Battle Among the Stars, Last Update 11/15/2008

[Charles_IV]

Click image to enlarge.

NearStars (.png) (800 x 600 pixels) Version 4.01

http://s531.photobucket.com/albums/dd357/melonkali1/?action=view&current=starscape02.png
Former Version 3.00

http://s531.photobucket.com/albums/dd357/melonkali1/?action=view&current=starmap02-1.png
Former Version 2.10

http://s531.photobucket.com/albums/dd357/melonkali1/?action=view&current=starmap01-1.png
Former Version 1.30

NO UPDATE: November 17, 2011

Well, I've been out of this map-making for the past three years, but I still like the concept and I still like this map, based upon accurate information about the nearest stars to our own solar system. I would prefer it to be played under adjacent attack rules, but that's me. If you think it's dull, I think it's basic and absent of those bells and whistles I think add little to a good simple game of strategy and conquest. I'd like to advance this map further if there's any interest...and yes, I'm open to considering suggestions.

Charles IV

LAST UPDATED: November 15, 2008
Version 4.01

There are 84 stars on the chart, but four of them have no mineral worlds. Thus there are ten systems available for each of eight players.

Mineral worlds are the moons and planets in a star system that provide the raw materials for starship construction. Starships, the military forces in this game, can be built only at the technological and industrial centers identified as homeworlds with interstellar shipyards. For every three mineral worlds that a player controls by occupying star systems, his shipyards can build one starship per year (per turn). But no shipyard can produce any more than fifteen starships per turn, no matter how many mineral worlds supply it.

There are no continent bonuses in this game. There are no interstellar federations or empires except for those the players create during the game.

The game is won by capture of all eight shipyard worlds or by total elimination of all opponents or capture of specified goals.

Players begin on one homeworld with a shipyard and a fleet of four starships. All other worlds have as many neutral forces as they have mineral worlds.

4.01 Relocated some driftward homeworlds and added force-counter markers.

[Juan_Bottom]

What do you all think?

That I'd like to see your work? lol

[MrBenn]

(How do I display this image on my post as others have done?)

Instead of using [url] tags, use the [img] ones
Oh, and you'll need to use the 'direct link' from photobucket...

[Charles_IV]

A thousand thanks, MrBenn, for the information about how to display the map image!

Charles_IV

[Juan_Bottom]

Is this a map that you play on at home or something? I do really like it, yet I don't know why...

I don't think that they can make the "for every 8 ships destroyed" rule work. But you'd have to ask a foundry-pert about that.

The each industrial world rule is pretty different too... I like it! So long as you still get your 3 drop.

I do like this map though. SUPPORT!

[Juan_Bottom]

Oh, and as for the colors. I like those too, especially the blue. It looks like sci-fi from the 80s & early 90s. You know how every future computer screen had the blue background?

One problem that the foundry-perts may have is the solar background the. Check out the Mars map to see what I mean.

But that said, I do like the map and the gameplay seems pretty good too.

[MrBenn]

I'm struggling to view the image on the small monitors they give us at work

I'll have a look on my bigger monitor when I'm at home, but in the mean-time, will leave you with some wise words:

9. A map must work within the following map size restrictions:

1. SMALL MAP: WIDTH up to 630 px; HEIGHT 600 px
2. LARGE MAP: WIDTH up to 840 px ; HEIGHT 800 px.
3. SIZE DIFFERENTIAL: A large map must be noticably larger than their small map; 9% larger is required but 33.3% (1/3rd) is recommended.
4. NOTE: Mapmakers are encouraged to make their large maps smaller than the maximum size limits when possible to eliminate scrolling to attack/read the sidebar info.

[Charles_IV]

MapMakers Handbook wrote:9. A map must work within the following map size restrictions:

1. SMALL MAP: WIDTH up to 630 px; HEIGHT 600 px
2. LARGE MAP: WIDTH up to 840 px ; HEIGHT 800 px.
3. SIZE DIFFERENTIAL: A large map must be noticably larger than their small map; 9% larger is required but 33.3% (1/3rd) is recommended.
4. NOTE: Mapmakers are encouraged to make their large maps smaller than the maximum size limits when possible to eliminate scrolling to attack/read the sidebar info.

