Maybe hold 2 fish places and you get a bonus, +1 for every other one?natty_dread wrote:Hm, I'm thinking resource pairs.
Moderator: Cartographers
Maybe hold 2 fish places and you get a bonus, +1 for every other one?natty_dread wrote:Hm, I'm thinking resource pairs.

I thought of that as I was typing, but I'm not sure if I want to adapt that gameplay from the other maps. If I do, I want the way to get them be a little more trickier, or have some different rules, you know?natty_dread wrote:Hm, I'm thinking resource pairs.
I'm torn between this theme and the other one. Do I go with a grungy industrial and dark look, or with a scenic theme that recognizes the timber, fisheries, and other local attractions? I'm not sure. Input on this? What would you guys prefer?Funkyterrance wrote:I was thinking that since Michigan has a very industrial history as someone mentioned early on in this thread, maybe the bonuses and the like could be set up this way? The design of the map could have images of steel mills, foundries, etc., that signified "hot spots". It could even be set back when all of this stuff was in full force. Not a big history buff myself but it seems like you guys have enough state pride/interest in history that you could easily iron out the details. Just sending this up the flagpole to see if it flaps..
Funkyterrance
I'm not against the industrial suggestion by any means, but I think Michigan has such good natural geography (all the water and trees) that that in it of itself could be the gimmick this map needs. To me, it seems Michigan was known for its industry longer ago (just like Cleveland, except, well, Cleveland sucks), so if you were wanting to make this a more modern map, you should focus on its natural attractions (think of those "Pure Michigan" ads, for those who've seen them).rdsrds2120 wrote:I'm torn between this theme and the other one. Do I go with a grungy industrial and dark look, or with a scenic theme that recognizes the timber, fisheries, and other local attractions? I'm not sure. Input on this? What would you guys prefer?Funkyterrance wrote:I was thinking that since Michigan has a very industrial history as someone mentioned early on in this thread, maybe the bonuses and the like could be set up this way? The design of the map could have images of steel mills, foundries, etc., that signified "hot spots". It could even be set back when all of this stuff was in full force. Not a big history buff myself but it seems like you guys have enough state pride/interest in history that you could easily iron out the details. Just sending this up the flagpole to see if it flaps..
Funkyterrance
-rd
Here! Here!Victor Sullivan wrote:I'm not against the industrial suggestion by any means, but I think Michigan has such good natural geography (all the water and trees) that that in it of itself could be the gimmick this map needs. To me, it seems Michigan was known for its industry longer ago (just like Cleveland, except, well, Cleveland sucks), so if you were wanting to make this a more modern map, you should focus on its natural attractions (think of those "Pure Michigan" ads, for those who've seen them).
-Sully
You can't get to the pink region because it is drawn poorly. He said he is redoing it.OliverFA wrote:Hi rdsrds2120
This map seems interesting. It's amazing how mapmakers continue to find areas in the world that deserve a map depicting themI only have a couple of minor comments.
Is the top left of the map not connected to any place? If I understand correctly, the forests can not be passed. And seems to be a compelte line of forests separating territories on the left top from the rest of the map.
Also. Isn't it a bit strange that the teal zone is not connected internally? Why is it a region bonus if people can't travel within it? And the same goes for the magenta area. Wouldn't it more sense to give St Clair to the teal area and Eaton to the magenta area?
Other than those couple things, the draft looks perfect to me

Because it makes it harder. I plan for this to be, technically, a standard gameplay map (no bombarding, autodeploys, maybe 1-way attacks). However, I want it to be a little trickier than something like Classic. You move around the map the same way a standard map does, but there should be obstacles and various nooks and crannies to make you coordinate your moves better than just "grab a bonus". Making bonuses a little harder to get makes them more rewarding when you do get them.Funkyterrance wrote:Maybe there is a way to incorporate both ideas. You could have factories and such without it looking "grungy" I should think. I was envisioning more along the lines of sim city, green grass and blue rivers/lakes. However I think grungy with smog and oil drums leaking all over the place would appeal to some people too. You are right Sully about Michigan having a less industrial vibe these days, that's why I thought maybe it could be a "period piece"
.
I think whichever way is more inspiring to you guys(the makers) is the way you should go. Tbh I would find either way fun in its own right.
sounds good to me.rdsrds2120 wrote:Because it makes it harder. I plan for this to be, technically, a standard gameplay map (no bombarding, autodeploys, maybe 1-way attacks). However, I want it to be a little trickier than something like Classic. You move around the map the same way a standard map does, but there should be obstacles and various nooks and crannies to make you coordinate your moves better than just "grab a bonus". Making bonuses a little harder to get makes them more rewarding when you do get them.Funkyterrance wrote:Maybe there is a way to incorporate both ideas. You could have factories and such without it looking "grungy" I should think. I was envisioning more along the lines of sim city, green grass and blue rivers/lakes. However I think grungy with smog and oil drums leaking all over the place would appeal to some people too. You are right Sully about Michigan having a less industrial vibe these days, that's why I thought maybe it could be a "period piece"
.
I think whichever way is more inspiring to you guys(the makers) is the way you should go. Tbh I would find either way fun in its own right.
Also, I'm a major speed fs player. I want to minimize the amount of straight attack routes to slow people down, making this fun on both settings.
-rd
Just be careful not to include too many choke points, though, that will certainly make this map less strategically appealing. So, check to make sure you don't linearize the map with impassables.rdsrds2120 wrote:Because it makes it harder. I plan for this to be, technically, a standard gameplay map (no bombarding, autodeploys, maybe 1-way attacks). However, I want it to be a little trickier than something like Classic. You move around the map the same way a standard map does, but there should be obstacles and various nooks and crannies to make you coordinate your moves better than just "grab a bonus". Making bonuses a little harder to get makes them more rewarding when you do get them.Funkyterrance wrote:Maybe there is a way to incorporate both ideas. You could have factories and such without it looking "grungy" I should think. I was envisioning more along the lines of sim city, green grass and blue rivers/lakes. However I think grungy with smog and oil drums leaking all over the place would appeal to some people too. You are right Sully about Michigan having a less industrial vibe these days, that's why I thought maybe it could be a "period piece"
.
I think whichever way is more inspiring to you guys(the makers) is the way you should go. Tbh I would find either way fun in its own right.
Also, I'm a major speed fs player. I want to minimize the amount of straight attack routes to slow people down, making this fun on both settings.
-rd
everywhere116 wrote:You da man! Well, not really, because we're colorful ponies, but you get the idea.
king sam wrote: quit facebook stalking me... and Im a sailor all I do is drunk, cuss and make illegitimate kids when Im away from CC
dont sig that
He is. just that he dosent want to spend all his time on graphics at the moment sense we still are in game play mode, not graphics.AgentSmith88 wrote:Any thoughts on adding major cities? (Detroit, GR, Lansing, etc)
Also maybe you want to incorporate the Macinac Bridge somehow?
Just some ideas.
