Conquer Club

Forza AZ wrote:

Geoster wrote:I think this map more than any other shows the glaring weaknesses of the Foundry process. After we spend all this time on pointless quibbling and fiddling the map STILL gets released with a major bug. I'm not even going to get into the serious balance issues in this map right now, although I plan to after more playtesting.

I agree. After AoM was released there was a discussion here that we might want to make a group of people that went over the XML before release. Nothing has been done with that I think, since still maps are released with mistakes in the XML.
I can off course understand that map makers are not able to see these mistakes as they spend so much time on the XML that they overlook the mistakes.
But a group of people with a fresh perspective should be able to get all mistakes out of the XML. I just didn't see this partial bonus mistake as it's written in a new way now (not all possible combinations seperately any more). But apparently this new way doesn't work (yet).

yes a testing facility is greatly needed. not only for the xml features but also for the gameplay. i also have suggested the implementation of private test games and a new private subforum for map makers and xml gurus. it's not the first time a map is released with mistakes and it surely won't be the last time.

i'm actually curious what exactly andy and keyogi do? afterall they are in charge with the final verifications of the maps. instead of spending their time chasing pixels on the map, pixels that bother nobody they should perhaps spend more time on the xml (that's if they spend any time at all).

it's very hard for a map maker to spot it's own xml mistakes because after spending hours looking at the xml you get knida dizzy and reckless.

Forza AZ wrote:The partial bonusses still don't work. In game 866568 I have 3 V's and 5 Z's at my first turn, but I didn't get any bonus while I should have gotten a bonus of 7.

Forza ZA, you are not the onyl one with this issue...i have PMed lackattack after thinking this issue was rectified, hopefully he will get back to us with 24/

DiM wrote:

Forza AZ wrote:

Geoster wrote:I think this map more than any other shows the glaring weaknesses of the Foundry process. After we spend all this time on pointless quibbling and fiddling the map STILL gets released with a major bug. I'm not even going to get into the serious balance issues in this map right now, although I plan to after more playtesting.

I agree. After AoM was released there was a discussion here that we might want to make a group of people that went over the XML before release. Nothing has been done with that I think, since still maps are released with mistakes in the XML.
I can off course understand that map makers are not able to see these mistakes as they spend so much time on the XML that they overlook the mistakes.
But a group of people with a fresh perspective should be able to get all mistakes out of the XML. I just didn't see this partial bonus mistake as it's written in a new way now (not all possible combinations seperately any more). But apparently this new way doesn't work (yet).

yes a testing facility is greatly needed. not only for the xml features but also for the gameplay. i also have suggested the implementation of private test games and a new private subforum for map makers and xml gurus. it's not the first time a map is released with mistakes and it surely won't be the last time.

i'm actually curious what exactly andy and keyogi do? afterall they are in charge with the final verifications of the maps. instead of spending their time chasing pixels on the map, pixels that bother nobody they should perhaps spend more time on the xml (that's if they spend any time at all).

it's very hard for a map maker to spot it's own xml mistakes because after spending hours looking at the xml you get knida dizzy and reckless.

DiM...I have to concur with you, obviously u have been through this xml horror to a lesser extent. Apart from the errors that we ourselves are capable of writing into the xml (whether it be from lack of attention or simply being too close after doing the graphics) i do think the process of "beta testing" would be a more sure way to go before maps are released for play. Whether that involves an entirely new panel of players or the mapmakers and xml writers i think is open for the forum to discuss. Probably the later would be best. But after this experience i think it is definitely needed, especially when new xml is being tried.

I must also thank everyone for their patience in this process.

are there still some starting problems with this map. I cannot attack from FIS AA to V5. Should be possible according the comment

are there still some starting problems with this map. I cannot attack from FIS AA to V5. Should be possible according the comment

gisbert wrote:are there still some starting problems with this map. I cannot attack from FIS AA to V5. Should be possible according the comment

there are some xml problems for that map, keep posting them and they'll be finishd

gisbert wrote:are there still some starting problems with this map. I cannot attack from FIS AA to V5. Should be possible according the comment

gisbert....thanks for your post.

