*[Abandoned] Feudal England and Wales

[The Bison King]

That's fine. I don't mind a little debate, so long as it stays on topic and doesn't become personal.

However Wales is right there. In plain view. In the description he's just talking about England, and I haven't once made the argument that Wales was a part of England at this time.

[koontz1973]

Moved this to the Drafting room for you TBK as it is pretty much making itself now. You know the routine, can I get you to fill in the first post for me.

[The Bison King]

Moved this to the Drafting room for you TBK as it is pretty much making itself now. You know the routine, can I get you to fill in the first post for me.

Lol of course.

[Oneyed]

The Bison King, I have some ideas but much depends on how you "see" your map. my main question is about gameplay. is possible to change it or you can go with what you have now. also what about to add any story to map? so not only hold castle and conquer lands, some more bonuses, negative bonuses and so on...

Oneyed

[The Bison King]

The Bison King, I have some ideas but much depends on how you "see" your map. my main question is about gameplay. is possible to change it or you can go with what you have now. also what about to add any story to map? so not only hold castle and conquer lands, some more bonuses, negative bonuses and so on...

Oneyed

I am NOT into that over-complicated recreating history thing. I'm currently playing on that Trafalgar map with it's convoluted mess of bombards and one way attacks and special conditions to make it as much like the battle as possible and I HATE it (no offense to who-ever's map that may be). I want to keep the gameplay simple and like it is now. It's entirely my intention to make a map that is fun to play and easy to understand, that is my primary objective.

I'm not adding a story or anything stupid like that, YOU MAKE THE STORY, the game is the story. I know that the Normans conquered England in 1066 but maybe when YOU play the Saxons and Angles hold England, or maybe the Welsh unite and invade the mainland. You see what I mean?

[The Bison King]

and on the map its england and wales territories in play.

There, name changed to Midieval Britain

Britain=England and Wales

SOLVED

[General Brock II]

Great idea, Bison King! I think it's spelled "medieval," though... Midieval doesn't look right, to me...

[The Bison King]

Great idea, Bison King! I think it's spelled "medieval," though... Midieval doesn't look right, to me...

OH MY GOD!!! HOW MANY TIMES CAN I SPELL THIS WORD WRONG!!!! WHY AM I SO FREAKING STUPID!!!!!!!!!!!

[General Brock II]

The Bison King, I have some ideas but much depends on how you "see" your map. my main question is about gameplay. is possible to change it or you can go with what you have now. also what about to add any story to map? so not only hold castle and conquer lands, some more bonuses, negative bonuses and so on...

Oneyed

I am NOT into that over-complicated recreating history thing. I'm currently playing on that Trafalgar map with it's convoluted mess of bombards and one way attacks and special conditions to make it as much like the battle as possible and I HATE it (no offense to who-ever's map that may be). I want to keep the gameplay simple and like it is now. It's entirely my intention to make a map that is fun to play and easy to understand, that is my primary objective.

I'm not adding a story or anything stupid like that, YOU MAKE THE STORY, the game is the story. I know that the Normans conquered England in 1066 but maybe when YOU play the Saxons and Angles hold England, or maybe the Welsh unite and invade the mainland. You see what I mean?

I agree with Bison, here. Keep it simple, for we've got a plethora of complicated maps turning out.

haha, not your fault, Bison - nobody else apparently caught it, either.

[koontz1973]

Just a thought, some towns would be nice to add another level of play. Have these as a hold castle and town for the region bonus.
Any ideas on impassables and where you are placing them?
Why not put Hadrian wall (just text along the line) at the top. I know it is Roman but it is still there today and would go some way to showing why Scotland was not invited to this party.

[VicFontaine]

Haven't read the thread. Just saw the pics. Initial thoughts:

1) When I saw the title of this map thread, I thought, "Heck yeah!" Then I saw the map.
2) The graphics are nice, the fonts are nice, etc. The gameplay has nothing unique about it. There are already maps so similar to this. There is so much you could do to make this map truly "mediaeval" or "middle-age".
3) I hope some research will go into middle-aged Britain and it can be more historical with more to it: warring families, trade routes, religious sites, etc.

[Neato Missile]

Map looks rad, hope it finds purchase in the rocky soil of the forge.

The simplicity of gameplay and design are excellent and play to your strengths. The struggle to make this map more "narrative" seems unnecessary: the map derives its terris/regions from medieval-era geography, why isn't that enough to qualify it as Medieval England? It doesn't need knights or plagues or Shakespeare quotes to make it sufficiently Historical.

[VicFontaine]

Map looks rad, hope it finds purchase in the rocky soil of the forge.

The simplicity of gameplay and design are excellent and play to your strengths. The struggle to make this map more "narrative" seems unnecessary: the map derives its terris/regions from medieval-era geography, why isn't that enough to qualify it as Medieval England? It doesn't need knights or plagues or Shakespeare quotes to make it sufficiently Historical.

Well, there's two ways to go about it: Call it "mediaeval" (which is a valid spelling, FYI ) and simply make it geographically such...and nothing else. But that just seems misleading. At least, it was to me, a history fan and a fan of mediaeval Britain and Europe particularly.

