Page 2 of 13

Re: Gilgamesh; bull of heaven, pg 3

PostPosted: Wed Jan 21, 2009 10:03 am
by oaktown
gimil wrote:Wht not move the contient legends to the bottom and have them in a horizontal line. On that orange section you can 7 brikes making it prefect to fit your legends there. Move the challenges text to undernearth the title and make the title area a little bigger. That will reduce the busyness of the bottom left that benn was talking about.

I was actually toying with that idea recently.... the reason I didn't do it is that the solid colors along the top and bottom of the map do a lot to help convey the sense that this entire thing is part of a wall, which I think the image needs more - not less - of. I'll think more on this, however, as it would open up the bottom of the map nicely.

The story behind the Bull of Heaven goes something like this... Gilgamesh and Enkidu walk into the great forest to face Humbaba, the protector of the forests. They call Humbaba out and kill him, angering the gods, who then send the Bull of Heaven (believed to be a physical manifestation of drought) to the walls of Uruk. Scores of men are killed by the Bull before Gilgamesh and Enkidu defeat it, but in doing do Enkidu is mortally wounded. Enkidu's death sends Gilgamesh into a existential tailspin, yada yada yada.

So - how does one convey that on a CC map? It seems as if the Bull really isn't a part of a region, and should really only be able to be defeated by Gilgamesh (Ururk), but I guess there's no reason that the Bull can't hit Uruk back. For that matter, I guess the Bull could hit any territory, but perhaps only be attacked BY Uruk.

Ooh, here's a thought - what if the Bull can bombard ANY of the great cities, but only be attacked by Uruk? That would give it significant strategic value.

Re: Gilgamesh; bull of heaven, pg 3

PostPosted: Wed Jan 21, 2009 2:57 pm
by ZeakCytho
oaktown wrote:So - how does one convey that on a CC map? It seems as if the Bull really isn't a part of a region, and should really only be able to be defeated by Gilgamesh (Ururk), but I guess there's no reason that the Bull can't hit Uruk back. For that matter, I guess the Bull could hit any territory, but perhaps only be attacked BY Uruk.

Ooh, here's a thought - what if the Bull can bombard ANY of the great cities, but only be attacked by Uruk? That would give it significant strategic value.


It's a nice idea, but I think it would be Uruk far too powerful. If you hold Uruk (and thus bull of heaven) early in the game, you can stop anyone else from getting the city bonus.

So, perhaps start it with 4 or 5 neutrals?

Re: Gilgamesh; bull of heaven, pg 3

PostPosted: Wed Jan 21, 2009 9:09 pm
by Natewolfman
oaktown wrote:The story behind the Bull of Heaven goes something like this... Gilgamesh and Enkidu walk into the great forest to face Humbaba, the protector of the forests. They call Humbaba out and kill him, angering the gods, who then send the Bull of Heaven (believed to be a physical manifestation of drought) to the walls of Uruk. Scores of men are killed by the Bull before Gilgamesh and Enkidu defeat it, but in doing do Enkidu is mortally wounded. Enkidu's death sends Gilgamesh into a existential tailspin, yada yada yada.

So - how does one convey that on a CC map? It seems as if the Bull really isn't a part of a region, and should really only be able to be defeated by Gilgamesh (Ururk), but I guess there's no reason that the Bull can't hit Uruk back. For that matter, I guess the Bull could hit any territory, but perhaps only be attacked BY Uruk.

this sounds like its own map... lol

Re: Gilgamesh; bull of heaven, pg 3

PostPosted: Thu Jan 22, 2009 5:34 pm
by rjz115dude
i like this map, i would definatly play on this map...its not completely complicated and it's not overwhelmingly simple. I don't like the arrows though, i think you could find a different way to show that. And i think it would be better if you made the mountains all the same color, or at least just make them mountain colors, because i dont really like the blue mountains...just something to think about, and i can definatly see this map appearing on conquer club soon

Re: Gilgamesh; bull of heaven, pg 3

PostPosted: Sun Feb 01, 2009 2:02 pm
by oaktown
Click image to enlarge.
image

The concerns about making the Bull, and thus Uruk, too powerful did not fall on deaf ears. The Bull is now a standard starting territory with only one attack route - Uruk. This gives uruk some advantage in that it is a city AND it controls access to that challenge, but does not give it unearthly powers across the board.

Moved the legend info around - I think this makes more sense.

Re: Gilgamesh; pg 4

PostPosted: Sun Feb 01, 2009 5:20 pm
by MrBenn
Image
Welcome to the Foundry Proper... Onwards and Upwards!

