Conquer Club

Bruceswar wrote:Sorry my first game on this map... Ugh the southern bonuses are hard as hell to tell what goes with what. I find myself not being able to tell what is what. I am sure I am not the only one.

Actually yes you are.

What are you hoping to accomplish anyway? This map was in beta for a loooong time, nobody complained. Beta period is over, if you don't like the map nobody forces you to play it.

natty_dread wrote:

Bruceswar wrote:Sorry my first game on this map... Ugh the southern bonuses are hard as hell to tell what goes with what. I find myself not being able to tell what is what. I am sure I am not the only one.

Actually yes you are.

What are you hoping to accomplish anyway? This map was in beta for a loooong time, nobody complained. Beta period is over, if you don't like the map nobody forces you to play it.

You failed to miss my point. I will just move along since you missed it. Anyhow, nobody said I do not like the map..

Bruceswar wrote:

natty_dread wrote:

Bruceswar wrote:Sorry my first game on this map... Ugh the southern bonuses are hard as hell to tell what goes with what. I find myself not being able to tell what is what. I am sure I am not the only one.

Actually yes you are.

What are you hoping to accomplish anyway? This map was in beta for a loooong time, nobody complained. Beta period is over, if you don't like the map nobody forces you to play it.

You failed to miss my point. I will just move along since you missed it. Anyhow, nobody said I do not like the map..

I have to say, Natty, that I do agree with him to some extent. I really like the map and I know it has been quenched. But, I have found that I have a big advantage over people who haven't played the map because they get confused. For example: Foroyar and Svalbard are not strictly part of any bonus region, but Aland, Gotland, and Bornholm are. For those three, the army circles cover the whole island and make it very hard tell if its color is close enough to the rest of the region to be included.

Another area of major confusion (much bigger in my experience) is when dotted lines connect to a city. Since they have the appearance of going under the city icon, many people think that they connect with the underlying territory, not the city. I have had games where people load up on Vesturland, for example, only to have me easily take their one on Reykjavik and break their bonus.

I know the map has been quenched and these concerns should have been made earlier (frankly I am shocked they weren't), but they are such easy fixes I don't see a reason not to.

carlpgoodrich wrote:

Bruceswar wrote:

natty_dread wrote:

Bruceswar wrote:Sorry my first game on this map... Ugh the southern bonuses are hard as hell to tell what goes with what. I find myself not being able to tell what is what. I am sure I am not the only one.

Actually yes you are.

What are you hoping to accomplish anyway? This map was in beta for a loooong time, nobody complained. Beta period is over, if you don't like the map nobody forces you to play it.

You failed to miss my point. I will just move along since you missed it. Anyhow, nobody said I do not like the map..

I have to say, Natty, that I do agree with him to some extent. I really like the map and I know it has been quenched. But, I have found that I have a big advantage over people who haven't played the map because they get confused. For example: Foroyar and Svalbard are not strictly part of any bonus region, but Aland, Gotland, and Bornholm are. For those three, the army circles cover the whole island and make it very hard tell if its color is close enough to the rest of the region to be included.

Another area of major confusion (much bigger in my experience) is when dotted lines connect to a city. Since they have the appearance of going under the city icon, many people think that they connect with the underlying territory, not the city. I have had games where people load up on Vesturland, for example, only to have me easily take their one on Reykjavik and break their bonus.

I know the map has been quenched and these concerns should have been made earlier (frankly I am shocked they weren't), but they are such easy fixes I don't see a reason not to.

Bingo! 100% spot on.

The map is quenched, and I'm not going to bring it back to development because 2 people say so. Perhaps you guys should have spoken when the map was still in beta, or when it was in development - there was loads of time, but I didn't see either of you.

I've played tons of games on the map for beta testing, and the majority of people had no problems figuring out what is what on the map.

I had the same problem as Bruce and carlpgoodrich when I first played this map.
It only takes one game or a few minutes inspecting BoB to work it out though, much easier than trying to decipher more complicated maps such as Stalingrad.

Also:

Another area of major confusion (much bigger in my experience) is when dotted lines connect to a city. Since they have the appearance of going under the city icon, many people think that they connect with the underlying territory, not the city.

If people refuse to read the legend I can hardly help that, can I.

ManBungalow wrote:I had the same problem as Bruce and carlpgoodrich when I first played this map.
It only takes one game or a few minutes inspecting BoB to work it out though, much easier than trying to decipher more complicated maps such as Stalingrad.

I do not use bob, along with many others. It took me ages to figure out which islands went with what.

natty_dread wrote:The map is quenched, and I'm not going to bring it back to development because 2 people say so. Perhaps you guys should have spoken when the map was still in beta, or when it was in development - there was loads of time, but I didn't see either of you.

I've played tons of games on the map for beta testing, and the majority of people had no problems figuring out what is what on the map.

