Conquer Club

ok i did take a look, well just have, and i think that the Nord bonus is a little unfair.
i would either increase the bonus, reduce the number of ajacent terits by altering the terits, or change the acctual continent.
i dont know if you've based the continents on acctual regions, you probably have, so in my opinion i think its best to alter the terits - reduce the number of ajacent terits, and/or increase the bonus for it.

^sorry if theres errors in that - i cant acctaully read what ive written -screen res. altered!^

First of all, the bonus calculators out there are only really useful as starting points (and we already have that). From there, you have to use logic and discussion. The calculator can't see everything. They can be used to justify telling someone that a bonus is off though. So I'll take a look.


I'm confused by you saying nord's bonus is too high. maybe you have a different calculator.

territories x 1.5
border territories x 4
neighbor territories x .5
neighbor regions x 1

divide by 6 and subtract 1

6x1.5 + 3x4 + 4x.5 + 2 = 9 + 12 + 2 + 2 = 25 / 6 = 4.16 - 1 = 3.16

If anything this says nord's bonus is too high.

The rest are as follows

Artibonite 3.5
Centre 2.17
Ouest 3.41
Sud 2.17
Sud-Est 3.25

edbeard wrote:I'm confused by you saying nord's bonus is too high. maybe you have a different calculator.

oh, sorry if i said that, i had the screen res. high so couldnt really read what i wrote.
i didnt work anything out on the calculator about your map, i was just suggesting that you take a look.
i ment to say something like the Nord bonus is too low for the amount of boardering terits and continents.

I don't understand how you said the exact opposite of what you meant on all accounts because of the screen resolution.

here's the image so we know what we're talking about




an important question for people to answer is, do you think the difference between borders 3 vs 2 continents and having 4 vs 3 territories that can attack your continent is worth an additional army?

What I'm talking about is the difference between Artibonite and Sud-Est. Those are the difference between those continents.

I suppose it does make sense, and reduce nord to a 3 bonus wouldn't be horrible.

That would leave us with the same number of bonuses but just switching nord and artibonite.

Ouest could arguably be made into a 4 bonus continent. This would leave the bonus structure even for each half and looking like this.

Nord - 3
Artiboninte - 4
Central - 2
Ouest - 4
Sud - 2
Sud-Est 3


Thoughts?


My other thought is to just make everything a bonus of 3 except the two that are obviously worth 2

edbeard wrote:I don't understand how you said the exact opposite of what you meant on all accounts because of the screen resolution.

lol sorry - i think its best to forget everything i said coz i musta been chatting shit
i just thought that the nord bonus of:

edbeard wrote:Nord - 3
Artiboninte - 4
Central - 2
Ouest - 4
Sud - 2
Sud-Est 3

3 was fair because it ver open and there are a lot of terits for that continent.
i might be chatting **** again i dont know

--tom

Should continent bonuses be influenced by what players can do after holding a continent?

What I mean is, if you hold Artibonite, the calculator says you should get 3.5

However, if you take over Port-de-Paix, this number goes down closer to 3. That makes sense because you've cut down your defending territories in half.

This is something any player will do, so it probably doesn't make sense to round up the 3.5


Basically, what I'm saying is that I think all the continents are worth 3 armies (except for Centre and Sud obviously). Each half of the board is worth the same that way and it evens out starting points.

I think the only way to prove this is via testing. Unless someone comes in with great reasoning.

yeh, i agree

im seeing things your way now, well not exactly 'coz i cant see the map!
some time i will fix my screen res. and see,
i think its a good map, too bad that hardly anyone is commenting..

--tom

edbeard wrote:

Haven't read back through the thread, but here are my comment mr beard...

• Overall I like this map a lot. It's simple with straightforward gameplay and not confusing graphics. Good Work
• I've never been a fan of the "double line" bridge connectors, but that's just my personal taste.
• I think your water route dots are too big, and they all need to be curved. That means the Pestel dotted line should have a curve to it as well, even if the quickest route is straight - it would just make it look better.
• I'm not sure I like the non-playable map area (far right of board). The red mixed with greenish yellow looks bad to me. The bevel looks good, but maybe work on the color blending a bit.
• Your legend is to plain. Is it possible to dress it up a little? Maybe also add a little Haiti touch to the map? Focus on the artistic influences and maybe deep spirituality of the land (not the extreme poverty). I would still love to see something to do with Zombies on this map. Ever see The Serpent and the Rainbow ???
• I also think your map is too bright. Maybe the water is too deep/bright of a blue for me, could you darken it some?

