Conquer Club

chapcrap wrote:Is this the same: https://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewt ... 1&t=154636

If so, can I merge?

yes

MERGED: Restrictive Random Map

and

MOVED back out to Suggestions.

Rather than just have one all encompassing Random map choice I'd like to have the option of choosing a random map from set categories.

e.g.
Random (small) - maps with less than 25(?) terits
Random (large) - maps with more than 80(?) terits
Random (medium) - maps that fall between (small) and (large)
Random (Conquest) - Conquest maps
Random (standard) - classic type maps with regional/ continental bonuses
Random (complex) - the weird and the wonderful
Random (Beta) - for current beta maps
possibly a couple more obvious categories that don't spring to mind right now

Having such options would enable themed tourneys, aid clans and tourneys to avoid unsuitable/ unwanted maps for the competition (especially in tie-breaks), give those that are looking for pick up games (whether it be as individuals or teams) the choice of playing on the type of map they're happy with.

I think this is a duplicate, but just in case it isn't, yes I'm in favour.

I suggested this way back when random map first came out. I think there should also be an option for Random (All) - but I'm definitely a huge fan of smaller categories.

Bollocks.

Dukasaur wrote:I think this is a duplicate, but just in case it isn't, yes I'm in favour.

It is. I think it's been called "limited random" in the past if anyone wants to search for it.

Should be yes, i fear for my life anytime i play random in case it's hive. Seriously i think i'll kill myself if i have to play that map again.

agentcom wrote:

Dukasaur wrote:I think this is a duplicate, but just in case it isn't, yes I'm in favour.

It is. I think it's been called "limited random" in the past if anyone wants to search for it.

I already did and posted about it in the Mod Forum, just hadn't merged... I guess I'll go ahead and do it. And we'll use the OP from this thread, because it's more thought out.

Well past time for a bump.

It's a very simple addition, no-one is against it, it benefits many, just sort it out!

Queen_Herpes wrote:The Hive Strikes again! I concur. Though perhaps would be easier to just select ten maps that are ridiculous like THE HIVE, and some others and eliminate them entirely from random.

Ridiculus hive...
How have things changed during the last years lol....

Vid_FISO wrote:Well past time for a bump.

It's a very simple addition, no-one is against it, it benefits many, just sort it out!

another 2 years have passed, why?

Interesting, can you put together a list of maps that fall under each of your categories?

Random (small) - maps with less than 25(?) terits
Random (large) - maps with more than 80(?) terits
Random (medium) - maps that fall between (small) and (large)
Random (Conquest) - Conquest maps
Random (standard) - classic type maps with regional/ continental bonuses
Random (complex) - the weird and the wonderful
Random (Beta) - for current beta maps
possibly a couple more obvious categories that don't spring to mind right now

IcePack wrote:Interesting, can you put together a list of maps that fall under each of your categories?

Random (small) - maps with less than 25(?) terits
Random (large) - maps with more than 80(?) terits
Random (medium) - maps that fall between (small) and (large)
Random (Conquest) - Conquest maps
Random (standard) - classic type maps with regional/ continental bonuses
Random (complex) - the weird and the wonderful
Random (Beta) - for current beta maps
possibly a couple more obvious categories that don't spring to mind right now

Whoever has control of the site should be able to do that a lot easier than I can, using this page as the base, it just needs a few more sort columns added for yes/ no flags and its done.

IcePack wrote:Interesting, can you put together a list of maps that fall under each of your categories?

Random (small) - maps with less than 25(?) terits
Random (large) - maps with more than 80(?) terits
Random (medium) - maps that fall between (small) and (large)
Random (Conquest) - Conquest maps
Random (standard) - classic type maps with regional/ continental bonuses
Random (complex) - the weird and the wonderful
Random (Beta) - for current beta maps
possibly a couple more obvious categories that don't spring to mind right now

Whoever has control of the site should be able to do that a lot easier than I can, using this page as the base, it just needs a few more sort columns added for yes/ no flags and its done.[/quote]

This would have fit very well my Madness in Rio tournament....I'm definitaly a fan of this suggestion....Please have a look at it.

Vid_FISO wrote:

IcePack wrote:Interesting, can you put together a list of maps that fall under each of your categories?

