All Your Base Are Belong To Us

[DiM]

I gave you some suggestions for a title a few pages ago... if none of those work for you, I still think you can come up with something better than an old internet meme.

yes i know. so far only you and now greenoaks complained about the title while others actually said it should stay and the majority did not say anything which i take as a silent ok.

anyway this is moot at this point as the map regardless of its name is vacationed

[koontz1973]

i told you why i don't like it - it feels like fingernails across a chalkboard. i am a native english speaker and your title jars my core, how much clearer can i be.

the title repulses me. how can i enjoy a map when i can't bear to hear it's name.

i didn't enter this thread before now because i thought that this was a joke but this thread has gone on far too long.

From another native English speaker, this maps title suits it. With the aliens involved, how did they learn to speak perfect English considering it is only the 3rd or 4th most spoken language around.
I hope it was not from the internet because if they did, they better not come into this thread or the title would really be buggered.

[The Bison King]

1. the map looks better than some quenched maps so it clearly meets the crude draft standard required for a draft stamp
2. the map has had plenty of updates. much more than the 2 required from new map makers
3. the map has more interest than some maps that already are in the main foundry.

Wow you are so humble... Trust me having an attitude like this is not going to help you at all.

so you actually have the guts to dispute my 3 points? interesting.

1. so you really think that graphically speaking this map isn't sufficient to be considered at least a crude draft? would you be so kind and explain to me what exactly should a crude draft look like?
2. are you disputing the fact that i had plenty of updates? learn to count and read the rules. old map makers need just a draft while new map makers need to produce 2 updates. i have 7. i call that more than enough.
3. and yes the map has more interest than some in the main foundry. the map has more people posting here and more replies in the last week than some of the maps in the main foundry had in the last 6 months. i call that more interest.

and wow you are so patient... I understand that the process is slow, but if you want to get a map through you have to have some persistence. It's on you to see the idea through. If you want to give up now go ahead, but it would be a shame. The map does look good, and in time I know it would be forged. However, if you'd rather throw away your efforts because you didn't receive the instant gratification you crave, knock yourself out.

the process is slow? no sh*t, it's frickin lethargic, it's in deep coma awaiting to be disconnected from the machines.
there are maps that have been in production for over an year. some even more. if a map gets quenched in 6 months i call that slow. but if a maps stays in production for over an year then clearly something is very wrong.

do YOU understand that the process is slow? do YOU intend to do something to make it faster? or are YOU just going to sit around and wait and wait and wait some more and maybe make a post or 2 every other week?

Conquer Club Divine Meteorological Condition map was sticky in the gameplay forum when it had ~5 pages and a very crude image.
Hawaii map is 8 months old, has just 4 updates and doesn;t look very good at all. not to mention it has just 7 pages of comments in all this time. and yet that's considered main foundry material, but my map doesn't even look like a draft, right?
and there are plenty more examples.
and you have the nerve to tell me this map doesn't look like a draft and doesn't have interest from the community. wow.
but why am i surprised? you're just the kind of slacker that produces an updated once a month and barely posts. you'll fit right in with the pace of the foundry.

DUDE, CHILL OUT

I'll ignore the personal attacks and suggest that you take three steps back hold your breath and count to 10. Maybe use that time to analyze the situation and recognize how much of an over reaction this is. All I suggested was that you find a more legible font, and make the legend more clear. I've never seen someone flip out so much over a sticky. Most people are happy to be stickied. Also I would kindly suggest that you please treat the people who post in your thread with a little kindness and respect. You are doing yourself no favors by insulting the very people who can help advance your map along.

If you change your mind and decide that you want your map to progress, just be patient and respond to the criticism in a professional manner.

If you'd rather continue with your tantrum and throw it in the bin be my guest I'm sure a mod will assist you shortly.

[DiM]

I've never seen someone flip out so much over a sticky. Most people are happy to be stickied.

why would i be happy to be stickied in the drafting room when the map clearly belongs in the main foundry? please help me understand.

Also I would kindly suggest that you please treat the people who post in your thread with a little kindness and respect. You are doing yourself no favors by insulting the very people who can help advance your map along.

i assume you're referring to the way i responded to greenoaks. if you think that posts like his are feedback that makes this map move forward then you and i have totally opposite opinions on this matter. his post wasn't even remotely constructive. in fact it was just a destructive and mean one. obviously i could not respond in a kind manner.

to each and every other post that has been considered constructive i responded fast and with proper respect. in fact i am one of the few map makers that responds to every person and implements almost all requests. so don't talk to me about respecting the feedback givers.
the most respect you could show somebody is to thank him for his suggestion and immediately present an update which is something you never do on your maps. so don't talk to me about respect.

