Conquer Club

AndyDufresne wrote:I think you can probably chalk the final decision for trees up to mapmaker preference, since it has no impact on game play and is mainly a small aesthetic item.


--Andy

totally subscribe that

Yeah, it seems a little absurd to me that you're still discussing the trees....omg it's a nice map, trees are the last problem specially because although someone can think that maybe they look like bunny shit, they don't clash with the current style of the map. Really this map should be stamped now! There's nothing that is not up to the current standard. Going to ask to a graphics CA to give a final review to it, if there's nothing else than those trees this map can have the approval to go with the small and then be moved to the forge.

Nobodies

thenobodies80 wrote:Yeah, it seems a little absurd to me that you're still discussing the trees....omg it's a nice map, trees are the last problem specially because although someone can think that maybe they look like bunny shit, they don't clash with the current style of the map. Really this map should be stamped now! There's nothing that is not up to the current standard. Going to ask to a graphics CA to give a final review to it, if there's nothing else than those trees this map can have the approval to go with the small and then be moved to the forge.

Nobodies

I agree with nobodies on this! I don't see why people are still quibbling over the trees myself. This map should be in FF by now. I personally believe that the trees fit with the rest of the graphics.

isaiah40 wrote:

thenobodies80 wrote:Yeah, it seems a little absurd to me that you're still discussing the trees....omg it's a nice map, trees are the last problem specially because although someone can think that maybe they look like bunny shit, they don't clash with the current style of the map. Really this map should be stamped now! There's nothing that is not up to the current standard. Going to ask to a graphics CA to give a final review to it, if there's nothing else than those trees this map can have the approval to go with the small and then be moved to the forge.

Nobodies

I agree with nobodies on this! I don't see why people are still quibbling over the trees myself. This map should be in FF by now. I personally believe that the trees fit with the rest of the graphics.

I disagree. The forests don't fit the map, they're the weak spot on an otherwise great looking map.

Now maybe the map is "good enough" and maybe it can be passed through as is, but shouldn't we encourage mapmakers to do the best they can? Should we settle on "good enough"?


On my nordic countries revamp, there was also lots of nitpicking about forests and mountains... for some reason, the foreman never stepped in to say "stop this nitpicking and let the map through", and I'm glad that he didn't, because even though I had to make like 7 different versions of the mountains & forests, and it was a huge pain in the ass, the map was eventually better for it.

natty_dread wrote:I disagree. The forests don't fit the map, they're the weak spot on an otherwise great looking map.

Opinion. And it seems like most others disagree.

chapcrap wrote:

natty_dread wrote:I disagree. The forests don't fit the map, they're the weak spot on an otherwise great looking map.

Opinion. And it seems like most others disagree.

There have been several others who have expressed concerns about the trees. Which you can see if you read back the thread a bit.

I understand you're anxious to play the map, and the mapmaker surely appreciates the sentiment as well. And it's good that you show up to show your support for the map. But it's never a goood idea to push for a map to be moved faster just because you can't wait to play it. It puts pressure on the mapmakers and the foundry mods which makes it harder for them to create the best possible maps they possibly can.

I still see nothing wrong with trees. Kab did verious attempts, no one of them please everyone. The foundry rules say that all mapmakers should respond to concerns raised. Kab did this. I'm not asking to push the map through the foundry system because I want to play it, if you don't believe this check how many games I played on KC. I think Kab is the first who knows I don't like so much the gameplay of this type of maps, but sorry if I look at the map I still say that is one of the most pretty maps we have in development and I see the Kab's point of view with the trees. Yes you can think they look like shit, I could say they look like balls or fishing sinkers, but everyone here understood they are trees and call them trees.
So the point is that the current discussion is just matter of opinions. And when it's matter of opinions the CAs should have to ask only one thing, Is this map up to the current standards? If the answer is yes and there are really no graphics issues...then I don't see why not to give a stamp and waste time.

About the comparision with nordic countries, I said you more than in a single occasion that make a comparision between maps is a bad thing and always a wrong thing, each single mapmakeing development is a unique thing. Just all them has to follow the same rules.

Said that, if when this map will be online people will say us: Hey there's some bunny shit on this map, the trees are terrible who stamped this one?, then in that moment I will take my hat off to you saying "I was wrong, you were right".

I bet it won't happen because, as said, right now we're discussing just about a thing that is matter of opinion, it's like say that you think leonardo is better than michelangelo and I'm saying the opposite, who is right?
If you want to make a comparision (lol - yes i'm making a comparision after saying you to not make one!), the current discussion is the same you have about impassables on your london map thread that honestly is a totally nonsense.

Nobodies

Nobodies, I don't want to get into an argument with you again... I wasn't claiming that you wanted this map moved because you want to play it, I wasn't refering to you with that. If Kabanellas is happy to go ahead with these forests, and everyone else thinks it's fine, then I guess that's that.

I'm just expressing my opinion that I think it's a shame that such a beautiful map like this has such a flaw as the current forests. The graphics are great all over the map, except for the forests, which don't fit the map at all in my opinion.

Also, I'm not comparing this map to any others, I only brought up the other map as an example of a situation where a map was made better with a little extra effort. This map could go forward with these forests, and you're right, most people probably wouldn't complain about them. Most people don't really care that much about the graphics of maps, as long as they are clear and playable. But I don't think that's a reason not to try our best to make the best looking maps we can.

All I'm saying is, yes, the map is good as it is. But with better forests, it could be truly great.

I'm totally sympathetic with your concerns Natty - though they're not the same as mine when it comes to this map

I tend to be quit a perfectionist and always try to apply the highest standards on everything I do. That being said you must know that I'm totally comfortable with these trees, actually I'm more than that because I like the way they fit on this map and I'm not figuring any way better of doing them. And I've tried.

At this point, I have some spare time and I'd like to start working on the small map. That will be a time consuming task and I just need to have everything settled to do that.

For the Cathedrals, Can you use a biretta instead of the cross? The cross just seems kind of gaudy and out of place.

that's not really a cross... it's a cathedral seen from above

Maybe if you made the trees just a tiny bit smaller? Like 1-2 px smaller in diameter. Sorry if I've suggested this already, can't remember...

Kabanellas wrote:that's not really a cross... it's a cathedral seen from above

Makes more sense from that angle.

natty_dread wrote:Maybe if you made the trees just a tiny bit smaller? Like 1-2 px smaller in diameter. Sorry if I've suggested this already, can't remember...

here you go:

Current version


Small trees

I think the smaller trees work somewhat better.

Last Call

If anyone has any other comments on gameplay, now is the time to speak up! If there are no other concerns within the next couple of days, this map will be moved to the Final Forge!

isaiah40

I don't see much difference between the trees.

But if it makes natty happy...

natty_dread wrote:I think the smaller trees work somewhat better.

+1

I would say just make the hexagons darker. They're just a little to hard to see in my opinion.

I know that I pointed this out before, but Supply is spelled wrong at the top.

natty_dread wrote:I think the smaller trees work somewhat better.

I think you're probably right. I'll change them

chapcrap wrote:I know that I pointed this out before, but Supply is spelled wrong at the top.

on it!

The Bison King wrote:I would say just make the hexagons darker. They're just a little to hard to see in my opinion.

I think that once the army numbers appear on map you won't have that perception. I'd wait for that... If we still feel the same at that point, I'll change them.

updated version with smaller trees: