Conquer Club

Dust Bowl [Quenched]

Care to peruse completed maps? Take a stroll through the Atlas.

Moderator: Cartographers

Forum rules
Please read the Community Guidelines before posting.

Do you want to have the map changed so Dust territories are given out evenly?

Yes
36
69%
No
16
31%
 
Total votes : 52

Postby Aerial Attack on Thu Nov 08, 2007 10:48 am

I like the update. As far as state lines go, I think you should keep the same stroke weight (whatever that means) or thickness. Just add small breaks (effectively make them dashed lines) in the Dust Bowl affected areas. Then you could still tell they are states AND that you can only cross in the Dust Bowl.
Image
My Conquer Club Scripts | Bests: 2133, #205
User avatar
Sergeant Aerial Attack
 
Posts: 1132
Joined: Mon Jun 04, 2007 7:59 pm
Location: Generation One: The Clan

Postby RjBeals on Thu Nov 08, 2007 11:00 am

Good Idea. I'll test it out. Thanks
User avatar
Private RjBeals
 
Posts: 2506
Joined: Mon Nov 20, 2006 5:17 pm
Location: South Carolina, USA

Postby Coleman on Thu Nov 08, 2007 11:01 am

Continue with this idea?
  • Yes - 73% - [ 34 ]
  • Not sure, need more structured map first - 19% - [ 9 ]
  • No - 6% - [ 3 ]
Total Votes : 46
Warning: You may be reading a really old topic.
User avatar
Sergeant Coleman
 
Posts: 5402
Joined: Tue Jan 02, 2007 10:36 pm
Location: Midwest

Postby RjBeals on Thu Nov 08, 2007 11:34 am

Image

Hows this? I like it and will keep it if it's agreed upon. Thanks for the suggestion Aerial Attack.

Also - looking at Oklahoma, It's too easy to hold for that bonus. I think I may take out the dark drought region of North Platte (Nebraska) and create a new one out of Woodward (Oklahoma). That way OK would have 3borders to defend, the same as Texas, but slightly less bonus.

Also I want to move the drought region of XIT Ranch in Texas to also border Oklahoma. As of right now - what do you think? Or leave it.
User avatar
Private RjBeals
 
Posts: 2506
Joined: Mon Nov 20, 2006 5:17 pm
Location: South Carolina, USA

Postby Coleman on Thu Nov 08, 2007 11:42 am

I like it. I think you could extend the thick lines a little father. Denver, North Platte Sterling look like they might connect. Unless Denver is supposed to connect to North Platte. :? Same with a few other areas.
Warning: You may be reading a really old topic.
User avatar
Sergeant Coleman
 
Posts: 5402
Joined: Tue Jan 02, 2007 10:36 pm
Location: Midwest

Postby RjBeals on Thu Nov 08, 2007 11:50 am

Coleman wrote:I like it. I think you could extend the thick lines a little father. Denver, North Platte Sterling look like they might connect. Unless Denver is supposed to connect to North Platte. :? Same with a few other areas.


Well that answers that. If you already question it, then I'm sure it needs extending. It is not suppose to connect. That will be no problem to extend the lines, but I'll let the map sit for a while to get some more feedback.

I see I left the end quotes off of "Dust Bowl" in the description paragraph. That will be fixed also.

And "Dustbowl" should be 2 words in the Attack paragraph. That will be changed also.
User avatar
Private RjBeals
 
Posts: 2506
Joined: Mon Nov 20, 2006 5:17 pm
Location: South Carolina, USA

Postby Aerial Attack on Thu Nov 08, 2007 12:03 pm

Bonus Structure:

Nebraska (4 terrs, 2 defense points, 2 drought - current +3 bonus, suggest +3)
Colorado (6 terrs, 2 defense points, 2 drought - current +4 bonus, suggest +4)
Kansas (5 terrs, 3 defense points, 2 drought - current +4 bonus, suggest +4)
New Mexico (6 terrs, 2 defense points, 1 drought - current +3 bonus, suggest +4)
Oklahoma (7 terrs, 3 defense points, 2 drought - current +6 bonus, suggest +5)
Texas (8 terrs, 3 defense points, 3 drought - current +7 bonus, suggest +6)