Random (small) - maps with less than 25(?) terits
Random (large) - maps with more than 80(?) terits
Random (medium) - maps that fall between (small) and (large)
Random (Conquest) - Conquest maps
Random (standard) - classic type maps with regional/ continental bonuses
Random (complex) - the weird and the wonderful
Random (Beta) - for current beta maps
possibly a couple more obvious categories that don't spring to mind right now

Whoever has control of the site should be able to do that a lot easier than I can, using this page as the base, it just needs a few more sort columns added for yes/ no flags and its done.

My point was, if things are community agreed upon and spelt out its a lot easier to get implemented then if it's half done or the coder has to figure stuff out. Nobody wants to implement it and then have the community say it should have been 75 instead of 80, or they got the complex maps "wrong" etc

IcePack wrote:
My point was, if things are community agreed upon and spelt out its a lot easier to get implemented then if it's half done or the coder has to figure stuff out. Nobody wants to implement itand then have the community say it should have been 75 instead of 80, or they got the complex maps "wrong" etc

The truth is in there!

Not sure if it could be done but add random settings to the maps as well. Where it picks the random map and settings so you don't know until the game starts what settings or map you are playing on. I think that it might make clan wars a lot more interesting if both sides go into it not knowing what the map and settings are. Not sure if it could be done just wanted to throw my stupid idea out there.

Swifte wrote:

IcePack wrote:
My point was, if things are community agreed upon and spelt out its a lot easier to get implemented then if it's half done or the coder has to figure stuff out. Nobody wants to implement itand then have the community say it should have been 75 instead of 80, or they got the complex maps "wrong" etc

The truth is in there!

I don't know what the admin stance on this is, but I do know without it being a full suggestion it doesn't have much of a shot

IcePack wrote:

Swifte wrote:

IcePack wrote:
My point was, if things are community agreed upon and spelt out its a lot easier to get implemented then if it's half done or the coder has to figure stuff out. Nobody wants to implement itand then have the community say it should have been 75 instead of 80, or they got the complex maps "wrong" etc

The truth is in there!

I don't know what the admin stance on this is, but I do know without it being a full suggestion it doesn't have much of a shot

How about this lot get together and sort it out? The knowledge and expertise is in there (or at least should be).

Vid_FISO wrote:

IcePack wrote:

Swifte wrote:

IcePack wrote:
My point was, if things are community agreed upon and spelt out its a lot easier to get implemented then if it's half done or the coder has to figure stuff out. Nobody wants to implement itand then have the community say it should have been 75 instead of 80, or they got the complex maps "wrong" etc

The truth is in there!

I don't know what the admin stance on this is, but I do know without it being a full suggestion it doesn't have much of a shot

How about this lot get together and sort it out? The knowledge and expertise is in there (or at least should be).

Sure its possible, but most of us have other things on our plate in our volunteer areas. My only intention here was to respond / help get something you seemed passionate about moving along.
You asked why 2 years have passed, and its because its a half finished suggestion and I tried pointing out the areas that could be worked on to help it.

I dont really care about the suggestion one way or another, so if those supporting the suggestion dont care enough to do something about it, it'll likely be another 2 years.

PUT THIS IN THE ORIGINAL POST
Okay so I made a bunch of groups. Nothing here is perfect I am sure many things are misplaced, and yes maps are allowed to be in more than one category. leme know which categories are good, which need editing, etc. Hope this helps keep this suggestion alive!

NOTE: Please, comment on the ones I have ???'s (top of each category if any), those are ones I am unsure. If anyone disagrees with anything a placed in a group, comment, I will add ???'s to that one as well so others can see to comment. ALSO, if you see something with ?? around it, please comment, whether you think it should be in that category or not; the more responses we have on the ones we are unsure of, the faster we will become sure of it xD

show: Random-Standard

show: Random-Complex

show: Random-Conquest

show: Random-Beta

show: Random-Small

show: Random-Medium

show: Random-Large

show: Random-06 to 07

show: Random-08 to 09

show: Random-10 to 11

show: Random-12 to 14

show: Random-Real Maps

show: Random-Almost Real Maps

show: Random-Imaginary Maps

NOTE: The above is if it is decided we want multiple Random options. We can also decide on other things mentioned, as well as, or instead of the categories:

-Able to choose a list of 'x' number of maps, and have the map picked from that pool
-Able to exclude a list of 'x' number of maps from the Random map option

**If I missed anything please let me know

Just tackling the easy one first, "Conquest"

