Conquer Club

fluffybunnykins wrote:I like the idea of combining crayon with satire & Bush-wacking...
how about drawing it as if bush drew it in crayon? some suggestions:-
~ a bit of finger painting?
~ america in the middle of the map?
~ more pics: camels, terrorists, commies, etc?
~ mark the big bit at the bottom-right West New Zealand: it's smaller geographically, but bigger intellectually & culturally

We'll get on that just as soon as the all-German map of the UK is finished. It'll be called "1946 if the Americans hadn't intervened."

cheeseweasel wrote:

fluffybunnykins wrote:I like the idea of combining crayon with satire & Bush-wacking...
how about drawing it as if bush drew it in crayon? some suggestions:-
~ a bit of finger painting?
~ america in the middle of the map?
~ more pics: camels, terrorists, commies, etc?
~ mark the big bit at the bottom-right West New Zealand: it's smaller geographically, but bigger intellectually & culturally

We'll get on that just as soon as the all-German map of the UK is finished. It'll be called "1946 if the Americans hadn't intervened."

better late than never, I suppose...

fluffybunnykins wrote:

cheeseweasel wrote:

fluffybunnykins wrote:I like the idea of combining crayon with satire & Bush-wacking...
how about drawing it as if bush drew it in crayon? some suggestions:-
~ a bit of finger painting?
~ america in the middle of the map?
~ more pics: camels, terrorists, commies, etc?
~ mark the big bit at the bottom-right West New Zealand: it's smaller geographically, but bigger intellectually & culturally

We'll get on that just as soon as the all-German map of the UK is finished. It'll be called "1946 if the Americans hadn't intervened."

better late than never, I suppose...

nice!

i like the idea but its not playable. that few continents would mean u could just take people out immediately. imagine a terminator game on that map. just wouldn't work. and it could be easily abused. u just set up a freestyle terminator and u automatically get at least 1 kill if u r on regularly enough. and doubles or even triples?!?!?! 2 ters each...

I Think 30 would be the min number of territories that could be a playable map.

its just the fact that if you dont like a map you should not play it...

Who cares if this map won't work with triples or larger amounts of people? It's a small map, it's not supposed to be played like that. With three people, each one gets six, which means that it will be nigh impossible to eliminate someone on the first turn.
By the way- I love the map. If you need any help creating crayon effects digitally, I know Fireworks has some crayon brush strokes.

Yeah, it wouldn't work with all settings (note that the bare minimum for full playability card-wise is four per players plus one; if any player gets five, their number is immediately reduced to two) but I do think there's potential for some nice quick games where a full one would be too long.

I'll try to do the crayon effect in PSP, but if it ends up consistently looking worse than it does when it's scanned, then I might seek some outside help.

I think mimimum for 3 and 4 player is 34 teritory.
3 players- 33-1 neutral
4 players-34-0 neutral

Andy has already said he sees no point in making this map so let it die guys.

There are tons of better ideas out there, even if you want to make a small map. Just change the theme.

Evil DIMwit wrote:note that the bare minimum for full playability card-wise is four per players plus one; if any player gets five, their number is immediately reduced to two)

Not quite:
4 per player plus n.
Where n= number of players.

You get the 5th at the end of your turn, you don't need to cash these cards in until the start of your next turn, meanwhile all the other players may have accumulated 5 cards.

Ruben Cassar wrote:Andy has already said he sees no point in making this map so let it die guys.

Andy always says that, early on in map development!

Captain Crash wrote:

Ruben Cassar wrote:Andy has already said he sees no point in making this map so let it die guys.

Andy always says that, early on in map development!

Is that so? I don't think he does actually...

Ruben Cassar wrote:

Captain Crash wrote:

Ruben Cassar wrote:Andy has already said he sees no point in making this map so let it die guys.

Andy always says that, early on in map development!

Is that so? I don't think he does actually...

And what's wrong with a little hyperbole now and then?

Captain's correct. I often say such things early in development. Sometimes it takes time for everything to win me over


--Andy

Captain Crash wrote:

Evil DIMwit wrote:note that the bare minimum for full playability card-wise is four per players plus one; if any player gets five, their number is immediately reduced to two)

Not quite:
4 per player plus n.
Where n= number of players.

You get the 5th at the end of your turn, you don't need to cash these cards in until the start of your next turn, meanwhile all the other players may have accumulated 5 cards.

This is also true. Now, don't I feel like a fool twice. But I'm not entirely convinced there is no mechanism that makes possible maps with fewer than thirty territories; a closer examination of the program's procedure would be required.

evil dimwit, to get on with your map, you have to put either bigger teritories or smaller names, so the army circles can fit.

