Peloponnesian War [Done]

[Incandenza]

I dunno, qwert, now the bonus is even harder to hold. I'm trying to picture a situation where someone would actually be able to claim that bonus, and all I can come up with is a very-end-of-game situation where the player in question already owns most of the map. Any time in a game where one players holds just Thracian Odrysi, Lyncestians, and Lacedaemonians (to say nothing of the other 2 bonus terits), that player is probably a turn from winning the game (if they haven't won already) and has a very large terit bonus and quite a few helmet bonuses.

[Qwert]

by Incandenza » Tue Jan 06, 2009 3:22 am

I dunno, qwert, now the bonus is even harder to hold. I'm trying to picture a situation where someone would actually be able to claim that bonus, and all I can come up with is a very-end-of-game situation where the player in question already owns most of the map. Any time in a game where one players holds just Thracian Odrysi, Lyncestians, and Lacedaemonians (to say nothing of the other 2 bonus terits), that player is probably a turn from winning the game (if they haven't won already) and has a very large terit bonus and quite a few helmet bonuses.

ok how about these-i will put in legend 2 Swords 2 bonuses- in that way if you take 2 sword territory you get 2 army,and in that way no need for addition explanation,that you will get 4 army if you hold 4 swords. Short and simle-sound ok?

[Incandenza]

Perfect.

[Qwert]

good i will prepare new update.

new update
change-bonuse for swords-2 swords bonus 2
add contures of greek warriors behind sea.I hope that these is ok.

Click image to enlarge.

[ZeakCytho]

I preferred the sea without the texture. Other than that, this looks great.

[Qwert]

by ZeakCytho » Wed Jan 07, 2009 10:44 pm

I preferred the sea without the texture. Other than that, this looks great.

Thanks, now its very dificulty to work,because CA openly ignoring to post, well you know last gimil post,when he say that dont graphicaly like map,and after that all CA start ignoring to post here. I belive that these map deserve to move faster.

[Incandenza]

Have no fear, it's moving quite fast indeed.

[hulmey]

Looks like a very fun map, you got here!! But the sea is very bright. Could you tone it down a little?

[mibi]

Personal opinion: This map looks like chart junk. It really doesn't have to be as complicated as it is, and I do see any reason why it has to be so. Whats up with the inset, I don't understand it. I don't think this one will be very popular with anyone.

[Qwert]

by mibi » Thu Jan 08, 2009 6:31 pm

Personal opinion: This map looks like chart junk. It really doesn't have to be as complicated as it is, and I do see any reason why it has to be so. Whats up with the inset, I don't understand it. I don't think this one will be very popular with anyone.

Well these look that you copy and paste same post from mine other map topic,no need to write anything new. ,every time same oppinion, its good that yours map is not "Chart junk"

[mibi]

by mibi » Thu Jan 08, 2009 6:31 pm

Personal opinion: This map looks like chart junk. It really doesn't have to be as complicated as it is, and I do see any reason why it has to be so. Whats up with the inset, I don't understand it. I don't think this one will be very popular with anyone.

Well these look that you copy and paste same post from mine other map topic,no need to write anything new. ,every time same oppinion, its good that yours map is not "Chart junk"

Qwert, you are just not bringing anything new the table. People enjoy complexity, not complication. Ardennes has 33 active games. Crossword has twice that. Now if you are trying to make maps for the smallest niche possible, go right ahead. But there is one basic factor that your recent maps lack. The fun factor. Europe, can't go wrong there. Imperium Romanum, well that's still kinda Europe. Ardennes, what the hell is that? And your latest one... it's like Ancient Greece, only you have to jump through all kinds of hoops first. No one likes a map that requires a Rosetta stone to decipher. There is no hook, no setup, it just dumps you in the midst of usability clusterfuck and you have feel your way out before some Rhode scholar noob farmer takes a dump on your little menagerie of icons. Of course, perhaps the Peloponnesian historians on this site will flock to this map like flies to shit because someone on the internet finally heard their call for Thucydidian turn based strategy game. But as for the others, who may not be familiar with the ins and outs the 2,500 year old skirmish, or even that it is the Peloponnesian War as the greek title treatment is not doing anyone any favors, then you leave them no clues, no meat. This map is entirely assumptive. Different shields, helmets, colored boats, what does it all mean? The fact is, it means nothing, unless you are already familiar with the quite unfamiliar subject matter. With certain topics you can get away with certain levels of assumption of player knowledge, this is not one of them. So the subject matter is sucked out, and what's left. Icon soup, with a pinch of barely legible text, a dash bonus pictograms, stir in a dead alphabet, and finally serve with a totally useless inset biscuit.

