[Official] Classic Revamp [Quenched]

[rutty]

I'm not sure this is the right place to send this message. please let me know if it isn't.

I can see that the classic map is a good map. I don't mind that classic is the default map. What i do mind is that my favourite map classic shapes has been removed.

Please reinstate classic shapes map as an optional map for players like me who don't like change.

Regards,

Rutger

[natty dread]

Please reinstate classic shapes map as an optional map for whiners like me who don't like change.

Why don't you like change?

Everything changes, my friend. You can either fight it and be miserable, or go along with it and try to influence it to the direction that suits you best.

Omnia mutantur, nihil interit.

[bedub1]

Please reinstate classic shapes map as an optional map for whiners like me who don't like change.

Why don't you like change?

Everything changes, my friend. You can either fight it and be miserable, or go along with it and try to influence it to the direction that suits you best.

Omnia mutantur, nihil interit.

I agree. I wish I had come in here sooner, right after the release of v7 so I could have said no, wait, I like v6 better with regards to those 3 lines on the right....but hindsight is 20-20.

[nesterdude]

THIS MAP SUCKS

You can see my original post early in the thread

Thanks for ruining what had already gotten bad, but now is crap.

Here's some more pretension for your Latin

Oh horridas civitas, oh horridas res

[natty dread]

THIS MAP SUCKS

This poster sucks

[AndyDufresne]

Lets all play nice.

I think under the circumstances and limitations the map had to go through, the new Classic Map is a fine addition.


--Andy

[natty dread]

Indeed let's play nice.

I just feel this nesterdude is not expressing his opinions very nicely.

Here's an idea nester, why don't you try making a better map? After you've tried and know how much hard work it is to get a map in play, perhaps you'd learn to respect the work others have put in a bit more and express your opinions in a nicer tone.

I'm not saying you shouldn't be allowed to post your opinions, mind. I'm just saying there's a nicer way of giving feedback, than bashing all over the hard work others have done free of charge just for your (as in, you as a player) enjoyment in mind.

[leolou2]

Thank you this looks great oh yeah Happy New Year all

[nesterdude]

Whoah

First of all, just because you work hard on something, doesn't mean it's worth the effort. Par example: You slave for hours on a cake and it flops. Are we to commend you for your work? No.

I appreciate the time and effort. What I cannot appreciate is joining a Classic Art/Shapes game, and waking up to it being this travesty in the middle of one of my games.

As well, just because you do this for free, you volunteered for it. If you don't' like criticism, then don't volunteer.

I joined a map in which territories were touching, not something I'd look at in an American Airlines magazine.

Again, this is a bad map, bottom line.

[natty dread]

First of all, just because you work hard on something, doesn't mean it's worth the effort. Par example: You slave for hours on a cake and it flops. Are we to commend you for your work? No.

But here the cake did not flop. Majority of CC considers the new classic great, and loves it. You're in the minority having your tantrums. So you don't have to commend the maker for his work, but the way you express your opinion is just not nice.

As well, just because you do this for free, you volunteered for it. If you don't' like criticism, then don't volunteer.

Criticism is one thing. Bashing all over someones' work just because you don't like it is childish. It's like an 8-year old having a tantrum, "I want it now, I want it exactly like this, I don't want it like that!! Waaaah!!!" Usually, by the time those 8-year-olds grow up and become adults, they learn how to put their personal feelings aside when expressing their opinions in a civilized manner.

Then again, your profile doesn't tell your age, so I'm not sure is it fair of me to expect you to behave like an adult?

What I cannot appreciate is joining a Classic Art/Shapes game

I joined a map in which territories were touching, not something I'd look at in an American Airlines magazine.

So if you have been playing shapes games, how is this any different? Except for being visually far superior, of course.

