Conquer Club

Re: WWI: Gallipoli [9.9.15] V39 (p22) [Quenched]

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

Moderator: Cartographers

Forum rules
Please read the Community Guidelines before posting.

Re: Re: WWI: Gallipoli [21.9.13] V38 (p22) - BETA Ready

Postby cairnswk on Tue Oct 29, 2013 3:44 pm

Armandolas wrote:well..i have to disagree with you. CC is not a art gallery or a history museum to teach something about what happened in the past.
Its made to play games, roll dices and if possible play some well made maps with lots of history and interesting stuff(like some of your maps)
Im actually surprised that you believe on what u write...or maybe the way you wrote it.


Well you may not think it that way, but then you don't produce maps, do you?
Maps have a very big degree of education behind them, and that includes navigation, otherwise why would the human race produce them. They are a tool for achievement and leanring about how people saw thing in the past as well as the concept of designs surrounding them, and this all changes as ideas and progress is made in society. They are also a marketing tool.

If CC is not an art gallery, then why do we as cartographers have to go through such rigors to have our maps made to such a high standard of graphic ability, and that standard is increasing all the time as cartos/artists get better and seek different designs. Look at some other cartos' maps and then tell them that CC is not an art gallery.
As for the history museum, if we didin't have history we wouldn't have a past to be able to learn from, although judging by many on this globe somethings like war are never learned, but i fear that is more a condition of mankind. Even the game of warfar has a past and it's called the Art of War on which this game is based.

I have no problem with loosing condition staying but at least make it enjoyable for people playing it, being killed in 1st or second round is not gratifiying to anyone. Neither who dies neither who kills.

You well know that different maps now have different capacities for player numbers.
At another's invitiation, I recently played an Ethiopia 12 player and got wiped in the second round. So what! Did i winge and bitch and carry on about it being unfair. No, i accepted it in the spririt of competition - c'est la vie ! No-one likes losing but we often have to in order to learn lessons etc in life, but the less winging the more we can get on with better things.

anyway,so loosing condition stays. I guess that issue about that player getting bombarded and killed in 1st round is being adressed.
And sorry again if this was allready asked or debated but, can landing territories be randomized?Makes no sense to me playing a fog game and know for sure where opponent is

This map was proved to be unbalanced in that condition, and it has been changed and tnb80 will forward for uploading shortly.
No landing territorities cannot be randonised. (they could if the xml was set up that way but it isn't in this)
The landing territories are part of how this battle happened...forces leaving battles ships etc. and arriving on certain beaches - therein lies a great deal of history in itself.
If you want to muck around with those facts, then this no longer becomes Gallipoli, but some imaginative mess that someone might have dooddled across a graphics board. My idea was to present Gallipoli, not the other.
As for fog, that is a condition of the gameplay engine, not a condition that i deliberately allowed for nor was present when this happened in history.
If the map doesn't work for fog, then don't play it in that mode. Same as for if you don't like it. Simple.
Image
* Pearl Harbour * Waterloo * Forbidden City * Jamaica * Pot Mosbi
User avatar
Private cairnswk
 
Posts: 11510
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2007 8:32 pm
Location: Australia

Re: Re: WWI: Gallipoli [21.9.13] V38 (p22) - BETA Ready

Postby cairnswk on Tue Oct 29, 2013 3:46 pm

kizkiz wrote:The issue of having all bombardable land terts will be addressed in next update
Having played a bit more now, i can agree that the map encapsulates carnage nicely! The amount of slaughter and trying to build a big enough stack to survive a move across a bombard tert in trench is great.
You could not get rid of the lose condition anyway, as the start ships cannot be attacked


Fortunately, there are some players out there who are deriving a good deal of satisfaction from the map. :)
Image
* Pearl Harbour * Waterloo * Forbidden City * Jamaica * Pot Mosbi
User avatar
Private cairnswk
 
Posts: 11510
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2007 8:32 pm
Location: Australia

Re: Re: WWI: Gallipoli [21.9.13] V38 (p22) - BETA Ready

Postby kizkiz on Tue Oct 29, 2013 3:52 pm

cairns, deep breath :D
I think this could be a great map.
Some misunderstanding above, but nothing to worry about. The major problem has been addressed.
As for the comments about knowing where your oppo is, well plenty of maps where that is the case, and it just makes for different tactics.