The point isn't, "What does this map need to make it worth playing?" The question is, "Can this map be more and really add something unique?"

Yes.

[The Bison King]

Well I definitely plan on keeping the gameplay simple, adhering to a "less is more" philosophy... except for the number of territories where I have come to the conclusion that "more is more". I definitely don't agree with the statement "the gameplay has nothing unique about it" The gameplay is entirely unique, simple but unique. There isn't a single map on this site (to my knowledge) that has a bonus structure like this one.

Definitely expect the graphics to evolve, and add a level of flavor that is still missing.

Any ideas on impassables and where you are placing them?

For the most part I'm thinking about leaving it pretty open, but I am considering adding some hills to block off part of Wales.

Why not put Hadrian wall (just text along the line) at the top. I know it is Roman but it is still there today and would go some way to showing why Scotland was not invited to this party.

That's a good idea.

[koontz1973]

I think the closest we have to this style of GP is going to be Antartica.

[VicFontaine]

Again I'm really hoping to do this supersized. I'll plan on doing this big unless I can't. I truly and honestly think this map will be better the bigger it is. Shrinking it will be my damage control plan.

Good luck with that. They like to change things on you. Didn't you get the memo? The TPS reports? Your 8 bosses telling you the same thing, Bob? They only want Luxembourg-sized maps

Carry on. I still don't see how this map is "entirely unique" to the CC site as you claim, but of course, I'll play it and probably enjoy it just because it's Britain!

[Oneyed]

I think you should united area under castle London with are under castle Norwich to one with these two castles and the same do with area under castle Hastings and area under castle Dover.

Oneyed

[guttorm]

I still don't see how this map is "entirely unique" to the CC site as you claim

I think it is pretty original to base it on a 17th century map while still calling it medieval or whatever..

..someone should make a map of North America (without Mexico) but call it StonedAgeCanada. That will also be a unique map.

[The Bison King]

I still don't see how this map is "entirely unique" to the CC site as you claim

I think it is pretty original to base it on a 17th century map while still calling it medieval or whatever..

..someone should make a map of North America (without Mexico) but call it StonedAgeCanada. That will also be a unique map.

Ok, It was a 17th century map of 600-900's England, but whatever, please just skim the thread long enough to be a snarky asshole and not offer anything constructive. Thanks buddy, the foundry is way better off with posters like you.

[VicFontaine]

So...is the only way this is "totally not a Feudal War or Epic" that the regions are not identical?

Break it down for me?

[zimmah]

medieval

[The Bison King]

So...is the only way this is "totally not a Feudal War or Epic" that the regions are not identical?

Break it down for me?

You're right. It is very similar to Feudal Epic. I was even going to call it "Feudal Britain" but I thought "Medieval" was cooler. There's nothing wrong with taking a winning formula and popular formula and re-envisioning it. The feudal maps have a really cool gameplay mechanic, and it's not like this map copies it directly. The Castles are powered down, and they can't bombard.

[VicFontaine]

Ah OK gotcha. I guess I must've misread something (seriously) since I thought you or someone else said in this thread words like "unique" and "not like the Feudals." That's where my suggestion came in to really take a remarkably fascinating time in world history (middle ages) and make it history specific. I think you could easily keep it simple (as you desire) while making it more unique and less like those other maps.

Either way, I always like your creativity, so....

[The Bison King]

Click image to enlarge.

I'm doing the lines and colors in two seperate programs so they don't match up entirely at the moment. Once I know what size I'll be doing it, I'll redo the colors.

Unless there's something I missed all the names are on there now, so we can look at what names wouldn't have been used prior to 1300 and change them.

I think you should united area under castle London with are under castle Norwich to one with these two castles and the same do with area under castle Hastings and area under castle Dover.

Oneyed

Ok you're English is usually pretty good, but this one... it took some serious work, lol. If you're talking about combining the 4 Eastern kingdoms into 2 I won't be doing that. I'm going to stick with the current bonus structure based on that Jean Bleau map. I like that there are 4 small bonuses that are easily exhausted in the south east and 4 large "double" bonuses in the north and west that can be shared. I think it makes for a cool dynamic.

[Oneyed]

Ok you're English is usually pretty good, but this one... it took some serious work, lol. If you're talking about combining the 4 Eastern kingdoms into 2 I won't be doing that.

I have often problem to explain my ideas in English , but you understand me right

I'm going to stick with the current bonus structure based on that Jean Bleau map. I like that there are 4 small bonuses that are easily exhausted in the south east and 4 large "double" bonuses in the north and west that can be shared. I think it makes for a cool dynamic.

ok, if your decision is go with map about Heptarchy, there will be needed any changes because the end of Heptarchy is in 9th century:

- names of regions must be changed. you have much of them modern. maybe you should go with anglo saxon names.
- also the borders of region should be another
- maybe use "capitals" better as castles
- Wales was not unitied in these times
- Cornwall was not part of Wessex yet
- Cumbria was not part of Northumbria

these are the main my notices.

Oneyed