[Abandoned] Research & Conquer

[iAmCaffeine]

I think this map has a long way to go graphically, in all honesty. The text is difficult to read. Generally, the map looks like it had a decent grey background with some images copy/pasted onto it.

[isaiah40]

I've been trying to find time to comment on the above properly, but have too many games running and life got a bit busier too.

I agree with the TSF being an advanced tech requirement, the +1 per 2 homeland territories, and the +1 per 3 land territories in general. Something will have to get figured out with the conscription techs now that the normal +1 per 3 is being added.
We won't have the normal +1 per 3 regions right now.

I've also wondered about reducing the amount on standing army a little to make it more appealing as an option to take first before the homeland.
Like maybe a n10?

I've also wondered about reducing Secret Conscription neutral to make conquest more appealing earlier on.
Reduce to what value??

I'd like to see something done to make enemy homelands more appealing to take to encourage more combat between players on the map.
Well we could make all the neutral regions n2.

Sabotage really needs to be gimped or removed. I personally think gimped would work better. Oliver suggested in one of our games to make it a killer neutral and more of an operation rather than tech. Maybe a killer 20 or 25 would be suitable?
Killer 25 would be good, with the ability to bombard the TSF? I think it fits with the theme and the idea of sabotage.

The last thing I wanted to mention is conditional autodeploys are possible through the new transformations code. I think figuring out something to use this new code with would be neat. Possibly remove or change Propaganda to use the code since I don't think it's very useful the way it is now.
Actually conditional autodeploys are still not possible through the new transforms as of yet, unless something has changed very recently.

[isaiah40]

Just posting this to see what people think. Please give constructive input!

Click image to enlarge.

[koontz1973]

In two minds about it. It looks better in the way that it is easier to read and you have given yourself more space. But on the other hand I do not like it as it looks unnatural. Out of the two, my preference is for the original layout.

[iAmCaffeine]

I think this map has a long way to go graphically, in all honesty. The text is difficult to read. Generally, the map looks like it had a decent grey background with some images copy/pasted onto it.

I believe this^ still applies. Also, the green and blue text don't work. You have a decent colour scheme going, no need it to add bits of random blue and green.

[isaiah40]

I think this map has a long way to go graphically, in all honesty. The text is difficult to read. Generally, the map looks like it had a decent grey background with some images copy/pasted onto it.

I believe this^ still applies. Also, the green and blue text don't work. You have a decent colour scheme going, no need it to add bits of random blue and green.

I know about the green text, that will be changed. The blue looks fine to me, so I will wait and see if others have any input on it. As for the graphics, this has already been stamped for graphics, and unless you can let us all know what is wrong with the graphics and give ideas on how to improve them then please specify what! If you're looking for a complete overhaul of the graphics, I'm sorry but that is not going to happen because I do not have the time due to RL obligations. I said on Feb 19th that I'd have an update done that weekend, well that weekend has long come and gone, and I was finally able to get some time to do an update. Secondly, I believe that the graphics represent the theme well. So if you have suggestions on how to improve them - without a major overhaul - then please be specific.

[-=- Tanarri -=-]

Just posting this to see what people think. Please give constructive input!

Click image to enlarge.

I prefer the original layout. The new proposed layout makes it look like TSF is required for the Special Researches. There's also an over abundance of empty space in the new version.

The only thing I can think of to make it easier to show you need to own the TSF in order to attack the advanced researches is to include a small note right below the "Advanced Research" title saying something like "Needs TSF", "Need to Own TSF", "Need to Own TSF to Attack", or something similar.

[iAmCaffeine]

More proof of lacking graphics being accepted. There's no point in even offering suggestions.

[-=- Tanarri -=-]

I've been trying to find time to comment on the above properly, but have too many games running and life got a bit busier too.

I agree with the TSF being an advanced tech requirement, the +1 per 2 homeland territories, and the +1 per 3 land territories in general. Something will have to get figured out with the conscription techs now that the normal +1 per 3 is being added.
We won't have the normal +1 per 3 regions right now.

I've also wondered about reducing the amount on standing army a little to make it more appealing as an option to take first before the homeland.
Like maybe a n10?

I've also wondered about reducing Secret Conscription neutral to make conquest more appealing earlier on.
Reduce to what value??

I'd like to see something done to make enemy homelands more appealing to take to encourage more combat between players on the map.
Well we could make all the neutral regions n2.