Bon appetite!

[Qwert]

Ok,you dont like mine maps, now its no need to post any more in mine topic.
Bon appetite!

I realy dont want to continue these conversation, because i dont want to measure what maps is best-just go to AADOMM and continue with yours self Promotion, and i will not stop you in these.
Im not have any attention to go in other topic and say how some maps is junk and bad.

[mibi]

It's not about your maps qwert, it's about our maps, as in, Conquerclub's. If WidowMakers brought this map forth I'd be saying the same thing. Your welcome to dismiss my criticism as a personal attack, but you would be wrong. Either way, I didn't stay in the way of your last map. I am just saying, don't be surprised if this one meets the same lackluster fate at the bottom of the pile.

[Qwert]

by mibi » Fri Jan 09, 2009 5:53 pm

It's not about your maps qwert, it's about our maps, as in, Conquerclub's. If WidowMakers brought this map forth I'd be saying the same thing. Your welcome to dismiss my criticism as a personal attack, but you would be wrong. Either way, I didn't stay in the way of your last map. I am just saying, don't be surprised if this one meets the same lackluster fate at the bottom of the pile.

Now these is bigest problem here-what every you-WidowMakers,Gimil,Yeti say these is rule here and everybody need to obey, why you not go back and start Classic Art Revamp. Or you think that these map is master piece here and need to be example for all map makers how to make maps, but first need to be CA or hes supporters to create map with any involvments of comunity. Its very easy to create map when you have subjective oppinion of CA. So far Oaktown,Gimil, and you,realy dont like these map(i dont want to say hate,because im not 100% sure),but they ignore to post.(Oaktown explane why not post and im respect that), and other people like visual and gameplay concept of map.
You say yours,and i dont understand why you continue to posting,and ofcourse that any normal person will dismiss your Criticism, because words like "chart junk" not worth to comment.
If you have something against people who interesting history,then again you are lost here, and its better to go back in your topic and create another Apstract map who realy dont have nothing with history.

And last when you counting Ardenens active games-you have plenty maps who have barely 50-60 active games, its these for you measyre of Popularity? Do your maps have 500 Active or 100 active games?
I hope that you will now lost energy on your project, instead to posting here to say how mine map is junk.

[Incandenza]

Okay, one thing that I've been meaning to post about: the helmet in thracian bessi is unbalancing, it gives Pontus access to 2 helmets while everyone else has 1 (unless they go into the peninsula itself)... maybe move it to thracean maedi?

[Qwert]

by Incandenza » Sat Jan 10, 2009 11:17 am

Okay, one thing that I've been meaning to post about: the helmet in thracian bessi is unbalancing, it gives Pontus access to 2 helmets while everyone else has 1 (unless they go into the peninsula itself)... maybe move it to thracean maedi?

Good point,these helmet is need to remove from map,because if i put in Thracian maedi,then Dardanians will be close to these bonuses.
Consider removed.

[Incandenza]

Good point,these helmet is need to remove from map,because if i put in Thracian maedi,then Dardanians will be close to these bonuses.
Consider removed.

Good man.