[The Bison King]

i assume you're referring to the way i responded to greenoaks. if you think that posts like his are feedback that makes this map move forward then you and i have totally opposite opinions on this matter. his post wasn't even remotely constructive. in fact it was just a destructive and mean one. obviously i could not respond in a kind manner.

Yes, you could have. It doesn't matter if it was constructive or not JUST BE NICE.

[DiM]

i assume you're referring to the way i responded to greenoaks. if you think that posts like his are feedback that makes this map move forward then you and i have totally opposite opinions on this matter. his post wasn't even remotely constructive. in fact it was just a destructive and mean one. obviously i could not respond in a kind manner.

Yes, you could have. It doesn't matter if it was constructive or not JUST BE NICE.

so i take it you would be nice to somebody that comes in your thread and makes a destructive and mean post?
let's say somebody comes in your map and says:

point 1. this map is a piece of garbage that makes my eyes bleed and nauseates me every time i look at it
point 2. there's no point 2 because there's no way i'm would be interested in a map that's so bloody ugly.
and i didn't come to tell you this before now because i thought that this was a joke but this thread has gone on far too long

what would your response be to that? how would you feel about that post? would it make you all warm and fuzzy inside?

[The Bison King]

I'm done with this. All you are doing is effectively spamming your own thread.

Good day sir.

[isaiah40]

First of all, I agree with what The Bison King said about the font being a chore to read, Especially on the Human side. Maybe bold the font, increase the size, change the color, IDK. If you increase the font size and need a little extra room from what you have requested, then I'd rather do it all now then wait until later and you requesting another size increase. So please I know you'll do this and then I can give a quick look at your supersize application and we can get it done.

[DiM]

First of all, I agree with what The Bison King said about the font being a chore to read, Especially on the Human side. Maybe bold the font, increase the size, change the color, IDK. If you increase the font size and need a little extra room from what you have requested, then I'd rather do it all now then wait until later and you requesting another size increase. So please I know you'll do this and then I can give a quick look at your supersize application and we can get it done.

i appreciate the comments but please move the map to the recycling bin.
thanks.

oh and if have the forum rights to move threads in the whole foundry please drop by the steamworks thread and move that one too.

[isaiah40]

[MOVED]

Per mapmakers request, this has been moved into the Melting Pot.

[yeti_c]

Shame to see a good map idea be dragged down and wasted by idiots and indifference.

C.

[Victor Sullivan]

Shame to see a good map idea be dragged down and wasted by idiots and indifference.

C.

I agree! In an attempt to get things moving again...

I think perhaps the functionality of the techs bonus-wise could stand to be changed to make things a little more interesting. While I like the simplicity of the tech pair bonus, consider another option. The second line of Level 1 techs bombard the "non-important" territories (we should probably come up with a different term for those territories, btw), the second line of Level 2 techs bombard labs/silos, and the first line of Level 3 techs assault bases. Perhaps instead of having a tech pair bonus, have bonuses that are related to their bombardments. So have like a +1 per 3 non-important territories for the first line of Level 1 techs (we could consider removing the territory bonus altogether, and have this be the source of territory bonuses, though I may prefer setting it such that only non-tech territories are apart of the territory bonus and have this be in addition), +1 or +2 per DNA Lab for the first line of Human Level 2 techs, and +1 or +2 per Nuke Silo for the first line of Alien Level 2 techs. Level 3 techs I think are fine without a bonus. The techs could then probably have actual names related to the tech's functionality and focus, instead of just "Level 1", "Level 2", "Level 3". For example, Level 1 could be called "Land War", Level 2 "Foreign Research", and Level 3 "Apocalypse" or something.

Some other things: I think the autodeploy on the bases should be reduced to 2. 3 seems very high to me. With a +3 auto, I feel like the losing condition would rarely come into play. Also, I think there should be a killer neutral between the second line of Level 2 and the first line of Level 3 (one killer neutral territory per line of tech, so 4). It doesn't have to be very high (maybe just 2-4), it's mainly to make more of a divider between techs and make the objective and assaulting the bases more difficult to get to. Also, I think there's something that needs to be done about the legend(s). There is just stuff everywhere. There has to be a more effective way of communicating everything... I'll let you know if I think of something.

