Israel (V3.0)

[natty dread]

No need to apologize, but you shouldn't confuse new mapmakers - if you give advice about the foundry protocols you need to be sure it's correct.

As the map is currently, it would likely require some supersize. And the supersize guidelines aren't very strict anymore - maps have been given supersize for purely graphical reasons, it's always judged on a map-to-map basis.

Anyway, you do have a point, in that there are ways to make the map size more comfortable - overly long maps are annoying in that they require scrolling up & down... rotating the map slightly would get rid of this problem.

[BigBallinStalin]

Hey, pitrules,

I've got some gameplay suggestions:

1) If one holds all the Palestinian terries, they get an extra bonus.

It might make the gameplay more interesting for 2-4 player scenarios.


2) If not all Palestinian terries, how about giving an extra bonus for holding an incremental amount of cities? (+2 for 3 cities, or something like that)?


3) Perhaps, have the Sinai Desert be represented by a "Bedouin base," which connects to all terries bordering the Sinai Desert?

That might make the map less static, or bottle-necked.


4) This one might be crazier, too complicated, or not useful enough:

Have checkpoints in between each territory. If you control the checkpoint, you control access in between the two territories.

For example, player 1 holds Hebron, and the Hebron-Shemesh checkpoint. Player 2 holds Dimona and the Dimon-Hebron checkpoint. Player 1 can only attack Shemesh (via the checkpoint), but can't attack Dimona from Hebron--unless Player 1 controls the Dimon-Hebron checkpoint.

[natty dread]

For example, player 1 holds Hebron, and the Hebron-Shemesh checkpoint. Player 2 holds Dimona and the Dimon-Hebron checkpoint. Player 1 can only attack Shemesh (via the checkpoint), but can't attack Dimona from Hebron--unless Player 1 controls the Dimon-Hebron checkpoint.

If I read this right, you'd want the borders between territories to be dependent on holding a checkpoint. This would require conditional borders which are not possible as of yet.

Or if you mean that there's simply a checkpoint between each territory and the territories don't border directly but only via the checkpoints, then that's doable.

[crazymilkshake5]

First off, Ya'll do know that im doing the grafics for this map, right? and i like the checkpoint idea, ill run it by Pit

[BigBallinStalin]

For example, player 1 holds Hebron, and the Hebron-Shemesh checkpoint. Player 2 holds Dimona and the Dimon-Hebron checkpoint. Player 1 can only attack Shemesh (via the checkpoint), but can't attack Dimona from Hebron--unless Player 1 controls the Dimon-Hebron checkpoint.

If I read this right, you'd want the borders between territories to be dependent on holding a checkpoint. This would require conditional borders which are not possible as of yet.

Or if you mean that there's simply a checkpoint between each territory and the territories don't border directly but only via the checkpoints, then that's doable.

This.

But it means that a checkpoint counts as a terry. And each original territory (before this checkpoint idea) should be represented with a central "checkpoint HQ," so to speak.

[pitrules88]

I like the checkpoint idea, we'll see how it looks printed out. Crazymilkshake has taken over the design work as I think I ran into too many small issues along the way that would take a lot of time to correct - and as natty pointed it, it was too narrow and when I rotated it the whole thing it looked horrible. So basically I would have had to start from scratch with all the labelling. As I said, very time consuming, but I think crazymilkshake is on the right track.

[Dukasaur]

I like the checkpoint idea, we'll see how it looks printed out. Crazymilkshake has taken over the design work as I think I ran into too many small issues along the way that would take a lot of time to correct - and as natty pointed it, it was too narrow and when I rotated it the whole thing it looked horrible. So basically I would have had to start from scratch with all the labelling. As I said, very time consuming, but I think crazymilkshake is on the right track.

Not sure which solution you're going to end up using, but I would like to weigh in from a player's point of view: a map that requires scrolling is always annoying. Whatever you need to do to get it to fit on one screen, do it!

[BigBallinStalin]

I like the checkpoint idea, we'll see how it looks printed out. Crazymilkshake has taken over the design work as I think I ran into too many small issues along the way that would take a lot of time to correct - and as natty pointed it, it was too narrow and when I rotated it the whole thing it looked horrible. So basically I would have had to start from scratch with all the labelling. As I said, very time consuming, but I think crazymilkshake is on the right track.

Not sure which solution you're going to end up using, but I would like to weigh in from a player's point of view: a map that requires scrolling is always annoying. Whatever you need to do to get it to fit on one screen, do it!

or buy a bigger screen

[BigBallinStalin]

So, any update on the Israel project?

[crazymilkshake5]

Not yet mate, I'm in the process of moving currently, so i dont have much time to do anything. sorry.

[Industrial Helix]

This map would really benefit from some texture!

[natty dread]

Why was this stickied?

[pitrules88]

because it's an awesome map idea

[crazymilkshake5]

I sent pit the next version... just waiting for him to post it...

[pitrules88]

I have posted on the first page.