Conquer Club

Gameplay: Standard, Open to suggestions.

Territories: 50 (I think)
I didn't change a bunch of stuff I meat to, but the spelling is better.
Bonus regions: 9


see post on pg 6 for changes.
Version 2.0
http://percent135.wikispaces.com/file/view/Belgium+v2.0+copy.bmp
Version 1.6
http://percent135.wikispaces.com/file/view/Belgium+v1.7+copy.bmp Version 1.2
http://percent135.wikispaces.com/file/view/Belgium+v1.2.bmp
Version 1
http://percent135.wikispaces.com/file/view/Belgium+copy.bmp

I will explain changes later, I have midterms to study for.

Looking good, we need a Belgium map

Gameplay: You might want to add in a few impassables, while bonuses are pretty good (except I think pink should be worth more than 6 as it boarders so many other territories and continents), I think the mosh pit needs splitting up a little to make many of your continents actually worth taking. I'd look into Belgian rivers.

Graphics: A lot of work is going to be needed here but a promising start. The colours (especially the pink, the two blue conts above it and the orange) are very garish and don't fit with each other too well. Also many of your continents are rather similar in colour. Borders also are pretty bad. You need to ditch whatever tool your using to draw them, does your software have a path tool?

That's all for now, good luck with it and don't worry about not many posts, Christmas I fear will leave most people not in the mood, I'm already pretty resigned to not getting anything on my Denmark map for a while.

Do you have any contact with TOM? Because if these going to be similar to tom map,then i think that you must change everything, district,colours,borders,maybe names.For now toms map look much better,then these map.

It has nothing to do with tom. I know it isn't as good as his yet but he is banned so there's not much he can do. Hopefully my map making skills will improve as this map progesses and this map will become that good.

Looking good so far, especially for a first draft!

On the graphics, something like this was left on my map which can be fixed easily - it seems a bit scratchy and when the bevels (I'm pretty sure those are bevels around the bonuses) are added the bonus borders get skewed and very jagged (see the border between the top right pink/reddish bonus and the lime green. Also, I would think about dulling down that light green color — it's a bit much on the eyes. In addition, check out the border separating Bastogne and Libramont — it doesn't end at the horizontal border. You gotta touch that stuff up.

Speaking of the northwest, unless you intend to add impassables between the previously mentioned two bonuses, I think that the reddish one should be worth +2 (borders 4, defend 2) … heck, looking back I think you should add +1 to all your bonuses.

Check that out for some rivers. You'll need some impassability here unless it's going to be one huge, hectic battle.

Good start!

I have a new draft with some impassables but that picture helps a lot. I'll put the new version up by either tonight or tomarrow. Thanks for that map of the rivers!

Version 1.2


Changes:
Impassibles added
Borders redone

Some of the impassibles reduce the amount of borders but unfourtunently the rivers in belguim aren't that conveniently set up for this map.

Better on the borders (still need work), but I'd change the color of some of the continents as well as the water. I'd just drum down the entire color scheme, to be honest. It's a bit much on the eyes.

i would work a little more on the rivers or streams or whatever, make them flow more, and blend in

I like the style. This has a lot of potential.

InkL0sed wrote:I like the style. This has a lot of potential.

Aye to that.

I would suggest a darker colour for the water (atm the streach next to gent is invisible). Also I'd lose the bit betwixt ciny and florennes, the dotted line isn't exactly clear.

Most of your boarders now look really scrappy but what you are trying to do will look very good with a little more work.

Here's a good technique i've found. I use gimp but if you use something else you'll have to find someone to give you the equivilent.

For the boarders between continents:

• Use a layer path tool to outline your boarder, stroke it with about 2 px
• create a new layer for the colour highlight, make a layer mask for it. with everything outside the continent invisible, and inside the continent visible
• use a large, heavily feathered paintbrush and go over the boarder. It will only paint inside the continent producing a nice effect.

For the boarders within continents:

• Layer path tool again, this time select stroke with tool: Paintbrush. that should lay down a nice feathered back
• Stroke again with 1 px. this will place your boarders on top of the colours.

^you may want a lot of different layers for this for easier changes later.

Balsiefen wrote:Most of your boarders now look really scrappy but what you are trying to do will look very good with a little more work.

Here's a good technique i've found. I use gimp but if you use something else you'll have to find someone to give you the equivilent.

For the boarders between continents:

• Use a layer path tool to outline your boarder, stroke it with about 2 px
• create a new layer for the colour highlight, make a layer mask for it. with everything outside the continent invisible, and inside the continent visible
• use a large, heavily feathered paintbrush and go over the boarder. It will only paint inside the continent producing a nice effect.