Anyway Ed - nice job so far. I'll try to keep following this one.

RjBeals wrote: I would still love to see something to do with Zombies on this map.
why?
I also think your map is too bright. Maybe the water is too deep/bright of a blue for me, could you darken it some?

too bright - seriously?
it may just be my monitor but if anything it should be brighter, and im not saying that it should be, i think its fine, maybe the colours need a little tone down but not much..

--tom

Maybe not zombies... but darker.
maybe like this

Wow, suddenly this map looks so much more appealing to me. Thanks for the darkening on it edbeard!

I like the direction RJ's idea is going...right now I don't feel like there is anything that makes me want to play the map.


--Andy

you've convinced me RJ!
yeah i dont see any specific draw to the game, but it still looks good amongst other things..

--tom

TaCktiX wrote:Wow, suddenly this map looks so much more appealing to me. Thanks for the darkening on it edbeard!

I didn't mean to steer this in a direction that ed didn't want to take it. I can sometimes explain myself better with a graphic rather than a paragraph. I just wanted to show what I meant for a darker overall look.

(edit) If ed wants graphic advise, suggestions or different ideas, he can pm me and I'll offer what I can.

Oops, didn't notice the poster wasn't edbeard. My bad on the credit, RJ.

now it doesn't look like a dull and boring text book.

RjBeals wrote:I just wanted to show what I meant for a darker overall look.

I'll put together something like that this weekend. Also, if I do that then the legend has to change too.

It's a pity because I liked the textbook theme

mibi wrote:now it doesn't look like a dull and boring text book.

hey shut up

edbeard wrote:It's a pity because I liked the textbook theme

i did too, but theres only a few things that you can alter with a textbook theme without making it not a textbook theme - if you understand that!

Not sure if it has been mentioned here already, but why isn't the Manneville / Bouli border a bridge like the others?

thegeneralpublic wrote:Not sure if it has been mentioned here already, but why isn't the Manneville / Bouli border a bridge like the others?

I believe they are two different rivers and are not connected in real life.

though it's hard to find evidence to prove it. I'll try to find a map to show this


edit: I guess it's not according to one map I found. But, this map is also missing the eastern part of that river which shows up on all other maps I've seen. Whatever. I'll fix that part so it's not as confusing.

so what have you got in store for your next update?

t-o-m....some feedback if i may, and i didn't read the whole thread so please forgive if others have covered anything here...just giving my first perceptions....

1. for me...brown legend, dark blue sea, black font on sea and bright tert colours doesn't work design wise.
2. the previous suggestion with light blue sea and white legend worked better, although the white legend needed to change.
3. i like the overall appearance....it is clean and crisp,,,,even though some have suggested a little bright, but on a map like this bright can be toned down a tad and still retain a sub-tropical flavour.
4. just some attention to differentation between border thickneses and rivers need to be made clearer.
5. perhaps try something other than thick black dots for the sea routes....it just sticks o-ut too much for me

but otherwise....coming along good.

uhhh cairnswk. tom is not the map maker. And, the image you are critiquing wasn't posted by myself (or tom even). thanks for posting though

Anyway, I decided to at least give a shot to the style RjBeals put up since it seemed to be something people liked. If it gets a decent liking, i'll follow through with it






v4
v3
v2
v1

What you need to know:

1. 28 territories
2. 6 continents

Changes in this update
1. ocean colour made darker
2. new legend
3. new sea routes
4. non-playable land made darker
5. changed nord bonus from 4 to 3
6. changed sud-est colour

To Do:

1. Gameplay / Bonus Discussion
2. make Manneville - Bouli border into a regular bridge.
3. redo Ile de Tortue - Limbe water route
4. thicker rivers to avoid impassable confusion

I like this direction ed.

edbeard wrote:uhhh cairnswk. tom is not the map maker. And, the image you are critiquing wasn't posted by myself (or tom even). thanks for posting though

Anyway, I decided to at least give a shot to the style RjBeals put up since it seemed to be something people liked. If it gets a decent liking, i'll follow through with it

OGM....
Sorry edbeard. guess i just didn't research properly.