Conquer Club

Theme: Allegheny National Forest, Pennsylvania, USA. The USA has 155 national forests. Most of these are in the western USA but the Allegheny is Pennsylvania's only national forest tipping over the half-million acre mark. The Allegheny was established in 1923 by Calvin Coolidge as a response to widespread clearcutting and subsequent flooding in western Pennsylvania. Map is based on real forest conditions with gameplay modifications.

Territories: 81 Total (currently editing down to 78 or 79). This includes 9 cities and 5 villages. Gameplay would be similar to feudal in that everything starts neutral but cities. But territory setup is more similar to USSR but on a different scale.

Continents: 9 continents based on watershed boundaries. Range from 3 to 14 territories. Territory bonuses will be similar to berlin with a bonus for obtaining x+ in continent. In addition there are two scattered continents with Wilderness Areas and oil & gas fields. Wilderness areas earn bonuses and oil & gas fields earn negatives on deply. Distribution of oil & gas fields tilted against upstream territories intentionally (see movement below).

Movement: Movement is standard except for some theme-based movements. Canoe launches allow players to attack downstream territories (but not upstream). North Country Trail (a USA national scenic hiking trail) can be used to attack territories in either direction along trail. The 2 Ranger stations can be used to attack territories with other stations (free ride with the US Forest Service).

I am looking to balance 4 basic goals: 1) high map complexity w/ large number of game variations, 2) Reasonable learning curve, 3) reduced map clutter, and 4) enhanced map design. My next step with the map will be to undo continent colors in arview and instead export the map into photoshop to enhance the aesthetics. The sooner I can get input on these plus any gameplay thoughts or anything else for that matter is greatly appreciated.

Version 2.8 Map - June 28, 2008


Version 2.7 Map - June 27, 2008


Version 2.6 Map - June 25, 2008


Version 2.5 Map - June 22, 2008


Version 2.4 Map - June 19, 2008


Version 2.3 Map - June 10, 2008

wow big and confusing!

looks like a good 1st start

i dont really know what to say

t-o-m wrote:wow big and confusing!

looks like a good 1st start

i dont really know what to say

fair enough! Too big and too confusing? I like the complex maps so that certainly plays a part.

great first draft. I hope you stick it out and move this map through the foundry. So many good starts just fall into the furnace. My family is from Johnstown, and I actually grew up there. Was in the flood of 77 (I think it was 77). You face a tough task to have that many territories and not have clutter. To help, see if you can create map colors that do not need the round army circles. Also, take that huge stroke off the territ identifying numbers.

Seamusk...first impressions:
A good start, I've heard of the Allegheny River, but too massive and too much for even my eyes to take in in one go.
Can i suggest before you go any further, that you reduce this to the small size and then look at it and ask "would i play on this map at this small size".
I hate to sound negative because i make complicated maps and maps with a lot to take in also, but this is going to prove a real challenge to most tactical players.
The concept is great, and i personally like the icons you have. Perhaps reduce the number of territories to make it simpler and give the viewer more eye space.

RjBeals wrote:great first draft. I hope you stick it out and move this map through the foundry. So many good starts just fall into the furnace. My family is from Johnstown, and I actually grew up there. Was in the flood of 77 (I think it was 77). You face a tough task to have that many territories and not have clutter. To help, see if you can create map colors that do not need the round army circles. Also, take that huge stroke off the territ identifying numbers.

Cool! Spent some time in Johnstown before. Not as a resident though. I hear ya on the map colors. Will do what I can. Regarding the stroke, do you mean the white background? Or the stroke size itself? Both are easy to fix so...

uh for now all i have time to say is:

t-o-m wrote:wow big and confusing!

looks like a good 1st start

i dont really know what to say

cairnswk wrote:Seamusk...first impressions:
A good start, I've heard of the Allegheny River, but too massive and too much for even my eyes to take in in one go.
Can i suggest before you go any further, that you reduce this to the small size and then look at it and ask "would i play on this map at this small size".
I hate to sound negative because i make complicated maps and maps with a lot to take in also, but this is going to prove a real challenge to most tactical players.
The concept is great, and i personally like the icons you have. Perhaps reduce the number of territories to make it simpler and give the viewer more eye space.