[saaimen]

At least read the bloody thread, nesterdude.
The original Classic map had borders instead of connectors alright.
Then it had to be replaced in a couple of hours' time, so Classic Shapes came to be. For those who wanted a map with some sort of theme, Classic Art was added.
Now the plan was to make a new Classic map that actually looked like the world. To avoid copyright issues with Hasbro, CC has opted for points connected by lines, like Classic Shapes. I think they have made a very smart choice there, which will hopefully ensure the existence of CC without legal issues.

I collect that you just hate these connected-dots-style maps, however smart it was to make this one. Yet if you'd be able to set aside that hate, you'd see this is NOT a bad map. It is very well made and beautiful (at least, the non-dimmed version of it - read up in the thread). I hope you're enough of a CC'er to admit that.

[stahrgazer]

Comparing the new map to Shapes is a bit ludicrous. Shapes had direct, not arced lines, starting in the direction of feasible attack; clear differences between the symbols for the various regions rather than merely colorized text to show the difference between regions.

I'd really detest it if the site chose to make all the maps like this, even if I can appreciate the work that went into the map.

If the attempt was to make the map as un-Risk-looking as possible, as I believe it was, then the map succeeded. Unfortunately, for many of us, it's so un-Risk-looking that it's confusing over and above knowing the capital names of the chosen cities. The site has, backhandedly, acknowledged the confusion by allowing those in SoC to somehow see this map with Shapes' overlay (lucky them).

Personally, I don't find the new map "beautiful;" any beauty I could see in the shading of the countries as 'artwork' is gone because of all the distracting arcs. As for gameplay: I dislike not seeing a shape outline for the various regions especially when all the regions use essentially the same colorscheme; and I find it difficult to discern the various regions from just the tiny colorized texts.

[sully800]

The site has, backhandedly, acknowledged the confusion by allowing those in SoC to somehow see this map with Shapes' overlay (lucky them).

This is the third thread in which I have read this incorrect statement - I'm only responding again in case someone else does not see the correction.

SoC members see the exact same map as everyone else, not Shapes. However in addition to the city names, the letter/number names from shapes are placed on the map. This was done because the SoC has already written strategies using the Shapes names, and they will continue to do so because it is faster and easier for them.

If anything it makes the map more confusing (IMO) since there are two sets of names for each territory. The city names are used in the gamelog for both versions of the map.

[nesterdude]

At least read the bloody thread, nesterdude.
The original Classic map had borders instead of connectors alright.
Then it had to be replaced in a couple of hours' time, so Classic Shapes came to be. For those who wanted a map with some sort of theme, Classic Art was added.
Now the plan was to make a new Classic map that actually looked like the world. To avoid copyright issues with Hasbro, CC has opted for points connected by lines, like Classic Shapes. I think they have made a very smart choice there, which will hopefully ensure the existence of CC without legal issues.

I collect that you just hate these connected-dots-style maps, however smart it was to make this one. Yet if you'd be able to set aside that hate, you'd see this is NOT a bad map. It is very well made and beautiful (at least, the non-dimmed version of it - read up in the thread). I hope you're enough of a CC'er to admit that.

I read the bloody thread pal

If such is the case, then LEAVE THE GAMES THAT PEOPLE JOINED IN THE MAP THE JOINED (e.g. leaving shapes or art and introducing this map as a beta separate map)

I don't like this new map, that's clear.

But I won't join it. I'd like the play my games out on the maps I joined.

[sully800]

If such is the case, then LEAVE THE GAMES THAT PEOPLE JOINED IN THE MAP THE JOINED (e.g. leaving shapes or art and introducing this map as a beta separate map)

I don't like this new map, that's clear.

But I won't join it. I'd like the play my games out on the maps I joined.

That's actually an understandable gripe. I know a that not everyone will like a given map, and one of the problem with revamps are the way they are transitioned. You didn't choose to play using these graphics, and since you just started many games on the old design you feel slighted.