The gameplay on this is very much geared towards different strategies i think
Trench leads to stacking and trying to run across bombard zones with enough troops to survive till the next turn, and a slow roll of troops. In team play stacking and deploying will be vital, and parachute reinforcements very strategic for passing stacks around where they are needed.
non trench will see plenty of stack and run, but you have to be very careful not to leave yourself vulnerable tot he vast amount of starting troops that can come from various points.
Plenty of options for gameplay imo
User avatar
Major kizkiz
 
Posts: 673
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2011 3:28 pm
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Re: WWI: Gallipoli [21.9.13] V38 (p22) - BETA Ready

Postby cairnswk on Tue Oct 29, 2013 4:12 pm

kizkiz wrote:cairns, deep breath :D
I think this could be a great map.
Some misunderstanding above, but nothing to worry about. The major problem has been addressed.
As for the comments about knowing where your oppo is, well plenty of maps where that is the case, and it just makes for different tactics.

The gameplay on this is very much geared towards different strategies i think
Trench leads to stacking and trying to run across bombard zones with enough troops to survive till the next turn, and a slow roll of troops. In team play stacking and deploying will be vital, and parachute reinforcements very strategic for passing stacks around where they are needed.
non trench will see plenty of stack and run, but you have to be very careful not to leave yourself vulnerable tot he vast amount of starting troops that can come from various points.
Plenty of options for gameplay imo


Yeh kizkiz, my comment above was aimed elsewhere. I appreciate your feedback and the fact you see positives in the map :)
Image
* Pearl Harbour * Waterloo * Forbidden City * Jamaica * Pot Mosbi
User avatar
Private cairnswk
 
Posts: 11510
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2007 8:32 pm
Location: Australia

Re: Re: WWI: Gallipoli [21.9.13] V38 (p22) - BETA Ready

Postby Armandolas on Tue Oct 29, 2013 4:34 pm

Lets see if u cant read it properly "if possible play some well made maps with lots of history and interesting stuff(like some of your maps)"..so wich part am i saying something different from you?
For sure you look bitter and i dont know why..maybe because im not a map maker and im expressing an opinion as a player..wich you dont seem to be.
So ok, you are a map maper and im a player, but in the end we both aim for 1 common goal.

When i said this is not an art gallery i was not refering to the quality of the designs. Some quality pieces around. But those board are to play the game remember?if if u dont make a map to play it, even if its a masterpiece you can just sticky it in your tumblr. That is not refering to this map but for the sentence you wrote before

I guess you took my words as a critic to your map.Well you understood it wrong or i explained my self wrong.I made 1 critic to it. Its tottally obvious and was adressed by other people.
So you cant take critics now?do you just accept complements? Then take one: the map looks nice and promising and made me want to play it.

And where can u see bitching and whinning by me? I wrote here in a polite way. Just said i disagree with your point of view. Why are u acting like an idiot?

By the way, i didnt mean to say to randomize the landing territories.I was trying to say the land territories(the ones u must hold to stay in the game)
User avatar
Colonel Armandolas
 
Posts: 1761
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 6:32 am
Location: Lisbon

Re: Re: WWI: Gallipoli [21.9.13] V38 (p22) - BETA Ready

Postby EricPhail on Tue Oct 29, 2013 5:23 pm

Playing in Games 1345938 and 13498604:
Noticed that the phantom continent doesn't include beach z (according to BOB, anyway), now while the continent might be irrelevant (and soon to disappear) I'm assuming it was related to the losing condition: so could you check/confirm that beach z is a valid land territory for the purposes of the losing condition, thanks
Sergeant 1st Class EricPhail
 
Posts: 106
Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2013 12:59 pm

Re: Re: WWI: Gallipoli [21.9.13] V38 (p22) - BETA Ready

Postby cairnswk on Tue Oct 29, 2013 5:51 pm

EricPhail wrote:Playing in Games 1345938 and 13498604:
Noticed that the phantom continent doesn't include beach z (according to BOB, anyway), now while the continent might be irrelevant (and soon to disappear) I'm assuming it was related to the losing condition: so could you check/confirm that beach z is a valid land territory for the purposes of the losing condition, thanks


