300 terit map

[DiM]

would people be interested in a 300 terit map? i have a project that i want to do but i'm not sure if 300 terits is such a good idea.

before you vote please take into consideration the folowing pros and cons:


advantages:

1. perfect for build-up games
2. perfect for those that want long lasting games
3. perfect for huge battle royale.
4. good simulation of a big scale war.


disadvantages:
1. map size. 300 terits need a lot of space so the map size will be quite scary
2. impossible to play RT games
3. not good for non premium members as they will keep one slot blocked for a long time.


the project consists of 300 terits but this number can be lowered to 200 or 180.
in the poll you have several options so please vote the number of terits you consider the map should have.


PS: note that i haven't said anything about the theme of the map. it is not important at this moment because i haven't made a decent image to present and now some xml features are not available so currently the map xml is impossible. after i gather a decent number of votes and i hear people's opinions i will start working on the graphics part and by the time i finish hopefuly lack will implement more features.

[steve monkey]

wouldn't a 300 territory map require loads of scrolling?
Would that frustration be compensated by the game play potential offered?

Hmm, I'm gonna think this one over a bit more.

[Kaplowitz]

It would be cool if you could base it on the movie 300.

[Coleman]

I think 240 or 320 would be great in case 8 player games ever actually get implemented.

[DiM]

wouldn't a 300 territory map require loads of scrolling?
Would that frustration be compensated by the game play potential offered?

Hmm, I'm gonna think this one over a bit more.

this is one of the disadvantages i posted in the beginingof the thread:

1. map size. 300 terits need a lot of space so the map size will be quite scary

[steve monkey]

just thinking aloud

[steve monkey]

out of curiosity, how many territories does world 2.1 have?

[DiM]

It would be cool if you could base it on the movie 300.

actually it has absolutely nothing to do with the movie 300. a map based on the movie 300 would be quite similar to other maps.

this is a whole new gameplay concept.

[Kaplowitz]

It would be cool if you could base it on the movie 300.

actually it has absolutely nothing to do with the movie 300. a map based on the movie 300 would be quite similar to other maps.

this is a whole new gameplay concept.

I know that you did not mean that when you made the thread, i was just saying that it would be cool to have a map based on the movie with 300 terit.

Getting back to the main point of the thread, i agree that 320 would be good for 8 player games, and maybe you should wait for more updates on that.

[DiM]

Getting back to the main point of the thread, i agree that 320 would be good for 8 player games, and maybe you should wait for more updates on that.

there's no hurry with this map. as i already said some xml things i need aren't yet implemented. so it might take quite a while before they are. the point of this thread is just to get an idea if people would play such a large map. i know some people really hate world 2.1 cause of the size while others love it for the same reason.

[Bodmanbod]

well 2.1 works due to the subcontinenets, if you were to make such a large map you would need either subcontinents or just lots of continents.

[DiM]

well 2.1 works due to the subcontinenets, if you were to make such a large map you would need either subcontinents or just lots of continents.

i already said this is not like a regular map with continents and such. it has a whole new bonus system and gameplay.

this thread is only about the number of terits. would a 300 terit map be played or is it too large? that's the question.

[steve monkey]

I voted maximum 240. I think that any larger and the map would become very unpractical and would suffer as a consequence.

[Bodmanbod]

well i think people would be reluctant to play it, it's a hell of a lot of territories, nearly 3 times world 2.1 and about 7 times larger than classic.

explain a little how the bonuses might work please, they will have to be very considered in such a large map.

[wcaclimbing]

I think 300 would be AWESOME!!!!

It would be probably the most fun ive ever had on CC.

I cant wait

If it was a geographic map, it could be super-realistic wars with all the new XML tools.

[KEYOGI]

I personally wouldn't play a 300 territory map, but I appreciate the idea. You'd have to be vary careful about map size though. Perhaps it's an issue for Andy and myself to discuss, because I have a feeling mibi's Trojan War map might have been taking the map height recommendations a little too far.

[Bodmanbod]

i think it's certain to say it would be a map that pretty much couldn't be viewed in small version.

[DiM]

well i think people would be reluctant to play it, it's a hell of a lot of territories, nearly 3 times world 2.1 and about 7 times larger than classic.

this is exactly why i started this thread. i want to see how large can a map be and still be attractive to people.

explain a little how the bonuses might work please, they will have to be very considered in such a large map.

sorry i can't yet say anything about that. this thread is not about the map it is about number of terits.

[Bodmanbod]

well the max number of territories depends on the style of map...

if you think you have a bonus solution that will make it work then go for it, but make sure it really does work. i think this map would be most interesting on freestyle, if not then in a 3 player game a player would get 33 armies in his first turn and take out a large section.

[DiM]

I personally wouldn't play a 300 territory map, but I appreciate the idea. You'd have to be vary careful about map size though. Perhaps it's an issue for Andy and myself to discuss, because I have a feeling mibi's Trojan War map might have been taking the map height recommendations a little too far.

yes. i think a clear position on map size would be really helpfull.
the current recomended sizes are already being considered as way too small and need some adjusting. i'm looking forward to an answer. thanks

[DiM]

i think it's certain to say it would be a map that pretty much couldn't be viewed in small version.

actually the small version would not be that small

it would pretty much be something large. and the large version will be something extra large

[Bodmanbod]

i think it's certain to say it would be a map that pretty much couldn't be viewed in small version.

actually the small version would not be that small

it would pretty much be something large. and the large version will be something extra large

just how tall will this map be? small can't be wider than 600 pixels

[sully800]

I love the idea of big maps, but scrolling ruins the entire fun of playing. So I would try to eliminate/minimize scrolling in any way possible while maximizing countries. That simply means reducing oceans, keeping countries small, keeping the names short, etc.

But its also important to note that when clickable maps arrive scrolling won't be a big concern any more.

[DiM]

well the max number of territories depends on the style of map...

if you think you have a bonus solution that will make it work then go for it, but make sure it really does work. i think this map would be most interesting on freestyle, if not then in a 3 player game a player would get 33 armies in his first turn and take out a large section.

yes i do think the gameplay will be very interesting on such a large map and the proposed bonus system would fit it perfectly.
my main concern is the size and ofcourse the xml additions i need.

[Bodmanbod]

i really would like to know more about this bonus system, until then i reserve my judgment.