Re: Gilgamesh; pg 4

PostPosted: Sun Feb 01, 2009 9:47 pm
by The Neon Peon
May I make a personal request that you change the image name while hosting to something without "game"in it. My computer blocks that, so I am unable to view or comment on this.

Re: Gilgamesh; pg 4

PostPosted: Mon Feb 02, 2009 3:52 am
by MrBenn
Your computer blocks gilgamesh? That sounds more like a setup issue :lol:

Re: Gilgamesh; bull of heaven, pg 3

PostPosted: Sat Feb 07, 2009 3:32 pm
by yeti_c
herschal wrote:42 posts and already an advanced draft?? It is good but I think you need a few more peoples opinions before giving it a stamp. And only 3 updates can hardly be called advanced. There are other maps in here with 10 pages of critisism and they are not even advanced drafts. Just because he is an experieced map maker and a cartographer doesn't mean he can get special treatment.
Don't get me wrong though, I love the map!


Edit: I forgot that this was a competition entry and received some vetting there. That makes me less annoied but I still think it should have been in here a little longer.


I have to say I completely disagree with all of this post.

C.

Re: Gilgamesh; bull of heaven, pg 3

PostPosted: Sat Feb 07, 2009 4:15 pm
by oaktown
yeti_c wrote:
herschal wrote:42 posts and already an advanced draft?? It is good but I think you need a few more peoples opinions before giving it a stamp. And only 3 updates can hardly be called advanced. There are other maps in here with 10 pages of critisism and they are not even advanced drafts. Just because he is an experieced map maker and a cartographer doesn't mean he can get special treatment.
Don't get me wrong though, I love the map!


Edit: I forgot that this was a competition entry and received some vetting there. That makes me less annoied but I still think it should have been in here a little longer.


I have to say I completely disagree with all of this post.

I assume that includes the part where herschal said he loves this map? :-s ;)

Re: Gilgamesh; pg 4

PostPosted: Sat Feb 07, 2009 5:22 pm
by Beko the Great
Oh! Thank you Oaktown! Thank you very much to keep this Idea alive! I'm so fan of sumerian and ancien t mesopotamia I was very sad when this map was taken away from centerscape... but I think it was better, this map will have a unique gameplay, I'm very hopeful to see very soon!

Re: Gilgamesh; pg 4

PostPosted: Sat Feb 07, 2009 5:24 pm
by Aline_Cedrac
Beko the Great wrote:Oh! Thank you Oaktown! Thank you very much to keep this Idea alive! I'm so fan of sumerian and ancien t mesopotamia I was very sad when this map was taken away from centerscape... but I think it was better, this map will have a unique gameplay, I'm very hopeful to see very soon!


I agree with you, dear Beko the Great! :oops: Thank you Oaktown, for making this fantasy of some come true! Good luck with everything! You can count with my help and support, if needed!

Re: Gilgamesh; pg 4

PostPosted: Mon Feb 09, 2009 11:47 pm
by oaktown
Click image to enlarge.
image


Nothing fancy in this update - I just wanted to clean some crap up. Regions extend off the map (looks cleaner), mountains fit some region borders better, etc.

The Neon Peon wrote:May I make a personal request that you change the image name while hosting to something without "game"in it. My computer blocks that, so I am unable to view or comment on this.

Odd request, but granted. We now have the epic of Gilgamsh.

Re: Gilgamesh; pg 4

PostPosted: Tue Feb 10, 2009 12:12 am
by ZeakCytho
Gameplay wise, I think you may have undervalued Subartu. It has 9 territories and 6 borders, but is only a +5? It has an implicit +1, because there are 3 great cities in it, but even so, I think +6 would be a better base value (so it's +7 total). Sumer is also a bit undervalued - one less territory, 1 less border - I think it should be a +5 base (+1 for having 3 cities added on to that for a total of +6). Then Amorities, which is 2 less territories and 1 less border than Sumer, would have a more justified +4.

The other option would be to bring Amorities down to +3. But I think this map has enough small bonuses, between Wilds, Elam, Challenges, and Cities.

Re: Gilgamesh; pg 4

PostPosted: Tue Feb 10, 2009 8:41 am
by lt_oddball
for sure you couldn't find better actual historic province names than
"garden of the gods, the waters of death and the great darkness, and bull of heaven " ???
You make it like a cheap lord of the rings map..:s
:sick:

Re: Gilgamesh; pg 4

PostPosted: Tue Feb 10, 2009 9:35 am
by oaktown
lt_oddball wrote:for sure you couldn't find better actual historic province names than
"garden of the gods, the waters of death and the great darkness, and bull of heaven " ???
You make it like a cheap lord of the rings map..:s
:sick:

Or perhaps the Lord of the Rings was a cheap copy of Gilgamesh.

