Conquer Club

I added a glow to the text and tried to clean the text up and make it readable at both sizes. Not easy to do at 72dpi (web resolution)

=D=

Large
http://imageshack.us/a/img19/388/kk018lg.png


Small
http://imageshack.us/a/img405/5838/kk018sm.png

Anyone else have any comments? I am thinking I can make that legend look even better... if the graphics seem like they are going in the right direction I'll spend some time doing the pixel perfect nudging as well.

=D=

You do have a little bit of room, I wouldn't mind you trying going a tick or 2 higher on the small map font size for the legend.

RedBaron0 wrote:You do have a little bit of room, I wouldn't mind you trying going a tick or 2 higher on the small map font size for the legend.

AGreed ... the fonts in the legend on both large and small could use some work. I will look at that asap.

=D=

Here is an attempt at making things more readable.

=D=

LARGE
http://imageshack.us/a/img585/1540/kk019lg.png


SMALL
http://imageshack.us/a/img838/5131/kk019sm.png

omg dude, your maps are amazing.
where do you get all this inspiration

dolomite, still having trouble reading the small font, small map. The size with the yellow glow is the smallest readable text. Everything else is completely unreadable.

koontz1973 wrote:dolomite, still having trouble reading the small font, small map. The size with the yellow glow is the smallest readable text. Everything else is completely unreadable.

Wow its all completely readable to me.

I will see what can be done.

How about we look into allowing a larger "small" map so I can make the text more readable.

=D=

dolomite13 wrote:

koontz1973 wrote:dolomite, still having trouble reading the small font, small map. The size with the yellow glow is the smallest readable text. Everything else is completely unreadable.

Wow its all completely readable to me.

I will see what can be done.

How about we look into allowing a larger "small" map so I can make the text readable.

=D=

yellow text at the top: People can see that they only start with 1 kingdom and 1 corresponding territory as soon as they start the game. So why mention it in text? Isn't that just stating the obvious?
The only part that isn't redundant is that it's mentioning it's your unique feature. So why not just say "your feature on the righ is unique to you". Wouldn't that be shorter?

explanation kingdoms: you can reduce the size of the explanation by saying "kingdom symbol *display example figure of a symbol*: attacks corresponding territory"
and also say "right: letter favoured territory"
That's all you need. Saying "kingdom forces are displayed on the left" is again just stating the obvious.

explanation auto, killer, reset: These explanations seem redundant too. People already know what you mean when you say "auto" or "reset". I also suggest you replace "killer" with "decay", so it needs no explanation and people will still know what you mean.

reduce the size of these things and I think you'll have enough space to enlarge the font size of the rest.

waauw wrote:explanation kingdoms: you can reduce the size of the explanation by saying "kingdom symbol *display example figure of a symbol*: attacks corresponding territory"
and also say "right: letter favoured territory"
That's all you need. Saying "kingdom forces are displayed on the left" is again just stating the obvious.

explanation auto, killer, reset: These explanations seem redundant too. People already know what you mean when you say "auto" or "reset". I also suggest you replace "killer" with "decay", so it needs no explanation and people will still know what you mean.

reduce the size of these things and I think you'll have enough space to enlarge the font size of the rest.

Thanks a bunch...

I have been working on moving things around and was able to cut down the kingdom explanation part to mostly graphics and I was able to increase all of the fonts...

Need to go do house work and take care of a sick wife but should have a update shortly.

=D=

OK I think I'm going in the right direction now...

I will work on it more this evening...

=D=

SMALL
http://img819.imageshack.us/img819/2305/kk020sm.png


LARGE
http://img822.imageshack.us/img822/9895/kk020lg.png

looks so much better now

I am not happy with how WIZARDS works currently...

I would like to change it to Resets 5 instead of Decay 1 ... but I need a clarification on Conditional Borders as a mechanic. Does the conditional border open immediately when the condition is met? if so it should be easy to make the change that way [favored] <==adjacent==> [favored] would be slowed down just a bit and we could change [maelstrom]+[favored]=+1 to [favored]=+1

This also gets rid of the "Decay" mechanic from the map... which BTW I am not a fan of ... I really want a decay to 0 instead of 1 to be implemented.