Sabotage really needs to be gimped or removed. I personally think gimped would work better. Oliver suggested in one of our games to make it a killer neutral and more of an operation rather than tech. Maybe a killer 20 or 25 would be suitable?
Killer 25 would be good, with the ability to bombard the TSF? I think it fits with the theme and the idea of sabotage.

The last thing I wanted to mention is conditional autodeploys are possible through the new transformations code. I think figuring out something to use this new code with would be neat. Possibly remove or change Propaganda to use the code since I don't think it's very useful the way it is now.
Actually conditional autodeploys are still not possible through the new transforms as of yet, unless something has changed very recently.

+1 for 3 normal territories -- I strongly believe a standard territory bonus would help the conquer side of the game, which is sorely lacking at the moment, but if we'd like to see how other changes affect it first, then I'm happy enough to see where things go.

Standing Army -- I think neutral 10 would work well enough. Really, the 15 it is now still makes it worthwhile to go for, just it only makes sense to go for the homeland and then National Pride first and then worry about other techs like Standing Army. I think if it were neutral 10 it may encourage players to take it before completing their homeland bonus. At 10 it would line up with National Pride's bonus ratio as well.

Secret Conscription -- I think it'd be worth reducing it to a neutral 15, maybe even neutral 10, if the standard +1 for every 3 bonus isn't being included. I think it's important to make it easy to gain the ability to get troops from conquering land territories.

Open Conscription -- While I'm at it, I think it'd be useful to reduce Open Conscription a bit, either to 60 or 70, to make it a bit easier to take. If you're going to go the conquer route for your troops and use this tech to do so, then you still have to spend 3-4 guys per territory to take the territory on top of the research cost. I think making this change would help encourage the conquer side of the board as well.

Enemy Homelands -- I think reducing the neutrals to 2 on the entire map would be the wrong way to go. I haven't played many non trench games on the map, but I think with how quickly the bonuses increase, you need to have the neutrals at 3-4 in order to help slow down fast elimination of players. I was thinking more along the lines of significantly changing Propaganda. As it is now it barely makes sense to research it when you've taken a second capital. I think changing Propaganda to read either +1 per enemy homeland territory or +1 per homeland territory would help make taking out an enemy player and/or fighting over neutral homelands much more worthwhile. The neutral value would need to be changed to something like 25-30 if enemy only or 50-60 if your homeland is included. Thematically including your own homeland in the bonus could make sense since there's countless examples of governments using propaganda on their own populaces to change the way they think. Including your own homeland with a return of 6-8 turns would also make it a viable secondary option for increasing your bonus before you go off to invade other homelands.

Sabotage -- I agree 25 neutral would work well. This way it's high enough to discourage constant homeland mine bombarding to break homeland/National Pride bonus, but makes it still useful to break those bonuses in multiplayer or to break mining bonuses in 2 player if your opponent has a large mining bonus. If this gets implemented the way it's suggested, then I'd suggest increasing National Pride to 25 neutral, as I think 20 is too low for the bonus if it's going to be more permanent due to the changes in Sabotage. I think the idea of being able to bombard TSF with Sabotage is worth trying out. We could also take it one step further and allow it to bombard all the "Special Research" section (including other Sabotages for counter-Sabotage moves in freestyle games)... this could make sense since the Special Research section really aren't researches so much as various efforts to obtain bonuses, which is something I'll bring up at the end of this message.

Conditional Autodeploys -- According to bigWham they are possible using the transformation code... or at least he marked Conditional Autodeploys as implemented and stated they were possible in the thread. I think the only research which could be considered for replacement at this point is Propaganda, but my primary suggestion for it would be to change it to the above. If others don't feel the same, then we could look into changing it to something that uses Conditional Autodeploys, if they're able to be done as bigWham suggests.

"Special Researches" -- I think it'd be useful to find some other name for this section. The way I see it, the Basic and Advanced researches are all knowledge which has been gained through research, whereas the "Special Research" section I see more like putting out resources in order to gain a benefit. National Pride would be like running a specific type of propaganda type campaign to instill a sense of national pride into the populace. TSF is putting resources into building an advanced research facility. Propaganda is putting resources into convincing populations that you're the best leader to follow. Sabotage is putting resources into sabotaging your opponents. Making the name change would also help the change to Sabotage make more sense.

Doomsday Device -- I think it'd be worthwhile to change the neutral of this to at least 250, perhaps even 300, even with it being behind the TSF. At the moment, it's a race to see who can research it first while everybody stays huddled in their homelands or nearby. 50 troops a turn is fairly easy to get to and especially in trench games, you can often get it with only 20-25 troops per turn with nobody being able to do anything about it besides Sabotage to slow you down a bit, which often isn't enough.

