Conquer Club

Posted: **Wed Sep 16, 2009 8:13 am**

Evil DIMwit wrote:How many neutral troops do the farms start with, then?

Good question, 2 or 3? I really don't have that thought out yet.

Posted: **Wed Sep 16, 2009 8:25 am**

Since you have Moldova on the map, I would consider finding out what the regions are in Ukraine and making them into bonuses. For me the map is bland without them. Moldova would be one bonus of course. If you use regions as bonuses, you can then put 1 farm in each region and maybe you get +1 auto deployed on each farm held. I'd say 3 neutral on each farm to start is good.

Can you reduce the opacity/transparency of the background? My eyes want to go where the wheat and the sky meet. Maybe take it down by 50% and see what happens.

Keep up the good work.

Posted: **Wed Sep 16, 2009 4:37 pm**

isaiah40 wrote:Since you have Moldova on the map, I would consider finding out what the regions are in Ukraine and making them into bonuses. For me the map is bland without them. Moldova would be one bonus of course. If you use regions as bonuses, you can then put 1 farm in each region and maybe you get +1 auto deployed on each farm held. I'd say 3 neutral on each farm to start is good.

I really dislike the idea of this becoming a more or less "classic" gameplay map. We have more than enough already.

isaiah40 wrote:Can you reduce the opacity/transparency of the background? My eyes want to go where the wheat and the sky meet. Maybe take it down by 50% and see what happens.

I'll do that in next version, personally, my eyes are fine with it, but I received this complaint from others I showed the map too as well.

Posted: **Wed Sep 16, 2009 5:27 pm**

Version 4
[bigimg]http://img4.imageshack.us/img4/4684/ukrainelagreversion4.jpg[/bigimg]

Changes:
Pretty much reworked most of the graphics.

Posted: **Wed Sep 16, 2009 5:56 pm**

I think 2 neutrals per farm is fair. 3 would just be obstructive.

Posted: **Thu Sep 17, 2009 10:51 pm**

I have a version with a few extra pixels in the moldova symbol removed.

Is there anything that yet needs to be done or can we get this stickied?

Posted: **Thu Sep 17, 2009 11:15 pm**

1. Territory Labels - temporary names or numbers will suffice, and are always open to change.
2. Borders/Paths/Impassables - it should be made clear where territories do/do not connect.
3. Bonus Areas - where combinations/groups of territories will award a bonus, this should be indicated on the map.
4. Legend - speculative bonus values and explanations of any attack rules or gameplay features.

For the preliminary reveiw you've gotta be close to hitting these points, 1 and 2 your solid on, 3 and 4 are a still in question a bit I think.

Classic maps have colored bonus region, it looks like you're not moving in that direction, explaining that in depth on your first post will help.
The legend is very simple right now, a bit more explanation to where you want to go gameplay-wise will help you also. If you have any special rules with your gameplay you'll have to add it to your legend.

You are close, and the map is looking great, last thing that will help you towards that review is getting a few more folks in here to comment on your map. You're getting there, this is usually a process that takes awhile, but the best way to quick'n the process is getting more people to comment. Look at isaiah40's Fractured America map, he's got 170 comments on his map in 2 and a half weeks, that's one of the big reasons he's already being reviewed.

Posted: **Fri Sep 18, 2009 7:22 am**

RedBaron0 wrote:You are close, and the map is looking great, last thing that will help you towards that review is getting a few more folks in here to comment on your map. You're getting there, this is usually a process that takes awhile, but the best way to quick'n the process is getting more people to comment. Look at isaiah40's Fractured America map, he's got 170 comments on his map in 2 and a half weeks, that's one of the big reasons he's already being reviewed.

Thank you Redbaron0! The other thing I did was crop a section out of my map and turn it into my sig (and with help from thenobodies) made it clickable so people can click on it and view my map. I also started to 'patrol' so to speak other peoples map ideas and drafting room projects and started to make comments on their maps with my sig. I think both reasons helped.