FIS AA borders Runway C and the that is the only place FIS AA can attack to.

Bombardment is a new xml feature. this is being severely tested in this game.
FIS AA can bombard (whittle down) the aircraft noted in the legend until all V5 aircraft armies are gone and then it should turn neutral. so i am lead to believe. I understand the xml should be correct, please try again, and if you have further problems, please post in the final forge -> quenched maps under this pearl harbour topic.

Wisse wrote:

gisbert wrote:are there still some starting problems with this map. I cannot attack from FIS AA to V5. Should be possible according the comment

there are some xml problems for that map, keep posting them and they'll be finishd

Ok I hope you get it all done. The map looks great

Cairnswk, next time when somethig is FF'sed, and you give links to XML's, give also a link to the XML tester

onbekende wrote:Cairnswk, next time when somethig is FF'sed, and you give links to XML's, give also a link to the XML tester

onbekende....the xml tester was used thoroughly in the testing for this, and i can assure you that it only came up with the warnings about the one way borders, which i understand is normal.

cairnswk wrote:

onbekende wrote:Cairnswk, next time when somethig is FF'sed, and you give links to XML's, give also a link to the XML tester

onbekende....the xml tester was used thoroughly in the testing for this, and i can assure you that it only came up with the warnings about the one way borders, which i understand is normal.

I mean that one where you hover over the army shades and it gives in red lines which stuff that spot can attack

find it neat

onbekende wrote:

cairnswk wrote:

onbekende wrote:Cairnswk, next time when somethig is FF'sed, and you give links to XML's, give also a link to the XML tester

onbekende....the xml tester was used thoroughly in the testing for this, and i can assure you that it only came up with the warnings about the one way borders, which i understand is normal.

I mean that one where you hover over the army shades and it gives in red lines which stuff that spot can attack

find it neat

yes i used that one also.
but as you know, everyone can make mistakes.
what it really needs it some beta testing for the xml and the gameplay by a panel of players and xml writters.
perhaps another stage after final forge before quench.

Maybe I just don't follow the legend, and its probably in the main thread but I saw this one and thought it might be faster......
How do the airplane bonuses work?

It's pretty simple really.

If you have 2 or 3 you get 3 bonus. if you have more then 4 but not all of them you get 4 bonus. If you have them all you get what it says on the main legend.

oh.....then how come I didnt get any extra armies?

Uh...

You know, to be honest I haven't played it yet. Lack said he put the fix in. Let me query your game.

Here is the number 865757

I have 4 or more Kates, but didnt get any bonus.

You have 3 vals as well and didn't get anything for that. Or whoever green is does and isn't getting anything.

I wrote it the way lack said too. I'm guessing his schema code for the way that works may be wrong...

So my airplanes are worthless?

Apparently. This map should probably be pulled until we get the xml figured out right. Something isn't adding up.

beta testing for maps?

xml checkers team?

Coleman wrote:Apparently. This map should probably be pulled until we get the xml figured out right. Something isn't adding up.

I was thinking the same thing (which is why I haven't played on it yet).

bonus's are way to high anyway lol....player in my game started with3 aeroplanes from the off!!!

as yet i have no reply from lackattack about concerns i PMed him last evening.

Hi there,

Just starting to play this map.

I have a point that you could fix :

With 6 players everyone gets to start with 12 lands (bonus =4) ..but during the first round obviously the later players will lose at least one land and thus 1 bonus army.
That puts them immediately in a worse position than the first players.

Also the chances are very big that 1 or 2 players have two airplanes in a group which gives them a huge bonus advantage which is very difficult to take away in the first turn (a plane can only be taken away by taking its connecting ship away).

So please add more neutral armies at the start of the map.
Most notably in the airplanes areas !!


Thanx.

(also you could reduce that airplanes bonus..far too big)