For the boarders within continents:

• Layer path tool again, this time select stroke with tool: Paintbrush. that should lay down a nice feathered back
• Stroke again with 1 px. this will place your boarders on top of the colours.

^you may want a lot of different layers for this for easier changes later.

Well.... Quite honestly I don't realy get that. I only have photoshop elements and gimp but I didn't realize that it was only photoshop elements untill I was looking for the path tool (it is my dad's computer so I didn't know.) I could start all over on gimp but that is on my brother's computer and he is always on it. I'm in a sticky situation here cause my dad doesn't want me to put gimp onto his computer. For the borders I actualy just made them using the curved line tool in microsoft publisher then put them into the photoshop file. Then I used the burn tool to make the thicker color behind the line.

I am rely stuck here

Check out the Tips Tricks and Tutorials thread (viewtopic.php?f=127&t=22320) in Foundry Discussion. You might find some other good advice in there

Lets tackle the misspelled names while we are at it

Leper => Ieper
Breveren => beveren
Dillbeek => Dilbeek
Hasset => Hasselt
Tourani => Tournai
Durby => Durbuy
Leige => Liège
Vise => Visé
Verviraes => Verviers

better that way

Bastonge -> Bastogne

On what did you base the names of the territories actually?

Riazor wrote:Bastonge -> Bastogne

On what did you base the names of the territories actually?

If I remember correctly he posted somewhere that they were based off cities … that might've been MarVal however.

woops, indeed overlooked that one

the.killing.44 wrote:

Riazor wrote:Bastonge -> Bastogne

On what did you base the names of the territories actually?

If I remember correctly he posted somewhere that they were based off cities … that might've been MarVal however.

I did use cities. Some people wanted to have the regions named using either flemmish or dutch depenging on their actual languages but I neither speak dutch or flemmish.

onbekende wrote:Lets tackle the misspelled names while we are at it

Leper => Ieper
Breveren => beveren
Dillbeek => Dilbeek
Hasset => Hasselt
Tourani => Tournai
Durby => Durbuy
Leige => Liège
Vise => Visé
Verviraes => Verviers

better that way

Ya... I am realy bad at spelling. Thanks for the corrections.
THere will be a minor update up in a few days with corrections of names and with some other minor changes.

I feel the colors are just too bright. Also I very much like your concept but the game play needs work. I like the river idea you have used and would like to see more of it. Try and make the colors of the surrounding countries a different shade then the map. PLEASE DARKEN THE COLORS

I'll be back later

New update.

Changed:

1 Brussels added as inset map
2 Colors changed (darker colors used)
3 Bonuses showed diffferently
4 Rivers thinned
5 Borders changed

I didn't realy finnish doing all the work on Brussels. The names I used are all the French versions in brussels but that can change. I think it should be a +8 bonus but it might be an objective.

Colors are much, much better now. I can actually look at the map for an extended period of time now, enough to write this .

Some thoughts:

1. I think you can do much better with the font. A new one can bring a lot more life to the map — try something more Belgian/European. Take a look at pepperonibread's Germany revamp for a font to base it off. Also, decorating/coloring the title would be nice. The font there is better, but like other things it needs to stand out some more. A flag there would do wonders. Another thing — I think centering the tert names would both clarify and make them look nicer. I know(/think) that you're saving room for the #s and their shadows, but you don't need very much and places like Durby do not need to be so removed from the center of the tert. You should also make the names fit in better: like Jodoigne, Brussels, and Ravels — to name but a few — are either cut off or just cramped somewhat. An arc/angle could be a nice touch.

2. You're going to have to redraw the borders somewhere down the road, why not make it now? Something more fluid and less pixelated — what are you using to make this? If it's Ps, use the brush tool — default black 2pt, 100% everything. Makes everything look a lot better. Right now they are very scratchy, and that takes away from the flow of the map. Look at Benn's Europa for some really nice borders. Also, on the bonus borders, something like a bolder/thicker line, or maybe just some faded/textured/patterned outline around the continent borders would both differentiate better and make it more apparent that those switch, although the colors do do a fine job of that.

3. You still need to work on the rivers. They just don't look like water to me. More blue, less turquoise-green is a start. From there … well, we'll see. Probably first comes bevels around them, then perhaps texture. Another thing: when they are making four-way borders impassable like at the Ath-Harelbacke intersection it helps a lot to stretch further out — just enough to make it more clear that Ath and Harelbacke (for instance) cannot cross, but not enough to block the Zottegem border out completely. Gent-Brugge is another place that needs that badly, and it won't be very hard to do.

