Moderator: Cartographers
I've done live plays and the +4 seems to border on being an overpowered bonus, making it easier to obtain doesn't make a lot of sense to me. In fact we've already considered dropping the continent bonus to +3 without such a change.sfhbballnut wrote:what if you only had to control one of the mixes?
I know how you feel. In all honesty I haven't read a lot of the posts so that's probably why it doesn't make much sense at first glance. However, you need to consider that most people who are going to play the map will most likely never visit the foundry let alone this thread.Coleman wrote:I'm not sure how much more we can explain things without turning the map into a sea of text that people will only need to read their first time playing.
If you want to hear something scary, not only has it already been mentioned, but it has already happened. I'm not the art guy though, so beyond that there isn't much I can say.KEYOGI wrote:Like I said I haven't read a lot of posts, so I apologise if this has already been mentioned... but perhaps tone down all those textures. They might look nice, but it's possibly something you'll need to consider to help improve gameplay.
Well the negative bonus was an idea presented by someone, but I forget who, and in a live play through it was really fun and slightly slowed down how much Matty owned us all (He was getting +7 instead of +8 for two) and it encouraged more play through the center.Spockers wrote:I hate to be going backwards here, but while I don't mind the concept of your map, I can't get past the negative bonus.
I can't understand the point of being punished for owning territories.
Also, do you have to own then whole 'continent' segment thing to get the ally/enemy extra bonus? or just the country with they symbol?
Against my better judgment I'm going to try responding to this. I see that you've played Space, the territories being needed for multiple continents thing shouldn't confuse you. I also see you've played USApoclypse so you should be able to understand the negative/positive bonus causing territories. I feel the worst case scenario with this map is I'm just making something fun for the more veteran players of the unusual maps who like to try different things. I'll let WidowMakers respond to that other part if he wants, but I haven't seen anyone bash on his art before in this topic.Teya wrote:I just find the whole thing confusing. Im not even going to bother trying to understand it.
I think widowmakers needs to try something new with his graphics as well. To me there has been no variations in anything he has done, which in the end just gets boring.
Ok, I have some more time to elaborate.sfhbballnut wrote:I don't see what's so confusing. This looks awsome, not just visualy, but it'd be a blast to play
The symbols on either side of a symbol are the enemy symbols to that one.KEYOGI wrote: - I don't really understand the Allied/Enemy system. If I hold Prosperity, Mandate and Fact I get +3? If I hold Demise, Mandate and Charity I get -1? Or is Mandate not part of the Enemy mix because of the "2 Enemy symbols" part?
I'm pretty sure I understand what you mean, but that's definately not made clear by the map. How's anybody supposed to just understand that? And if they do, wouldn't you need to spend half an hour before you take your turn just to figure out if anyone has a bonus? Sorry if it's just me, maybe I'm particularly stupid today.JCRuffino wrote:The symbols on either side of a symbol are the enemy symbols to that one.
The symbols either side of the symbol opposite are allied symbols to that one.
At least I'm pretty sure that's right.
There is less variation becasue the initial textures were decided to be too MUCH. I reduced the highlights and shadows of each territory to better "tone" them down.Teya wrote:I just find the whole thing confusing. Im not even going to bother trying to understand it.
I think widowmakers needs to try something new with his graphics as well. To me there has been no variations in anything he has done, which in the end just gets boring.
I like th ediamond in the middle color idea. It will be fixed next update.Nikolai wrote:This is an amazing map. Definitely keep going.
Let's see...
I actually liked it better when the diamond in the middle had a little more color to it - it looked like a real stone reflecting the colors around it. Just make it a copy of the stone under the 8.
As the map reads. You get +2 for holding a group of 3 allies (according to the way the green lines on the circle key depics.) You get -1 for holidng a group of 2 enemies (according to the way the green lines on the circle key depics.)Nikolai wrote:As far as the bonus for allied thought bases goes, I think it's really awesome. I was wondering if you have to have both enemies to suffer the -1 penalty, or if it's -1 per enemy? I prefer the latter, for the record. And would it be possible to clarify that you can only get enemy bonuses once you have ally bonuses, which I think is what you're doing, and that the only enemies that count are the enemies of the territory at the point of the arrow? I figured it out while reading the thread, but my first reaction was slightly confused.
This will be updated also. Plus I am going to try and put in an explaination for the overlapping territories for the bordering continent bonuses.Nikolai wrote:I would also, for playability purposes, definitely recommend bringing the bonus for a thought down to +3, unless you take my earlier suggestion about increasing the number of territories per thought. Then it would probably need to be play tested again.
I will get rid of the 8 number and replace it with the word EIGHT.KEYOGI wrote:-Do I get any bonus for holding the centre? It would appear not to be the case, but it could easily be mistaken that you get 8.
I am in the process of working on a traditional (somewhere in N.A.) map as wee speak. Now that King of the Mountains is Quenched, I will keep working on this and my new one. Most people, in the foundry, keep saying that there have been too many abstract maps lately. I don't want to get stuck making abstract maps and having people think that is all I can do. Stay tuned!KEYOGI wrote:-While I respect WidowMakers skills, I get Teya's point. I'd like to see what he could do with a traditional geographical map.

WidowMakers wrote:
Then read under those. ONLY THE TERRITORIES WITH SYMBOLS CAN BE USED TO RECIEVE ALLY/ENEMY BONUS.
There are no other requirements for these bonuses.
I agree with Coleman. I don't know how to better explain this.
I agree about the army shadows but if I make them textured or less plain, the actual numbers might be harder to read. With all of the different colors, shadows are needed but I don't know what to do to make it theme well but also allow the numbers to look weel also. I will try so things and post samples.Molacole wrote:I don't like the army shadows. I don't know how to explain what I'm thinking, but for some reason I think of gelatine lol Do you think you could pull off a gelatine like type of army circle? I don't know... it doesn't make much sense to me either. Those shadows now don't go to good with the map. They're too plain while the rest of the map is very detailed. Did I mention I liked the detailed patterns better?![]()
