[Abandoned] - Castle Battle

[Marvaddin]

Click image to enlarge.

With demo-army numbers

Previous Version

What You Need To Know

1a.Starting Territories - 42
1b.Total Territories - 68
2. Continents -
3. Other Gameplay Features - Autodeployed bonuses, neutral starting territories, Bombard Routes

Changes in this Update

1. Updates to legend
2. Arrows on 1 way attack routes
3. Added Missing Name

To Do List

1. Finalise Legend graphics
2. Unify attack route colours
3. Finalise the territories names
4. Small map
5. Keep Graphics
6. Army circle for inner gate

Points to Discuss

1. Which colour is better for the attack routes, left or right?
2. What needs doing on the legend and title?
3. What needs doing to the territory names?
4. Anything else?

Old lines:

1. The number of territories currently on the map: 64

2. The number of continents: -

3. Descriptions of any unique features or areas.
The goal of this map is to rebuild in a more accurate form a real Siege. There will be no continents, but rally points where that represent troops gaining new positions in the battlefield. Also, there are no 'borders', but attack routes. The Siege weapons also try to emulate their effect in real battles. This is how it works:

- The legions, both attacking and defending, give a +1 bonus.
- The catpults receive an auto deploy, +3 until now, but can only bombard walls and archers towers. Cant conquer any territories, but can be conquered. (So it receives just one way routes.)
- Its almost the same about the burning oil barrels in the walls. each one receive a +2 bonus (auto deploy), and can bombard the territories under the barrel. Actually they have a normal attack to archers towers, but this is something we can think about.
- The archers towers receive a smaller bonus (+1 auto deploy) but have a better reach as you can see at the "extra bombard routes" legend. Some of those routes are still wrong, we will correct that soon. They connect to adjacent walls (with the oil barrels) and defenders rally points near them. Can just bombard the territories out of the castle.
- The battery ram only get auto deploy (+2) to bombard the gate, and this one could maybe receive something, too. Need think better about this one.
- The Siege Tower gives no bonus, but can connect to a point beyond the walls (not all points, just an especific point, possibly DR 10 (its not in the legend yet).
- The moat could give a negative bonus, but maybe its not necessary, once the oil have a bonus to bombard it. Any thoughts?
- The constructions on both sides of the castle, the Stables and the Smithy, they give a normal bonus +3.
- Inside the inner wall, there is the treasure room (we also could call it sanctuary, , temple, etc), something harder to achieve but with a better bonus. Im thinking about +5 or +7, according to how difficult we will do it.
- Except for the legions, other bonuses start neutral.

To clarify the mechanics:
- To invade the castle:
1) Use the men on water spaces to attack walls. But its not easy, the walls receive an auto deploy bonus of oil, and can bombard them, like the archers towers. The best way would be keep men at a safe distance and bombard with catapults before invade.
2) Use men to break the gate. This one can also be bombarded by battery ram.
3) Using the Siege Tower to go over the walls.
- To leave the castle:
1) For now the gate is the single way, but we can think about a "hidden" passage.

Again, the rally points and legions are starting territories, others being neutral in the start.

So, what to you think about it? Would it be possible? Do you have other ideas?

For now, I think that are main priorities: fix the legend, putting the right bombard routes, discuss the bonuses, and thinking about removing / adding rally points (Im up, for example, to remove some DR's, the castle looks a bit crowded), and about the hidden defenders tunnel.

Well, you are free to discuss the graphics, too... even why its not me doing them
(And I admit, I think Tel is doing a very nice job )

[t-o-m]

wow!
great stuff!!!


i think there should be more focus on the middle of the map, e.g more like seige in the way that there needs to be something to invade, rather than 2terits

[InkL0sed]

Those attack lines are really invasive...

[mibi]

I would prefer you renamed it, as it eliminates the possibility of my own Siege 2. Also, where did the graphics come from?