Thanks for the good feedback. I like your galapagos map btw. I have been avoiding the small map size view so far but yeah will definitely need to do that. I do have 10 territories I plan on merging into 5 already so hopefully that helps some. And you are not being negative, your observations are accurate. I WANT criticism. constructive criticism anyhow.

I have been watching this map develop from the beginning. It has come such a long way and i cannot wait to play it. The theme is an awesome idea. With the start of the game like feudal and the bonuses like berlin, battles on this map will surely be intense.. Great Job Seamusk i look forward to seeing it in action!!!

post deleted.

Good Luck.

hehe. this is one of the earliest maps that danfrank speak of. for kicks sake

danfrank wrote: Edited out per request.

Good Luck.

This would be fun to play, the gameplay is awsome but its more of something Cairswk would do, You need to add in the legand and all that and don't worrie about army circles yet.

I have also watched this map from the start. It looks really good. Def not confusing at all. I think cc needs some large maps such as this that would actually take some skill to play. Keep it up sea.

I've updated the map for the second time this week. Version 1.2 is posted above. As I state above in the update, I have no clue what to do next. I really like the map as it is but I probably just need additional eyes on it. So hopefully folks can do that.

Are you working on a small map? For me to have any faith, I need to see all this on a small map.

1. SMALL MAP: WIDTH up to 630 px; HEIGHT 600 px

--Andy

AndyDufresne wrote:Are you working on a small map? For me to have any faith, I need to see all this on a small map.

1. SMALL MAP: WIDTH up to 630 px; HEIGHT 600 px

--Andy

yes, in progress.

Trying to identify next to dos. Here is what I have for sure:

1. Sharpen text to make clearer on small map

2. Make small map with 88s

3. Edit xml to match changes

Here is the input so far in groups of similar comments. There were several positive comments as well but they don't need fixing.

wow big and confusing!

Basically tried reducing territories, terraforming continents, changing background colors so I don't need army circles, reshaping territories, resizing territory numbers, repositioning territory numbers, etc... Is this satisfactory enough on this end?

You face a tough task to have that many territories and not have clutter. To help, see if you can create map colors that do not need the round army circles. Also, take that huge stroke off the territ identifying numbers.

Done as suggested.

...too massive and too much for even my eyes to take in in one go. Can i suggest before you go any further, that you reduce this to the small size and then look at it and ask "would i play on this map at this small size".

This got delayed mostly because I wanted to see the small version with the armies. I've now done that. Working on the 88s. I'm actually quite satisfied with it mostly. There are a couple of smaller regions that may need attention. West Branch Tionesta Area #01 is still the tightest. This is challenging because I would like to keep this as a separate territory. I know that we don't have to be precise but for people who know the forest that area, known as the Hearts Content National Scenic Area, is a well known landmark. I've actually already made it bigger than it is.

So now that the small map is up, input?

This is going to prove a real challenge to most tactical players. The concept is great, and i personally like the icons you have. Perhaps reduce the number of territories to make it simpler and give the viewer more eye space.

I reduced a few territories and reshaped several others. Setting this up for up to 8 players and maintaining tactical balance will be tricky. I don't want to make more territory edits until I get more gameplay feedback. All the territories are at least clear at the moment.

I find the map very busy and cluttered, though I don't know if there's anything that can really be done about that. The legend is also a bit of a disaster right now - just plain text floating next to the map image. If you redo the legend and make it look more...legendy, the map might feel less busy. Focusing all the legend information in one area is also a good idea (move the whole map over to the right a bit, maybe, and move the text on the right over to the left).

Also, the map needs a background.

Definitely sharpen the text on the small version. If you can, do it on the large version too. It's a bit hard to read. I wouldn't worry about the XML for a long time if I were you. Just focus on getting the map done well.

ZeakCytho wrote:I find the map very busy and cluttered, though I don't know if there's anything that can really be done about that. The legend is also a bit of a disaster right now - just plain text floating next to the map image. If you redo the legend and make it look more...legendy, the map might feel less busy. Focusing all the legend information in one area is also a good idea (move the whole map over to the right a bit, maybe, and move the text on the right over to the left).

Also, the map needs a background.

