Moderator: Cartographers
Coleman wrote:You should continue but it should be huge, with hex being the theme you could easily have 600+ territories if you make them just big enough to hold the army numbers, without breaking the foundry size rules. (Although almost everyone breaks the foundry size rules)
Coleman wrote:You should continue but it should be huge, with hex being the theme you could easily have 600+ territories if you make them just big enough to hold the army numbers, without breaking the foundry size rules. (Although almost everyone breaks the foundry size rules)
Keredrex wrote:Coleman wrote:You should continue but it should be huge, with hex being the theme you could easily have 600+ territories if you make them just big enough to hold the army numbers, without breaking the foundry size rules. (Although almost everyone breaks the foundry size rules)
I think this would be awesome... The Continents could be designated by Groupings of similar colored armies... the larger the area covered the bigger the continent value...Is it Possible??
Jota wrote:The notion of tesselated hexagonal countries is not a bad one. However, it's also not a map. It's just a gimmick. Gimmicks can be a great way to help flesh out an incomplete map idea. They can also be a useful inspiration that the rest of a map might eventually grow up around. But a gimmick isn't itself a map.
For example, one thing that tesselated hexagons makes me think of is a honeycomb. So you might use this to do a map based on a beehive. And instead of just making all of the continents identical seven-country blocks, you could grow them organically around the concept of a beehive, making them different shapes and sizes, but still having them all fitted together as contiguous groups of hexagons.
And that's just one direction you could go in. I'm sure there are plenty of others. Maybe something computer-related, like a VR environment. Or a school of magic (I'm sure the number six could be made useful in an environment like that -- circles and stars and so forth). Or... well, I'm sure there are plenty of ideas that'd be compatible with a grid of hexagons. Ideas other than just "a grid of hexagons". And once you have an idea, then you can start figuring out a map based on it.
And if it later turns out that the idea doesn't really need the hexagons after all, then you can always save them for later on -- for the next map you design.
Floppie wrote:I disagree on it being a gimmick. It's based on the design of classic war games. The current image is just a start and the computer theme was just the first thing to come to mind, but I think the concept of just doing a simple hex tileset is sound. Maps don't *have* to have some elaborate theme or be artistic to be good maps.
What's wrong with "just a hex grid"? Does it make the game less fun? Is the map less playable?
Floppie wrote:I disagree on it being a gimmick.
Floppie wrote:It's based on the design of classic war games.
The current image is just a start and the computer theme was just the first thing to come to mind, but I think the concept of just doing a simple hex tileset is sound. Maps don't *have* to have some elaborate theme or be artistic to be good maps.
What's wrong with "just a hex grid"? Does it make the game less fun? Is the map less playable?
Coleman wrote:You should continue but it should be huge, with hex being the theme you could easily have 600+ territories if you make them just big enough to hold the army numbers, without breaking the foundry size rules. (Although almost everyone breaks the foundry size rules)
hulmey wrote:This guy called KLOBBER has already tried it but he was a arse. TRy going through some threads in the map foundry to find that thread. It was quite a popular thread so there must have been about 10 pages!!!
Think it was called honeycomb
Jota wrote:(And yes, I do think that making it hundreds of hexes in size and giving bonuses based on holding large masses of contiguous territory would definitely make things more interesting, and could be a great step towards making the map something more than "just a hex grid".)
KLOBBER wrote: I personally find repetition to be annoying and possibly even a sign of compromised intelligence
gimil wrote:http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=19886&start=0
That was a CC experience of a lifetime
natty_dread wrote:I was wrong
Jota wrote:Floppie wrote:I disagree on it being a gimmick.
Then what you and I consider to be a "gimmick" are probably two different things. I consider "based on a Crossword puzzle" to be just a gimmick. "A map with extra bonuses for holding capital cities" is a gimmick. Heck, even "Ancient Greece" is a gimmick, when you get right down to it. But all of those have had actual game maps developed around them, with distinctive layouts and continent structures and gameplay.Floppie wrote:It's based on the design of classic war games.
I'm guessing you're talking about turn-based strategy board games, which I admit I haven't played many of. But I suspect that those were generally more than just identical units battling across completely uniform and symmetric terrain?The current image is just a start and the computer theme was just the first thing to come to mind, but I think the concept of just doing a simple hex tileset is sound. Maps don't *have* to have some elaborate theme or be artistic to be good maps.
The theme doesn't have to be elaborate, but I think there should be some theme, really. Even if it's a completely simple or abstract one. (I'm the person who made the Crossword map, after all.)What's wrong with "just a hex grid"? Does it make the game less fun? Is the map less playable?
I think so, yeah. We don't have fancy unit types or movement rules or emergent behaviors in this game. We have maps and continents and borders and bonuses. Not having any variation between continents or borders -- making the map seven identical and symmetrical continents, laid out in a symmetrical pattern -- severely limits how much variation in gameplay there can be (unless there's some other gimmick added in to make things more interesting).
I can see room for a map like that, certainly, for the sake of experimentation if nothing else, provided it has some theme to justify it. But there already is one: Chinese Checkers. If we went with the map that you posted an image of, I don't think it'd really be adding anything new to the site.
I do want you to understand that I'm not trying to discourage you. If I weresn't interested in your idea, I wouldn't have written that original response, nor this one. I only wrote it because I do think it's a worthwhile gimmick, and I think that you could really do something fun with it. If I weren't interested, I would have just ignored it completely. I am all for gimmicks. It's just that they need to developed into mature maps in order for them to the bear fruit they deserve.
Return to Melting Pot: Map Ideas
Users browsing this forum: No registered users