Conquer Club

It is far too green

Seriously though, the forests might look a bit better if you throw in a couple of other colour trees, maybe a couple of orange and red ones, also it kind of looks like the river is above the forest maybe make a few trees looks like it over hangs the river slightly might make this look better. Lastly on the forest maybe adding a slight shadow from them might make them see more real.

On the to the mountains, I think the problem you have here is mainly that there seems to be no consistency with the scale, the width of the river compared to the size of the mountain seems wrong. Also they seem very 'shiny', although im not quite sure how to improve that... But the shape seems good.

Either way i think the maps looks nice, possibly a bit of variation to the colour of the ground, mudflats around the river, maybe a desert, shingle beaches instead of all this idealised sand

But anyway

How about instead of the previous green background color you go with the "dust bowl" background color and make it a middle east castle fight? There are plenty of castles in that area and a sand Feudal war would really be intriguing!

I've seen enough dirt brown castle environments in first person shooters, please, no.

I'd not get too gimicky with the environments in this actually. Age of Realms 3 sees a lot less play than the other two for some reason and the extreme contrasts between the kingdoms might be as good a reason as any. If you pick an environment I'd say make sure it all flows together or changes from one theme to another naturally and is not brown.

Coleman wrote:I've seen enough dirt brown castle environments in first person shooters, please, no.

I'd not get too gimicky with the environments in this actually. Age of Realms 3 sees a lot less play than the other two for some reason and the extreme contrasts between the kingdoms might be as good a reason as any. If you pick an environment I'd say make sure it all flows together or changes from one theme to another naturally and is not brown.

I didn't suggest a brown or dirt dirt colored map but a sand colored map ! It's much more bright and inviting and honestly without a environment change I don't see a reason to make another Feudal map! There are already 2 green maps with similar game play. How many more of those do we need??

Gillipig wrote:

Coleman wrote:I've seen enough dirt brown castle environments in first person shooters, please, no.

I'd not get too gimicky with the environments in this actually. Age of Realms 3 sees a lot less play than the other two for some reason and the extreme contrasts between the kingdoms might be as good a reason as any. If you pick an environment I'd say make sure it all flows together or changes from one theme to another naturally and is not brown.

I didn't suggest a brown or dirt dirt colored map but a sand colored map ! It's much more bright and inviting and honestly without a environment change I don't see a reason to make another Feudal map! There are already 2 green maps with similar game play. How many more of those do we need??

Well, thanks to Coleman, we know that these other 2 get lots of games made every day so another one might be warranted. Straying to far from the formula might cause disaster and never get played.
Feudal War 178.29
Feudal Epic 53.29
But staying with the same might also cause that problem. Damned if you do and damned if you don't. By keeping with the same sort of colours brings the maps together.

koontz1973 wrote:Well, thanks to Coleman, we know that these other 2 get lots of games made every day so another one might be warranted. Straying to far from the formula might cause disaster and never get played.
Feudal War 178.29
Feudal Epic 53.29
But staying with the same might also cause that problem. Damned if you do and damned if you don't. By keeping with the same sort of colours brings the maps together.

I think having "Feudal" in the title will do that ! Those numbers are totally wrong btw! I just searched with game finder and the real stats are:
Feudal War 349.365
Feudal Epic 31.321
I just don't see a reason to make another one if it's going to look the same anyway! I actually prefer the newest of the Feudal maps so I won't say that it wasn't a good map but the number of games played on it isn't very impressive when compared to it's predecessor! Even when you take into consideration that it hasn't been playable for as long. If a third map is made I'll play it once to see if it's better than the previous maps! Don't expect a lot of games being played on it though if the map doesn't bring something radically new! Only Pirates of the Caribbean can do the same thing over and over again and be equally successful every time !

Gillipig wrote:

koontz1973 wrote:Well, thanks to Coleman, we know that these other 2 get lots of games made every day so another one might be warranted. Straying to far from the formula might cause disaster and never get played.
Feudal War 178.29
Feudal Epic 53.29
But staying with the same might also cause that problem. Damned if you do and damned if you don't. By keeping with the same sort of colours brings the maps together.

I think having "Feudal" in the title will do that ! Those numbers are totally wrong btw! I just searched with game finder and the real stats are:
Feudal War 349.365
Feudal Epic 31.321
I just don't see a reason to make another one if it's going to look the same anyway! I actually prefer the newest of the Feudal maps so I won't say that it wasn't a good map but the number of games played on it isn't very impressive when compared to it's predecessor! Even when you take into consideration that it hasn't been playable for as long. If a third map is made I'll play it once to see if it's better than the previous maps! Don't expect a lot of games being played on it though if the map doesn't bring something radically new! Only Pirates of the Caribbean can do the same thing over and over again and be equally successful every time !

But success does not mean good or even quality.
Blame Coleman for the stats, they are not mine.
I think this one is going to be different. With the new types of GP that have been introduced since the last map then it should be different enough.

koontz1973 wrote:

Gillipig wrote:

koontz1973 wrote:Well, thanks to Coleman, we know that these other 2 get lots of games made every day so another one might be warranted. Straying to far from the formula might cause disaster and never get played.
Feudal War 178.29
Feudal Epic 53.29
But staying with the same might also cause that problem. Damned if you do and damned if you don't. By keeping with the same sort of colours brings the maps together.