Drought Areas: I suggest
-1 for five areas
-2 for eight areas
-3 for eleven areas
-4 for all twelve areas
Image
My Conquer Club Scripts | Bests: 2133, #205
User avatar
Sergeant Aerial Attack
 
Posts: 1132
Joined: Mon Jun 04, 2007 7:59 pm
Location: Generation One: The Clan

Postby Coleman on Thu Nov 08, 2007 12:13 pm

I agree with all of that. :)
Warning: You may be reading a really old topic.
User avatar
Sergeant Coleman
 
Posts: 5402
Joined: Tue Jan 02, 2007 10:36 pm
Location: Midwest

Postby I GOT SERVED on Thu Nov 08, 2007 12:17 pm

Coleman wrote:I agree with all of that. :)


I would have to concur. The only suggestion I have would be to kick up the negative bonus for holding all of the drought by onr or two.
Image


Highest score: 2512
Highest rank: 424
User avatar
Captain I GOT SERVED
 
Posts: 1532
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2007 9:42 pm
Location: Good 'ol New England

Postby mibi on Thu Nov 08, 2007 12:35 pm

who the f*ck would hold 12 drought areas, that doesnt make sense, unless the game is already over.

i think the drought bonus needs to be reworked.
User avatar
Captain mibi
 
Posts: 3350
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 8:19 pm
Location: The Great State of Vermont

Postby RjBeals on Thu Nov 08, 2007 12:55 pm

mibi wrote:who the f*ck would hold 12 drought areas


Don't start bashing people for making suggestions mibi... (joke). It's just there for intimidation I guess. Rework the whole drought area's though, I kind of like having a negative bonus though - seeing as how it was so hard to survive anyway in those areas.
User avatar
Private RjBeals
 
Posts: 2506
Joined: Mon Nov 20, 2006 5:17 pm
Location: South Carolina, USA

Postby mibi on Thu Nov 08, 2007 4:32 pm

RjBeals wrote:
mibi wrote:who the f*ck would hold 12 drought areas


Don't start bashing people for making suggestions mibi... (joke). It's just there for intimidation I guess. Rework the whole drought area's though, I kind of like having a negative bonus though - seeing as how it was so hard to survive anyway in those areas.


I like the negative bonus area too... its what the map IS about, I just think the negative bonus structure can be reworked.

Maybe -1 for each drought area unless you own the whole state or something. That would keep people out unless it was really nessasary to "try and make a living there" and getting their whole state bonus. -1 might be a little harsh tho.... I dunno. right now I think its a bit of a non-factor since its takes so many drought territories to have an effect on the the bonuses.

another idea, which may not be possible, is to have each drought territory be -1 if its over the amount of non-drought territories you have. forexample, you can occupy 8 drought areas as long as you occupy 8 non drought areas, if someone conquers 3 of your non drought areas, then its imbalanced and a -3 bonus comes in to play. So its turns the drought area into a gamble, which may or may not pay off, kind of like how the dustbowl was.

i dont know anything about xml so that may not be possible at all.
User avatar
Captain mibi
 
Posts: 3350
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 8:19 pm
Location: The Great State of Vermont

Postby RjBeals on Thu Nov 08, 2007 4:46 pm

mibi wrote:another idea, which may not be possible, is to have each drought territory be -1 if its over the amount of non-drought territories you have. forexample, you can occupy 8 drought areas as long as you occupy 8 non drought areas, if someone conquers 3 of your non drought areas, then its imbalanced and a -3 bonus comes in to play. So its turns the drought area into a gamble, which may or may not pay off, kind of like how the dustbowl was.


That is GREAT!! That's the key I've been looking for in order to make the drought areas a factor, but a gamble also. So if your balanced out, and it's my turn, I simply attack some non-drought areas and give you negative bonus. Very Very Cool. So do people pay your for your ideas or what!

