Lunar War [GP, G, X] files on p.1

[natty dread]

I am using 256 shades of gray actually.

I've been working on a new version, with improved craters & mines, and connection lines, I'll probably post it today.

[yeti_c]

I'm gonna repost this... because it is still true - 15 pages later...

You have a mishmash of connection styles that really doesn't help you see what attacks what - as it stands - this is a "BOB only" map... (i.e. playable only with BOB)

C.

How are the craters here any different than for example the train lines in vancouver or chicago? Only difference is that this map has a different ratio of territories with line connections and territories with borders.

Players seem to have no problems with such arrangement on those maps. Furthermore, there are more complicated maps than this out there, and people still play them.

Which map has different styles of connectors out there? I can't think of any with Borders and Connections? Most maps stick to 1 style and 1 style alone.

C.

[ender516]

NYC and Chicago come to mind.

[natty dread]

And vancouver.

Sorry, I was going to make an update today but nordic went live and I got caught up playing speed games on it... so I'll have to postpone it til tomorrow.

[Industrial Helix]

Given the poll, I'd like to voice my opinion in favor of territories rather than connected army dots. Natty, you're familiar with my reasons, so no sense in repeating them.

[natty dread]

I know your opinion IH, but in this case I have to say I don't agree with it. There's just no way to represent the craters with territory borders... I mean, how would one decide where to draw the borders? The craters are holes in the moon surface, the edges of those holes are the only borders they have... And since they are not side-to-side, I can't use those borders. I'm very much against inventing some arbitrary borders for them just to make the connections conform to some age-old standard.

IH, I'm afraid we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one. I won't be doing an all territory-borders-type map out of this one, it just doesn't fly.

If the current map really proves to be too confusing (and by which I mean that majority votes "no" in the poll) I'm prepared to change all connections to line connections (then at least they will be uniform). Otherwise I'll keep them as they are.

[yeti_c]

NYC and Chicago come to mind.

NYC are a set of distinct connected territories that are specifically attached that way for a reason... rather than the random effort that is here - also they're a lot more obvious.

C.

[natty dread]

Yeti_c, you have a right to your opinion. I also have a right to disagree with it. As long as you keep throwing the same argument without once listening or considering my counter-arguments, I'm afraid you're not going to convince me.

Besides that I believe the poll speaks for itself.

[yeti_c]

Meh - feel free to make a shit map then - I'll leave you to it.

C.

[natty dread]

Meh - feel free to make a shit map then - I'll leave you to it.

C.

Sure, resort to insults when you can't handle a reasonable discussion/debate between adults.

It sucks when you can't have your way at all things, eh?

[yeti_c]

No it sucks when you're trying to help yet end up beating your head against a brick wall of stupidity.

C.

[natty dread]

Sadly, I have better things to do with my time than indulge in a childish name-calling competition with you. I'm trying to make a map here, and you're not helping, you're trying to push your own opinion by force, and implying that if I don't agree with you then my map is shit and I'm stupid. Where does this arrogance sprout from? What have I ever done to offend you that you need to resort to such low blows?

We are here trying to make a map. You have every right to give your opinion, but if the mapmaker disagrees you, it will not help one bit if you start insulting and throwing tantrums. Your opinion is not the only opinion in the world, and I will consider all opinions equally. Majority of the people here seem to have no problems reading this map, as the poll clearly indicates.

However, like I already said, if it proves too hard for most people to comprehend this map the way it is now, I'm willing to change all connections to line-connections. But I will not be installing some arbitrary borders around the craters - that would really spoil the feel of this map and I'd rather scrap the whole project and start over with a gameplay designed for territory borders. If that's what people want, then fine. But before I do this I'm going to hear other opinions as well as yours, yeti. If you can't handle it then stay the f out of my thread, please.

[yeti_c]

Ignorance is bliss - knock yourself out.

C.

[natty dread]

What's next, your dad is stronger than my dad?

Whatever. Bye bye yeti. Come back when you're capable of having a rational discussion.

[porkenbeans]

Sadly, I have better things to do with my time than indulge in a childish name-calling competition with you. I'm trying to make a map here, and you're not helping, you're trying to push your own opinion by force, and implying that if I don't agree with you then my map is shit and I'm stupid. Where does this arrogance sprout from? What have I ever done to offend you that you need to resort to such low blows?

We are here trying to make a map. You have every right to give your opinion, but if the mapmaker disagrees you, it will not help one bit if you start insulting and throwing tantrums. Your opinion is not the only opinion in the world, and I will consider all opinions equally. Majority of the people here seem to have no problems reading this map, as the poll clearly indicates.

However, like I already said, if it proves too hard for most people to comprehend this map the way it is now, I'm willing to change all connections to line-connections. But I will not be installing some arbitrary borders around the craters - that would really spoil the feel of this map and I'd rather scrap the whole project and start over with a gameplay designed for territory borders. If that's what people want, then fine. But before I do this I'm going to hear other opinions as well as yours, yeti. If you can't handle it then stay the f out of my thread, please.

