[Abandoned] - World 3.0

[natty dread]

There's no bonus areas on this map. Every territory gets an autodeploy.

[IcePack]

There's no bonus areas on this map. Every territory gets an autodeploy.

I know but in my mind that's not a change in map just a change in set ups etc. Like if you or I were to take classic map and make it auto deploy and add a few extra territories, should that map get approved too?

IcePack

[DiM]

I'm not just saying "I don't like it" a few posts back I said make something unique / different (though ur right I have no specific change suggestions). But he didn't want to talk he just argue that it's diff already etc

but it IS different.

world 2.1 has big countries split into smaller regions, world 3.0 doesn't
world 2.1 has continent bonuses, world 3.0 doesn't
world 2.1 has a bonus for number of terits held, world 3.0 doesn't
the maps have a different number of terits
there are totally different connections
world 2.1 has no autodeploy
the strategies will be completely different. (for example if you manage to hold the usa and canada in world 2.1 you get a nice bonus of 7 plus whatever you get for the number of terits you own. in world 3.0 if you hold usa and canada you get just a +2.


again, aside from the fact that they are both world maps please show me one thing they have in common from a gameplay point of view.

[natty dread]

There's no bonus areas on this map. Every territory gets an autodeploy.

I know but in my mind that's not a change in map just a change in set ups etc. Like if you or I were to take classic map and make it auto deploy and add a few extra territories, should that map get approved too?

Possibly. It's an entirely different gameplay, I'm not necessarily saying if it's a good or bad one, but you can't argue it isn't different.

[IcePack]

There's no bonus areas on this map. Every territory gets an autodeploy.

I know but in my mind that's not a change in map just a change in set ups etc. Like if you or I were to take classic map and make it auto deploy and add a few extra territories, should that map get approved too?

Possibly. It's an entirely different gameplay, I'm not necessarily saying if it's a good or bad one, but you can't argue it isn't different.

Ok - if adding a few territory and routes to classic and changing from bonus structure to autodeploy is enough to get a map thru, f*ck it I'll start making maps. It'll be pretty easy then and we can have two of everything all slightly modified with different bonus structures.

HOW FUN! If that really is all it takes, then I clearly have no argument here.

DiM - create away! I sgguest classic next, Hawaii, Cuba, Easter islands etc are easy add ons to create a wholly new map. :/

IcePack

[natty dread]

Ok - if adding a few territory and routes to classic and changing from bonus structure to autodeploy is enough to get a map thru

No, it isn't enough to get a map through. The map also needs to have support from the community, and a capable mapmaker who is able to bring it up to CC standards.

Look, no one is telling you you shouldn't come over to map threads and give your opinion/feedback. That's really commendable. But you can't get all butthurt if people disagree with you, or challenge your views, or ask you to defend your argument. Giving and receiving feedback is a two-way interaction, you can't just waltz in and say "hey, I have an opinion, everyone listen to me!" You have to be willing to honestly participate in the discussion with the mapmakers and the other commentators.

[IcePack]

Sure, but him actively complaining "nobody gives feedback" and then bitch slapping somebody making some of their first foundry comments (whether we agree or disagree) is fine.

My point was getting across - that's fine but there are much BETTER ways to ask for clarification then how it got handled if you wish to elicit feedback. I'm fine with people disagreeing with me I said that awhile ago.

I guess my point was it wasn't changed enough. If you / he feels it is, wonderful. We disagree.

Cheers,
IcePack

[Industrial Helix]

Well, I'm liking this idea, but I'm wondering how exactly you intend to fit numbers AND names on some of those places... Africa and SE Asia look especially problematic.

[Boler]

I would find distances confusing, for example, it is technically the same distance from Angola, through a tiny strip of Nambia, to Botswana, as it is from Poland, attacking Kalingrad, which is technically part of Russia, and then subsequently attacking from Russia to Alaska, which is technically part of the United States. So Poland to the United States is a massive distance in an extremely short route.

On an unrelated note, you must of been using an older map when creating this. Sudan has recently been divided into two new countries, Sudan, and South Sudan, officially. Check out Google Earth or Wikipedia if you want to see.

[natty dread]

Sure, but him actively complaining "nobody gives feedback" and then bitch slapping somebody

Where exactly is the bitch slapping? Dim isn't always the most socially functional mapmaker, and neither am I for that matter, but I don't see that there has been any overly rude or mean comments in this thread.

Like I said: feedback, like any other communication, is a two-way street. You only get from it as much as you give to it.

I would find distances confusing, for example, it is technically the same distance from Angola, through a tiny strip of Nambia, to Botswana, as it is from Poland, attacking Kalingrad, which is technically part of Russia, and then subsequently attacking from Russia to Alaska, which is technically part of the United States. So Poland to the United States is a massive distance in an extremely short route.

This is exactly what I was talking about... this is one reason why I think the idea of using "countries & countries only" as territories is flawed. But then again, others like it so...

