Conquer Club

I think you just sort of meet all the criticism here and then they move it up... This is actually one of the best maps ive seen in this stage, So I dont understand the hold-up....

I do think you will need some sort of theme... Some thing like "Fantasy of Dragon-land" Throw some dragons here and there in with some flame... <-- this was just one lame example.. but it is an example of a theme I think you will be asked for.

Hmm.. I'll think about that, maybe I could push this in more of a steam punk direction for the theme.

A quick explanation about the foundry process:

First you post your map draft in the melting pot (check)
then you submit a design brief (check)
If you have a clear enough design plan for the map the design brief will be approved and map will be moved to gameplay workshop
In gameplay workshop the gameplay features of the map will be worked in shape. Gameplay will be balanced. After the gameplay is satisfying your map gets moved to graphics workshop
...where graphics get hammered into shape, you will also need to make a small version of your map (which is 630x600 max.) when they are up to par your map moves to final forge...
...where you will do all final adjustments and tweaks, and write the xml for your map, and then you get the xml stamp and get to beta testing, where the map gets played by the community, any flaws that are found in beta will get fixed, then your map is ready and you get a medal.

The whole process can take anything from 6-12 months, lots and lots of editing, drawing, debating with critics and foundry mods, sweating blood...

Still interested?

well you have a hellova start... dont let this guy scare you.. Id love play a map that isnt europe or North america- Id love to play this map.. And this one is well ahead of the curve in my opinion.

Nah, not trying to scare anyone. Just laying out the facts... It's best that you know now what you have ahead of you. If you're up for it, all the better... but some people show up in the foundry, post one or two drafts, then disappear disappointed that their map didn't go immediately into live play... I just think it's best to let all new mapmakers-to-be know from the start that making a map is a long term commitment.

Anyway, I wish you all the luck with your project, and hope you have the guts to carry it through. Mapmaking is a lot of work, but it is also a lot of fun, and you will learn things in the process.

I'm all in. Sounds like a lot of work but I'm kind of looking forward to be honest.

I really like what I see, no kidding. You've put a lot of thought and work into it already, which is going to pay off dividends as your map gets closer to quench. Could you please edit your Design Briefed map title into the topic title and note what pages the most recent version is on? Official policy to ease feedback by folks.

TaCktiX wrote:I really like what I see, no kidding. You've put a lot of thought and work into it already, which is going to pay off dividends as your map gets closer to quench. Could you please edit your Design Briefed map title into the topic title and note what pages the most recent version is on? Official policy to ease feedback by folks.

I agree man... this guy has a GREAT map in the stage one area... and It looks fun.

I like just about everything about this map. From the colors to the textures to the font to the number of territs. The only thing that needs some attention is the mountains. Whats new ? they are always the hardest thing to make right for all mapmakers. They seem to be drawn allright, just the color is what I am having a problem with.

Good luck with this map. I will follow it.

refreshing bison king. Hope you stick with this - it's a winner.

porkenbeans wrote:...The only thing that needs some attention is the mountains.

Hand-draw them. That's what I did for Research and Conquer, and I've heard nothing but praise about them. (And a kudos to RjBeals for showing me a PDF explaining how to do it, don't have link sadly, he might still)

please share that pdf.please

Sorry if this has already been brought up, but, the size is way to big. It needs to be no larger than 840x800.

I just have one comment on this.

The bonus Hnal (I think that's how you spell it) at 4 is way too much. The whole map will revolve around taking this single territory to get a bonus of 4. It terms of gameplay that being a bonus of 4 or even a bonus of 2 ruins it for me. I think you could get away with it being a bonus of 2 but 1 seems plenty. Perhaps expand that Hnal to two territories and keep it a bonus of 2 or less.

Wow, a lot of good responses.

The bonus Hnal (I think that's how you spell it) at 4 is way too much. The whole map will revolve around taking this single territory to get a bonus of 4. It terms of gameplay that being a bonus of 4 or even a bonus of 2 ruins it for me. I think you could get away with it being a bonus of 2 but 1 seems plenty. Perhaps expand that Hnal to two territories and keep it a bonus of 2 or less.

The bonus is called "Ifnal" I'll try to make that more clear, or I might change it. That's definitely the territory that I have changed around the most. It's interesting, because if I you can build off that start building off that far western corner early enough you can defend a lot of territory with very little effort, but at the time, this is easy to recognize so it usually stays contested most of the early part of the game. We tried reducing it to 3 once, that worked ok. Another thing we tried is having that island "caspiar" hook up to the far western territory "Ionsfee". That actually made it kind of a pain in the ass to hold. It sort of works, but if we did that, it should stay worth 4. Over all I see you're concern that "he who controls that bonus controls the game" it definitely is a strategy that can work, but it isn't the only one. I've played 6 games on this map, 2 games were won that way, the other 4 were not.

Sorry if this has already been brought up, but, the size is way to big. It needs to be no larger than 840x800

I'm pretty sure the first image posted should be 840x629

viewtopic.php?f=63&t=114460

Ah, I see it now. I was looking at the extra large version.

This is really a very pretty map, and I am very glad to see a map that does not have a thousand territs. There is nothing wrong with a smaller map. (territs not size).

You will need to do a little redrawing, as about half a dozen territs are too small. Outside of that, I have no other nit-picks with the graphics.

The Bison King wrote:Wow, a lot of good responses.