Definitely sharpen the text on the small version. If you can, do it on the large version too. It's a bit hard to read. I wouldn't worry about the XML for a long time if I were you. Just focus on getting the map done well.

THANK YOU! Very helpful. All very helpful. I agree about the legend. I'm gonna rework that. Gonna add much of this to my to do list. Another suggested changing the background on the trail.

Updated to do list:

1. Replace Legend on both maps and/or Sharpen text to make clearer on small map

2. Change highlighting of North Country Trail to help clarity

3. Fix Tunungwant 02 so that the circle isn't covering the whole area

4. Create background for map

5. Make small map with 88s

6. Edit xml to match changes (note that I've already written the xml except for the x and y locations)

i think that the neutrals you have on the auto deploy places (they are auto deploy right?) are too high. for a +2 bonus, i would not try to go through 8 neutrals just to get 2 extra armies. the same with the archaeological (which is spelled wrong on the map). and why is there 9 cities? i don't think anyone would go for a 10 neutral city for +3. i wouldn't anyway. are the neutral counts throughout the map random, or are they placed there strategically. and why are there so many oil fields? the person who starts in Bradford is in a huge disadvantage to somebody who starts in Sheffield or Ridgway.
for the Tunungwant creek bonus it says +2 for 3 terits, but it looks like there is only 2...
I would either take away some oil fields around bradford, add some + bonuses, make it neutral to start out, or completely delete it cuz whoever starts there is at a huge disadvantage, as i've said before.
under muzette it looks like the trail continues, and there is another shelter there.

now for some positive
i like how there are territs spreading between some regions. it's like the "8 thoughts" thing.
i like maps where you're given only one terit to start with (i think they're called conquest maps?) and i'm assuming thats what this one is, starting in the cities. mention the state in the name, because otherwise, people have no idea where this is, or if its real. at least i didn't until i looked at the thread title. this map has a lot of unique gameplay that i like so far. the greens are kinda blendy though. it looks like this would be a fun map to play on in the future. i like it so far, and good luck!

P.S. - sorry if this is too much...

damn, you kick ass rocky mountain! Greatly appreciated. Gonna answer a couple of your questions and then update my to do list here.

The 9 cities are there for a couple of reasons. One thing I like is that a 9th city helps increase the randomness of the starting positions a lot. I guess think of it like feudal where you start and you are like "OK, last time I started here...". At least that is my rationale for it. I know other maps have 9 like the New World map. And yeah I guess this is a conquest map though I hadn't thought of it in those terms.

There are 3 territories in Tunungwant. Note that the territories immediately adjacent to the cities are territories but unnumbered "townships". But what might be throwing you off is that Tunungwant 02 is hard to see. It is disconnected from the others and someone else has already pointed out to me that it is hard to see. On to do list...

Looking at it I agree with you that Bradford is at too much of a disadvantage. On one hand those cities are more isolated and can build more freely before being attacked. On the other hand, there probably are too many oil fields. This is somewhat because I based it on the forest and there are boatloads of oil fields up there. But this is wher ereality and fiction need to break.

Funny thing is when I started this map I thought it would be the only map with split territories. I had never played 8 thoughts. I was quickly corrected on this.

I'm terrible with colors. Do you think the greens are too blendy? I was trying to emphasize greens and browns since it is a forest. and yet have some brighter colors in there without having anything too bright. I should have noted this before. Another thing I want to look at is how these colors appear to a color blind person. Are they too blendy for that reason?

And thanks again for the great input. ANd I'm glad you like where this is going. I too am fond of these types of conquest maps.

Updated to do list:

1. Replace Legend on both maps and/or Sharpen text to make clearer on small map

2. Change highlighting of North Country Trail to help clarity

3. Fix Tunungwant 02 so that the circle isn't covering the whole area

4. Reduce oil field density in northeast

5. Fix neutrals on auto bonus villages and dig sites

6. Create background for map

7. Give private lands more stark appearance

8. Make small map with 88s

9. Fix map title to reflect state where forest is located

10. Edit xml to match changes (note that I've already written the xml except for the x and y locations)

come on when do we get to play this

when it gets quenched!
for more info on how a map gets quenched, visit:
the stages of a maps progress through the foundry
I know you were kinda joking, but it still helps anyway