-Sully

[DiM]

i believe an update is required for this to be moved.

V8:
*improved legibility
*changed bits and parts of the legends
*added arrows on the map for the 1-way attacks of the bases.
*various other gfx details.

Click image to enlarge.

[DiM]

I think perhaps the functionality of the techs bonus-wise could stand to be changed to make things a little more interesting. While I like the simplicity of the tech pair bonus, consider another option. The second line of Level 1 techs bombard the "non-important" territories (we should probably come up with a different term for those territories, btw), the second line of Level 2 techs bombard labs/silos, and the first line of Level 3 techs assault bases. Perhaps instead of having a tech pair bonus, have bonuses that are related to their bombardments. So have like a +1 per 3 non-important territories for the first line of Level 1 techs (we could consider removing the territory bonus altogether, and have this be the source of territory bonuses, though I may prefer setting it such that only non-tech territories are apart of the territory bonus and have this be in addition), +1 or +2 per DNA Lab for the first line of Human Level 2 techs, and +1 or +2 per Nuke Silo for the first line of Alien Level 2 techs. Level 3 techs I think are fine without a bonus. The techs could then probably have actual names related to the tech's functionality and focus, instead of just "Level 1", "Level 2", "Level 3". For example, Level 1 could be called "Land War", Level 2 "Foreign Research", and Level 3 "Apocalypse" or something.

Some other things: I think the autodeploy on the bases should be reduced to 2. 3 seems very high to me. With a +3 auto, I feel like the losing condition would rarely come into play. Also, I think there should be a killer neutral between the second line of Level 2 and the first line of Level 3 (one killer neutral territory per line of tech, so 4). It doesn't have to be very high (maybe just 2-4), it's mainly to make more of a divider between techs and make the objective and assaulting the bases more difficult to get to.

i'd love to hear other people's thoughts on your gameplay suggestions.
tech names can be easily implemented. i'm wide open to suggestions like gene splicing, atomic bombardment and so on.

Also, I think there's something that needs to be done about the legend(s). There is just stuff everywhere. There has to be a more effective way of communicating everything... I'll let you know if I think of something.

-Sully

i actually like the current layout. most of the maps have monoblock legends. right here i'm trying something different and i want to keep it like so. of course text can be moved around but the overall idea with a center map surrounded by info panels stays.

[Victor Sullivan]

Are the one-way attacks from the bases necessary, do you suppose?

Also, do you suppose we could get this moved back to the Drafting Room for stampage?

And DiM, you should probably apply for Supersize, as doesn't the current size exceed the limit?

-Sully

[DiM]

Are the one-way attacks from the bases necessary, do you suppose?

it's the easiest way to force people into expanding on the research terits. if the bases can be attacked by other terits on the map then i fear some people will just avoid the tech trees and stick to the world map. this would happen especially in a 1v1 game where they'd just kill eachother and ignore the neutrals from the techs.

Also, do you suppose we could get this moved back to the Drafting Room for stampage?

well, not getting this stamped and moved was the reason i vacationed it. back then apparently the FAs were new and IH had some issues. IH unfortunately left but now we have gimil and the FAs have had over a month to get used to working in the foundry. so hopefully this time it will be a smoother process.

And DiM, you should probably apply for Supersize, as doesn't the current size exceed the limit?

-Sully

i already applied. in fact i was the first person to use the new application thread on the 13th of Aug: http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=3307131#p3307131

[isaiah40]

Okay, now that this has been moved back, I still see a potential problem with the font on the Human side especially on Level one. I suggest to adjust the kerning on that level. It is a combination of the light background and the light text, which i believe adjusting the kerning will help the readability.

And before I forget ...

[DiM]

Okay, now that this has been moved back, I still see a potential problem with the font on the Human side especially on Level one. I suggest to adjust the kerning on that level. It is a combination of the light background and the light text, which i believe adjusting the kerning will help the readability.

And before I forget ...

the text will most likely be changed to some real research name or something. when that happens i will make sure it fits just fine and it's perfectly visible. right now it's a bit pointless to adjust something that will surely be deleted.

and thanks for the badge

[MarshalNey]

The map's look/layout seems excellent to me, and the title is hilarious (even if it is sort of a internet inside joke).