[t-o-m]

I would prefer you renamed it, as it eliminates the possibility of my own Siege 2.

totally agree, i think you should have at least asked mibi 1st.

maybe "Castle conquest"
something bombardment
[another map's name] - imperial attack

[Marvaddin]

[another map's name] - imperial attack

hmmmmm... Imperial Dragoons Attack!
I like it
But I doubt Telvannia would like... well, I think we can find another name...

About where the graphics came from... I have no idea... lets ask Tel.

[AndyDufresne]

I'm glad to have you back in the Foundry, Marv. Been some time, hasn't it? I'll watch for now, and then once you're further along I'll stop by and comment.

Stick around, why don't you?


-Andy

[Kaplowitz]

I....love....the....gfx....

ill comment more once i get over that.

[mibi]

Basically, what you are going to have a hard time with, is meshing the really nice rendered 3D graphics, with a game board requiring visual markers and information. Currently, the implementation of the information aspect ruins the entire map. This will be the first true 3D map, and it will be a difficult road. I wish you luck.

[TaCktiX]

I can't read any of the smaller territory names, nor the continent names on the walls. The graphics are beyond bling, but readability is somewhere between nonexistent and infinitesimally present.

[InkL0sed]

Maybe instead of those horrible dashed-lines, you could draw lines on the ground or through the air? You know... make it more a part of the map instead.

[WidowMakers]

Looks good. very detailed for a beginning idea

Several question/Suggestions:
1) Are the graphics original?
2) This is the large map. The small map will be very hard to read. And many of the numbers will completely block the figure or area under them.
3) Please show the map with real army number and not the stylized ones. It makes it easier to see if there will be any issues.
4) Maybe pick a better font. One that still says "medieivel" but is easier to read

totally agree, i think you should have at least asked mibi 1st.
maybe "Castle conquest"

I also agree that a new name is needed.
But..
I have an idea that I plan on going back to called Conquer Castle just to let you know

WM

P.S.

This will be the first true 3D map, and it will be a difficult road. I wish you luck.

Actually mibi, Circus Maximus was done in Maya and is 3D. it just has a very interesting perspective. So it really depends on your definition of TRUE 3D.

[hulmey]

f*ck me, im disappointed now, i thought mibi was making another siege

[seamusk]

VERY NICE!

I gotta read closer but at first glance this looks great. Will give a closer read in a couple of days as I need to work too much in the next 24 hours to do much more than that.

[snapdoodle]

I'm agreeing w/ the previous mentions but I'll reiterate.

Graphics show a tremendous amount of hard work. And it's obvious the person doing them has a knack for it.

Font is bordering on illegible and this is the big map.

Attack lines are invasive...

Name should be changed. I really don't think any one should ever make a second version of something unless they made the first one.

Here's where I'll throw in something new...

The way the attack routes are set down don't make sense w/ the graphical presentation. Why couldn't some guy run from DR 6 to DR 10. Visually there is empty space separating the two so it implies you should be able to move from DR 6 to DR 10. Or from the stable to DR 3. Or how are the guys from the bottom of the moat attacking upward? This may not be a concern for you but it really stunts this maps ability to make a player feel like they are really there.

Part of the reason Seige is one of my favorite maps is its ability to give that sense of place while you are playing. Same goes for Waterloo.

I think the problem, in part, is that you are selling this as a more accurate form of a real siege. While that's admirable I think you only achieve that with the movement implied by the trail from the battering ram and the siege tower. Everything else is too static and devoid of life to make anyone feel that this is more accurate. You probably wouldn't have this problem if you just gave up on the accuracy aspect because that's probably where the biggest burden will be for this map.

I wish you good luck.

[hulmey]

I'm agreeing w/ the previous mentions but I'll reiterate.

Graphics show a tremendous amount of hard work. And it's obvious the person doing them has a knack for it.

Font is bordering on illegible and this is the big map.

Attack lines are invasive...

Name should be changed. I really don't think any one should ever make a second version of something unless they made the first one.

Here's where I'll throw in something new...

The way the attack routes are set down don't make sense w/ the graphical presentation. Why couldn't some guy run from DR 6 to DR 10. Visually there is empty space separating the two so it implies you should be able to move from DR 6 to DR 10. Or from the stable to DR 3. Or how are the guys from the bottom of the moat attacking upward? This may not be a concern for you but it really stunts this maps ability to make a player feel like they are really there.