Random (Conquest) - Maps that have few starting locations, you fight through neutrals to get to your enemy. Usually has an objective as well
??Das Schloss??
??Kings Court II??
Age of Realms 1: Might
Age of Realms 2: Magic
Age of Realms 3: Mayhem
Antarctica
City Mogul
Easter
Feudal War
Jamaica
Kings Court
Monsters
New World
Peloponnesian War
Treasures Of Galapagos
Woodboro
WWII Poland

------

I dont consider DS a true conquest style map. More complex then conquest. But if you do have it on this list, then stuff like Conquer 500, maybe World Cup's, etc also belong here. District of Alaska too is similar to DS. AYB as well. All ????'s Actually i think monsters belongs in this catagory too, you aren't starting with 1 territory but have one main and then several throughout the map. And poker club. and salem switch. and route 66. i think it just kinda adds to many that aren't true conquest? but for now, maybe mark as ???

KC II should definitely be conquest.
You have Feudal War, but you need to add feudal epic
Add labyrinth
Add baseball
Add clandemonium
I think betas like Promontory Summit and Krazy Kingdoms also fall under here eventually if the get quenched

IcePack wrote:...
I dont consider DS a true conquest style map. More complex then conquest. But if you do have it on this list, then stuff like Conquer 500, maybe World Cup's, etc also belong here. District of Alaska too is similar to DS. AYB as well. All ????'s Actually i think monsters belongs in this catagory too, you aren't starting with 1 territory but have one main and then several throughout the map. And poker club. and salem switch. and route 66. i think it just kinda adds to many that aren't true conquest? but for now, maybe mark as ???

KC II should definitely be conquest.
You have Feudal War, but you need to add feudal epic
Add labyrinth
Add baseball
Add clandemonium
I think betas like Promontory Summit and Krazy Kingdoms also fall under here eventually if the get quenched

Awesome, thank you so much!!! Need more posts like this, you see I never played conquer 500, district of alaska, labrynith, baseball, promontory summit or krazy kingdom. Needed that


I added everything as you said, the first ones with the '??'. I also added after thinking, you said to add AYB with ??'s, well then I guess so would Arms Race, with ??'s?

If we were to implement it, I think the random small/medium/large map should exclude the conquest map.
First because conquest map have their own category.
second because I believe if someone want to play small/medium/large map they are expected "normal map".
I feel the strategy on conquest map is not really influence by the size of the map. While map like FNA or Eurasia are totally different because of their size, than map like doodle, luxembourg, or than medium "normal" map, because of their size.


On the random "standard" :

Siege! -> it has one way attack, and some special bonus combination. ( throne + wall, camp + gate). Though quite simple it's not really standard.
Wales -> I never find the connection on this map to be that obvious. Plus there is 2 different kind of bonus.
Age Of Merchants -> you put it in the complex, but forgot it in the standard
Bamboo Jack -> To me, connections aren't easy to get because of the Prisoner of war regions on the left side
Draknor - Level 1 -> there is basically only one way attack on this map. ( you pit it in complex )
Egypt: Valley Of The Kings -> some one way attack, and all the scarabs connecting each other, plus some weird bonus.
Forbidden City -> emperor have some special connections. Also I find it very difficult to understand the border system of this map. Bonus aren't that easy either. ( Note you put it in complex as well)
Treasure of galapagos -> you put it in complex
Imperium romanum -> you put it in complex
madness -> connections aren't straightforward
Space -> some special connections
Sydney metro -> some special connections.

Donelladan wrote:If we were to implement it, I think the random small/medium/large map should exclude the conquest map.
First because conquest map have their own category.

I don't think we can use conquest having its own category as a reason not to include it in other categories. I say this because, there is a chance that this gets implemented, but only to conquest random option, or only the sm/med/lg option, or any other combination of categories. If we exclude maps because they are in another category already, and that category it was in already doesn't get implemented also, the map will be missing. But if they get implemented, it is easy to see it is in two categories and we can decide if we want to take them out of one, or keep them in both

Donelladan wrote:second because I believe if someone want to play small/medium/large map they are expected "normal map".
I feel the strategy on conquest map is not really influence by the size of the map. While map like FNA or Eurasia are totally different because of their size, than map like doodle, luxembourg, or than medium "normal" map, because of their size.

This part, I agree with, I will ?? all conquests in the sm/med/lg categories, thank you!