“If the following names: Anu, Enkidu, Mashu, Uruk, remember you The Silmarillion of Tolkien, you have to know that they belong to the Epopee of Gilgamesh.”
-Isaac Asimov

Re: Gilgamesh; pg 4

PostPosted: Tue Feb 10, 2009 8:24 pm
by sailorseal
Well I am back after my "vacation" and here is what I have to say...

1. The conquer all of the symbols has to be changed because it should easily be acquired by the drop

2. Move the word oaktown over to not confuse a n00b about what the name is

3. Create new great cities around the lower left and top

4. The Sumer bonus is too low

5. The Grey bonus is too low

Love the map and would like to see it continue.

Re: Gilgamesh; pg 4

PostPosted: Thu Feb 12, 2009 2:31 am
by gho
You should add a description of the map and the times like you have in your triple alliance map in order to make the map more interesting historically.

Re: Gilgamesh; pg 4

PostPosted: Thu Feb 12, 2009 12:44 pm
by sailorseal
gho wrote:You should add a description of the map and the times like you have in your triple alliance map in order to make the map more interesting historically.

This could fill up some of the empty space at the bottom...

Re: Gilgamesh; pg 4

PostPosted: Fri Feb 13, 2009 11:36 am
by oaktown
Click image to enlarge.
image


sailorseal wrote:1. The conquer all of the symbols has to be changed because it should easily be acquired by the drop

Dropped it to +1, same as holding three cities. Originally the Bull would start neutral, making the +2 more reasonable.

sailorseal wrote:2. Move the word oaktown over to not confuse a n00b about what the name is

Fixed.

sailorseal wrote:3. Create new great cities around the lower left and top

Trouble with this suggestion is that the most significant cities at the time were along the rivers, for obvious reasons. Anyway, I'm not troubled by thelack of cities in the west, because both of those bonuses are small and easy to hold, making for excellent starts.

sailorseal wrote:4. The Sumer bonus is too low

Agreed - bumped up to +5, which is really +6 with the cities.

sailorseal wrote:5. The Grey bonus is too low.

Disagreed - since you have to either hold the Bull or defend against it, Sumer and Subartu (grey) are now very close in size and borders, so I think that making them both +6 (including the cities within) is in line with the rest of the map.

gho wrote:You should add a description of the map and the times like you have in your triple alliance map in order to make the map more interesting historically.

Done... space at the bottom filled. All of the bonus info now sits together on the lower tiles, as it should.

Re: Gilgamesh; update on pg 5

PostPosted: Fri Feb 13, 2009 4:59 pm
by sailorseal
Wonderful, I recommend summoning a jury...

Re: Gilgamesh; update on pg 5

PostPosted: Sat Feb 14, 2009 5:20 am
by gho
Why dont you make the three challenges start neutral and make it a plus 3 to hold them all, to make it worth trying to get at the beginning instead of going for a continent which people usually do. I think it might add a bit of dimension to the play.

Re: Gilgamesh; update on pg 5

PostPosted: Thu Mar 05, 2009 8:45 pm
by oaktown
gho wrote:Why dont you make the three challenges start neutral and make it a plus 3 to hold them all, to make it worth trying to get at the beginning instead of going for a continent which people usually do. I think it might add a bit of dimension to the play.

While I like the idea of making the challenges more attractive, there are negative side effects to starting them neutral. First, it would leave the map with 41 starting territories, which means every game would start with a minimum of 4 neutral territories or as many as 9 (seven player games). And the locations of the challenges aren't good for neutrals; the Bull would never come into play unless a player already had the other two and Uruk, while the Scorpions sit at a valuable bottleneck - a neutral there would allow easy expansion behind it and cut off the north and south halves of the map.

I'd really like to work further on this, but the feedback has dried up. lack of interest?

Re: Gilgamesh; update on pg 5

PostPosted: Fri Mar 06, 2009 4:43 am
by Incandenza
Not lack of interest, lack of anything really all that wrong with the map. It looks ready to be kicked up the ladder.

For the record, there's only a 2.75% chance a player will drop the challenges.

Re: Gilgamesh; update on pg 5

PostPosted: Sat Mar 07, 2009 2:39 pm
by AndyDufresne
This is one of my favorite new looking maps, I'm just not sure I've anything to add at the moment.


--Andy