Thanks for that pickup Eric. Appreciated. :)
Updated xml is below.
Attachments
04Gallipoli.xml
(42.55 KiB) Downloaded 293 times
Image
* Pearl Harbour * Waterloo * Forbidden City * Jamaica * Pot Mosbi
User avatar
Private cairnswk
 
Posts: 11510
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2007 8:32 pm
Location: Australia

Re: WWI: Gallipoli [21.9.13] V38 (p22) - BETA Ready

Postby pamoa on Wed Oct 30, 2013 6:59 am

I don't know if the issue was raised
but I think the 2 coastal batteries are too powerful to be starting regions
specially the Kum Kale (white in lower left corner)
in a 1vs1 my south section landing ships were wiped out before I could play
and as their is no battleship behind I almost cannot play that zone of the map
De gueules Ć  la tour d'argent ouverte, crĆ©nelĆ©e de trois piĆØces, sommĆ©e d'un donjon ajourĆ©, crĆ©nelĆ© de deux piĆØces
Gules an open tower silver, crenellated three parts, topped by a apertured turret, crenellated two parts
User avatar
Cadet pamoa
 
Posts: 1242
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 3:18 am
Location: Confederatio Helvetica

Re: WWI: Gallipoli [21.9.13] V38 (p22) - BETA Ready

Postby cairnswk on Wed Oct 30, 2013 3:44 pm

pamoa wrote:I don't know if the issue was raised
but I think the 2 coastal batteries are too powerful to be starting regions
specially the Kum Kale (white in lower left corner)
in a 1vs1 my south section landing ships were wiped out before I could play
and as their is no battleship behind I almost cannot play that zone of the map


That pamoa, is unfortunately the way Gallipoli went.
I have found Kum Kale very useful in wiping out the enemy down in that sector.
If you have been wiped out from there then you have to fight somewhere else.
Image
* Pearl Harbour * Waterloo * Forbidden City * Jamaica * Pot Mosbi
User avatar
Private cairnswk
 
Posts: 11510
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2007 8:32 pm
Location: Australia

Re: Re: WWI: Gallipoli [21.9.13] V38 (p22) - BETA Ready

Postby thenobodies80 on Thu Oct 31, 2013 5:55 am

I have to say that I like the idea to be historically accurate.
Said that gameplay must have always the priority so please cairnswk, take note of pamoa's thought. If it becomes a more large community request/desire we need ,at least, to think about an alternative, sounds good? ;)

Nobodies
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class thenobodies80
 
Posts: 5400
Joined: Wed Sep 05, 2007 4:30 am
Location: Milan

Re: Re: WWI: Gallipoli [21.9.13] V38 (p22) - BETA Ready

Postby pamoa on Thu Oct 31, 2013 6:19 am

maybe lowering the crossing point neutral
De gueules Ć  la tour d'argent ouverte, crĆ©nelĆ©e de trois piĆØces, sommĆ©e d'un donjon ajourĆ©, crĆ©nelĆ© de deux piĆØces
Gules an open tower silver, crenellated three parts, topped by a apertured turret, crenellated two parts
User avatar
Cadet pamoa
 
Posts: 1242
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 3:18 am
Location: Confederatio Helvetica

Re: Re: WWI: Gallipoli [21.9.13] V38 (p22) - BETA Ready

Postby cairnswk on Thu Oct 31, 2013 3:18 pm

thenobodies80 wrote:I have to say that I like the idea to be historically accurate.
Said that gameplay must have always the priority so please cairnswk, take note of pamoa's thought. If it becomes a more large community request/desire we need ,at least, to think about an alternative, sounds good? ;)

Nobodies


Of course i'll take note if it becomes a larger community concern tnb, but at present it is only pamoa and this is only 1 player,
and don't forget the current figures have been agreed between ian and myself, so gameplay should be balanced for the operations of the map scanario.

