Age of Realms: Magic [Quenched]

[lord voldemort]

oh thats annoying...it caught me off...luckiley im in pretty commanding lead..
thanks dim.
great map!

[DiM]

oh thats annoying...it caught me off...luckiley im in pretty commanding lead..
thanks dim.
great map!

no problem. next time read the legend

[The1exile]

so eon connects only to ikalu and vesk.

And thus, Mua + resource + Ghyr + resource + dock triangle = killer bonuses.

[wicked]

I'm putting this here since it's the most recent one, but it applies to the first one too. I see the Objective now (had to get Yeti to explain objectives...lol) is to "Unite the Realms" on these maps, as an alternate way of winning. I don't believe this makes it clear enough that uniting the realms = win the game. I know space it tight on the maps, but is there anyway to add that unite the realms= win the game instruction to these maps? It's not clear to those of us who don't live here in the foundry, which is 95% of the site. Thanks for considering.

[yeti_c]

I'm putting this here since it's the most recent one, but it applies to the first one too. I see the Objective now (had to get Yeti to explain objectives...lol) is to "Unite the Realms" on these maps, as an alternate way of winning. I don't believe this makes it clear enough that uniting the realms = win the game. I know space it tight on the maps, but is there anyway to add that unite the realms= win the game instruction to these maps? It's not clear to those of us who don't live here in the foundry, which is 95% of the site. Thanks for considering.

I think this is a failing of the site rather than the Map really...

The site should have better instructions regarding the Objectives.

C.

[wicked]

I agree somewhat, but think it's a failing of both. I can assure you that the vast majority of the people on this site do not read instructions, so while we should also put something in the instructions, it does need to be on the maps as well IMO.

[rebelman]

I agree somewhat, but think it's a failing of both. I can assure you that the vast majority of the people on this site do not read instructions, so while we should also put something in the instructions, it does need to be on the maps as well IMO.

i believe this is due to be included in the instructions (it was mentioned on another thread) as for making this clear on the map - it was even more vague on age of realms befor I and some others pushed DiM to go as far as he did. good luck convincing him to further expand.

[DiM]

first of all the site needs better explanations of all gimmicks used on maps.
writing long legends to explain what bombardments and one way attacks are is really nasty especially when space is so tight.

second i think it's up to the map maker to do the map as he likes. i want my objectives to be a bit vague and yet very clear to those that know where to look.

even now i'm not totally happy with the amount of info i had to put on the map. i wish it was more vague.

and btw if anybody is curious about the clues on the map he has 3 options:
1. figure the clues and do the objective to win the game
2. go to the forums and ask what are the clues about
3. do nothing

btw wiked. if you didn't enjoy that bit of clue i guess you'll hate the riddler. just do a search for it in the map ideas if you're curious

[wicked]

Explanations of gimmicks are exactly what's needed. And the most appropriate place is on the map. People will not go very far to search for an answer. But I do understand the lack of space on the map.

I know there's Map Info pages in the works, could it be something that is included there (if it's not already)? I think that would be sufficient.

Edit: OK I see it there on the map info pages. Looks good.

I will check out that riddler. thanks.

[Coleman]

I agree somewhat, but think it's a failing of both. I can assure you that the vast majority of the people on this site do not read instructions, so while we should also put something in the instructions, it does need to be on the maps as well IMO.

We have something in the works that we hope lack is willing to implement that will place the more complex maps in their own section (complete with a tooltip players are forced to at least glimpse if they attempt to join such a map) explaining that the map is way beyond average risk and may require some extra study on their part to fully understand.

This combined with the info pages when we are ready with them should be more then enough to handle a lot of these problems.

Of course we probably need to wait until the UI hire is ready.

Anyways like they say, you can only lead a horse to water, you can't make them drink but we're sure going to try...

PS... I didn't know we had a draft of the riddler.

[DiM]

Explanations of gimmicks are exactly what's needed. And the most appropriate place is on the map. People will not go very far to search for an answer. But I do understand the lack of space on the map.

I know there's Map Info pages in the works, could it be something that is included there (if it's not already)? I think that would be sufficient.

to include all the explanations on the map it would mean some maps would simply double in size because of all the text.


look at magic. it has the decay feature. i called it frostbyte and pointed on the map that the frostbyte terits lose 1 army per turn.
but there's much more than that. it has to be said that neutrals aren't affected by frostbyte, it has to be said it applies when you press bgin turn, if also has to be said that it continues to kill 1 troop each turn until you have just 1 left. it doesn't turn to neutral.

but all this info is impossible to put on any map.

imagine having 1 way, decay, bombardments, starting neutrals, autodeploy, and a few other tweaks plus a weird non classic bonus system (ie merchants map).
that map would simply be impossible to make because of the pages over pages of explanations.

the best solution is to somehow mark terits as having bombardments or say in the legend X bombards Y and that's all. people will go to the instructions or go to the map info page and read everything they need.

[wicked]

Ahh yes, maps that need a manual, and have instructions bigger than maps. I always stay away from those. All the instructions is a good thing though, as it lets me know not to bother at first glance.

BTW, I see your point and am thinking the map info pages is the way to go for all that info.

[mibi]

has anyone won by objective? And not when you already dominated the map.

[Lone.prophet]

i won some times by objective while i wasnt winning in armies

[DiM]

has anyone won by objective? And not when you already dominated the map.

it's been done many times but from what i've seen only on fog. it's pretty hard to do it when there's no fog but it is possible in the right conditions.

for example it's chained fortifications and people have their armies split and you have a big army. go for sanctuary and they won't be able to stop you cause you have a bigger army there (despite having an overall lower army count and lower bonus)

[mibi]

has anyone won by objective? And not when you already dominated the map.

it's been done many times but from what i've seen only on fog. it's pretty hard to do it when there's no fog but it is possible in the right conditions.

for example it's chained fortifications and people have their armies split and you have a big army. go for sanctuary and they won't be able to stop you cause you have a bigger army there (despite having an overall lower army count and lower bonus)

yeah I like that idea...although the -10 really scares people off tho

[DiM]

has anyone won by objective? And not when you already dominated the map.

it's been done many times but from what i've seen only on fog. it's pretty hard to do it when there's no fog but it is possible in the right conditions.

for example it's chained fortifications and people have their armies split and you have a big army. go for sanctuary and they won't be able to stop you cause you have a bigger army there (despite having an overall lower army count and lower bonus)

yeah I like that idea...although the -10 really scares people off tho

the -10 only kicks in when you begin your turn. so let's say you leave 10 troops in url, they will be a very effective defence until you begin your turn. then those 10 will die but it won't really matter if you already hold the sanctuary.

[wcaclimbing]

when will the 3rd in the trilogy be released to the map foundry?

[DiM]

when will the 3rd in the trilogy be released to the map foundry?

when i get the graphic skills needed for what i have in mind and when some xml issues are solved.

[jwithington]

this map is the best thing in conquer club since dice.

esp with fog or war! thanks for a great great addition that made the game new again.

[DiM]

this map is the best thing in conquer club since dice.

esp with fog or war! thanks for a great great addition that made the game new again.

you're welcome mate.

[Qwert]

why Sancuary have 75 neutral army?

[Sir. Ricco]

Cuase if you take it and hold it for 1 round you win the game.

[Qwert]

its a litle bad idea?

[The1exile]

Why do you think so? I don't. Might consider reducing it to about 50 to allow it to be taken earlier, but that might make it too easy for many player games.