Okay, a couple more things:
1. now that the sword bonus has been changed, perhaps you could add one more so that there are 6 sword terits (thus 3 opportunities for a bonus). Maybe Ambraciotes, something for the far west of the map would be nice
2. I'm concerned about the numbered terits. They really stick out like a sore thumb with all the work you've done researching and using proper names for the terits, and most of them aren't all that strategically important anyway. 1 and 2 can be dealt with if maybe you put a slightly shaded box over the area, it'll reinforce the concept that there's an inset for those two terits. 3 and 4 could easily be merged into one terit and given a proper name (and probably the 6 neutral). Seems like you could rework the borders around 5 to make room for a proper name. 6 could probably be eliminated, elimiotes and and thessalians touch anyway. And it seems like you could find room for 7.

[iancanton]

its very dificulty to work,because CA openly ignoring to post, well you know last gimil post,when he say that dont graphicaly like map,and after that all CA start ignoring to post here. I belive that these map deserve to move faster.

don't worry, qwert, we're not ignoring u. the gameplay stamp for this map is in incandenza's capable hands and it seems that u're working well together. it's difficult for gimil to try to stamp the graphics before the territory layout has been finalised.

ian.

[Qwert]

Good man.

Okay, a couple more things:
1. now that the sword bonus has been changed, perhaps you could add one more so that there are 6 sword terits (thus 3 opportunities for a bonus). Maybe Ambraciotes, something for the far west of the map would be nice
2. I'm concerned about the numbered terits. They really stick out like a sore thumb with all the work you've done researching and using proper names for the terits, and most of them aren't all that strategically important anyway. 1 and 2 can be dealt with if maybe you put a slightly shaded box over the area, it'll reinforce the concept that there's an inset for those two terits. 3 and 4 could easily be merged into one terit and given a proper name (and probably the 6 neutral). Seems like you could rework the borders around 5 to make room for a proper name. 6 could probably be eliminated, elimiotes and and thessalians touch anyway. And it seems like you could find room for 7.

1.These is problem,far west is most populated part of map,its have big numbers of City states,and that why dont have enough space for swords.Space for Swords need to be like Arcadians or Lyncestians to stay swords,and these is what i dont have in those part of map,Close space for swords can be Tessalians,or to stay in 5 swords.
2.Territory 3 and 4 is importan,because player who start in Skyros will have one easy territory less then other,and these is much importan in cards games,for example Romans have 6 easy territory to take,and skyros have 5 territory,with these change skyros will have only 4 easy territory,and that will give other people advantage.
Strategicaly importan its all territory in Cards game,for example you have FEudal war some terriotry who not strategicaly importan,but they exist in map.
No 5names is Athamanes,and its quit long name for these area,and for 6 is even longer name Perhaebbians, and for 7 is even more longer Samothrace.Numbers is best option to man not be to much cramped,and if these work in other map,so why will that be problem here?
I know that you see problems with 6 but these is historical map,and if i remove 6 then Elimiotes and tessalians will be big terriotries,and will be not logical to have these.6 is normal countries betwen these two city states.

1 and 2 territories,i must say that im not quit understand what you mean?

[gimil]

Now these is bigest problem here-what every you-WidowMakers,Gimil,Yeti say these is rule here and everybody need to obey, why you not go back and start Classic Art Revamp. Or you think that these map is master piece here and need to be example for all map makers how to make maps, but first need to be CA or hes supporters to create map with any involvments of comunity. Its very easy to create map when you have subjective oppinion of CA. So far Oaktown,Gimil, and you,realy dont like these map(i dont want to say hate,because im not 100% sure),but they ignore to post.(Oaktown explane why not post and im respect that), and other people like visual and gameplay concept of map.
You say yours,and i dont understand why you continue to posting,and ofcourse that any normal person will dismiss your Criticism, because words like "chart junk" not worth to comment.
If you have something against people who interesting history,then again you are lost here, and its better to go back in your topic and create another Apstract map who realy dont have nothing with history.

There is alot you say here qwerts ,that is frankly absurd. There is evidently alot that you still don't understand about the foundry and how things work.

First, whatever me, Widowmakers, yeti_c or mibi say isn't 'rules you have to follow'. It has always been the same in the foundry as far back as I remember. We are all members of the CC community and all have a right to pose our opinions and disatisfaction towards any map within the forum. Your job as a map maker is to accept that opinion and either use it to make your map better ot rebuttel it with an appropriate response.