Perhaps in the future there should be a bigger warning before maps are switched in a revamp - maybe after reaching final forge another announcement could have been made to let everyone know it was coming. I don't think there is any way to let the old games finish on the design they started with, but I can see you would prefer that solution to the current system. Anyway, I'm sorry you're not happy with the new design nester and I mean that sincerely.

[nesterdude]

Thank you Sulli.

[john9blue]

The Art games should have stayed Art... so the people who hate lines can have the discrete territories. Shapes was lines anyway, so this should have simply replaced Shapes, like Shapes replaced the old Classic...

[Esn]

To be honest, I liked the simplicity of "Shapes". Also, typing "attack F5" is easier than typing "attack Johannesburg". I guess I'll get used to it.

It does look very nice, though.

[saaimen]

Imagine yourself coming to this site for the very first time. You've probably googled "Risk", and you're expecting to see some nice and advanced form of the board game you love.

You come here, have a look around and see that most games are played on this ugly grey thing called "Classic shapes" with codenames instead of actual words.

Would you stay?

[stahrgazer]

The site has, backhandedly, acknowledged the confusion by allowing those in SoC to somehow see this map with Shapes' overlay (lucky them).

This is the third thread in which I have read this incorrect statement - I'm only responding again in case someone else does not see the correction.

SoC members see the exact same map as everyone else, not Shapes. However in addition to the city names, the letter/number names from shapes are placed on the map. This was done because the SoC has already written strategies using the Shapes names, and they will continue to do so because it is faster and easier for them.

If anything it makes the map more confusing (IMO) since there are two sets of names for each territory. The city names are used in the gamelog for both versions of the map.

Thanks for clarifying

Obviously, I misunderstood what Lack said about it.

However, I still think the regions are horridly difficult to discern with no between-country borders; and the aesthetics of the underlying new map are harmed by all the white arcs that define strike paths.

Regardless, I commend you for working on it.

As for the lack of transition, someone in some thread (this or another) made a suggestion that an announcement get placed within the maps themselves prior to a changeover. If that's at all feasible, that seems reasonable. Or perhaps a daily countdown banner as you come on CC, like they do with some major announcments. While it doesn't help when someone joined one map and it's suddenly another, if they get like a 30-day countdown, it's a better warning system. Then again, is it likely to be needed ever again?

[MrBenn]

The decision to merge the maps together was taken by lackattack. While I'm sad to see it go, I'm supportive of his decision.

On another subject, let's try and keep the discussion amicable - I don't really want to have to put on my Big Bad Mod Boots to do some stomping!

[The Neon Peon]

To be honest, lines make more sense for a map than territories. The only problem is that we've been playing on territories for too long a time.

- In a line map, to see what connects to one territory, you look at the territory, and simply follow the lines and see where they lead.
- In a normal map, to see what connects to one territory, you look at the territory, find the squiggly shape around it, look at the squiggly shapes around that shape, and see how many of them share an edge with that territory. Once you've found the squiggly shape that has a side shared with the territory, you look in the squiggly shape to see what the name of it is.

Isn't that the process you have to go through? On a regular map, you have to go through that process, or a similar one. (although it occurs in a very small amount of time)

Also, line maps allow the maker to do more with the graphics. Just look at the texture and many colors of land on this map. You'd have to get rid of most of it if you were to color the territories. (I know someone will say that the lines detract from the image, but aren't the territory borders on normal maps also lines, except ones that don't go in a very straight path?)

But, as I said, we've been playing on territories for a much longer time and we've gotten used to it. So for everyone (unless you've played mostly rail maps or Midkermil), you'll be slower in playing this map than you would have been, and it will seem more confusing. But really, a lines system for maps makes more sense, in my opinion. We just need to get used to it.

[natty dread]

But really, a lines system for maps makes more sense, in my opinion. We just need to get used to it.

Right on! Then maybe there's still hope for my Nordic countries map...

[Gilligan]

The XML says 'Beunos Aires'

[MrBenn]

The XML says 'Beunos Aires'

I believe a corrected version of the XML has already been sent to lackattack....