pamoa wrote:maybe lowering the crossing point neutral

you mean KK Beach?
If so, what to?
Image
* Pearl Harbour * Waterloo * Forbidden City * Jamaica * Pot Mosbi
User avatar
Private cairnswk
 
Posts: 11510
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2007 8:32 pm
Location: Australia

Re: Re: WWI: Gallipoli [21.9.13] V38 (p22) - BETA Ready

Postby pamoa on Fri Nov 01, 2013 3:46 am

pamoa wrote:maybe lowering the crossing point neutral
cairnswk wrote:you mean KK Beach?
If so, what to?
no I ment TekkeBurnuTrenches and InTepe
so KumKale isn't so isolated
De gueules Ć  la tour d'argent ouverte, crĆ©nelĆ©e de trois piĆØces, sommĆ©e d'un donjon ajourĆ©, crĆ©nelĆ© de deux piĆØces
Gules an open tower silver, crenellated three parts, topped by a apertured turret, crenellated two parts
User avatar
Cadet pamoa
 
Posts: 1242
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 3:18 am
Location: Confederatio Helvetica

Re: Re: WWI: Gallipoli [21.9.13] V38 (p22) - BETA Ready

Postby cairnswk on Fri Nov 01, 2013 6:48 am

pamoa wrote:
pamoa wrote:maybe lowering the crossing point neutral
cairnswk wrote:you mean KK Beach?
If so, what to?
no I ment TekkeBurnuTrenches and InTepe
so KumKale isn't so isolated

OK, but to what number?
Image
* Pearl Harbour * Waterloo * Forbidden City * Jamaica * Pot Mosbi
User avatar
Private cairnswk
 
Posts: 11510
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2007 8:32 pm
Location: Australia

Re: Re: WWI: Gallipoli [21.9.13] V38 (p22) - BETA Ready

Postby pamoa on Fri Nov 01, 2013 7:09 am

I think the Kum Kale (white in lower left corner) coastal batteries is too powerful to be a starting region
specially in 1vs1 south section landing ships can be wiped out before one could play
and as their is no battleship behind so one almost cannot play that zone of the map

maybe lowering the crossing points TekkeBurnuTrenches and InTepe neutral to 3 or even 2
so KumKale isn't so isolated
De gueules Ć  la tour d'argent ouverte, crĆ©nelĆ©e de trois piĆØces, sommĆ©e d'un donjon ajourĆ©, crĆ©nelĆ© de deux piĆØces
Gules an open tower silver, crenellated three parts, topped by a apertured turret, crenellated two parts
User avatar
Cadet pamoa
 
Posts: 1242
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 3:18 am
Location: Confederatio Helvetica

Re: Re: WWI: Gallipoli [21.9.13] V38 (p22) - BETA Ready

Postby Armandolas on Fri Nov 01, 2013 2:51 pm

Do the updates reflect on current active games?or it will be affected upon new game?
For ex: the issue about Beach Z
User avatar
Colonel Armandolas
 
Posts: 1761
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 6:32 am
Location: Lisbon

Re: Re: WWI: Gallipoli [21.9.13] V38 (p22) - BETA Ready

Postby Gilligan on Fri Nov 01, 2013 3:29 pm

Armandolas wrote:Do the updates reflect on current active games?or it will be affected upon new game?
For ex: the issue about Beach Z


Once it's uploaded it'll affect current games
Image
User avatar
Captain Gilligan
 
Posts: 12478
Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 4:59 pm
Location: Providence, RI

Re: WWI: Gallipoli [21.9.13] V38 (p22) - BETA Ready

Postby cairnswk on Fri Nov 01, 2013 3:37 pm

Attachments
05Gallipoli.xml
(42.61 KiB) Downloaded 311 times
Last edited by cairnswk on Mon Nov 04, 2013 3:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Image
* Pearl Harbour * Waterloo * Forbidden City * Jamaica * Pot Mosbi
User avatar
Private cairnswk
 
Posts: 11510
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2007 8:32 pm
Location: Australia

Re: WWI: Gallipoli [21.9.13] V38 (p22) - BETA Ready

Postby Gilligan on Fri Nov 01, 2013 6:56 pm

I'm kind of starting to think that we may need a second way to end the game.