On to your map. I think you have too many farms for the map size. It'll work because you have 16 territory free which would give (in an 8 player game) 2 territory per player. I see this map as "The farmers are revolting, put down the revolt and win!" kind of map. What is the theme of the map besides just a Ukraine map. Knowing a lot of the people who play these maps, they are wanting something different with bonuses and challenging! You have a solid map here so let's take a step back and figure out your theme, any bonuses you may want etc. I'll help you if you want and I'm sure there are others who would be willing to help as well. Lets not let this map get put on the back burner!

Posted: **Sat Sep 19, 2009 1:05 pm**

Here is why the gameplay is what it is:

[bigimg]http://img4.imageshack.us/img4/4684/ukrainelagreversion4.jpg[/bigimg]

Note: farms start out as neutral 2s

Firstly, there are 16 starting territories:
2 player: 5-5-- (6 neutral)
3 player: 5-5-5-- (1 neural)
4 player: 4-4-4-4
5 player: 3-3-3-3-3-- (1 neutral)
6 player: 2-2-2-2-2-2-- (4 neutral)
7 player: 2-2-2-2-2-2-2-- (2 neutral)
8 player: 2-2-2-2-2-2-2-2

Secondly, the 16 starting positions allow them to be divided into 8 "groups" of 2 territories each, as you will see by the map. Each group is surrounded by neutral farms and is 1 territory away from 2-3 other groups.

What this accomplishes is (other than when starting next to a neutral) a player may have to eliminate the opponent next to them so that he/she can hold a farm bonus.
- The advantage of starting next to a neutral is minute seeing as you will only be able to take 1-2 farms before being forced to expose yourself to another group of human territories. The two regions with a possibility to take 2 farms before exposure to another group are next to each other, balancing out that small advantage.

Thirdly, all the neutral territories have a farm on them for gameplay purposes.
- It is impossible to start out with a bonus.
- Every neutral you attack gains you a bonus. Almost always in games on AoR and Feudal, the neutral territories which do not give a bonus are left untaken. To me, this seems like a waste of space. On this map, if you attack a neutral, you get a bonus. This way, every territory is a part of the game and not just filler.
- This makes the map more about expansion than a build game. A continent bonus structure creates games where one earns bonuses in "leaps" - you can take 4-5 territories and earn nothing but then finally take over the last set. On this Ukraine map, almost any attack you make earns you troops = expansion + fewer build games

Fourthly, the make-your-own-bonus structure means that there are no fixed territories to defend. The way the territories are laid out makes a fairly even [bonus]:[territories to defend] ratio.

Posted: **Sat Sep 19, 2009 1:49 pm**

The Neon Peon wrote:Firstly, there are 16 starting territories:
2 player: 5-5-- (6 neutral)
3 player: 5-5-5-- (1 neural)
4 player: 4-4-4-4
5 player: 2-2-2-2-2-- (6 neutral)
6 player: 2-2-2-2-2-2-- (4 neutral)
7 player: 2-2-2-2-2-2-2-- (2 neutral)
8 player: 2-2-2-2-2-2-2-2

Wouldn't it be 5 player: 3-3-3-3-3-- (1 neutral)?

Also, you'll want to make sure that no player can start with both territories of one human group. That peace of mind would be a big advantage if the other players are all forced to compete from the outset.

Posted: **Sat Sep 19, 2009 1:53 pm**

Evil DIMwit wrote:Also, you'll want to make sure that no player can start with both territories of one human group. That peace of mind would be a big advantage if the other players are all forced to compete from the outset.

I am all for that, but how?

Posted: **Sat Sep 19, 2009 1:57 pm**

Pretty sure you can rig up some starting position in the XML. Check out Yeti_c's guide or ask the man himself if you're still unsure. I'd look it up myself but I happen to be in a hurry.

Posted: **Sat Sep 19, 2009 7:03 pm**

The Neon Peon wrote:Note: farms start out as neutral 2s

Firstly, there are 16 starting territories:
2 player: 5-5-- (6 neutral)
3 player: 5-5-5-- (1 neural)
4 player: 4-4-4-4
5 player: 3-3-3-3-3-- (1 neutral)
6 player: 2-2-2-2-2-2-- (4 neutral)
7 player: 2-2-2-2-2-2-2-- (2 neutral)
8 player: 2-2-2-2-2-2-2-2

Secondly, the 16 starting positions allow them to be divided into 8 "groups" of 2 territories each, as you will see by the map.