It'd be great to get others comments on these thoughts as well and I look forward to the second test beta version of the map becoming available. It's been a lot of fun testing out the first version and I think a few flaws in the balance have certainly come up.

[DiM]

1. there are several elements that aren't properly aligned (bolts, dials)
here are a few self explanatory images:






2. the brass dials don't have symmetrical sides. the right side is 4px shorter than the left one.
here's an image where i added 2 red lines of the same length for comparison reasons:


3. the brass(?) dials are supposed to have a bit of depth. metal bolted on metal. instead they look like stickers or like they're drawn. just a bit of bevel or maybe not even that, maybe just a small shadow would do the trick. (see image after the next point)

4. the brass or whatever metal is supposed to be, looks very blurry. here's a side by side image where i changed the texture, gave the brass a bit of level and some shadow to give it depth. added some bolts that also have some bevel and look like they're penetrating through the metal.


5. the background texture also looks very blurry. some tarnished metal or whatever, as long as it's crisper. maybe something like so:


6. the title. if i remember correctly you used to have one with some cogs in it. that was a good idea. what happened to it? this one can be ok too, if you change it's texture, but i feel like the old one had more potential.

7. the instructions in the bottom right part of the map would look so much better if they were integrated in the whole "monitors and dials and command panels" idea. maybe make it look like it's written on a post-it note. or even make it appear on a separate monitor. whatever floats your boat. right now it's out of place.

i do have more stuff but i feel like it's enough for now.

[zimmah]

I agree with DiM, i wanted to say something like it as well but I'm not very good at explaining my concerns about graphics.

Pretty much the whole image looks 'flat' and like an image and it doesn't feel 'alive' like it should be. The gameplay looks interesting but the map can be improved a lot.

[isaiah40]

More proof of lacking graphics being accepted. There's no point in even offering suggestions.

Please see DiM's post, that is what I am looking for, not "the graphics are lacking" and not give suggestions on how to improve them. I am always open to suggestions, but as I have mention a complete redo is out of the question due to lack of time. DiM's suggestions are not a complete revamp, but minor changes right now. So please if you have suggestions please post them.

@DiM - Thank you for your - as always - good suggestions. I will look at them and work on them slowly.

I prefer the original layout. The new proposed layout makes it look like TSF is required for the Special Researches. There's also an over abundance of empty space in the new version.

The only thing I can think of to make it easier to show you need to own the TSF in order to attack the advanced researches is to include a small note right below the "Advanced Research" title saying something like "Needs TSF", "Need to Own TSF", "Need to Own TSF to Attack", or something similar.

Oliver and I agreed to have the TSF attack the Advanced Researches when you also hold the Basic Researches. So the layout is correct in showing that. I could add some height to the map to the bottom and add in the new instructions with the previous layout, on the flip side a player has to be able to look at a map and see what is going on at a glance. But please give me other ideas on how to do it. Remember there is already a lot going on here so we need to simplify some instructions, and if that means we have some extra space, then we'll have to do it. I can enlarge the Doomsday buttons so the whole troop number fits in it.

[-=- Tanarri -=-]

Seeing as the discussion has stalled... does anyone have any thoughts on below?

I've been trying to find time to comment on the above properly, but have too many games running and life got a bit busier too.

I agree with the TSF being an advanced tech requirement, the +1 per 2 homeland territories, and the +1 per 3 land territories in general. Something will have to get figured out with the conscription techs now that the normal +1 per 3 is being added.
We won't have the normal +1 per 3 regions right now.

I've also wondered about reducing the amount on standing army a little to make it more appealing as an option to take first before the homeland.
Like maybe a n10?

I've also wondered about reducing Secret Conscription neutral to make conquest more appealing earlier on.
Reduce to what value??

I'd like to see something done to make enemy homelands more appealing to take to encourage more combat between players on the map.
Well we could make all the neutral regions n2.

Sabotage really needs to be gimped or removed. I personally think gimped would work better. Oliver suggested in one of our games to make it a killer neutral and more of an operation rather than tech. Maybe a killer 20 or 25 would be suitable?
Killer 25 would be good, with the ability to bombard the TSF? I think it fits with the theme and the idea of sabotage.