[IcePack]

Another observation: this map is pretty huge - supersize maps are already pretty rough while playing on my iphone.
I'm currently on a borrowed computer - and still doesn't fit the whole image on one screen. I assume / hope if this ever does move forward it will be sized differently?

Natty - again its a matter of opinion. One can reinforce he believes its different, where I think it isn't. Its like liberals and conservatives, they will never agree with one another no matter how much discussion takes place. I point back to my classic map example. If i add a few territories, change some colors, and make it all auto deploy its still basically classic.

IcePack

[DiM]

Well, I'm liking this idea, but I'm wondering how exactly you intend to fit numbers AND names on some of those places... Africa and SE Asia look especially problematic.

i'm wondering the same actually
i guess i'll deal with each region as i go ahead and try my best to fit everything.

shorter names, zoom bubbles, lists, whatever. i'll see what fits and make sure it all works out.

[DiM]

I would find distances confusing, for example, it is technically the same distance from Angola, through a tiny strip of Nambia, to Botswana, as it is from Poland, attacking Kalingrad, which is technically part of Russia, and then subsequently attacking from Russia to Alaska, which is technically part of the United States. So Poland to the United States is a massive distance in an extremely short route.

let's call this the flavour of each country being represented by a single terit

On an unrelated note, you must of been using an older map when creating this. Sudan has recently been divided into two new countries, Sudan, and South Sudan, officially. Check out Google Earth or Wikipedia if you want to see.

i will correct this when i get to sudan. thanks for pointing it out.

[natty dread]

Another observation: this map is pretty huge - supersize maps are already pretty rough while playing on my iphone.

Well, you don't have to play on supersize maps. Besides, iphones suck. But that's just, like, my opinion...

Natty - again its a matter of opinion. One can reinforce he believes its different, where I think it isn't.

Well, what are you complaining about? If all you wanted was to express your opinion about this map, you've succeeded, your opinion has been heard. If there isn't anything more you want to contribute, or you don't think the difference in opinion can be resolved, maybe you should move on to comment on some other map thread where your feedback might be of more use?

[IcePack]

Another observation: this map is pretty huge - supersize maps are already pretty rough while playing on my iphone.

Well, you don't have to play on supersize maps. Besides, iphones suck. But that's just, like, my opinion...

Natty - again its a matter of opinion. One can reinforce he believes its different, where I think it isn't.

Well, what are you complaining about? If all you wanted was to express your opinion about this map, you've succeeded, your opinion has been heard. If there isn't anything more you want to contribute, or you don't think the difference in opinion can be resolved, maybe you should move on to comment on some other map thread where your feedback might be of more use?

I will likely give feedback from viewpoint of an iphone cuz most dont seem to consider what it may or may not be like playing on a mobile device (regardless of iphone or not).

I'll get to other maps eventually, i have expressed my opinioin your right. I guess I'm addressing follow up comments / trying to clarify as the discussion progressed, then adding new ones.

IcePack

[zimmah]

zoom bubbles™

[The Bison King]

the map is accurate as of today.

Err.... Check it bro, South Sudan:

[DiM]

the map is accurate as of today.

Err.... Check it bro, South Sudan:

yeah i know. it was already pointed out

[lostatlimbo]

I like most of your work, but I have to say I probably won't play this one for two main reasons:

1) Playable insets are turn off for me. I guess its just the disassociation of borders, but I generally avoid maps like that.
2) More importantly, it seems like the gameplay here will be 100% luck. No strategy involved. If there are no bonuses, success is tied 100% to how well you roll. Whoever gets hot dice to start the game gets the advantage and likely wins (unless spoils turn the tide, but again - luck).

That said, its certainly an ambitious project and I wish you luck on it.

If you are going to go with the no bonus gameplay, you might consider dropping the multi-color look. Might be an interesting map if it was a more realistic color/texture (sort of like BisonKid's thumbnail above).

$.02

[Victor Sullivan]

I agree with lostatlimbo's analysis - this map is far too bland in gameplay. I say keep similar to World 2.1. If you're going to use the name, you should stick to the gameplay, too.

And your current draft doesn't do Africa and others justice - I mean, Greenland's just as big! Try something like the [url=http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2c/Hobo–Dyer_projection_SW.jpg]Hobo-Dyer[/url] or a modification of it.

-Sully

[DiM]

i'm currently swamped with planning 3 christmas parties plus my daughter's birthday party aside from the usual work and stuff. i'll deal with this (and the other maps) as soon as possible.

[Industrial Helix]

i'm currently swamped with planning 3 christmas parties plus my daughter's birthday party aside from the usual work and stuff. i'll deal with this (and the other maps) as soon as possible.

Ok... lets put it on a vacation for now, pm me when your ready to work on it or just post the update.

[natty dread]

Shouldn't this go to melting pot since it doesn't have draft stamp yet?

[DiM]

wtf? some maps stay in the main foundry for 2 months without an update and they're not binned and this one gets binned cause i didn't update it in a week?
i did not ask for this to be vacationed i just said it's gonna be a few days before i post an update.

[isaiah40]

[MOVED]

Sorry for the accidental move DiM, consider this back to where it belongs.