Battle For Iraq! [Quenched]

Care to peruse completed maps? Take a stroll through the Atlas.

Moderators: Global Moderators, Cartographers

Forum rules
Please read the Community Guidelines before posting.

Postby Rictus on Thu Oct 25, 2007 7:00 am

hulmey wrote:Basarah is British run terroity!!!


This is a good point, and a good reason to change USA to Coalition, I think. Whatever many Brits may feel about the war, after all, they are still participants alongside the US, and whilst their contribution may be less in numbers, it probably should be recognized.
Corporal Rictus
 
Posts: 205
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 7:13 am
Medals: 6
Standard Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (1)

Postby oaktown on Thu Oct 25, 2007 8:21 am

Rictus wrote:
hulmey wrote:Basarah is British run terroity!!!


This is a good point, and a good reason to change USA to Coalition, I think. Whatever many Brits may feel about the war, after all, they are still participants alongside the US, and whilst their contribution may be less in numbers, it probably should be recognized.

Huh, tough call... you could go either way on this one. Again, it gets political - do you name the US as the main instigator/perpetrator, or do you call it a 'multinational coalition' as the White House likes to?

In addition to the UK, there have been a couple dozen other countries that have supplied troops... some have pulled out, but many are still there. Romania, for example, had over 800 troops there at its peak, currently has around 600, and earlier this month said they have no intention of leaving. Who knew Romanians were so completely behind the war in Iraq? :wink:
Image
User avatar
Captain oaktown
 
Posts: 4552
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 9:24 pm
Location: majorcommand
Medals: 30
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (1) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (1)
Fog of War Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (3) Ratings Achievement (1) General Achievement (1) Map Contribution (12)
General Contribution (5)

Postby gimil on Thu Oct 25, 2007 8:39 am

oaktown wrote: Who knew Romanians were so completely behind the war in Iraq? :wink:


DiM wrote:i don't want to see a map of the glorification of innocent slaughter conducted by the americans.


The romanians are definetly behind hte iraq war 100% :wink:
What do you know about map making, bitch?

natty_dread wrote:I was wrong


Top Score:2403
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class gimil
 
Posts: 8605
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 12:42 pm
Location: United Kingdom (Scotland)
Medals: 39
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (2) Terminator Achievement (2)
Assassin Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (3) Fog of War Achievement (2) Speed Achievement (3) Teammate Achievement (2)
Cross-Map Achievement (2) Ratings Achievement (2) Map Contribution (7) Tournament Contribution (1) General Contribution (5)

Postby yamahafazer on Thu Oct 25, 2007 9:20 am

mibi wrote:
yamahafazer wrote:Ok... I haven't read all of the posts as I don't have time BUT!!! The very 1st thing that I can see that I think should be changed is the fact that you have a continent called "Kurd". If you are planing to split up the continents based on religon like you have with "Sunni" and "Shia" then the "Kurd" continent should realy be "Alevi" as it is very diferent to the other forms of Islam, and almost EVERY Kurd I have EVER met has been Alevi.


I thought kurds were sunni, I can change kurd to sunni kurd.


It's up to you realy... It wont change the game play... you could be right too... I've only realy met Kurd's from the east of Turkey and so far they've all been Alevi. But I gues it could be diferent in Iraq..... I don't know...
Image
User avatar
Private 1st Class yamahafazer
 
Posts: 211
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2007 9:56 am

Postby ghostlygirl on Thu Oct 25, 2007 1:55 pm

nvm
Last edited by ghostlygirl on Thu Oct 25, 2007 1:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Corporal ghostlygirl
 
Posts: 20
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2007 4:59 pm
Location: ontario
Medals: 3
Standard Achievement (2) Ratings Achievement (1)

Postby ghostlygirl on Thu Oct 25, 2007 1:56 pm

sorry... double post.
User avatar
Corporal ghostlygirl
 
Posts: 20
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2007 4:59 pm
Location: ontario
Medals: 3
Standard Achievement (2) Ratings Achievement (1)

Postby mibi on Thu Oct 25, 2007 1:59 pm

So here are my outstanding issues.

1. Should there be more than 3 combatants? Should I add another, The Mahdi Army or two more including the PKK (Kurdistan Workers Party). Right now this looks like a great 3 player map. But once you have 4-6 players it becomes more of a fight to control one combatant rather than combatants against each other. An issue to consider is size, added one or two more boxes to each city would cramp it, as well as extra legend copy.