With 18 on your battleship and every territory being auto +1, it can be very hard to finish games.
Image
User avatar
Captain Gilligan
 
Posts: 12478
Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 4:59 pm
Location: Providence, RI

Re: WWI: Gallipoli [21.9.13] V38 (p22) - BETA Ready

Postby cairnswk on Fri Nov 01, 2013 7:39 pm

Gilligan wrote:I'm kind of starting to think that we may need a second way to end the game.

With 18 on your battleship and every territory being auto +1, it can be very hard to finish games.


i have not had that experience...finding it hard to finish a game.

On what evidence do you base this thought?
Image
* Pearl Harbour * Waterloo * Forbidden City * Jamaica * Pot Mosbi
User avatar
Private cairnswk
 
Posts: 11510
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2007 8:32 pm
Location: Australia

Re: WWI: Gallipoli [21.9.13] V38 (p22) - BETA Ready

Postby Gilligan on Fri Nov 01, 2013 7:41 pm

Obviously have not played it a whole lot, but I imagine that Game 13494901 will be kind of hard to finish.
Image
User avatar
Captain Gilligan
 
Posts: 12478
Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 4:59 pm
Location: Providence, RI

Re: WWI: Gallipoli [21.9.13] V38 (p22) - BETA Ready

Postby cairnswk on Fri Nov 01, 2013 7:43 pm

Gilligan wrote:Obviously have not played it a whole lot, but I imagine that Game 13494901 will be kind of hard to finish.


I think you having an anxiety attack Gilligan.
You're only up to round 5 in that game, however, i cannot see the whole picture because of fog.
Image
* Pearl Harbour * Waterloo * Forbidden City * Jamaica * Pot Mosbi
User avatar
Private cairnswk
 
Posts: 11510
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2007 8:32 pm
Location: Australia

Re: WWI: Gallipoli [21.9.13] V38 (p22) - BETA Ready

Postby Gilligan on Fri Nov 01, 2013 7:44 pm

cairnswk wrote:
Gilligan wrote:Obviously have not played it a whole lot, but I imagine that Game 13494901 will be kind of hard to finish.


I think you having an anxiety attack Gilligan.
You're only up to round 5 in that game, however, i cannot see the whole picture because of fog.


Haha, perhaps! Even if it has been only 5 rounds, there are a lot of armies flying around. We shall see.
Image
User avatar
Captain Gilligan
 
Posts: 12478
Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 4:59 pm
Location: Providence, RI

Re: WWI: Gallipoli [21.9.13] V38 (p22) - BETA Ready

Postby cairnswk on Fri Nov 01, 2013 7:50 pm

Gilligan wrote:
cairnswk wrote:
Gilligan wrote:Obviously have not played it a whole lot, but I imagine that Game 13494901 will be kind of hard to finish.


I think you having an anxiety attack Gilligan.
You're only up to round 5 in that game, however, i cannot see the whole picture because of fog.


Haha, perhaps! Even if it has been only 5 rounds, there are a lot of armies flying around. We shall see.

Yes perhaps we should wait to see what the eventual outcome is!
Image
* Pearl Harbour * Waterloo * Forbidden City * Jamaica * Pot Mosbi
User avatar
Private cairnswk
 
Posts: 11510
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2007 8:32 pm
Location: Australia

Re: Re: WWI: Gallipoli [21.9.13] V38 (p22) - BETA Ready

Postby Armandolas on Sat Nov 02, 2013 5:16 am

EricPhail wrote:Playing in Games 1345938 and 13498604:
Noticed that the phantom continent doesn't include beach z (according to BOB, anyway), now while the continent might be irrelevant (and soon to disappear) I'm assuming it was related to the losing condition: so could you check/confirm that beach z is a valid land territory for the purposes of the losing condition, thanks



Can u clarify this please? i can see the autodeploy works. But it is not shown as a Land territory
User avatar
Colonel Armandolas
 
Posts: 1761
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 6:32 am
Location: Lisbon

PreviousNext

Return to The Atlas

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users