Proteins 101 <v.24 - new gameplay? *POLL!*> p1, p13

[natty dread]

The mere image in your signature made me retch.

Give up.

Thanks, your opinion will be noted. Now would you kindly stop spamming my thread with your pointless existence and go back sucking your mama's titties or whatever it is that you do.

[obliterationX]

The mere image in your signature made me retch.

Give up.

Thanks, your opinion will be noted. Now would you kindly stop spamming my thread with your pointless existence and go back sucking your mama's titties or whatever it is that you do.

I'll go one better -- I'll top myself, especially after looking after this disgusting, horrible, repulsive "map".

For any assisted-suicide patients, don't bother, just look at this map.

[natty dread]

Please stop spamming this thread. This thread is for discussion and development of my map, not for childish flame & bait attempts.

[danoprey]

Definitely version 18, without a doubt.

Background needs some changes though, but the look of the foreground is much better.

EDIT: ooh, I didn't see the version on p6 before I said that. King of cool, I'm torn. I think v18 makes for better gameplay though, just because it's easier to see.

P.S. The guy two posts before me is just an idiot.

[natty dread]

ooh, I didn't see the version on p6 before I said that. King of cool, I'm torn.

You know, so am I. We need a poll!

[natty dread]

Sorry moderators, the forum software won't let me create a poll on a thread that has already had a poll in the past. The voting options come up all scrambled.

So anyway, for those that have been following the development of my Protein map, which graphic theme is the better - the old or the new one?

Samples.

Old theme:

[bigimg]http://img204.imageshack.us/img204/9848/proteinmapv18blarge.png[/bigimg]

New theme:

[bigimg]http://img509.imageshack.us/img509/7677/proteinmapbb7.png[/bigimg]

[natty dread]

poll here:

viewtopic.php?f=241&t=100942&start=0#p2290848

[soundman]

You should put up the third option too. I kinda liked that one.

[natty dread]

You should put up the third option too. I kinda liked that one.

Well, this concerns an earlier crossroad in development.

If, as it looks like now, more people like the new version, then we can discuss if I should change the design to the third option. Besides, I guarantee you, the way that version looks now it would get no votes.. (except yours maybe)

[Incandenza]

Well, like Andy, the concept initially left me a bit cold. Fighting over protein molecules? A lot of science-oriented maps have come and gone in the foundry, and the main reason I think many of them failed was that they stretched the metaphor a little too far. Earlier in the thread, khazalid said something like "better this than another battle map," and while I agree with him to a point, the change-of-pace map is difficult to pull off, viz. the relative unpopularity of poker club (81 active games), Chinese Checkers (52 active games), Egypt Valley of the Kings (35 active games), or Crossword (32 active games) (compare with the active counts for some extremely successful change-of-pace maps: 172 Doodles, 246 Arms Race, 933 Feudals). Suffice it to say, you have a bit of an uphill climb.

I really like what you're doing visually, I think the blackboard concept is dynamite. I'm not sure the gameplay is quite there yet, tho I'm currently lacking some sort of killer suggestion... one thing I'd recommend is to think about what game types you think this map would fit best, and perhaps tweak from there.

[natty dread]

compare with the active counts for some extremely successful change-of-pace maps: 172 Doodles, 246 Arms Race, 933 Feudals

Doodles, Arms Race and Feudals... all are controversial maps, one way or another. They all divide opinions, people either love them or hate them. Then again they seem to have strong fan bases (or in case of feudal, lots of people farming on them... there, I said it!)

I really like what you're doing visually, I think the blackboard concept is dynamite.

Thank you.

I'm not sure the gameplay is quite there yet, tho I'm currently lacking some sort of killer suggestion...

Aww, I hope it's not again the "territories need more connections" thing... I actually like having some bottlenecks on the map. I was reluctant to add the connections between the blue nitrogens, but so many people wanted more connections...

one thing I'd recommend is to think about what game types you think this map would fit best, and perhaps tweak from there.

I have been thinking about it. I wonder if all map makers suffer from the same bias, of mainly designing their maps for game types that they like... I know it has at least subconsciouisly affected the way I designed this map. I like sequential flat 3-6 player games best, so that's what I think the gameplay fits best for. But should also well adapt for no-cards games... Escalating, why not, actually... but not so much.

The main features of the map are the double dipping territories on the continents, alternative ways to get bonuses if you can't get/hold a continent (nitrogens, oxygens) and the nitrogens acting as jump gates. Otherwise it's a pretty straightforward map. Number of territories and the number of continents are both pretty much average.

So what kind of gameplay should I go for then? I don't like to flood the map with gimmicks, like on some maps it seems the makers have to cram every possible xml feature on one map... for what purpose, I wonder.

I'd like to keep the gameplay simple, so that even new players can grasp the rules on their first time. But of course I want it to be playable and balanced. Mainly the gameplay should work best for 3-5 players flat/no card games. I don't, at the moment, see what more I could do to improve the gameplay, but keeping these things in mind, I'm willing to listen to suggestions, as always.

[natty dread]

I think I will be, for now at least, going with the new theme. Although it pains my heart every time I take a look at the latest version of the old theme and see how cool it was... Well, nothing to it but to make the new one even cooler. I've had such a good feedback for the new theme, the choice starts to make sense. I'll leave the poll open for a few days, so if you want to influence my choice there's still a chance.