Are starting positions or starting regions?
If they are starting regions in a 1vs1 each player will start with 5 regions and there will be 6 nutrals, but if they are coded as starting positions the X positions will be equally splitted among the players (X/2 not X/3) and with 8 groups of 2 regions each player will start with 8 regions and no neutral (except for farms).
I think you want to develope a map that starts and works like feudal war...right?
In this case you don't need SP because if you code everything neutral except 16 regions, these regions will be splitted 5-5 with 6 neutral.

The Neon Peon wrote:
Evil DIMwit wrote:Also, you'll want to make sure that no player can start with both territories of one human group. That peace of mind would be a big advantage if the other players are all forced to compete from the outset.

I am all for that, but how?

Evil DIMwit wrote:Pretty sure you can rig up some starting position in the XML. Check out Yeti_c's guide or ask the man himself if you're still unsure. I'd look it up myself but I happen to be in a hurry.

Is not possible to specify which player will get a position, but you can split adjacent regions among your 8 starting positions

Code: Select all

<positions>
<position>
  <territory>Uzhgorod</territory>
  <territory>Tiraspol</territory>
</position>
<position>
  <territory>Chernivitsi</territory>
  <territory>Kherson</territory>
</position>
<position>
  <territory>Izmayil</territory>
  <territory>Donetsk</territory>
</position>
<position>
  <territory>Berdyans'k</territory>
  <territory>Chernihiv</territory>
</position>
<position>
  <territory>Kharkiv</territory>
  <territory>Rivne</territory>
</position>
<position>
  <territory>Shostka</territory>
  <territory>Korosten</territory>
</position>
<position>
  <territory>Shepetovka</territory>
  <territory>Rih</territory>
</position>
<position>
  <territory>Kirovohrdask'a</territory>
  <territory>Ternopil</territory>
</position>
</positions>

Posted: **Sat Sep 19, 2009 11:25 pm**

thenobodies80 wrote:
The Neon Peon wrote:Note: farms start out as neutral 2s

Firstly, there are 16 starting territories:
2 player: 5-5-- (6 neutral)
3 player: 5-5-5-- (1 neural)
4 player: 4-4-4-4
5 player: 3-3-3-3-3-- (1 neutral)
6 player: 2-2-2-2-2-2-- (4 neutral)
7 player: 2-2-2-2-2-2-2-- (2 neutral)
8 player: 2-2-2-2-2-2-2-2

Secondly, the 16 starting positions allow them to be divided into 8 "groups" of 2 territories each, as you will see by the map.

Are starting positions or starting regions?
If they are starting regions in a 1vs1 each player will start with 5 regions and there will be 6 nutrals, but if they are coded as starting positions the X positions will be equally splitted among the players (X/2 not X/3) and with 8 groups of 2 regions each player will start with 8 regions and no neutral (except for farms).
I think you want to develope a map that starts and works like feudal war...right?
In this case you don't need SP because if you code everything neutral except 16 regions, these regions will be splitted 5-5 with 6 neutral.

The Neon Peon wrote:
Evil DIMwit wrote:Also, you'll want to make sure that no player can start with both territories of one human group. That peace of mind would be a big advantage if the other players are all forced to compete from the outset.

I am all for that, but how?

Evil DIMwit wrote:Pretty sure you can rig up some starting position in the XML. Check out Yeti_c's guide or ask the man himself if you're still unsure. I'd look it up myself but I happen to be in a hurry.