Do not feel alone natty. yeti has been doing the same thing in more than 1 of my projects. I think that he just might need a hug or something. Ok I will give him a virtual hug right now.
...I hope that it helps, but if not, I feel as natty does when he says, please try to act with a little civility, or stay away from my projects.

[natty dread]

please try to act with a little civility, or stay away from my projects.

Well said.

Ok I hope we can put this unpleasantness behind us, and concentrate on the map once again. Here's the next update, v.20 which should address some issues - namely those having to do with craters, and the moon looking too flat. I added some creative shading and lighting -type effects to help creating a better 3d-effect. Hope it works. I couldn't do very much of it though, as it would have disturbed the legibility of some areas of the map. But if it still looks too flat then I might be able to push it a bit further, maybe...

Anyways, v.20 here:

Click image to enlarge.

[MarshalNey]

It's an improvement. I'm sorry to be talking about graphics, I have no further critique for the gameplay (until Beta perhaps!) Hopefully this can be moved soon after a review.

The dotted lines seem fine, btw. And what's more I fully agree with your viewpoint about using borders; it would be too weird to have craters with borders. Then again, I've got a map that uses a mixed set of lines and borders as well, so I might be a bad judge

PS While you may think it's trivial, I really think the flags ought to be straight, this is the last I'll say on that I promise

[Industrial Helix]

PS While you may think it's trivial, I really think the flags ought to be straight, this is the last I'll say on that I promise

Seconded, yet again. There's no wind on the moon

[natty dread]

Ok ok, I'll change the flags. Soon...

Anyone think the flags should have shadows?

[ender516]

Hey, if you want realism with the flags, make them to scale. Seriously, I like the flags with the wiggle which is obviously created by wires and motors.
Whether the flags should be straight or not is not a gameplay issue. Solve it with a poll in the Graphics Workshop.

[natty dread]

Ok...

As for the territory connections, let's put it this way:

If I had a geographical map of a coast and sea with lots of little islands in the sea, would you ask me to stretch the coastlines of the little islands so that they touch the mainland and each other so that I wouldn't have to draw line connections from island to island?

Well? I didn't think so. Why is it any different when I'm doing a map of the moon... let's be honest, the moon is a huge hunk of rock, that's what it is. There's features called "seas" or "oceans" but in fact they're just rock at a slightly lower elevation. So since these marine features have clearly defined borders it is logical to me to represent them as the land area, which is divided into territories. And the craters are holes in the rock like said - so basically they're the same as the seas, but much smaller.

So it's logical to me to think of the craters as "islands" while the seas are "continents". The impassable light grey area could be thought of as the "ocean" if we keep with the analogy to regular geographical maps.

So humour me, all my critics, try to imagine this map as a standard geographical map. Imagine instead of the seas, land continents. Imagine the light grey non-playable area as ocean. Imagine all the craters, mines, bases as islands in that ocean. Now if I had a map like that, would you say "you got to get rid of those sea routes between the islands, and stretch the borders of the islands so that they touch each other - otherwise the map is too confusing with all these different connection styles"?

Would you?

[mibi]

As a successful graphic designer of many years who is quite knowledgeable in the field of user experience and user interfaces, it is my professional opinion that this map sucks ballz. I would list the many egregious violations of all things aethetic, however I am afraid my monitor might run out of ink. If this map were quenched in even 10% of its current form it would signify that the CC foundry is nothing more than a farting ground from over-encouraged noobs to fumble their way through pirated software in an attempt to depict our closest celestial bodies as visual crack whores slumming the starscape.



p.s. a bird pooped on your moon.

[natty dread]

What was that? Did someone speak?

[Evil DIMwit]

Besides that I believe the poll speaks for itself.

So far 21% say they can't understand the connections at all. That's one in five players, and that is a lot. You can't count on players not choosing this map if they don't understand it: Through tournaments, the 'random map' setting, and just haphazard clicking, people are going to play this map without looking and some will be confused. Therefore, if there's anything you can do to make the connections more intuitive, try it. My recommendations right now:
1. A prominent border around the crater circles that opens up where the crater borders a sea, or
2. Lines connecting the seas' army rectangles to all the territories that border the sea.

[natty dread]

Well, now we are getting somewhere. Thanks e_dw, I like it when someone comes up with solutions instead of just spewing mindless insults.

The #2 suggestion is something I have already considered. Like I said, if the connections prove too hard to grasp, I'm willing to make all connections into line-connections, but I'm going to wait until the poll is finished before I do anything to this map.

edit.

Now that I think of it, #1 could maybe be a better solution. Adding all the lines for the seas would probably just clutter the map even more, which would better be avoided.