Moderator: Cartographers
Isn't the fleur-de-lys symbol enough to understand that? It looks pretty straightforward to me compared to some of the more complicated maps which I cannot understand even after looking for 5 minutes at the legend!oaktown wrote:welcome - again, lovely graphics.
Quick concern: not everybody will know that Paris=Ile de France, even with the symbol... you know somebody will be confused when their opponent gets a +1 for holding Ile de France, when the legend says you get a +1 for holding Paris.
Unfortunately... no, many Americans won't equate the two at all.Ruben Cassar wrote:Isn't the fleur-de-lys symbol enough to understand that? It looks pretty straightforward to me compared to some of the more complicated maps which I cannot understand even after looking for 5 minutes at the legend!oaktown wrote:welcome - again, lovely graphics.
Quick concern: not everybody will know that Paris=Ile de France, even with the symbol... you know somebody will be confused when their opponent gets a +1 for holding Ile de France, when the legend says you get a +1 for holding Paris.
What if I change the name Isle-de-France with Paris. I loose some flavour but gain some straightforwardness! Alternatively you can say in the legend that Paris is the capital of Ile de France. This way you don't lose the "flavour".pamoa wrote:oaktown
not everybody will know that Paris=Ile de France, even with the symbol... you know somebody will be confused when their opponent gets a +1 for holding Ile de France, when the legend says you get a +1 for holding Paris.
Kaplowitz
Maybe make Paris its own little territory?
Ruben Cassar
Isn't the fleur-de-lys symbol enough to understand that? It looks pretty straightforward to me compared to some of the more complicated maps which I cannot understand even after looking for 5 minutes at the legend!
InkL0sed
Unfortunately... no, many Americans won't equate the two at all.
I totally disagree with this. The gameplay is interesting enough as it is. No need to make every map super complicated, we already have a bunch of those waiting to get quenched. Besides there is already the capital bonus, something that is not available in the other France map.nagerous wrote:It would be nice to throw in more gimmicks, cairns style. At the moment the map doesn't seem that appealing to play, just because it is so similar to the current France map. If it's going to be set in the 1789. maybe add a few more tricks within the map, to make it more exciting and playable, as otherwise people will just stick to playing the classic France map.
Fair call, I'm not against the map. I actually think it looks really good graphically etc. I'm just suggesting that there is the potential to hit a roadblock via the fact that the map has marked similarities to the other French map. I wasn't suggesting super complicated, I just thought a few more tricks could be sneaked in and it would make the map a more exciting prospect to play.Ruben Cassar wrote:I totally disagree with this. The gameplay is interesting enough as it is. No need to make every map super complicated, we already have a bunch of those waiting to get quenched. Besides there is already the capital bonus, something that is not available in the other France map.nagerous wrote:It would be nice to throw in more gimmicks, cairns style. At the moment the map doesn't seem that appealing to play, just because it is so similar to the current France map. If it's going to be set in the 1789. maybe add a few more tricks within the map, to make it more exciting and playable, as otherwise people will just stick to playing the classic France map.
Apart from that the structure of the regions and territories makes the strategy on this one totally different from the other France map.
What kind of tricks ?nagerous wrote:... I actually think it looks really good graphically etc. I'm just suggesting that there is the potential to hit a roadblock via the fact that the map has marked similarities to the other French map. I wasn't suggesting super complicated, I just thought a few more tricks could be sneaked in and it would make the map a more exciting prospect to play.
What does bother you with rivers? Consider that I wanted the map to geographically correct so rivers are sometimes impassable borders and sometimes crossable by a bridge or being at the center of a territory. Then they should flow until sea and for me they are part of the graphical definition of the map as i removed any other background.bryguy wrote:1) The river annoys me right now as is, could u change it?
2) You can hardly tell the venaissin belings where it does, cause it doesnt even touch its territ
3) Same for Foix
4) And maybe Nice
5) And could u make Roussillon and Corse (or is it Gorse?) touch there territs?
Well its up to you how it will affect gameplay but stuff like one way attacks, links from area to area via a shipping line, bonuses for holding castles that kinda malarky.pamoa wrote:What kind of tricks ?nagerous wrote:... I actually think it looks really good graphically etc. I'm just suggesting that there is the potential to hit a roadblock via the fact that the map has marked similarities to the other French map. I wasn't suggesting super complicated, I just thought a few more tricks could be sneaked in and it would make the map a more exciting prospect to play.
I'll think about itnagerous wrote:Well its up to you how it will affect gameplay but stuff like one way attacks, links from area to area via a shipping line, bonuses for holding castles that kinda malarky.pamoa wrote:What kind of tricks ?nagerous wrote:... I actually think it looks really good graphically etc. I'm just suggesting that there is the potential to hit a roadblock via the fact that the map has marked similarities to the other French map. I wasn't suggesting super complicated, I just thought a few more tricks could be sneaked in and it would make the map a more exciting prospect to play.
I agree. Just the capital starting as neutral is enough for this one.ZeakCytho wrote:Please don't put any tricks/gimicks into this map. It's great as it is now.
nagerous wrote:It would be nice to throw in more gimmicks, cairns style. At the moment the map doesn't seem that appealing to play, just because it is so similar to the current France map. If it's going to be set in the 1789. maybe add a few more tricks within the map, to make it more exciting and playable, as otherwise people will just stick to playing the classic France map.
I actually think it looks really good graphically etc. I'm just suggesting that there is the potential to hit a roadblock via the fact that the map has marked similarities to the other French map. I wasn't suggesting super complicated, I just thought a few more tricks could be sneaked in and it would make the map a more exciting prospect to play.
2 to 1 in the game tricks or not issue, I'll wait to see how it goes!Ruben Cassar wrote:I agree. Just the capital starting as neutral is enough for this one. Besides just looking at the latest bunch of 5 or 6 new maps to get quenched I realised that not even one of them has classic gameplay so we need some new maps to cater for this area as well.ZeakCytho wrote:Please don't put any tricks/gimicks into this map. It's great as it is now.
I don't think it should boil down to that. These things are something a map maker decides and defines at the start when he is planning a map without making major changes in this department as the map develops.pamoa wrote:2 to 1 in the game tricks or not issue, I'll wait to see how it goes!
No we dont, if people want classic maps they should come in and make themTaCktiX wrote:Keep with the classic gameplay. A mere difference in impassables and a capital bonus are enough to gameplay-wise distinguish this map from the present France. As Ruben has said, we need to deliver some classic maps to the masses after our last glut of complex maps.
Top Score:2403natty_dread wrote:I was wrong
TaCktiX wrote:Well considering that pamoa started this map as a classic gameplay one, I think the choice has already been made. Some people are trying to change that choice for petty reasons.