Is not possible to specify which player will get a position, but you can split adjacent regions among your 8 starting positions
Code: Select all
<positions>
<position>
  <territory>Uzhgorod</territory>
  <territory>Tiraspol</territory>
</position>
<position>
  <territory>Chernivitsi</territory>
  <territory>Kherson</territory>
</position>
<position>
  <territory>Izmayil</territory>
  <territory>Donetsk</territory>
</position>
<position>
  <territory>Berdyans'k</territory>
  <territory>Chernihiv</territory>
</position>
<position>
  <territory>Kharkiv</territory>
  <territory>Rivne</territory>
</position>
<position>
  <territory>Shostka</territory>
  <territory>Korosten</territory>
</position>
<position>
  <territory>Shepetovka</territory>
  <territory>Rih</territory>
</position>
<position>
  <territory>Kirovohrdask'a</territory>
  <territory>Ternopil</territory>
</position>
</positions>

Yes, what I meant was that all the regions other than the 16 would be coded neutral so that in two player games, territories are divided by 3.

Although, the splitting up regions into starting positions is an interesting idea. Would it be worth it to increase the amount of starting territories in a 2 player game to 8 if by doing it, the territories would be split 1 red - 1 green in each group? (if I understand your code correctly)

Posted: **Sat Sep 19, 2009 11:29 pm**

The Neon Peon wrote:Would it be worth it to increase the amount of starting territories in a 2 player game to 8 if by doing it, the territories would be split 1 red - 1 green in each group? (if I understand your code correctly)

If you mean in order to not give either player an advantaged drop, it wouldn't make a difference. There would be (by mathematical necessity) as many Red-Neutral starting zones as Green-Neutral zones.

Posted: **Sun Sep 20, 2009 11:45 am**

Evil DIMwit wrote:
The Neon Peon wrote:Would it be worth it to increase the amount of starting territories in a 2 player game to 8 if by doing it, the territories would be split 1 red - 1 green in each group? (if I understand your code correctly)

If you mean in order to not give either player an advantaged drop, it wouldn't make a difference. There would be (by mathematical necessity) as many Red-Neutral starting zones as Green-Neutral zones.

Yes, in that way in a 1vs1 each player will have 4 SP (8 regions) but it's not possible to know which positions each player will have. it could be fixed in some way, for example if your concern is limited only to 1vs1 you can code only 2 starting position with 8 regions. But in games with 3 or more players SP will not take effect.

Posted: **Sun Sep 20, 2009 11:49 am**

thenobodies80 wrote:
Evil DIMwit wrote:
The Neon Peon wrote:Would it be worth it to increase the amount of starting territories in a 2 player game to 8 if by doing it, the territories would be split 1 red - 1 green in each group? (if I understand your code correctly)

If you mean in order to not give either player an advantaged drop, it wouldn't make a difference. There would be (by mathematical necessity) as many Red-Neutral starting zones as Green-Neutral zones.

Yes, in that way in a 1vs1 each player will have 4 SP (8 regions) but it's not possible to know which positions each player will have. it could be fixed in some way, for example if your concern is limited only to 1vs1 you can code only 2 starting position with 8 regions. But in games with 3 or more players SP will not take effect.

Does that really work? Don't 2-player games count as being divided among 3 players anyway (with the neutrals being the 3rd)?

Posted: **Sun Sep 20, 2009 11:57 am**

Evil DIMwit wrote:
thenobodies80 wrote:
Evil DIMwit wrote:
The Neon Peon wrote:Would it be worth it to increase the amount of starting territories in a 2 player game to 8 if by doing it, the territories would be split 1 red - 1 green in each group? (if I understand your code correctly)

If you mean in order to not give either player an advantaged drop, it wouldn't make a difference. There would be (by mathematical necessity) as many Red-Neutral starting zones as Green-Neutral zones.

Yes, in that way in a 1vs1 each player will have 4 SP (8 regions) but it's not possible to know which positions each player will have. it could be fixed in some way, for example if your concern is limited only to 1vs1 you can code only 2 starting position with 8 regions. But in games with 3 or more players SP will not take effect.

Does that really work? Don't 2-player games count as being divided among 3 players anyway (with the neutrals being the 3rd)?

No, SP will be splitted randomly and equally among the players.
Standard drop regions are splitted among 3 players at least.
So if there are only 2 players starting positions will be divided among two players, but if there's a reminder (not in this map) it will be added to the other "standard drop" regions and divided by 3 (neutral player).

edit: if SP can't be splitted among the players for example only 2 SP in a 8 players game, the SP will not take effect

Posted: **Sun Sep 20, 2009 12:11 pm**

So will this allow no one to start with two territories in the same region?

