Conquer Club

the.killing.44 wrote:

army of nobunaga wrote:

the.killing.44 wrote:The complexity under discussion is that of the graphical image, not the gameplay.

"We all understand Waterloo."

That's not a generalization.

well my well liked friend, like I said, my eyes are old and I HATE European maps and Im not so smart... and to be honest, I have no problems seeing or understanding this map.

thanx for the input.

I'm not saying you have trouble, I'm saying you shouldn't generalize that there aren't people who have problems understanding complex maps. There's a standard for legibility the map has to meet, no matter if some people can read other complex maps.

you're welcome.

Incandenza wrote:
You're missing the point. And probably intentionally so. Since this is the graphics department, it's visual complexity, as in legibility, that is the issue. No one is talking about a gameplay overhaul.

army of nobunaga wrote:

the.killing.44 wrote:

army of nobunaga wrote:

the.killing.44 wrote:The complexity under discussion is that of the graphical image, not the gameplay.

"We all understand Waterloo."

That's not a generalization.

well my well liked friend, like I said, my eyes are old and I HATE European maps and Im not so smart... and to be honest, I have no problems seeing or understanding this map.

thanx for the input.

I'm not saying you have trouble, I'm saying you shouldn't generalize that there aren't people who have problems understanding complex maps. There's a standard for legibility the map has to meet, no matter if some people can read other complex maps.

you're welcome.

the STANDARD should be maybe mitigated by the 100 unique ppl that say it is understandable.


Frankly, a map called dawn of ages made it to beta... I didnt raise hell there, but maybe I should have... It is a complete buttfuck hieroglyphic map. But maybe perception is key to the beholder. And I guess my point is here.. that the majority of the beholders say, LETS TRY IT. And the minority that says "I dont get it" dont even play a lot of CC like the rest of us.


so ok... there you go.

Im out.

for like the 5th time on this thread... and i knew I had you foes for a reason killer or what ever.

the.killing.44 wrote:

army of nobunaga wrote:

the.killing.44 wrote:

army of nobunaga wrote:

the.killing.44 wrote:The complexity under discussion is that of the graphical image, not the gameplay.

"We all understand Waterloo."

That's not a generalization.

well my well liked friend, like I said, my eyes are old and I HATE European maps and Im not so smart... and to be honest, I have no problems seeing or understanding this map.

thanx for the input.

I'm not saying you have trouble, I'm saying you shouldn't generalize that there aren't people who have problems understanding complex maps. There's a standard for legibility the map has to meet, no matter if some people can read other complex maps.

you're welcome.

the STANDARD should be maybe mitigated by the 100 unique ppl that say it is understandable.


Frankly, a map called dawn of ages made it to beta... I didnt raise hell there, but maybe I should have... It is a complete buttfuck hieroglyphic map. But maybe perception is key to the beholder. And I guess my point is here.. that the majority of the beholders say, LETS TRY IT. And the minority that says "I dont get it" dont even play a lot of CC like the rest of us.


so ok... there you go.

Im out.

for like the 5th time on this thread... and i knew I had you foes for a reason killer or what ever.

I fail to see how 100 people should mitigate the standard when that means there are 19.681 others whose voices have not been heard and the people put in charge to judge the map see it as overly complex. For example, one of those non-Foundry visitors: http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewto ... d#p2633325

Incandenza wrote:

jefjef wrote:

Incandenza wrote:

Kabanellas wrote:I really think that after all this cutting and trimming the small map looks quite readable.. and I'm trying to distance myself from the mapmaker position taking a good look at it from the user point of view.

I do agree that it's not the more 'user-friendly' (small) map around, but then again, people will only play it if they want to. But I'm quite sure that this map will have its niche among CC followers.

It's not complexity that's the issue, it's legibility.

MrBenn wrote: Since November 2009, it doesn't look like a great deal has actually changed. Sure, there is slightly less clutter, but I remain unconvinced that the concerns about over-complexity have ever been addressed. Graphically, this is a very good image (and as I've previously stated, the artist is one of the better ones around the foundry right now), but I fear that the game board still requires some reworking, for concerns that have been raised and not comprehensively addressed.

From 4 or 5 posts up...

You're missing the point. And probably intentionally so. Since this is the graphics department, it's visual complexity, as in legibility, that is the issue. No one is talking about a gameplay overhaul.

jefjef wrote:

Incandenza wrote:

jefjef wrote:

Incandenza wrote:

Kabanellas wrote:I really think that after all this cutting and trimming the small map looks quite readable.. and I'm trying to distance myself from the mapmaker position taking a good look at it from the user point of view.

I do agree that it's not the more 'user-friendly' (small) map around, but then again, people will only play it if they want to. But I'm quite sure that this map will have its niche among CC followers.

It's not complexity that's the issue, it's legibility.

MrBenn wrote: Since November 2009, it doesn't look like a great deal has actually changed. Sure, there is slightly less clutter, but I remain unconvinced that the concerns about over-complexity have ever been addressed. Graphically, this is a very good image (and as I've previously stated, the artist is one of the better ones around the foundry right now), but I fear that the game board still requires some reworking, for concerns that have been raised and not comprehensively addressed.

From 4 or 5 posts up...

I think what counts against you jef, and myself even.. Is that we do not (not yet) make maps or spend a lot of time in this forum. So whenever we have a position that is against the establishment... instead of people looking at us as people that play a LOT of games and have valid points, we look like trouble makers.

Listen, I dont really like this map, but in my opinion it deserves to be in beta... Quiz me, I can tell you what attacks what and what the bonuses are... and like I said, im not that smart, and my eyes suck.


You're missing the point. And probably intentionally so. Since this is the graphics department, it's visual complexity, as in legibility, that is the issue. No one is talking about a gameplay overhaul.

I've intentional missed not a thing. I do not come to foundry with any agenda other than to help. But thanks for take on it.

YES this is the graphics thread. This map is legible. The number of recent posters who came to look at it attests to that fact.

What specifically do YOU not like? What can't YOU read?

Kab has asked and he is left scratching his ass and we are wondering what is keeping this from beta.

MrBenn wrote: 'Wessex' could work though?