, fate rarely shines good news.

Maps are kind of like headlines in a newspaper, on a website, etc. They often need a hook of some sort. And I think you are still trying to find that hook to push your map over the edge into a great map.

Best of luck again,


--Andy

This map may not be the best when it comes to gameplay or graphics, but what it does have is novelty. Its theme is one-of-a-kind, and that is what I like to see. Just sharing my opinion

[natty dread]

Well Andy, I guess we just have to agree to disagree on this one. I'm sure you'd much rather see another Rail XYZ or WWII: Another Complex Jigsaw Puzzle for People Who Enjoy Headaches When Trying To Figure Out The Rules -type of map.

So, my map lacks in graphics (despite lots of people posting that after the new graphical theme was released that the graphics are awesome), support (despite the fact that I have several people who seem to like my map and post their suggestions after every update (as you can see if you read through the thread)) and gameplay (although neither you or anyone else has really told me what is wrong about the gameplay).

Well fine. I guess I can live with that. Now if you excuse me, I'll try to ignore the feeling that I'm banging my head against the wall here and contemplate on a "hook" I can add on the map to make it "interesting".


Ps. excuse my attitude, I'm feeling really cranky after just waking up after having a nightmare of a desktop drawer sucking me in and eating me.

[natty dread]

Ok, all debate aside, back to the map.

I thought of a possible gameplay feature. What if the amide nitrogens could bombard other amido nitrogens, but only those that are in the same amino acid? In other words, only the adjacent amide nitrogens. Thus, H-A could bombard T-H, and T-H could bombard G-T and H-A. And so on.

How does this idea sound?