Part of the reason Seige is one of my favorite maps is its ability to give that sense of place while you are playing. Same goes for Waterloo.

I think the problem, in part, is that you are selling this as a more accurate form of a real siege. While that's admirable I think you only achieve that with the movement implied by the trail from the battering ram and the siege tower. Everything else is too static and devoid of life to make anyone feel that this is more accurate. You probably wouldn't have this problem if you just gave up on the accuracy aspect because that's probably where the biggest burden will be for this map.

I wish you good luck.

LOL im quite sure the graphics are from DE-LUX site

[t-o-m]

there is loads of controversy over the name, it would be a lot easier if you did change it, and not to castle conquest as i suggested.

[RjBeals]

LOL im quite sure the graphics are from DE-LUX site

I thought so as well at first glance. They've got some nice maps over there, but I couldn't find this one particularly. Maybe Telv got his inspiration from that site, and created his own? Here is a seige map from Lux in the same 3D style:

Click image to enlarge.

[hulmey]

LOL im quite sure the graphics are from DE-LUX site

I thought so as well at first glance. They've got some nice maps over there, but I couldn't find this one particularly. Maybe Telv got his inspiration from that site, and created his own? Here is a seige map from Lux in the same 3D style:

Click image to enlarge.

hmmm thats the one i saw so maybe its not it!!!!

[Telvannia]

Thanks everyone for the kind words about the graphics, Just thought i would answer a few of the graphical questions, though i will leave any gameplay discussion to Marvaddin

LOL im quite sure the graphics are from DE-LUX site

I thought so as well at first glance. They've got some nice maps over there, but I couldn't find this one particularly. Maybe Telv got his inspiration from that site, and created his own? Here is a seige map from Lux in the same 3D style:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v450/rjbeals/SiegeLux.jpg

1) Are the graphics original?

Yes, everything you see on the map was modeled by me with a 3D editor called blender. And no i have never seen the lux map before. Although all my inspiration came from: Marvaddin sketch map, pictures of siege weapons on the internet, and my own imagination; it does bear a slight resemblance to the lux map.

2) This is the large map. The small map will be very hard to read. And many of the numbers will completely block the figure or area under them.

This is true, but i suppose i will have to cross that bridge when i come to it, it will probably end up like supermax, with a small map that does not look anywhere near as nice as the large.

3) Please show the map with real army number and not the stylized ones. It makes it easier to see if there will be any issues.

The numbers are meant to be the territory titles, for example, a red flag with a 4 on it, is Attacker Rally 4, i hoped that that would be clear.

4) Maybe pick a better font. One that still says "medieivel" but is easier to read

Yeah i always have a problem with my fonts, i always wont them to be fitting to the map, so they tend to be hard to read

totally agree, i think you should have at least asked mibi 1st.
maybe "Castle conquest"

I also agree that a new name is needed.
But..
I have an idea that I plan on going back to called Conquer Castle just to let you know

I'm pretty sure Siege 2 was not planning to be the final name, just like MrBenn's map started off as Europe 2. I think that was just a stand in while a good name could be thought up.

Basically, what you are going to have a hard time with, is meshing the really nice rendered 3D graphics, with a game board requiring visual markers and information. Currently, the implementation of the information aspect ruins the entire map. This will be the first true 3D map, and it will be a difficult road. I wish you luck.

I think i knew this was going to be a problem from the start, i will have to work on making things seem to fit together, the hardest part i always find is the legend, but i think in this case the attack lines might be worse.

[another map's name] - imperial attack

hmmmmm... Imperial Dragoons Attack!
I like it
But I doubt Telvannia would like... well, I think we can find another name...

Maybe if we called it The Imperial Dragoons Attack on Castle CWC!


Does anyone have any ideas about the attack lines, i think the bombard lines will stay the same... But the attack lines can change.

[AndyDufresne]

This is true, but i suppose i will have to cross that bridge when i come to it, it will probably end up like supermax, with a small map that does not look anywhere near as nice as the large.