I think having "Feudal" in the title will do that ! Those numbers are totally wrong btw! I just searched with game finder and the real stats are:
Feudal War 349.365
Feudal Epic 31.321
I just don't see a reason to make another one if it's going to look the same anyway! I actually prefer the newest of the Feudal maps so I won't say that it wasn't a good map but the number of games played on it isn't very impressive when compared to it's predecessor! Even when you take into consideration that it hasn't been playable for as long. If a third map is made I'll play it once to see if it's better than the previous maps! Don't expect a lot of games being played on it though if the map doesn't bring something radically new! Only Pirates of the Caribbean can do the same thing over and over again and be equally successful every time !

But success does not mean good or even quality.
Blame Coleman for the stats, they are not mine.
I think this one is going to be different. With the new types of GP that have been introduced since the last map then it should be different enough.

If better graphics is the only upside then he might just as well just edit the current ones just like classic was edited! let's compare Feudal and AOR! A big difference between the Feudal maps and the AOR maps is that Feudal epic was not nearly as successful as AOR 2. Feudal Epic looks too alike Feudal War while AOR 2 does not look like AOR 1. AOR 3 didn't get up to par to the previous ones but has still had a lot more games played on it than Feudal Epic. What makes anyone think Feudal 3 would do better than Feudal Epic if it doesn't change a lot of things?
AOR 1 142.000
AOR 2 126.000
AOR 3 47.000
Feudal War 349.000
Feudal Epic 31.000
Feudal 3 ????

AOR has changed it's outlook and stayed interesting
Feudal War was more of a one hit wonder and I don't think Feudal 3 is going to have many games played on it unless it gets rid of the Green!!! There are two green maps already no need of a third pretty much identical installation! Make it a sand theme and it can stay fresh!

You cannot compare the 2 sets of maps that way. Where as AOR 1 and 2 are different, they have the same layout to an extent with the same gameplay in mind. The 2 Feudals are very different maps.

Epic has
126 territs
8 castles

War has
66 territs
6 castles

Epic is double the size of war.

Which ever stats we produce, we can both argue over them to no end and as this is a map thread, more than happy to carry on elsewhere.

Feudal War is more successful because i also contributed to it's making

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
... just kidding.

Gillipig's numbers are correct:
AOR 1 142.000
AOR 2 126.000

but this is not the whole truth. AoR2 was released later and it's logical to have fewer games. of the whole series AoR2 is in fact the most successful and it's only a matter of time before it will also become the leader of this trilogy when it comes to total number of games.

now, i attribute this success not only to the total change in graphics but mostly to the different gameplay. it kept a few of the old aspects but brought to the table a whole new array of gameplay changes that simply fit very well together.
AoR3 followed the same recipe. a complete change of graphics plus adding a lot of gameplay changes. unfortunatelly it didn't go just as well as AoR2 but it's still doing fine.
the current trend is AoR2>AoR3>AoR1
so at this very moment more people are playing parts 2 and 3 than those that are playing part 1.
given enough time and if the trend continues both AoR 2 and 3 will amass more total games than AoR1 proving that they are both better. however AoR3 despite being better than 1 is still not better than 2. i suspect it's probably because i went overboard with the gameplay changes trying to make each and every kingdom different. it meant people had to develop different strategies for different games and not many like that.

now back to feudal.
aside from the fact that it's too green and looks like a golf course
feudal epic didn't bring a graphical change. heck, it even features the same castle images i gave gimil for the first feudal. it simply took the original graphics and made them better. which is not a bad thing at all. it keeps things familiar and nice. but in my opinion it didn't change the gameplay enough. it's almost the same gameplay, upped for 8 players and with a different territory arrangement. the already established fans of feudal war probably tried feudal epic and decided it's the same deal but they abandoned it because they were already familiar with the layout from feudal war and didn't want to be bothered with learning a new layout only to experience roughly the same gameplay.

so in my opinion feudal needs to bring a new gameplay to attract people. simply making the same map with better graphics will not help. however it must not go overboard and include every single xml feature. a nice fresh gameplay and the map will be perfect even if it also looks too green ( )

I agree with dim. All Epic did was update War to 8 players, with no gameplay changes whatsoever. To make a succesful new Feudal map, it should have new gameplay.

But, also something to tie it back to the old - it shouldn't be too different either. Otherwise, there's no point calling it Feudal...

So take the core elements of feudal - the castles, IMO - and build a new gameplay around them.

natty_dread wrote:I agree with dim. All Epic did was update War to 8 players, with no gameplay changes whatsoever. To make a succesful new Feudal map, it should have new gameplay.

But, also something to tie it back to the old - it shouldn't be too different either. Otherwise, there's no point calling it Feudal...

So take the core elements of feudal - the castles, IMO - and build a new gameplay around them.