Please Please let XML be able to do this ???
Last edited by RjBeals on Thu Nov 08, 2007 4:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Private RjBeals
 
Posts: 2506
Joined: Mon Nov 20, 2006 5:17 pm
Location: South Carolina, USA

Postby I GOT SERVED on Thu Nov 08, 2007 4:47 pm

mibi wrote:another idea, which may not be possible, is to have each drought territory be -1 if its over the amount of non-drought territories you have. forexample, you can occupy 8 drought areas as long as you occupy 8 non drought areas, if someone conquers 3 of your non drought areas, then its imbalanced and a -3 bonus comes in to play. So its turns the drought area into a gamble, which may or may not pay off, kind of like how the dustbowl was.


That sir, is genius.
Image


Highest score: 2512
Highest rank: 424
User avatar
Captain I GOT SERVED
 
Posts: 1532
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2007 9:42 pm
Location: Good 'ol New England

Postby Optimus Prime on Thu Nov 08, 2007 5:12 pm

You have done an amazing job on this so far. I am terribly excited to see it out for play.

I like the new version with only being able to get to another state through the drought region. That gives it just a little extra spice to the gameplay without all of the incredibly hard to keep track of bonuses and scenarios.

As for the penalty for holding the drought regions, I think I personally like the idea where it is a straight deduction as you have now. Although I do think that the one suggested by mibi would work nicely as well, as long as the requirements were properly decided. Nothing too drastic, but enough to make you think twice at times.

Keep up the good work. :)
User avatar
Cadet Optimus Prime
 
Posts: 9665
Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2007 9:33 pm

Postby Herakilla on Thu Nov 08, 2007 5:21 pm

I GOT SERVED wrote:
mibi wrote:another idea, which may not be possible, is to have each drought territory be -1 if its over the amount of non-drought territories you have. forexample, you can occupy 8 drought areas as long as you occupy 8 non drought areas, if someone conquers 3 of your non drought areas, then its imbalanced and a -3 bonus comes in to play. So its turns the drought area into a gamble, which may or may not pay off, kind of like how the dustbowl was.


That sir, is genius.


i agree

what if you had oasises that counteracted the drought bonus if you connected them? (spelled wrong but you know waht i mean right?)
Come join us in Live Chat!
User avatar
Lieutenant Herakilla
 
Posts: 4283
Joined: Fri Jun 09, 2006 8:33 pm
Location: Wandering the world, spreading Conquerism

Postby Anarkistsdream on Thu Nov 08, 2007 5:25 pm

There aren't really any in that region, especially at that time in history. That was why it was called the Dustbowl. :wink:
virus90 wrote: I think Anarkist is a valuable asset to any game.
User avatar
Cook Anarkistsdream
 
Posts: 7567
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2007 11:57 am

Postby Herakilla on Thu Nov 08, 2007 5:29 pm

even nxt to the water?
Come join us in Live Chat!
User avatar
Lieutenant Herakilla
 
Posts: 4283
Joined: Fri Jun 09, 2006 8:33 pm
Location: Wandering the world, spreading Conquerism

Postby Anarkistsdream on Thu Nov 08, 2007 5:30 pm

Herakilla wrote:even nxt to the water?


If you notice, the drought didn't reach to the Gulf of Mexico.
virus90 wrote: I think Anarkist is a valuable asset to any game.
User avatar
Cook Anarkistsdream
 
Posts: 7567
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2007 11:57 am

Postby Herakilla on Thu Nov 08, 2007 6:03 pm

so ship some up there!
Come join us in Live Chat!
User avatar
Lieutenant Herakilla
 
Posts: 4283
Joined: Fri Jun 09, 2006 8:33 pm
Location: Wandering the world, spreading Conquerism

Postby yeti_c on Sat Nov 10, 2007 3:08 am

RjBeals wrote:
mibi wrote:another idea, which may not be possible, is to have each drought territory be -1 if its over the amount of non-drought territories you have. forexample, you can occupy 8 drought areas as long as you occupy 8 non drought areas, if someone conquers 3 of your non drought areas, then its imbalanced and a -3 bonus comes in to play. So its turns the drought area into a gamble, which may or may not pay off, kind of like how the dustbowl was.