Meanwhile, here's the latest update of the new style:

[bigimg]http://img213.imageshack.us/img213/3250/proteinmapbb10.png[/bigimg]

Not much done here, fixed the texts a bit to make them look more "natural"...
Fixed the glow on histidine a bit...

[jpcloet]

I'm torn between the 2. I like the brightness of the original and the theme of the second. I think what is throwing me off a bit is that the gray molecules are the same color. I wonder if a little more differentiation between the groups would be better. That way you might be able to reduce the fuzzy glow on the bonus areas a little. I don't think a professor would chalk the fuzzy. However, I am not a science guy.

[natty dread]

I don't think a professor would chalk the fuzzy.

See here, the things is, the professor asked one of his students to draw a nice image of a protein molecule on the blackboard, at the beginning of the course. The student happened to be an amateur graffiti artist, so he performed a student prank on the poor professor, and drew the whole thing on spray paint. Now the poor professor can't use his blackboard for anything else, so his students are using it to play world domination games....

[jpcloet]

I can buy that. The molecules need something though. The army circle may actually make a huge difference in the overall look.

[natty dread]

Army circles were tried on the previous theme, and most didn't like them actually... the molecules didn't seem to need them.

Although maybe the situation has changed? I'll try the army circles on today. But not yet, I'm hungry and I need to start making a pizza.

[natty dread]

Btw. I'm looking for someone to do the XML on this map. If I can't find anyone I'll do it myself, but here's a chance for someone to get another map medal out of this!

[danoprey]

Nooo, definitely the old one in space, I don't like the (old) new chalkboard one, unless it's the (new) new chalkboard one.

[natty dread]

Ok here's a comparison of with/without army circles, again. I put some numbers on too, couldn't be bothered to put different colour numbers though... I think this will suffice for now.

So how does it look? Better with or without?

[bigimg]http://img42.imageshack.us/img42/45/proteinmapv19a.png[/bigimg]

[ender516]

Btw. I'm looking for someone to do the XML on this map. If I can't find anyone I'll do it myself, but here's a chance for someone to get another map medal out of this!

I have been looking for an opportunity to pitch in on the XML of a map, and would be happy to help you out.

In regard to graphics, I will just say that although I think the blackboard background has merit in that it sets the right scene for a molecular model, I feel that it spoils the model when you make it look like it is drawn or painted on the blackboard. I would expect to see such a model standing on a table in a classroom, in front of a blackboard. Give the model back its bold 3-D look, and maybe give it a base and some wire supports. Even if you don't go that far, please consider putting more shading on the amide nitrogens. In most of the versions I have seen, including the latest, they seem flatter than the other atoms.

(By the way, there was a molecular map in the drafting room previously, but it stalled in July and was sent to the Recycling Bin at the end of August: Testosterone vs. Estrogen. This map had a bold 3-D look that I really liked, but I guess there weren't enough like-minded people out there. I'm glad you seem to be having better success.)

[natty dread]

In regard to graphics, I will just say that although I think the blackboard background has merit in that it sets the right scene for a molecular model, I feel that it spoils the model when you make it look like it is drawn or painted on the blackboard. I would expect to see such a model standing on a table in a classroom, in front of a blackboard. Give the model back its bold 3-D look, and maybe give it a base and some wire supports.

Thanks for your opinion! Nice to hear the 3d look has some fans. I was quite proud of how that molecule looked in the old theme.

Maybe it would be best that way. Maybe if I can find some way to make it so that the molecule stands out from the blackboard, so that it would look like it was standing on a table in front of the blackboard... Perhaps add some shading or something? But then that would interfere with the colour glows, which are kinda important for people unfamiliar with chemistry and proteins... which is probably quite a few people on this site

Decisions, decisions...

I doubt I'll go for the wire supports though... I might try it, but I don't think there's a way to make them look good.

I have been looking for an opportunity to pitch in on the XML of a map, and would be happy to help you out.

Great! You can start to get working on it, but expect a few gameplay changes which are probably going to have to come when the map goes to the main foundry. Also don't put in coordinates yet, until we decide if we're going to use army circles or not.

(By the way, there was a molecular map in the drafting room previously, but it stalled in July and was sent to the Recycling Bin at the end of August: Testosterone vs. Estrogen. This map had a bold 3-D look that I really liked, but I guess there weren't enough like-minded people out there. I'm glad you seem to be having better success.)

Wow, that is awesome! Perhaps if I get this map done some day I could ask the author of that map if I could resurrect that project, as a sequel to the protein map...

[natty dread]

here. How about this?

[bigimg]http://img691.imageshack.us/img691/696/proteinmapv19b.png[/bigimg]

[natty dread]

We probably will be making a kind of a compromise between the two themes. A 3d model of a molecule in front of the blackboard could very well be the case in a real classroom, see the thread.

[thenobodies80]

I've merged your old thread with the other topic you've posted to start a poll.
Now you should be able to start a poll, if there are problems, simply send to me a PM.

[ Merged ]

[natty dread]

I've merged your old thread with the other topic you've posted to start a poll.
Now you should be able to start a poll, if there are problems, simply send to me a PM.

[ Merged ]

Nope, poll creation still doesn't work on this thread.

Well I guess people will just have to post their opinions here and I will count them