MrBenn, my original is 800 wide by 600 deep, my "large" version of the map. I don't know why it displays so large here. My small version will conform as well at 600 px wide by 450 deep...if I can figure out what (if anything?) is wrong and how to fix it.

Ch_IV

[MrBenn]

Strange? The image dimensions appear to be 1024px × 767px??
It's possible that it's been resized when you imported it into photobucket? Who knows?

[Charles_IV]

The background is a Hubble picture of NGC2704. I've written to AP about it since its listed as an AP/NASA photo from 08/11/08. If its too pricey for me, I'll compose as good a drawing as I can, unless someone can suggest a site for freebie astronomical pictures.

The enlargement of my drawing occurred I believe when I saved my drawing as a PDF file in InkScape. The Adobe image looks a little enlarged. I don't know why it blew it up, but I'll see what I can do. Inkscape does quality precision drawing and its user friendly, but its standard SVG output format is a little ahead of the game right now although it is written in XML language.

Maybe I'll go ahead and shrink my 800x600 image to the smaller 600x450 scale and see how that size posts. Even if its wrong, it should be closer to what's expected.

The map is not one I've used for anything extra. I made it just for CC. Actually, I did the first two or three drafts on my paint program. Those I could save straight to JPEG format. Why is Paint not acceptable?

Thanks all!

[oaktown]

It's not that Paint isn't acceptable, it's that you're going to have a hell of a time producing a CC map in Paint. Here's a recent discussion as to why...
viewtopic.php?f=127&t=67747

As for map size, I also see it as over 1000 pixels wide. I suspect that when you save your Inkscape image it is maintaining the original image dimensions in inches, not in pixels, because when you save something to a PDF file I believe it may resample the image and change the PPI from whatever the default was in Inkscape. PDF may not be the best intermediary file type.

Here are some of my thoughts on your first draft:

• I like the general idea of using an actual image of space for a map, though I'd prefer to see something with better resolution.
• I really like the shapes of the army shadows, though you should note that since the army counts have black outline the army shadows tend to work better when they lighten the area around the army count, not darken it.
• Seems like a space map should be three dimensional, no? Like the old cube map that somebody tried a while back. Just a thought that you can disregard.
• An "enemy ship" is an army, or a territory? Either way, the game engine doesn't allow what you want to do in terms of gaining ships in "spoils," unless I'm not understanding you. Same goes for the "TO" tags - you'll need a game engine change. The neutral starts you can do, but they won't be random - you'll have to preset their starting values.
• an awful lot of your image is devoted to your legend, which right now doesn't say much... though since you have to read the text below to begin to understand what you're trying to do, you may need all of that room.
• I can't read many of the red territory names... could be a colorblind issue, or is anybody else having the same problem?
• It could just be that it's late, but I'm not sure that I entirely get the stuff in the legend about how many mineral worlds each color has... I think that a territory is a star system, and red star systems (for instance) have two mineral worlds; if I hold a combination of an Industrial world plus one red system (2 worlds) I get no bonus, if I hold two red systems (4 worlds) I get one bonus, and if I hold 3 red systems (6 worlds) I get a two bonus? And do the starting systems also have mineral worlds as per their color - thus if I start with Tyro I automatically have an Industrial World and 4 mineral worlds, so instant bonus on my first turn?
• You have only six starting locations - which is fine - but CC does allow for up to eight players in a game. Six starts would limit this map to 2-6 players, which as I said is fine if that's what you want to do.
• Any map that starts with set starting locations will be looked at very closely to determine whether or not the starts are fair... in this case the different starts have access to different system classes, and there's a big advantage to those that start in defensible corners. Armelian will be the best start by far, because it can hold six territories for a +6 bonus (I count 18 mineral worlds) with only three defense points: 20, 38 (?), and 16. As Serra expands, on the other hand, every territory it takes has to be fortified, and it has no access to a Class O.

Alright, I hope I've given you plenty to think over!

[Charles_IV]

Thanks very much Oaktown! Great help. I'm having to teach myself how to use vector/layer graphics. Can I get access to that tutorial???

I don't want to do 3d mapping unless I come up with something visually simple. I've seen some very complicated looking maps and don't want to add to the count.