The last thing I wanted to mention is conditional autodeploys are possible through the new transformations code. I think figuring out something to use this new code with would be neat. Possibly remove or change Propaganda to use the code since I don't think it's very useful the way it is now.
Actually conditional autodeploys are still not possible through the new transforms as of yet, unless something has changed very recently.

+1 for 3 normal territories -- I strongly believe a standard territory bonus would help the conquer side of the game, which is sorely lacking at the moment, but if we'd like to see how other changes affect it first, then I'm happy enough to see where things go.

Standing Army -- I think neutral 10 would work well enough. Really, the 15 it is now still makes it worthwhile to go for, just it only makes sense to go for the homeland and then National Pride first and then worry about other techs like Standing Army. I think if it were neutral 10 it may encourage players to take it before completing their homeland bonus. At 10 it would line up with National Pride's bonus ratio as well.

Secret Conscription -- I think it'd be worth reducing it to a neutral 15, maybe even neutral 10, if the standard +1 for every 3 bonus isn't being included. I think it's important to make it easy to gain the ability to get troops from conquering land territories.

Open Conscription -- While I'm at it, I think it'd be useful to reduce Open Conscription a bit, either to 60 or 70, to make it a bit easier to take. If you're going to go the conquer route for your troops and use this tech to do so, then you still have to spend 3-4 guys per territory to take the territory on top of the research cost. I think making this change would help encourage the conquer side of the board as well.

Enemy Homelands -- I think reducing the neutrals to 2 on the entire map would be the wrong way to go. I haven't played many non trench games on the map, but I think with how quickly the bonuses increase, you need to have the neutrals at 3-4 in order to help slow down fast elimination of players. I was thinking more along the lines of significantly changing Propaganda. As it is now it barely makes sense to research it when you've taken a second capital. I think changing Propaganda to read either +1 per enemy homeland territory or +1 per homeland territory would help make taking out an enemy player and/or fighting over neutral homelands much more worthwhile. The neutral value would need to be changed to something like 25-30 if enemy only or 50-60 if your homeland is included. Thematically including your own homeland in the bonus could make sense since there's countless examples of governments using propaganda on their own populaces to change the way they think. Including your own homeland with a return of 6-8 turns would also make it a viable secondary option for increasing your bonus before you go off to invade other homelands.

Sabotage -- I agree 25 neutral would work well. This way it's high enough to discourage constant homeland mine bombarding to break homeland/National Pride bonus, but makes it still useful to break those bonuses in multiplayer or to break mining bonuses in 2 player if your opponent has a large mining bonus. If this gets implemented the way it's suggested, then I'd suggest increasing National Pride to 25 neutral, as I think 20 is too low for the bonus if it's going to be more permanent due to the changes in Sabotage. I think the idea of being able to bombard TSF with Sabotage is worth trying out. We could also take it one step further and allow it to bombard all the "Special Research" section (including other Sabotages for counter-Sabotage moves in freestyle games)... this could make sense since the Special Research section really aren't researches so much as various efforts to obtain bonuses, which is something I'll bring up at the end of this message.

Conditional Autodeploys -- According to bigWham they are possible using the transformation code... or at least he marked Conditional Autodeploys as implemented and stated they were possible in the thread. I think the only research which could be considered for replacement at this point is Propaganda, but my primary suggestion for it would be to change it to the above. If others don't feel the same, then we could look into changing it to something that uses Conditional Autodeploys, if they're able to be done as bigWham suggests.

"Special Researches" -- I think it'd be useful to find some other name for this section. The way I see it, the Basic and Advanced researches are all knowledge which has been gained through research, whereas the "Special Research" section I see more like putting out resources in order to gain a benefit. National Pride would be like running a specific type of propaganda type campaign to instill a sense of national pride into the populace. TSF is putting resources into building an advanced research facility. Propaganda is putting resources into convincing populations that you're the best leader to follow. Sabotage is putting resources into sabotaging your opponents. Making the name change would also help the change to Sabotage make more sense.

Doomsday Device -- I think it'd be worthwhile to change the neutral of this to at least 250, perhaps even 300, even with it being behind the TSF. At the moment, it's a race to see who can research it first while everybody stays huddled in their homelands or nearby. 50 troops a turn is fairly easy to get to and especially in trench games, you can often get it with only 20-25 troops per turn with nobody being able to do anything about it besides Sabotage to slow you down a bit, which often isn't enough.

It'd be great to get others comments on these thoughts as well and I look forward to the second test beta version of the map becoming available. It's been a lot of fun testing out the first version and I think a few flaws in the balance have certainly come up.