And take away the penguins at the top of the page, either put them at the bottom or put polar bears there because penguins live in anatartica and polarbears live in the artic.

But back to the map...

So we have determined we need 15 Territories minimum for 3 players and 20 for 4 players.

So 2 Questions:
1) Can we limit a map to a max number of players?
and then
2) Can you had two territories (One could be the pair of small islands off of the east coast of Australia...New something or other...lots of sheep) to take it up to 20 and then make it only for 3 or 4 players? (Hence allowing for the odd doubles game if people were so inclined)
Another option may be to shrink Turkmenistan and split India from China to give the second extra territory.
You could possibly separate Australia from Asia and create a 5th 'continent' and give it a small bonus (+1?).

also fireedud wrote:take away the penguins at the top of the page, either put them at the bottom or put polar bears there because penguins live in anatartica and polarbears live in the artic

Agreed

So, first of all, it looks like the crayon beats the satire; the latter might then be a later project (though the region involved may change). Perhaps I'll post it in the ideas thread if the spirit strikes me so.
Incidentally, whom d'ya have to see around here to get a poll changed?

Secondly, adding two or three territories sounds like a solid plan, but there are several ways to go about that that I can think of off the top of my head:
1. I could add some territories to existing continents, leaving the number of continents intact and thus keeping the board on the simple side.
2. I could add some territories to America, Asia, and what would become Oceanea, and split the world into six continents again (which is somewhat against the simplifying spirit of the map)
3. If I'm putting in some New island nation off Australia, I might as well put in Japan, and the Caribbeans, and Madagascar, and then I might as well just give some complicated bonuses for holding more than one island territory to make up for the fact that it's so difficult to gain more than 11 territories for 3 territorial armies a turn.
4. Something else. I'm sure there are other great possibilities.
Incidentally, whom d'ya have to see around here to get a poll changed?

Thirdwise,

Captain Crash wrote:

also fireedud wrote:take away the penguins at the top of the page, either put them at the bottom or put polar bears there because penguins live in anatartica and polarbears live in the artic

Agreed

Well, I'm glad to tell you that I'm quite aware of usual Penguin habitation practices; the joke was meant that the hypothetical child who is drawing the world is not.

That, or they're auks. I like auks.

add territories to continents- i dont think they deserve the bonuses they have at the moment anyway. dont add more continents, like you said, unsimplifies it.

and i dont know if this was addressed or not, but both your pics have been scanned or photographs of a drawing. are you planning on making a digital picture? cuz i think its necessary.

It's been taking a while; I guess I do get carried away with aesthetics. I'll fix up something quick later today (or tomorrow if I have too much work today) and worry about prettifying it up later.

Evil DIMwit wrote:Incidentally, whom d'ya have to see around here to get a poll changed?

We used to PM Andy... now I think you can also PM keyogi.

Enigma wrote:both your pics have been scanned or photographs of a drawing. are you planning on making a digital picture? cuz i think its necessary.

I don't think it is necessary. You need to fiddle with your scanner settings a bit to improve color and contrast, and maybe draw it larger and shrink it down more after scanning, but I love the hand drawn look. Since you have a white background it should be easy to redraw only parts of the map and composite them in the computer.

Evil DIMwit wrote:adding two or three territories sounds like a solid plan

The argument seems to be that you need enough territories for everyone to have 5 cards... but I'm not sure that's true. What will happen if there aren't enough cards? We really don't know. I bet it doesn't break the game, though... if so, CC should be fixed to allow for fewer than 30 territories (or 40 if 8 player games are ever added). It should just double up on the cards.

Generally I love this map. It doesn't push the smallest map as far as Russian Roulette did, but maybe it pushes it just enough.

EvilOtto wrote:Generally I love this map. It doesn't push the smallest map as far as Russian Roulette did, but maybe it pushes it just enough.

I LOVE the idea of a really small map!
But I think Andy or Keyogi needs to tell us if:
1) The number of players can be limited, and
2) What happens if cards issued exceed the cards 'available' based on number of countries.

Answer to '2' may make the answer to '1' irrelevant.

Which map should be?

The crayon one
36% [ 24 ]
Satire, small
4% [ 3 ]
Satire, large
4% [ 3 ]
Crayon and Satire, small
16% [ 11 ]
Crayon and Satire, large
6% [ 4 ]
Neither you jerk. And where's New Zealand?
30% [ 20 ]

Total Votes : 65

new zealand almost won.

I am honestly quite shocked that it didn't