You're right about the mineral world counts and yes, the industrial worlds do get their own mineral world resources for use.

I only have six industrial worlds because I didn't think 51 sectors was enough to support an eight player game. I could redo with smaller but more numerous sectors.

I'll give good thought to all your ideas. Thanks again!

Ch_IV

[Charles_IV]

I think I've eliminated the sizing problem with my most recent save, an 800 x 600 map edited into my original post above.

Ch_IV

[Charles_IV]

Yep, I've eliminated the sizing problem. The background picture, though not as colorful is copyright-free. The other one would have cost $150 bucks from AP. I redid the grid to add more territory cells, some of which are empty and just indicate distance. Please let me know what you think.

Charles_IV

[mibi]

I am not a fan of this map in any shape or form.

[MrBenn]

The red lines are a bit overwhelming - it has the effect of making the background look like a background rather than an integral component.

I think I get what the legend is saying, but agree with Oaktown that it will need to be explained in much simpler terms.

Have you checked out any of the other space maps? (Clicky link to topic search results)
It might be worth reading through some of those to see where people have struggled before...

[Charles_IV]

I want to thank mibi for your entirely useless criticism. I'll be sure not to send this map to you for a Christmas gift.

[mibi]

I want to thank mibi for your entirely useless criticism. I'll be sure not to send this map to you for a Christmas gift.

lol, this map won't be quenched by Christmas anyways.

[Charles_IV]

mibi, such non-specific criticism is useless in developing this map to a functional and enjoyable level. If you simply do not like the concept of space combat, you need not even comment on the map. If you like space combat but feel I am somehow approaching this from the wrong perspective altogether, I would be interested in knowing what you dislike and what you would prefer. Then I can try to work with you.

Charles_IV

[mibi]

mibi, such non-specific criticism is useless in developing this map to a functional and enjoyable level. If you simply do not like the concept of space combat, you need not even comment on the map. If you like space combat but feel I am somehow approaching this from the wrong perspective altogether, I would be interested in knowing what you dislike and what you would prefer. Then I can try to work with you.

Charles_IV

um... ok... i will give you some.. criticism.. later when I have more time.

cheerio!

[mibi]

Ok, Battle Among the Stars... or is it Galaxy? Either way the only thing celestial here is the background. You could just as easily swamp it out for a piece of honeycomb and call it Battle of the Hive. Are there actual stars here? Is F1 a star? Because to me F1 brings up a the help dialog, G8 is political summit, J5 is a hiphop group, B4 is an internet abbreviation, A1 is a steak sauce, and so on. I would like to occupy stars, Alpha Centari, Cebelrai whatever. Make me feel like I am Among the Stars not Among the Alphanumeric Naming system. I dabbled with naming the prisoners in my Supermax map with numbers, but in the end, that was a dumb idea, because Big Smoke likes to take it up the ass from Tre, not T5.

Ok, so the concept and naming suck. The graphics need help too. Is F7 a sector of space or a star? It can't be a star because the back ground image has thousands of stars so how can you really single one out. The hexagon thing is a bit weird. It just creates this big jumble of territories and feels very crowded. When I think of a battle in space, I don't want to feel like I am surrounded on six sides by everyone else. The text is largely hard to read and needs a stronger aliasing as well as some background in places where there is no contrast. The map is too small too... it's just cramped, hell even two of the bonus text is tucked in the corner there.

My advice is to take this bug-eyed view of the heavens back to which ever extraterrestrial bee hive you stole it from. Start over with a pure black canvas. Make it larger to give your self some room to work. Create your own stars, with their own names. Built it up from scratch. It's just stars here, you don't have to be a graphics guru. Come up with some interesting gameplay features so it isn't just like the other space maps we have. Then you just might have something that has a purpose.

[Charles_IV]

MrBenn, you see that the new map eliminates the bold territory lines AND all the fancy play rules. Now its a simple classical risky-type battlemap. What do you think of this option?

[MrBenn]

Click image to enlarge.

The map certainly looks clearer now.

[Charles_IV]

Okay, mibi, this versions for you. I hope you at least like it better. C4

[Juan_Bottom]

I'm actually more confused now.
Why are D3 & 4 orange if Bal'shamir is in the opposite corner? The colors on this thing are all types of messed up.