4. The key needs work. For one, like the tert names, the names really don't stand out. It's also cramped and the bonus #s are uneven — use the tab button or just make a new text box to make them all aligned. Quite frankly, all of the text is just boring. Spruce it up! Wait … hold on … what is the red thing? It's not a mini-map, is it? The names are different, the outlines are something other … explain — what is that?

5. I really like the way that you made the bordering countries different colors — it's something subtle but just clicks for me. But you should dull down the colors there, too — make them seem more in the background. Also, like the rivers, you need to change the color of the water … that's the English Channel/North Sea, right? No need to label it, but there it could be of much bigger use to add some subtle texture — with something that big it will be more apparent unlike the rivers.

I will be back — I'm not even done yet . My mom is dragging me off the comp. This map has some great potential and you have a really good start, it just needs touching up. If you do decide to partner up with MarVal I think that map could be something incredible. Happy mapping!

.44

the.killing.44 wrote:Colors are much, much better now. I can actually look at the map for an extended period of time now, enough to write this .

Some thoughts:

1. I think you can do much better with the font. A new one can bring a lot more life to the map — try something more Belgian/European. Take a look at pepperonibread's Germany revamp for a font to base it off. Also, decorating/coloring the title would be nice. The font there is better, but like other things it needs to stand out some more. A flag there would do wonders. Another thing — I think centering the tert names would both clarify and make them look nicer. I know(/think) that you're saving room for the #s and their shadows, but you don't need very much and places like Durby do not need to be so removed from the center of the tert. You should also make the names fit in better: like Jodoigne, Brussels, and Ravels — to name but a few — are either cut off or just cramped somewhat. An arc/angle could be a nice touch.

I haven't really put much time into the font yet. I disagree with centering the territory names because I think the army numbers should be centered not the names but that is just me.

2. You're going to have to redraw the borders somewhere down the road, why not make it now? Something more fluid and less pixelated — what are you using to make this? If it's Ps, use the brush tool — default black 2pt, 100% everything. Makes everything look a lot better. Right now they are very scratchy, and that takes away from the flow of the map. Look at Benn's Europa for some really nice borders. Also, on the bonus borders, something like a bolder/thicker line, or maybe just some faded/textured/patterned outline around the continent borders would both differentiate better and make it more apparent that those switch, although the colors do do a fine job of that.

When I changed all the colors I didn't really do anything with the continent borders and I agree they should be thicker. The pixelated effect is probably because I did it with a low amount of pixes per inch so each pixel is bigger. I will try to fix this next update

3. You still need to work on the rivers. They just don't look like water to me. More blue, less turquoise-green is a start. From there … well, we'll see. Probably first comes bevels around them, then perhaps texture. Another thing: when they are making four-way borders impassable like at the Ath-Harelbacke intersection it helps a lot to stretch further out — just enough to make it more clear that Ath and Harelbacke (for instance) cannot cross, but not enough to block the Zottegem border out completely. Gent-Brugge is another place that needs that badly, and it won't be very hard to do.

I agree that the rivers are pretty pitiful. I will try to look at other maps and the way that they do rivers.

4. The key needs work. For one, like the tert names, the names really don't stand out. It's also cramped and the bonus #s are uneven — use the tab button or just make a new text box to make them all aligned. Quite frankly, all of the text is just boring. Spruce it up! Wait … hold on … what is the red thing? It's not a mini-map, is it? The names are different, the outlines are something other … explain — what is that?

I did the key in like 5 minutes before I had to leave for several days to go to the beach. It will be better next update. The Brussels mini-map is also something I did very quickly and will be better soon.

5. I really like the way that you made the bordering countries different colors — it's something subtle but just clicks for me. But you should dull down the colors there, too — make them seem more in the background. Also, like the rivers, you need to change the color of the water … that's the English Channel/North Sea, right? No need to label it, but there it could be of much bigger use to add some subtle texture — with something that big it will be more apparent unlike the rivers.

Again, I'll have to put some time into looking at water on other maps. (wow I have no life if that is what I am spending time doing)

I will be back — I'm not even done yet . My mom is dragging me off the comp. This map has some great potential and you have a really good start, it just needs touching up. If you do decide to partner up with MarVal I think that map could be something incredible. Happy mapping!

.44

Thanks for the advise!
~Mr Walrus

Ok, I don't really know where to begin... But I'll give it a shot.