2. Should the neutrals be in standard 1-3-2 format as they are now, or should they reflect the geopolitics on the ground? for example, the Kurds hate the baathists so to ally a kurddish city with the baathists you would need to conquer 3 instead of 1. Also, al-Queda is more popular in Sunni territory so cities in Anbar would only have 1 neutral on they al-queda square. Some bonus and ability balancing would need to be done if this were the case. The Americas would always be 3 or 4 since no one really likes them.

3. How should multiple combatants in the same town work? For example, I don't like the idea of stackable bonus where if you own the US and al-aeda in one city you get a bonus for each, it doesnt make sense. One idea I had was to make a negative bonus of -2 if you own two combatants in the same city. If neutralize this negative bonus, you would have to conquer all the combatants in the city, which would then be +0. Is this even possible in the xml?

eh?
User avatar
Captain mibi
 
Posts: 3360
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 8:19 pm
Location: The Great State of Vermont
Medals: 13
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (1) Map Contribution (5)
General Contribution (3)

Postby Coleman on Thu Oct 25, 2007 2:02 pm

That's all possible.

I'll let you know when something breaks my mind and/or the xml, it all looks possible still (although I said that for supermax at first...)

What broke supermax was needing more then one territory to trigger a bonus (like 3 of something there are 16 of) and having one of these territories be required in all the collections.
Warning: You may be reading a really old topic.
User avatar
Sergeant Coleman
 
Posts: 5402
Joined: Tue Jan 02, 2007 10:36 pm
Location: Midwest
Medals: 25
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (1) Triples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (1) Assassin Achievement (1)
Freestyle Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (1) Speed Achievement (2) Cross-Map Achievement (2) Ratings Achievement (2)
Training Achievement (1) Map Contribution (6) Tournament Contribution (2) General Contribution (2)

Postby mibi on Thu Oct 25, 2007 2:51 pm

Coleman wrote:That's all possible.

I'll let you know when something breaks my mind and/or the xml, it all looks possible still (although I said that for supermax at first...)

What broke supermax was needing more then one territory to trigger a bonus (like 3 of something there are 16 of) and having one of these territories be required in all the collections.


how do you do, 3 of something = 0
User avatar
Captain mibi
 
Posts: 3360
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 8:19 pm
Location: The Great State of Vermont
Medals: 13
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (1) Map Contribution (5)
General Contribution (3)

Postby ps2civxr20 on Thu Oct 25, 2007 3:30 pm

mibi wrote:So here are my outstanding issues.

1. Should there be more than 3 combatants? Should I add another, The Mahdi Army or two more including the PKK (Kurdistan Workers Party). Right now this looks like a great 3 player map. But once you have 4-6 players it becomes more of a fight to control one combatant rather than combatants against each other. An issue to consider is size, added one or two more boxes to each city would cramp it, as well as extra legend copy.

2. Should the neutrals be in standard 1-3-2 format as they are now, or should they reflect the geopolitics on the ground? for example, the Kurds hate the baathists so to ally a kurddish city with the baathists you would need to conquer 3 instead of 1. Also, al-Queda is more popular in Sunni territory so cities in Anbar would only have 1 neutral on they al-queda square. Some bonus and ability balancing would need to be done if this were the case. The Americas would always be 3 or 4 since no one really likes them.

3. How should multiple combatants in the same town work? For example, I don't like the idea of stackable bonus where if you own the US and al-aeda in one city you get a bonus for each, it doesnt make sense. One idea I had was to make a negative bonus of -2 if you own two combatants in the same city. If neutralize this negative bonus, you would have to conquer all the combatants in the city, which would then be +0. Is this even possible in the xml?

eh?


1. you wouldn't have the problem of over crampness if you get rid of some groups in places where they were never popular like the baaths in Kurdistan and shia areas. then you could add other groups in its place.

2. i wasn't sure of what the numbers were before but i think it is a great idea. also in al anbar al quida is weakening and is being kicked out my locals.

3. i dont think there should be a negative bonus as much as a decreeing bonus like -1 for each different party you have in a city so that you will still get a bonus but a reduced one.