The small map still better look pretty nice.


--Andy

[Marvaddin]

I'm glad to have you back in the Foundry, Marv. Been some time, hasn't it? I'll watch for now, and then once you're further along I'll stop by and comment.

Stick around, why don't you?

And Im very honoured by having a good friend like you here in the foundry... Maybe we should play some games again, huh? Good old times...
Im trying to be more present, but have some bad tests coming, so...

The way the attack routes are set down don't make sense w/ the graphical presentation. Why couldn't some guy run from DR 6 to DR 10. Visually there is empty space separating the two so it implies you should be able to move from DR 6 to DR 10. Or from the stable to DR 3. Or how are the guys from the bottom of the moat attacking upward? This may not be a concern for you but it really stunts this maps ability to make a player feel like they are really there.

Well, I can agree that in some cases the routes doesnt fit that well, like in the DR6 to DR10 example... I think the defenders area is a bit confused and I will soon start planning it better, although some sugestions could be interesting too. DR3 shouldnt be able to attack the stable, in my opinion, because of the guys holding the DR2. Remember, each rally point represents a position, that is holdable by enemy soldiers. This is a game and no map is really accurate to real battles. I could start to ask "why US dont have the skill to nuke Japan in classic map?" or something alike. Although the troops movements in a battle can be chaotic, in a game there are rules, and we wont allow thaaaaat freedom of movement, got it?

Guys attacking the walls from the moat??? They are using ladders, lol. Maybe we can draw some to make the idea more plausible.

Part of the reason Seige is one of my favorite maps is its ability to give that sense of place while you are playing. Same goes for Waterloo.

I dont have any problem about this map. I really have a sensation / appeal problem about a Crossword map, but not about this one. But, well, I was not thinking it could be great for everyone. This is just my opinion.

I think the problem, in part, is that you are selling this as a more accurate form of a real siege. While that's admirable I think you only achieve that with the movement implied by the trail from the battering ram and the siege tower. Everything else is too static and devoid of life to make anyone feel that this is more accurate. You probably wouldn't have this problem if you just gave up on the accuracy aspect because that's probably where the biggest burden will be for this map.

Its not intended to be a static map. I think you will agree about that when your archer tower becomes ashes due to a an unexpected catapult bombardment. Of course, the walls are designed to act like bottlenecks, but I still think the mobility wouldnt be bad... Hmmm, maybe we can make the gate easier to take, giving a stronger bonus to the ram? Because I think that if we forget the siege weapons, etc, there is no map to work about. If you can clarify your idea, maybe.

Well, about the name I have changed it to Castle Battle, but Im still looking for a better name, if someone can suggest it. Other options would be like Castle Raid, Castle Assault, or something alike with other words (Keep Assault, etc). In fact, this castle remembers me that one on Lord of the Rings (movie 2). Whats its name?

Well, about the readability, lets wait until Tel works a bit on it, and I will try some new rally points ideas and routes soon...

For now, a idea Im having... Dunno if its possible. I think there should be more people in the map... the legions could be a group, not a single person, and there should be some others, like being possible to see some archers, some soldiers, and even some orcs, lol I think it would increase the battle feeling. What do you say?

[AndyDufresne]

For a name...how about "Castle Incursion" or maybe just "Onslaught" (That's kind of a hip name, and plays off mibi "Siege" idea also) ...as this attack looks like a pretty vigorous assault.


--Andy

[t-o-m]

castle onslaught
hehe
i like andy's ideas

[Natewolfman]

First off let me say your map looks awesome! cant wait for you to finish it

For a name...how about "Castle Incursion" or maybe just "Onslaught" (That's kind of a hip name, and plays off mibi "Siege" idea also) ...as this attack looks like a pretty vigorous assault.


--Andy

as for the name, this is a really small thing but... i would really like it to be near on the map to Seige! kinda like its really nice how AoR games and AoM are right togeather, similar maps stay togeather... like i said name is probably the last thin on your mind, but it would just be cool if they were close