Thoughts?

=D=

Latest maps ...

SMALL
http://imageshack.us/a/img521/7830/kk021sm.png



LARGE
http://imageshack.us/a/img837/7380/kk021lg.png




=====================================================================

In case the idea for changing WIZARDS is approved...

SMALL
http://imageshack.us/a/img803/8560/kk022sm.png



LARGE
http://imageshack.us/a/img526/8639/kk022lg.png

The first sets of maps when dealing with the wizards.

koontz1973 wrote:The first sets of maps when dealing with the wizards.

I missed

[favored] ==assaults==> [maelstrom]

=D=

Latest (0.2.3)

Small
http://imageshack.us/a/img189/5594/kk023sm.png


Large
http://imageshack.us/a/img801/3330/kk023lg.png

waauw wrote:omg dude, your maps are amazing.
where do you get all this inspiration

Monsters was born from 30+ years of playing Dungeons & Dragons.

The Conquer 500 comes from having played boardgames like Formula D and video games like Super Sprint.

Homeworlds comes from my collection of space conquest board games as well as my love for video games games like Reach For The Stars.

As for Krazy Kingdoms ... well I have always loved the variability in both Cosmic Encounter and Small World board games. And wanted to see if I could push the envelope of conditional borders and came up with an Idea that fit their basic random configuration setup and brought it into the world of Conquer Club.

There are other games that I think could be reworked in the Conquer Club style but I will just hang onto those ideas for now

=D=

I am having issues with Nukes games on my Conquer 500 map and I think something similar could happen with this map. A random nuke could take out your special denying you access to that bonus. Likewise you could lose your race and the favored territory bonuses. Dropping you from 26 bonus to a max of 10.

Is there any way we could fix this with conditional borders... for instance if you lose your kingdom you can reclaim it from your any of your favored territory if you control all 4 of your favored territory... I do worry that someone who lost their kingdom could conquer 4 of someone else's favored territory and then take out that persons kingdom.

=D=

dolomite13 wrote:I am having issues with Nukes games on my Conquer 500 map and I think something similar could happen with this map. A random nuke could take out your special denying you access to that bonus. Likewise you could lose your race and the favored territory bonuses. Dropping you from 26 bonus to a max of 10.

Is there any way we could fix this with conditional borders... for instance if you lose your kingdom you can reclaim it from your any of your favored territory if you control all 4 of your favored territory... I do worry that someone who lost their kingdom could conquer 4 of someone else's favored territory and then take out that persons kingdom.

=D=

I do not see this as an issue. Since nukes came out, it has changed dramatically some maps. Look at maps with losing conditions like Antarctica. Das Schlob, you can lose your parachute and all those lovely auto deploys. Players know this when playing nukes and accept it.

ok if your cool with it ...

Whats the verdict on graphics... can I start lookin at XML

=D=

dolomite13 wrote:ok if your cool with it ...

Whats the verdict on graphics... can I start lookin at XML

=D=

I was making sure that you were finished working out the extra gameplay. Now that you seem to be done, I will look at this a little closer over the next couple of days.

isaiah40 wrote:

dolomite13 wrote:ok if your cool with it ...

Whats the verdict on graphics... can I start lookin at XML

=D=

I was making sure that you were finished working out the extra gameplay. Now that you seem to be done, I will look at this a little closer over the next couple of days.

Sounds good ... I think the extra gameplay seems worked out ... I only have 2 concerns about Nuke games...

1) fanatics and Wizards rely on you having a favored territory.
2) you can lose your race and not recover it hence also lose a favored territory.

I don't want to add another resource type for fanatics or wizards and still can't think of an elegant way to get your race back if it gets nuked. Players that lose a race or special ability will not be happy that's for sure.

I guess we could leave it as is and see how much rage it brings when it happens in beta.

=D=

dolomite13 wrote:1) fanatics and Wizards rely on you having a favored territory.
2) you can lose your race and not recover it hence also lose a favored territory.

And as I have said, nukes change a lot of games. These are not huge and you should not concern yourself with it. Having each of the races slightly different means you get different strategy for them.