I will make my notes for this in green:

Donelladan wrote:On the random "standard" :

-Siege! -> it has one way attack, and some special bonus combination. ( throne + wall, camp + gate). Though quite simple it's not really standard. If it was only a 1-way attack I may want to leave it in standard, but I think you are right I will ?? it. I did not know about that bonus, been a while for that map with me I guess
-Wales -> I never find the connection on this map to be that obvious. Plus there is 2 different kind of bonus. Wow didn't realize about this... yea that looks interesting i forgot about this map cool lol. I will ?? it... but note that it really doesn't need ??, it is definitely not standard
-Age Of Merchants -> you put it in the complex, but forgot it in the standard Gah, my bad, taking out of standard
-Bamboo Jack -> To me, connections aren't easy to get because of the Prisoner of war regions on the left side Hm your right, I'll add to complex and ?? mark in standard
-Draknor - Level 1 -> there is basically only one way attack on this map. ( you pit it in complex ) I don't understand what you mean by that? Arrows are all over the place, territories are different size and shapes, making the arrows more confusing. Many terrrits have 2-3 options which way to go, and to figure out which path is the right one to choose, takes a decent amount of time. If you elaborate on this i'll ?? mark it, but for now it stays in complex. *EDIT*: OH I see. I put it as complex because it is, but I also put it in standard whoops
-Egypt: Valley Of The Kings -> some one way attack, and all the scarabs connecting each other, plus some weird bonus. Erm I used to love this map how did I forget about connecting scarabs, and the bonus *le sigh*. ??marked and added to complex
-Forbidden City -> emperor have some special connections. Also I find it very difficult to understand the border system of this map. Bonus aren't that easy either. ( Note you put it in complex as well) Yea wasn't supposed to be in standard my bad... I need to go thru this list again meh. Sorry! deleted from standard
-Treasure of galapagos -> you put it in complex see above
-Imperium romanum -> you put it in complex *echo*
-madness -> connections aren't straightforward I can see where your coming from. ?? marking and going to complex
-Space -> some special connections only special connections are wormholes/warp gates, which if they were standalone and had no lines I would agree with, but since there are pretty clear lines connecting them, I wouldn't say they are special connections. I'll ?? mark it tho cause I can see others possibly thinking the same way as you, lets find out
-Sydney metro -> some special connections. Yup your right. Adding to complex and ??marking. I think for some sections while I was doing this I was harsher than on other sections when deciding between standard and complex. Really think the complex needs to be split. I'll work on that soon.

Thank you!!!!


EDIT: Here are a few changes I've made myself!!:
Cairns Metro, put it in complex and ??marked it. Territories have difficult connections
Conquer 4, should that be in standard? The bonuses are weird
Crossword, erased from standard, I already had it in complex
Indian Empire Added to complex. The have an additional weird bonus :the train tracks bonus
Ethiopia- Added to complex. Some territs have strange connections (Corners of map)
Fractured America- Added to complex. has additional bonus, holding capitals. Not sure if this can stay in standard, I would like it to but what do you guys think?
Malta- Added to complex. Different kinds of bonuses, and helipad connections
NYC- Added to complex. Those subways can get a bit confusing
RAIL MAPS! Should they be added to complex, because some of it can be aa bit confusing for rail, until you play a few.
San Francisco- 1-way trap! (a bunch of 1 way advances into alcatraz, but once you get there theres is no way out)
SAN MARINO, Should I put it in complex? You get bonus for holding torri's, but thats the only thing. I want to leave it in standard, anyone else have an opinion one way or the other?
SCOTLAND, Same as San Marino, with cities not Torri's
South Africa 1885- Added to complex. Hold any fort, or ship, and double all regional bonuses you hold.
Tamriel- Added to complex. Get an additional plus 2 when you hold the flag of the bonus you control
Texan Wars- Added to complex. One way attacks, additional bonuses
Thailand- Added to complex. Strange territory connections, unique bonuses
Triple Alliance- Added to complex. Unique territory connections (between capitals and Rio de la plata)
WWI Ottoman Empire- Added to complex. Strange territory connections (all ports connect)
WWII EASTERN FRONT- Has the hold all stars and you get a bonus thing, should we make that complex or keep it standard??
WWII IWO JIMA- Has strange territ connections, but its connected by a dotted line, not bad in my eyes, but does anyone think it should go in complex?