The bonus Hnal (I think that's how you spell it) at 4 is way too much. The whole map will revolve around taking this single territory to get a bonus of 4. It terms of gameplay that being a bonus of 4 or even a bonus of 2 ruins it for me. I think you could get away with it being a bonus of 2 but 1 seems plenty. Perhaps expand that Hnal to two territories and keep it a bonus of 2 or less.

The bonus is called "Ifnal" I'll try to make that more clear, or I might change it. That's definitely the territory that I have changed around the most. It's interesting, because if I you can build off that start building off that far western corner early enough you can defend a lot of territory with very little effort, but at the time, this is easy to recognize so it usually stays contested most of the early part of the game. We tried reducing it to 3 once, that worked ok. Another thing we tried is having that island "caspiar" hook up to the far western territory "Ionsfee". That actually made it kind of a pain in the ass to hold. It sort of works, but if we did that, it should stay worth 4. Over all I see you're concern that "he who controls that bonus controls the game" it definitely is a strategy that can work, but it isn't the only one. I've played 6 games on this map, 2 games were won that way, the other 4 were not.

Hmmm, I see you point about the western corner. All the same if I were playing this game and was next to Ifnal that's what I would go for every time. What if you make Ifnal start neutral 4-6. That way it's harder to conquer but is still a factor in the game that can be utilized. 5 neutral to me is perfect, but I think you might prefer less. At the very least this should start neutral if it doesn't already, someone getting a drop with a bonus of 4 to start is ridiculous.

Hmmm, I see you point about the western corner. All the same if I were playing this game and was next to Ifnal that's what I would go for every time. What if you make Ifnal start neutral 4-6. That way it's harder to conquer but is still a factor in the game that can be utilized. 5 neutral to me is perfect, but I think you might prefer less. At the very least this should start neutral if it doesn't already, someone getting a drop with a bonus of 4 to start is ridiculous.

hmmm... that's a thought, however that might be too much if every territory was neutral. Keep in mind no one starts with that bonus automatically. How about this. We bump the Ifnal bonus down to 3 and start Rolloland out as a neutral territory with 5 neutrals on it.

The Bison King wrote:

hmmm... that's a thought, however that might be too much if every territory was neutral. Keep in mind no one starts with that bonus automatically. How about this. We bump the Ifnal bonus down to 3 and start Rolloland out as a neutral territory with 5 neutrals on it.

I think that would work well in my opinion. Rolloland 5 nuetral as a 3 bonus is great.

Ok, I just uploaded the 600x600 small map.

Still need to change the large map to reflect changes in bonus worth, but I am tired, so I shall do that tomorrow.

viewtopic.php?f=63&t=114460&p=2540805#p2540805

Alright The Bison King I just realized something and I feel silly for this

I thought Rollaland was the only territory of Ifnal. I didnt realize you split the country like that. Perhaps that's some feedback in and of itself to make Rollaland more color orientated with the rest of Ifnal.

Disregard everything I said about making rollaland neutral 5. It doesn't need to be nuetral at all and I think it was perfectly fine as a bonus of 4 in its original state that you had it in. Sorry if you spent much extra time on this. Thanks for listening all the same. I was wondering why you orriginally said making all of the territories nuetral would be to much lol.

I'd like to see some numbers on the map because I think the small map, and some places on the large map, are too tight to fit numbers. The map must accommodate most of the name plus the numbers.

I think if you fiddle with the names and borders you can make it happen. This should help as well:

viewtopic.php?f=127&t=48259

Industrial Helix wrote:I'd like to see some numbers on the map because I think the small map, and some places on the large map, are too tight to fit numbers. The map must accommodate most of the name plus the numbers.

I think if you fiddle with the names and borders you can make it happen. This should help as well:

viewtopic.php?f=127&t=48259

Yes, I have already mentioned that some of the territs are way too small. You have plenty of room, so just do some redrawing, and make them larger. This one detail is the only bad thing about this map. Otherwise, it is absolutely gorgeous.

Yeah some fiddling was required but I stuck the troop counters in .

viewtopic.php?f=63&t=114460

A few area's get a bit cramped in the small one, but the large has plenty of breathing space.

Ok, the administrators were requesting that I ad some more dynamic to the game play, so this is what I have to offer.

6 potential rail bonuses. These would work in the same fashion as the Indian Empire map. As in, there are not any rail station territories (Those little circles at the end of the tracks are NOT territories) instead the bonus is acquired by controlling all territories along the path of the tracks. I kind of high balled it on the amount of rail bonuses. I think it might be wise to cut 1 or 2 out, but maybe not. I really need to test it more to say for sure.

I kept the rail bonuses purposefully small, since several of them build of preexisting bonuses.

One of the things that I am happy about is that this ads greater significance to the Caprinthian territories, Which usually remain relatively inactivity until mid or end game on account of it being a hard bonus to hold. That being said having 2 rail bonuses run through it runs the threat of it becoming too easy to hold so I think that one of them should be removed.

Also the +5 In the far North might be too high what do you think?

BTW this obviously is NOT what the final graphics will look like and is just a draft to show you what is going on in my head.

Any way, there is a lot here to think about and tweak so please give me your feedback. The main things I am interested in hearing is whether the bonuses are to high or low, if there are too many of them, or if the map needs them at all.

I look forward to your comments, and hopefully this map will move into the game play workshop soon!