4. (my own idea) i think to get a continent bonus you should have at least some presence n all of the cities on that contenent
Private ps2civxr20
 
Posts: 49
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2007 5:21 pm

Postby Goalie on Thu Oct 25, 2007 3:50 pm

this map is terrible
Cook Goalie
 
Posts: 25
Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2007 3:55 pm

Postby mibi on Thu Oct 25, 2007 4:53 pm

Goalie wrote:this map is terrible



the expert speaks
User avatar
Captain mibi
 
Posts: 3360
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 8:19 pm
Location: The Great State of Vermont
Medals: 13
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (1) Map Contribution (5)
General Contribution (3)

Postby Goalie on Thu Oct 25, 2007 5:18 pm

i am an expert
ur the loser
Cook Goalie
 
Posts: 25
Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2007 3:55 pm

Postby gimil on Thu Oct 25, 2007 5:34 pm

Goalie wrote:i am an expert
ur the loser


hows the cooks hat?
What do you know about map making, bitch?

natty_dread wrote:I was wrong


Top Score:2403
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class gimil
 
Posts: 8605
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 12:42 pm
Location: United Kingdom (Scotland)
Medals: 39
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (2) Terminator Achievement (2)
Assassin Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (3) Fog of War Achievement (2) Speed Achievement (3) Teammate Achievement (2)
Cross-Map Achievement (2) Ratings Achievement (2) Map Contribution (7) Tournament Contribution (1) General Contribution (5)

Postby mibi on Thu Oct 25, 2007 9:13 pm


1. you wouldn't have the problem of over crampness if you get rid of some groups in places where they were never popular like the baaths in Kurdistan and shia areas. then you could add other groups in its place.


that could work, as long as it wasn't too lopsided. since you seem to be the resident expert, care to tell me which groups are where?

2. i wasn't sure of what the numbers were before but i think it is a great idea. also in al anbar al quida is weakening and is being kicked out my locals.




well the map isn't about Iraq right now or Iraq 4 years ago, its more like Iraq over the past 4 years.

3. i dont think there should be a negative bonus as much as a decreeing bonus like -1 for each different party you have in a city so that you will still get a bonus but a reduced one.


well for this to work the bonus would have to be much higher and then it might get out of control. Like +3 for each allied city, other wise a 'reduced' bonus of +1 wouldn't hold much weight. I do kinda like the idea of having a negative bonus for two enemies, since its like some city conflict. and when you think about it, the only time these bonuses would come up is in the end game, when someone is mopping up the last hold outs of an opponent. I will give it more thought tho.

4. (my own idea) i think to get a continent bonus you should have at least some presence n all of the cities on that contenent


i dunno, i think the contenents will be difficult enough to take, considering the mixed territories and such.
User avatar
Captain mibi
 
Posts: 3360
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 8:19 pm
Location: The Great State of Vermont
Medals: 13
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (1) Map Contribution (5)
General Contribution (3)

Postby Reed Jones on Fri Oct 26, 2007 4:18 am

Great map mibi!
Sergeant 1st Class Reed Jones
 
Posts: 63
Joined: Fri Feb 16, 2007 5:48 am
Medals: 3
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (1)

Postby yamahafazer on Fri Oct 26, 2007 5:58 am

Goalie wrote:i am an expert
ur the loser


Hay if you don't like a map then fine, say so and then leave... DON'T BE RUDE!!!!!!!! :evil:
Image
User avatar
Private 1st Class yamahafazer
 
Posts: 211
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2007 9:56 am

Postby hulmey on Fri Oct 26, 2007 10:50 am

whats your opinon on this being a coalition rather than a USE vs Iraq map, Mibi?

Alot of non american troops gave there lives in Iraq and i think this should be acknowledged in this map!
[img]http://img801.imageshack.us/img801/9761/41922610151374166770386.jpg[/mg]
User avatar
Lieutenant hulmey
 
Posts: 3739
Joined: Fri Nov 03, 2006 7:33 am
Location: Las Vegas
Medals: 36
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (1)
Assassin Achievement (2) Manual Troops Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (2) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (2)
Trench Warfare Achievement (1) Speed Achievement (2) Teammate Achievement (2) Random Map Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (3)
Ratings Achievement (2) Tournament Achievement (1) Clan Achievement (3) Tournament Contribution (4)

Postby mibi on Fri Oct 26, 2007 11:06 am

hulmey wrote:whats your opinon on this being a coalition rather than a USE vs Iraq map, Mibi?

Alot of non american troops gave there lives in Iraq and i think this should be acknowledged in this map!


Personally I do not think it should be a Coalition as it effectively obfuscates this unilateral action.

The US had 85% of the troops when it began and 95% of the troops now. The war was started by the US and is ultimately a product of the US military and politics.

true, non-american troops have been killed, but this map isn't about honoring the dead. It is supposed to be non-partisan map of the realities and players involved in the conflict. Using a loaded term like Coalition would add undue bias.
User avatar
Captain mibi
 
Posts: 3360
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 8:19 pm
Location: The Great State of Vermont
Medals: 13
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (1) Map Contribution (5)
General Contribution (3)

Postby mibi on Fri Oct 26, 2007 5:03 pm

what needs to be done to get this into the foundry? there is a lot of flotsam in here.
User avatar
Captain mibi
 
Posts: 3360
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 8:19 pm
Location: The Great State of Vermont
Medals: 13
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (1) Map Contribution (5)
General Contribution (3)

Postby Coleman on Fri Oct 26, 2007 5:14 pm

I'd move it myself except for you've added me as an author so we are at cairnswk's mercy due to conflict of interest.