Second, bad feedback on your map should never be taken as a personal attack. No matter how much you want it to be. Bad feedback comes from people who WANT you to do good with your map. 99% of people who don't like a map choose to comment. Remeber that.

Third, the CA's are NOT here to give you all the feedback in the world to get your map through the map making process. We never have been. Our purpose and job role is to keep the foundry running smoothly and make maps move through the foundry process efficiently. I can comment on as many or as little maps as I see fight to work around my time commitment, engagement, mood plus any onther factor that may appear in my life. I am NOT a feedback machine.

Finaly, (this is where it gets personal) qwerts you seem to think that everyone is against you or ignoring you. The truth is everyone isn't against you and everyone isn't ignoring you. The single biggest problem with your maps is YOU. You can't take negative feedback. When you get negative feedback you lash out like it was a personal attack which has gained you a negative reputation as someone that is hard to work with. You have to learn to work with what people offer you and take feedback as no more than that, feedback.

Now I don't want to be in this situation with you ever map where you feel I am ignoring you but you just keep feeling sorry for yourself as if its everyone elses fault there is problems. Start taking a little responsibility and stop blaming the CA when somethnig doesn't go your way.

Now let again try and put all this conflict and neagtivity behind the use and just work together for a change. I want to feel I can comment on your map without fear of hostility, is that to much to ask for?

[oaktown]

So far Oaktown,Gimil, and you,realy dont like these map(i dont want to say hate,because im not 100% sure),but they ignore to post.(Oaktown explane why not post and im respect that)

Hey now qwert, I'm being a bit misrepresented here by you. First, I NEVER said I didn't like this map, so don't make me out to be the bad guy. What I said was:

this map looks almost exactly like your Roman Empire map

Second, I have never ignored this thread. On the contrary, I posted my feedback. I went on to give examples of what I thought could be altered to make this map more original. You dismissed my observations, so there's not much else I can do. It is frustrating trying to help somebody who doesn't want help. I suspect I am not the only one around here who feels this way.

Soliciting feedback means soliciting ALL feedback, positive and negative. If we only asked for good feedback, our maps would never improve. Personally, I thrive on constructive criticism around here - for me the worst scenario is getting absolutely NO criticism, because then my maps just sit in the Foundry and rot (as two of them are doing right now).

So you need to make a choice, qwert... are you open to accepting some critical feedback, and making changes based on that feedback? Or are you going to bunker down and defend your work/decisions in the face of all criticism? Neither road is easy to go down, so you need to figure out which will give you the best map.

[Incandenza]

Okay, I'll answer ya one at a time.

1.These is problem,far west is most populated part of map,its have big numbers of City states,and that why dont have enough space for swords.Space for Swords need to be like Arcadians or Lyncestians to stay swords,and these is what i dont have in those part of map,Close space for swords can be Tessalians,or to stay in 5 swords.

Well, what if you lost the "5" terit, had Ambraciotes go all the way across to the mountains, and put the sword icon there? It wouldn't hurt gameplay, it'd be two different 6's combined into one.

2.Territory 3 and 4 is importan,because player who start in Skyros will have one easy territory less then other,and these is much importan in cards games,for example Romans have 6 easy territory to take,and skyros have 5 territory,with these change skyros will have only 4 easy territory,and that will give other people advantage.
Strategicaly importan its all territory in Cards game,for example you have FEudal war some terriotry who not strategicaly importan,but they exist in map.

True, but terits aren't as important here as they are in feudal (given the +1 per 2 kindgom terit bonus). Unless you was to lower the overall terit count bonus, the different between 4 easy terits and 5 isn't that large. As far as the Romans, you could make Aetolians the 6 neutral terit, and combine 3 and 4 into some other terit.

No 5names is Athamanes,and its quit long name for these area,and for 6 is even longer name Perhaebbians, and for 7 is even more longer Samothrace.Numbers is best option to man not be to much cramped,and if these work in other map,so why will that be problem here?