I agree that the majority of people don't have a problem, but why not make it EVERYBODY? Its a really easy fix, maybe 20 min of work(?). My point is just that it is such a beautiful map and is so much fun to play, I hate the idea that some people are turning away from it after playing it once because the graphics are not clear. I think things like this are all that is keeping it from being one of the top 8-10 maps on CC.

I asked many times, from many people, if they had trouble figuring out any features on the map, and no one had.

I understand your problem is with the baltic islands.

Thing is, unlike you seem to think, fixing this would not be a "simple easy fix" - I would have to redraw army circles, redraw sea routes and change the XML coordinates. So you will have to show me that there is a really large demand for a change like this.

Meanwhile, it wouldn't hurt to use some common sense: bornholm only connects to denmark so logically it also belongs to denmark. Gotland only connects to Gothland, and in the case of Åland you should be able to see the colour of the island matches south finland.

natty_dread wrote:I understand your problem is with the baltic islands.

It would look like we're agreed that things could be made easier.

There have been slight adjustments to other maps post-beta, but these usually fly beneath the radar, or are carried out at the whim of the mapmaker, so let's not pull the "it's done and I'm done with it" card / spoils...

How long do you think it would actually take you to move army circles and adjust the paths?

MrBenn wrote:

natty_dread wrote:I understand your problem is with the baltic islands.

It would look like we're agreed that things could be made easier.

There have been slight adjustments to other maps post-beta, but these usually fly beneath the radar, or are carried out at the whim of the mapmaker, so let's not pull the "it's done and I'm done with it" card / spoils...

How long do you think it would actually take you to move army circles and adjust the paths?

Well, seeing as I will be going on vacation tomorrow, at least 2½ weeks...

If you really think I should make these changes, I'm willing to consider it. But it will have to wait until I return from vacation, ie. 1st of august or so.

Ok just to get this clear... the problem is with Åland, Gotland & Bornholm and it should suffice if the army circles are moved just enough so the land colour is more visible.

I think the problem is on the small map only, or do I need to change the large map too? (to me the large map seems very clear, but I might be biased so I'm asking it here.)

I think that should do it. On the large map, Aland and Gotland are definitely clear. Bornholm is probably fine IMO but someone might disagree.

Ok so I will update the small map then. I'll try to get it done this weekend.

Large



Small



XML with updated coords

http://www.fileden.com/files/2010/2/7/2 ... dic_10.xml


ok, it's out of my hands now.

Cheers natty. I've sent the update to lackattack

MrBenn wrote:Cheers natty. I've sent the update to lackattack

And the update has now gone live...

Thanks again natty

I've been toying with the idea of revamping my first map...

A bit of improvement...

So, should I go through with this? Anyone think this map could use a bit of touch-up?

seeing how so very few people play the map i'd say don't bother wasting your time with it. do something new.
on the other hand improving the graphics might help the map.
it's really up to you but i'd go for a new map.

Funny, I really like this map as it is actually. I'd recommend leaving it as is - I think it was a very solid effort.

DiM wrote:seeing how so very few people play the map

Are you kidding me? This is the most popular map I've made.

Besides, better graphics could get more people to play it.

danryan wrote:I'd recommend leaving it as is - I think it was a very solid effort.

Oh come on, it's my first map and it's fugly. I made it with paint.net which is just one step up from ms paint.

Besides, I already got my creative juices flowing.

Actually, I'll just post this in it's own thread, to get it some notice.

Files for upload:

XML: http://www.fileden.com/files/2010/2/7/2 ... ordic1.xml
Large: http://img585.imageshack.us/img585/1918/nordic10.png
Small: http://img21.imageshack.us/img21/8246/nordic10s.png



[Mod Edit : Graphics Revamp. ONLY graphics suggestions will be taken in consideration]

Original map thread --> viewtopic.php?f=358&t=101345

Nordic was my first map, and looking back now, I wish I had worked on it longer. I was a new mapmaker then... By (my) today's standards, the map looks ugly, and I want to give my #1 map the makeover it deserves.

Here's what I have so far...

XML:

http://www.fileden.com/files/2010/2/7/2 ... ordic1.xml

show: test results

Latest images

show: Olders...

natty_dread wrote:

DiM wrote:seeing how so very few people play the map

Are you kidding me? This is the most popular map I've made.

not kidding at all. the map simply isn't played by a lot of people.
it has just 5379 games in 450 days. that's less than what classic gets in a week.

natty_dread wrote:Besides, better graphics could get more people to play it.

i'm 99% sure it won't. at least not in the long run. all revamps so far have caused a temporary spike in the games created immediately after the revamp is done. but soon enough everybody realises it's just the same old map with prettier graphics and the number of games returns to normal.
basically if a map has great gameplay it will be played regardless of graphics. your map has a simple classic gameplay that doesn't make it stand out in a crowd. it's not big to fit long 8 player games, it's not small like doodle for people to play russian roullette on it. it's of average size and any normal gameplay map of average size competes with classic. and obviously loses... badly.

so i'd rather see you work on something new, something better, something different than a revamp.