[-=- Tanarri -=-]

*pokes at the thread to see if there's any life left in the discussion*

[Gilligan]

I thought we were waiting for an XML update

[DiM]

I thought we were waiting for an XML update

isaiah is doing some graphical changes as per the suggestions above.

[isaiah40]

Well folks, The other day when I went to back up everything, my external HD crapped out on me. Then once I got another one and proceeded to back up my laptop, that HD crapped out! So I lost all my map files! As seeing as I don't have the time to totally redo this, never mind a few graphical changes, this will have to be placed on vacation again! Sorry to everyone that was looking forward to seeing this finally get some play time!

If anyone who has some very good graphical abilities want to finish this then please by all means do!!

[-=- Tanarri -=-]

Well folks, The other day when I went to back up everything, my external HD crapped out on me. Then once I got another one and proceeded to back up my laptop, that HD crapped out! So I lost all my map files! As seeing as I don't have the time to totally redo this, never mind a few graphical changes, this will have to be placed on vacation again! Sorry to everyone that was looking forward to seeing this finally get some play time!

If anyone who has some very good graphical abilities want to finish this then please by all means do!!

Sorry to hear your hard drives fell victim to the Research & Conquer curse, I hope everything's good with your computer now at least. It seems no matter how close we seem to get with this one something comes along and delays it a bunch. I'm hoping someone will be able to pick this back up and continue with it.

[RedBaron0]

Moved

At the mapmakers request this map is to be placed on abandoned status. This means this map can be picked up by anyone whom so chooses, using any such previous files or images, and alter them as if they were their own. Any updates to the Foundry between now and then may result in requiring any and all acquired stamps. Do not assume this map is nearly complete, put in the work and make it your map if you like this idea and would like to make it!!

[OliverFA]

Moved

At the mapmakers request this map is to be placed on abandoned status. This means this map can be picked up by anyone whom so chooses, using any such previous files or images, and alter them as if they were their own. Any updates to the Foundry between now and then may result in requiring any and all acquired stamps. Do not assume this map is nearly complete, put in the work and make it your map if you like this idea and would like to make it!!

I would like to pick up the map if possible.

Just to make things clear, this time I would do the graphics myself. Maybe I am no graphics expert, but my amateur skills should be enough.

[RedBaron0]

All yours kiddo, just gotta make an update. You can go from whatever is in here, or see if isaiah40 would be willing to pass you the Photoshop files.(most likely)

I also will HIGHLY recommend transforming some of the gameplay of this map by using the new transformations XML options, as well as trying the image staging options as well! It will likely stream line the existing gameplay, as well as making the graphics that much easier to manage.

[OliverFA]

All yours kiddo, just gotta make an update. You can go from whatever is in here, or see if isaiah40 would be willing to pass you the Photoshop files.(most likely)

I also will HIGHLY recommend transforming some of the gameplay of this map by using the new transformations XML options, as well as trying the image staging options as well! It will likely stream line the existing gameplay, as well as making the graphics that much easier to manage.

Thanks RedBaron0. Just a question, could you provide a bit more information about "image staging options"? Thanks in advance!

[RedBaron0]

All yours kiddo, just gotta make an update. You can go from whatever is in here, or see if isaiah40 would be willing to pass you the Photoshop files.(most likely)

I also will HIGHLY recommend transforming some of the gameplay of this map by using the new transformations XML options, as well as trying the image staging options as well! It will likely stream line the existing gameplay, as well as making the graphics that much easier to manage.

Thanks RedBaron0. Just a question, could you provide a bit more information about "image staging options"? Thanks in advance!

Its similar to the transformation tags. Instead of a border, a condition, or attack option, etc. The entire map image changes. Very useful to show passage of time/development of map conditions. Its a new option so there may yet be kinks to work out, but defenately opens many new avenues of gameplay. An example here could have the capitals become more powerful cities and be worth more auto deploy wise, as well as grow in size. Also you could keep the higher tech option on the image that occurs later since by design you wouldn't be able research such a high tech level without first researching the previous levels.

[OliverFA]

Looks great! Maybe this map had to be delayed all this time in order for all those advances to be available so it can be developed the way it was meant to be. I feel excited!

[OliverFA]

I have holidays the 2nd and 3rd week of August, and I plan to create a detailled plan about what to do during those weeks. Until then, I will read the documentation about the new possibilities and assimilate it.