Well, I already talked about eliminating 5 above, but why not get rid of 6 and just have Elimiotes and Thessalians fully border each other? And surely you could figure out a way to fit "Samothracians" next to the "7" island.

I know that you see problems with 6 but these is historical map,and if i remove 6 then Elimiotes and tessalians will be big terriotries,and will be not logical to have these.6 is normal countries betwen these two city states.

I appreciate that you want to be historically accurate, but let's be honest, this map depicts a war that happens two thousand five hundred years ago. If you fudge a few details for the sake of gameplay, I doubt anyone would notice. Besides, maybe you could shrik thessalians , enlarge Phtiotians and put another sword bonus there, even more bonus love for the west of the map. It might not be perfectly historically accurate, but I believe that strict accuracy has to take a backseat to gameplay.

1 and 2 territories,i must say that im not quit understand what you mean?

I mean Corinthians and Megarians: if you put a shaded box on the main map, you could get rid of the 1 and 2 on the main map, and just have the terits named in the inset

I just think getting rid of the numbers will help the map. It's weird to have such detailed names, and then have a random "3". To be honest, I can't think of another map that does it that way. I'd rather that you abbreviated names like in Imperium Romanum than had numbers.

[Qwert]

responde to incadenza>
If i only from begining know how many problems will cause swords(to you) i will newer add these bonuses,now im thinking to remove these bonuses,because i dont want to cause more problems with that. I create sword bonuses and i will remove,because i dont want to erase territories only because swords, also i dont understand how territories with numbers can cause any problems.
Territories is importan,because when you play with cards, if im erase some territories,and if im unite some territories,then some players will have less easy territories to take for cards,and skyros will then have problem to take territories with 6 neutrals.

I mean Corinthians and Megarians: if you put a shaded box on the main map, you could get rid of the 1 and 2 on the main map, and just have the terits named in the inset

I realy need some visual explanation of these.

Oaktown
So you need to make a choice, qwert... are you open to accepting some critical feedback, and making changes based on that feedback? Or are you going to bunker down and defend your work/decisions in the face of all criticism? Neither road is easy to go down, so you need to figure out which will give you the best map.

I get negative feedback mostly from you gyus(CA). All other people have possitive feedback abouth concept and graphic of these map.

[gimil]

I get negative feedback mostly from you gyus(CA). All other people have possitive feedback abouth concept and graphic of these map.

We give you negative feedback because we want you to make your map better, not because we are out to get you. And the CA's are members of the foundry community and our feedback deserved the same attention and respect as any other member of the foundry community.

[Qwert]

Gimil
We give you negative feedback because we want you to make your map better, not because we are out to get you. And the CA's are members of the foundry community and our feedback deserved the same attention and respect as any other member of the foundry community.

Do you know what you write in your feedback?
Sometime ago,when i ask why you not post in EUROPE 1914,do you know what you say?
You say that its not need for that because you only need to see if map accept all required standard for CC. Now these is Objective reply. I belive that CA must be Objective not subjective. If people say that map look good,and like Graphic and Gameplay concept of these map,and say that you exagerate when you say that "Colors hurt your head",what these mean,that you not want to accept what other people think.You are CA and your feedback must respect what other people think,not only what other CA think.
From yours feedback i get picture that you dont like map and that you want me to change everything. I realy dont know what is your graphic standard,but from EUROPE 1914 Feedback i get picture that you only follow what other people say,and that map need to meet required standard for CC.
Now when i say that CA need to post feedback, then these feedback need to have objective view, not something like" these hurt mine head" or 'Chart Junk",because i dont belive that these map is so bad,and that i need to change everything what you say. If other people think that map is good,why you not accept these,and we can move forward without any problems.
I work with people, but feedback when you ask to change everything,unfortunatly its not accepted from mine side,and i belive that these is exagerated.
If you still think that im need to change(redraw)all map,then is probably to annonce that here,so i can lock these topic.