As for the gameplay... I think the framework is sound, but frankly the text is a real eye-buster. I really like how good the font is thematically, but it needs to be legible first and foremost. I could hold the screen up to my face and try to puzzle out some of the blurrier areas, but I think I'll wait until the light-outlined-font-on-a-light-background issue is resolved.

-- Marshal Ney

PS At some point, it would help tremendously if the first post displayed a bonus breakdown and the number of dropped regions for the different numbers of players (2-3p games, 4p games, etc.).

[The Bison King]

Technically I should sticky this but since it's already spent time stickied, then binned, then came back with the requested changes:



Bamp!

[Victor Sullivan]

2 stamps in 4 posts - that's gotta be a record!

I would still like to hear feedback about my gameplay proposal from the last page: viewtopic.php?f=241&t=151174&view=unread#p3342235

-Sully

[Victor Sullivan]

Are the one-way attacks from the bases necessary, do you suppose?

it's the easiest way to force people into expanding on the research terits. if the bases can be attacked by other terits on the map then i fear some people will just avoid the tech trees and stick to the world map. this would happen especially in a 1v1 game where they'd just kill eachother and ignore the neutrals from the techs.

Ah, okay, that makes sense, thanks

-Sully

[DiM]

I think perhaps the functionality of the techs bonus-wise could stand to be changed to make things a little more interesting. While I like the simplicity of the tech pair bonus, consider another option. The second line of Level 1 techs bombard the "non-important" territories (we should probably come up with a different term for those territories, btw), the second line of Level 2 techs bombard labs/silos, and the first line of Level 3 techs assault bases. Perhaps instead of having a tech pair bonus, have bonuses that are related to their bombardments. So have like a +1 per 3 non-important territories for the first line of Level 1 techs (we could consider removing the territory bonus altogether, and have this be the source of territory bonuses, though I may prefer setting it such that only non-tech territories are apart of the territory bonus and have this be in addition), +1 or +2 per DNA Lab for the first line of Human Level 2 techs, and +1 or +2 per Nuke Silo for the first line of Alien Level 2 techs. Level 3 techs I think are fine without a bonus.

i see one big graphic problem with the suggestions you made for the gameplay. LEGEND SPACE
how on earth will i be able to explain all that and avoid having a wall of text to bore to death all the players?

and unfortunately i also see one big gameplay problem. right now the techs offer lots of little bonuses. basically there are 8 bonuses from the bases, 8 from the nukes and labs and 16 from the tech pairs. that's 32 bonuses. plenty for everybody to grab.
with your suggestion you will only have 8 bonuses for bases and 4 bonuses for tech + something. that's a drastic reduction.
in fact if you take away the bonuses for the starting bases you get from 24 achievable bonuses to just 4. this in my opinion limits the strategies and reduces the appeal of the map. with what you suggest only the people that hold the 1st line of tech 1 and tech 2 will get something.
and those bonuses will not only be very few but they'll also be very hard to get and hold. a whole line of tech is not an easy thing.

Some other things: I think the autodeploy on the bases should be reduced to 2. 3 seems very high to me. With a +3 auto, I feel like the losing condition would rarely come into play. Also, I think there should be a killer neutral between the second line of Level 2 and the first line of Level 3 (one killer neutral territory per line of tech, so 4). It doesn't have to be very high (maybe just 2-4), it's mainly to make more of a divider between techs and make the objective and assaulting the bases more difficult to get to.

i'm fine with reducing the autodeploy i'm not so sure on the killer neutrals though. how would that be explained? i mean the logic of the map. right now you have a linear progression which makes sense for researching a tech. but a killer neutral would basically mean that you research up to a certain point and then next turn you somehow lose a part of that research and have to do it all over again. it doesn't seem realistic.

[gimil]

Dim,

Your text on the left, right and bottom legends section is a tone of grey that matches the background. This makes it less pleasing to read. If you were to go with a vibrant white (like the text on the map itself) I feel the text will not only be easier to read (because it is a crisper colour) but will also make that particular font more consistent across the whole map.


Cheers,
gimil

[DiM]

Dim,

Your text on the left, right and bottom legends section is a tone of grey that matches the background. This makes it less pleasing to read. If you were to go with a vibrant white (like the text on the map itself) I feel the text will not only be easier to read (because it is a crisper colour) but will also make that particular font more consistent across the whole map.


Cheers,
gimil

check out the first 3 versions. the text was vibrant white and people complained it is too hard to read. then i made it like it is now and they said it's fine