The only thing I could see him justifiably forcing upon us is for you to make another update of some kind. Although you're already at Version 3, so it would be a stretch.
Warning: You may be reading a really old topic.
User avatar
Sergeant Coleman
 
Posts: 5402
Joined: Tue Jan 02, 2007 10:36 pm
Location: Midwest
Medals: 25
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (1) Triples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (1) Assassin Achievement (1)
Freestyle Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (1) Speed Achievement (2) Cross-Map Achievement (2) Ratings Achievement (2)
Training Achievement (1) Map Contribution (6) Tournament Contribution (2) General Contribution (2)

Postby mibi on Fri Oct 26, 2007 5:18 pm

Coleman wrote:I'd move it myself except for you've added me as an author so we are at cairnswk's mercy due to conflict of interest.

The only thing I could see him justifiably forcing upon us is for you to make another update of some kind.


cool, well i am waiting on some more feedback to the below issues before i update again...

So here are my outstanding issues.

1. Should there be more than 3 combatants? Should I add another, The Mahdi Army or two more including the PKK (Kurdistan Workers Party). Right now this looks like a great 3 player map. But once you have 4-6 players it becomes more of a fight to control one combatant rather than combatants against each other. An issue to consider is size, added one or two more boxes to each city would cramp it, as well as extra legend copy.

2. Should the neutrals be in standard 1-3-2 format as they are now, or should they reflect the geopolitics on the ground? for example, the Kurds hate the baathists so to ally a kurddish city with the baathists you would need to conquer 3 instead of 1. Also, al-Queda is more popular in Sunni territory so cities in Anbar would only have 1 neutral on they al-queda square. Some bonus and ability balancing would need to be done if this were the case. The Americas would always be 3 or 4 since no one really likes them.

3. How should multiple combatants in the same town work? For example, I don't like the idea of stackable bonus where if you own the US and al-aeda in one city you get a bonus for each, it doesnt make sense. One idea I had was to make a negative bonus of -2 if you own two combatants in the same city. If neutralize this negative bonus, you would have to conquer all the combatants in the city, which would then be +0. Is this even possible in the xml?

eh?
User avatar
Captain mibi
 
Posts: 3360
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 8:19 pm
Location: The Great State of Vermont
Medals: 13
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (1) Map Contribution (5)
General Contribution (3)

Postby Coleman on Fri Oct 26, 2007 5:22 pm

I answered 3. Possible, and I'd like it just as you said. By neutralize it do you mean make it no longer apply to the allegiance bonus?

No idea on 2.

As for 1, adding more would be up to you, but it may complicate the map more. The Mahdi Army may be worth adding, but I wouldn't worry about having 6 different ones.
Warning: You may be reading a really old topic.
User avatar
Sergeant Coleman
 
Posts: 5402
Joined: Tue Jan 02, 2007 10:36 pm
Location: Midwest
Medals: 25
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (1) Triples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (1) Assassin Achievement (1)
Freestyle Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (1) Speed Achievement (2) Cross-Map Achievement (2) Ratings Achievement (2)
Training Achievement (1) Map Contribution (6) Tournament Contribution (2) General Contribution (2)

Postby t.e.c on Fri Oct 26, 2007 8:52 pm

i don't think you should add the pkk, they seem to be attacking turkey more than anyone in iraq.
Corporal t.e.c
 
Posts: 298
Joined: Sat Dec 09, 2006 10:55 am
Location: aichi, japan
Medals: 13
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (1) Speed Achievement (2)
Cross-Map Achievement (3) Ratings Achievement (1)

Postby oaktown on Sat Oct 27, 2007 2:25 am

history is written by those who win, and since this piece of history hasn't been written yet it's hard to say how it should look. I say you pick a date at the beginning of the war and represent Iraq at that point rather than trying to represent all of the changes and new interests that have ocurred since Bush invaded months/years ago. Otherwise this map will always be changing and always upset some people.
Image
User avatar
Captain oaktown
 
Posts: 4552
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 9:24 pm
Location: majorcommand
Medals: 30
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (1) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (1)
Fog of War Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (3) Ratings Achievement (1) General Achievement (1) Map Contribution (12)
General Contribution (5)

PreviousNext

Return to The Atlas

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users

Login