I assume you want the new map to be green like the previous ones!? Sure a new gameplay is a must but I don't think it's possible to make a new fresh interesting Feudal map without a change of colors! The green has got to go because from a far you won't be able to tell the difference between the new one and the previous ones if it too has Feudal in the title and is bloody green allover !

natty_dread wrote:So take the core elements of feudal - the castles, IMO - and build a new gameplay around them.

Feudal castle assault

Just checking, any updates?
Appreciate what you have done, are doing and will do.

how about starting in villages, and then taking over castles and cities and working up to the capital, which is the several-territory wide victory condition... or something like that

-Forest/mountain areas that are passable but lose one per turn.

-A center area that when conquered can torch the towns.

- More space in between starting castles

- Forts that can attack nearby and bombard

- Rivers with resetting territories and connecting ports

- Those log rammers (don't know the name) in front of castles to conquer them. Reset to 5 or 10 after conquered.

i think this idea is dead, gimil hasnt posted in ages about and hasnt been on CC in 6 days so i dont think he even has the time to work on this.

As Sniper said, this idea is pretty much dead now but a third Feudal does not need to be made by Gimil. It just cannot be called Feudal ? The ideas and style can easily be copied/modified and after 6 pages of posts in this thread, the ideas are all here.

just a quick thought on the gate back on page 1

why do something like when you take the gate you +2 on that region and it can only stay for defensive use i am not sure if this is possible

What about adding some kind of naval dimension and Islands. That way player could secure their kingdoms and expand into having Colonies or client Kingdoms.

Alternatively, you could throw in bandits or barbarians on the outskirts. They could have a special attack feature like forest penetration.

Then along the same lines you could try giving each kingdom a unique attribute: Kingdom X has the ability to build ships, the Kingdom X castle can one way attack any territory bordering a lake that also borders it's kingdom area. Kingdom Y has guard towers on of its border territories. They can see and bombard up to two territories away. Kingdom Z has roads which allow the castle to border all of its kingdom territories. Kingdom W is has the benefit of a strong winter which decreases troop numbers by 2 per turn if there is no castle or village on that territory to provide shelter. This would add some opportunity to throw in some cool graphics like snow for Kingdom W and docks for Kingdom X.

Victor Sullivan wrote:The thought of another Feudal map makes me tingle with joy!



-Sully

That is good because you have played Epic and wars a total of six times.

gimil wrote:-Instead of every playing starting with just a castle, they instead start with their whole kingdom region.

I have not read everything here so sorry if I am not following all posts. But I stopped by because I love feudal and just wanted to say I love this idea. But I would leave 1 or 2 neutrals. Feudal with no spoils always starts with everyone grabbing their territories. With spoils it starts with everyone grabbing their territories except 2 so they can bombard those for cards. I think you need to leave the bombardable neutral there so it doesn't affect card play. But I love the idea of everyone starting with them because it encourages more strategy and takes away risk. Some feudal war games are simply decided by how lucky of dice one player gets taking his neutrals compared to another player. If everyone starts with them, this luck is negated which in turn makes it more skill based.

Thinking briefly on gates. I like them in principal being one way. You can get out easily but others have a tough way to get in. But it'd be nice to code it somehow that teammates could come through if they choose. That would throw the strategy of the game a loop that is never seen before on any other maps. Makes it very easy to kill your teammate in a card game but it is still tough for your opponents.

Thinking quickly, you could do a gate that has 2 one way territories in it, the exit has a small neutral number on it but the entrance has a larger one on it that resets when held. Not sure how you would let teammates in though. That is something you coding guys that are smarter than I am would have to htink of.

I have played both feudals something like 2000 times and have still one of the highest scores on the map (i think, hell who knows)

I sent yeti a detailed message a year ago on things i would like to see and improvements to take a top 10 map even higher. Ill try to unearth that message and if its deleted, Ill redo it here from memory.

The trick is about feudals is to do a top 5 list of what makes it great and a top 5 that lack.


greatness
1) you can be a detective in fog because each start is slightly diff with settings and how a person does the troops. (not epic)
2) plays into different styles, mainly you can be conservative like me by bombarding the first 7 rounds, or you can go out early.
3) all starts are not equal. there are completely different strategys with each starting point (not epic)
4) Neutrals -- the neutrals are the great equalizer to luck... skill usually wins on the feudals
5) large BUT simple..... you do not have to hold different things you do not have to read hieroglyphics.



guys that in a nutshell is why feudal is a top 10 map.... epic is a little less and I slammed yeti in my message for that.

Be a genius and work off those top 5 points and make a feudal 3 and you too will have a top 10 map.


Ill try to find that email to yeti and post it later.

koontz1973 wrote:As Sniper said, this idea is pretty much dead now but a third Feudal does not need to be made by Gimil. It just cannot be called Feudal ? The ideas and style can easily be copied/modified and after 6 pages of posts in this thread, the ideas are all here.

I`m confused. If the maps and the names ultimately belong to CC then why cant someone use the name feudal in developing a map ?

Please make this a "12-Player" Map. It won't be much use now, but if maps start having support for 12-players, then if/when the site adopts it, stuff will be much better.