That is GREAT!! That's the key I've been looking for in order to make the drought areas a factor, but a gamble also. So if your balanced out, and it's my turn, I simply attack some non-drought areas and give you negative bonus. Very Very Cool. So do people pay your for your ideas or what!

Please Please let XML be able to do this ???


Wow - love the idea Mibi... Hmmmmmm....

Right I've got to think about this...

On first instinct I reckon it can be done...

I'll have definitive answer on Monday -> Two nights of sleep should organise this into a working solution!!!

C.
Image
Highest score : 2297
User avatar
Lieutenant yeti_c
 
Posts: 9624
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2007 9:02 am

Postby yeti_c on Sat Nov 10, 2007 3:17 am

f*ck that -> I've got it...

OK - this can be done with required and overrides...

OK so you have 8 drought areas?

So you need 8 drought continents based like this...

Code: Select all
<continent>
  <name>8 droughts</name>
  <bonus>-1</bonus>
  <components>
    <component>drought a</component>
    ..... (list all drought territories here)
  </components>
  <required>8</required>
</continent>

note : <required> technically not needed for the highest one!

Then what you need are the cancellers...

Code: Select all
<continent>
  <name>8 waters</name> (Shit name I know!)
  <bonus>0</bonus>
  <components>
    <component>non drought territory</component>
    ..... (list all non drought territories here)
  </components>
  <required>8</required>
  <overrides>
    <override>8 droughts</override>
  </overrides>
</continent>

<continent>
  <name>7 waters</name> (Shit name I know!)
  <bonus>0</bonus>
  <components>
    <component>non drought territory</component>
    ..... (list all non drought territories here)
  </components>
  <required>7</required>
  <overrides>
    <override>7 droughts</override>
  </overrides>
</continent>


Note - because the continents only overide their matches then you get the correct balance of -1 or 0 for each drought area...

C.
Image
Highest score : 2297
User avatar
Lieutenant yeti_c
 
Posts: 9624
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2007 9:02 am

Postby Mjollner on Sat Nov 10, 2007 3:55 am

Sorry it took so long to get back on.

Nebraska and Kansas look fine.

Colorado:
all the city-named terr. are good
Western slope is in the wrong place(San Luis Valley, or Alamosa would be better names for this place)
Eastern Plains are not there, Craig or western slope would work here.

New Mexico:
Looks Ok, I belive cimmarron, logan and clayton are all in the Clayton area, but they're near the border and that helps with relating it to dustbowl.

Oklahoma:
It looks like there are some Oklahoman here, so they should point out glaring stuff(I'm a Colorado Native, so the Colorado stuff seems glaring to me.

Texas:
Amarillo is pretty far from it's named terr., it's up in Dallhart terr.
I'm not from TX, nor am I familiar with it, Amarillo is a pretty big city though, so I think people are bound to notice.

I love the style of the map, and love the idea.
Private Mjollner
 
Posts: 3
Joined: Sun Oct 28, 2007 11:37 pm

Postby RjBeals on Sat Nov 10, 2007 7:42 am

Mjollner - I'll for sure edit the Colorado regions with what you suggested. And I'll wait to hear for some Oklahoma feedback. I'll check maps.google for the Texas regions also. Glad you like.

Yeti_C - that's great news! So far it looks like everyone is okay with mibi's suggestion. I'll update this map in a few more days, and we'll work towards that with a fair bonus structure.

And I'm glad you understand that XML.. if/when this gets to final forge, would you be willing to help with the XML - your name would go on the bottom right of the map :)
User avatar
Private RjBeals
 
Posts: 2506
Joined: Mon Nov 20, 2006 5:17 pm
Location: South Carolina, USA

Postby Hatchman on Sat Nov 10, 2007 7:55 am

I love the look of this map - you got the colours dead on.
User avatar
Major Hatchman
 
Posts: 792
Joined: Sat Jan 13, 2007 6:05 am
Location: The charming village of Emery

PreviousNext

Return to The Atlas

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users