I'm a Belgian and I've only found this map by clicking captainwalrus' signature in an unrelated topic. I've been wondering for a long time if anyone would ever make a Belgium map, guess I didn't really believe enough people would be interested. So imagine my surprise when discovering that this map was made by an American!
Then I took a look at the map. And not to be rude, but... It was obiously not made by someone living in Belgium.
I'm not saying anything about graphics, because first of all this is an early stage so I understand that it doesn't look very 'Belgium-y' yet, which is normal, and second of all... I'm not good at graphics I might give some feedback on the looks of this map later on, but not yet.
What struck me was the very weird territory planning. To me, it doesn't feel right. I read that you've picked the territories based on city names. I can see that, but I just don't think you've picked the right cities.
Just to name a few: in Oost-Vlaanderen, you've taken Gent, Zottegem en Beveren (still spelled as Breveren for now). Gent is the province's capital, so good choice. But it is located far closer to the three-way border in the middle of Oost-Vlaanderen than to the center of the region you've declared 'Gent'. Also, you cannot take Zottegem and leave out Oudenaarde. Or go for Beveren and forget Sint-Niklaas. And then we haven't even discussed whether Aalst or Dendermonde should be in the picture.
Maybe another example that's less complicated: I don't see Leuven on the map. Leuven is far more important than Tienen, Zemst, Waterloo, Jodoigne or Dilbeek. Leuven is even the capital of Vlaams-Brabant. But you didn't even take that province into account. Yes, the now pink area should be divided in two, if you wish to be realistic. That area used to be one province, Brabant (which is also not mentioned on your map), but it was split a long time ago into Vlaams-Brabant (the Dutch speaking part) and Waals-Brabant (the French speaking part). This was even reproduced in the Benelux map; take a look at it.

Really, I don't mean to offend you or look down on your efforts, because I'm glad that a Belgium map will be made, and it's brave of you to do it being an American. But before refining graphics on the gameplay you already have, I'd revise my territories thoroughly. And I suggest that you ask a Belgian's help. Because I do believe you want a realistic geographical map, one that all Belgian CC'ers would be glad to play

saaimen wrote:Ok, I don't really know where to begin... But I'll give it a shot.

I'm a Belgian and I've only found this map by clicking captainwalrus' signature in an unrelated topic. I've been wondering for a long time if anyone would ever make a Belgium map, guess I didn't really believe enough people would be interested. So imagine my surprise when discovering that this map was made by an American!
Then I took a look at the map. And not to be rude, but... It was obiously not made by someone living in Belgium.
I'm not saying anything about graphics, because first of all this is an early stage so I understand that it doesn't look very 'Belgium-y' yet, which is normal, and second of all... I'm not good at graphics I might give some feedback on the looks of this map later on, but not yet.
What struck me was the very weird territory planning. To me, it doesn't feel right. I read that you've picked the territories based on city names. I can see that, but I just don't think you've picked the right cities.
Just to name a few: in Oost-Vlaanderen, you've taken Gent, Zottegem en Beveren (still spelled as Breveren for now). Gent is the province's capital, so good choice. But it is located far closer to the three-way border in the middle of Oost-Vlaanderen than to the center of the region you've declared 'Gent'. Also, you cannot take Zottegem and leave out Oudenaarde. Or go for Beveren and forget Sint-Niklaas. And then we haven't even discussed whether Aalst or Dendermonde should be in the picture.
Maybe another example that's less complicated: I don't see Leuven on the map. Leuven is far more important than Tienen, Zemst, Waterloo, Jodoigne or Dilbeek. Leuven is even the capital of Vlaams-Brabant. But you didn't even take that province into account. Yes, the now pink area should be divided in two, if you wish to be realistic. That area used to be one province, Brabant (which is also not mentioned on your map), but it was split a long time ago into Vlaams-Brabant (the Dutch speaking part) and Waals-Brabant (the French speaking part). This was even reproduced in the Benelux map; take a look at it.

Really, I don't mean to offend you or look down on your efforts, because I'm glad that a Belgium map will be made, and it's brave of you to do it being an American. But before refining graphics on the gameplay you already have, I'd revise my territories thoroughly. And I suggest that you ask a Belgian's help. Because I do believe you want a realistic geographical map, one that all Belgian CC'ers would be glad to play

OK. Thanks for the criticism and don't worry you won't offend me.THe reason i dodn't devide that central region in two was orrigionaly because there was an older attempt and I didn't want to just copy that which was stupid since that version was correct. I will redo the borders after a little more feedback. THANKS

~Mr. Walrus

there is an unnamed territory in the top left corner, (just pointingthat out)