If not, what if:

Code: Select all

<positions>
<position>
  <territory>Uzhgorod</territory>
  <territory>Tiraspol</territory>
  <territory>Chernivitsi</territory>
  <territory>Kherson</territory>
  <territory>Izmayil</territory>
  <territory>Donetsk</territory>
  <territory>Berdyans'k</territory>
  <territory>Chernihiv</territory>
</position>
<position>
  <territory>Kharkiv</territory>
  <territory>Rivne</territory>
  <territory>Shostka</territory>
  <territory>Korosten</territory>
  <territory>Shepetovka</territory>
  <territory>Rih</territory>
  <territory>Kirovohrdask'a</territory>
  <territory>Ternopil</territory>
</position>
</positions>

Posted: **Sun Sep 20, 2009 2:12 pm**

The Neon Peon wrote:So will this allow no one to start with two territories in the same region?

If not, what if:

Code: Select all

<positions>
<position>
  <territory>Uzhgorod</territory>
  <territory>Tiraspol</territory>
  <territory>Chernivitsi</territory>
  <territory>Kherson</territory>
  <territory>Izmayil</territory>
  <territory>Donetsk</territory>
  <territory>Berdyans'k</territory>
  <territory>Chernihiv</territory>
</position>
<position>
  <territory>Kharkiv</territory>
  <territory>Rivne</territory>
  <territory>Shostka</territory>
  <territory>Korosten</territory>
  <territory>Shepetovka</territory>
  <territory>Rih</territory>
  <territory>Kirovohrdask'a</territory>
  <territory>Ternopil</territory>
</position>
</positions>

No, it's 1 positions for each player not 1 territory of each position.
Maybe like this one, but it will effect only in 1vs1 games.

Code: Select all

<positions>
<position>
  <territory>Uzhgorod</territory>
  <territory>Ternopil</territory>
  <territory>Rivne</territory>
  <territory>Chernihiv</territory>
  <territory>Karkiv</territory>
  <territory>Berdyans'k</territory>
  <territory>Rih</territory>
  <territory>Tiraspol</territory>
</position>
<position>
  <territory>Chernivitsi</territory>
  <territory>Shepetovka</territory>
  <territory>Korosten</territory>
  <territory>Shostka</territory>
  <territory>Donetsk</territory>
  <territory>Kherson</territory>
  <territory>Kirovohradsk'a</territory>
  <territory>Izmayil</territory>
</position>
</positions>

Posted: **Sun Sep 20, 2009 2:43 pm**

I don't see that this is needed for 1v1 games. Why would you want to restrict them to one possible starting configuration?

Posted: **Sun Sep 20, 2009 2:52 pm**

The goal is to make it so that it is impossible in a game with any number of players to have someone start with their territories bordering.

1v1s can go whichever way = 8-8-0 or 6-6-4, I don't think it will really matter.

Posted: **Sun Sep 20, 2009 3:27 pm**

The Neon Peon wrote:The goal is to make it so that it is impossible in a game with any number of players to have someone start with their territories bordering.

1v1s can go whichever way = 8-8-0 or 6-6-4, I don't think it will really matter.

I don't think that is possible with any number of players. When SP are "good" for 8 players they are "wrong" for 2 players and viceversa.

Maybe is better to leave those 16 as normal regions or code only 8 of them (i have to look at numbers better).
But honestly I don't know if adjacent regions are a real issue :-k

Posted: **Mon Sep 21, 2009 9:43 pm**

Okay then, let's leave the xml for later.

Now what should I change for the next update?
So far, I've deleted the few white pixels by the beak of the bird underneath the title...

Posted: **Tue Sep 22, 2009 3:21 pm**

I think the map needs more contrast from the background. I look at it now and it all just meshes together.

Conquer Club

[Abandoned] - Ukraine & Moldova

Re: Ukraine & Moldova [Version 3.2 - Page 2]

Re: Ukraine & Moldova [Version 3.2 - Page 2]

Re: Ukraine & Moldova [Version 3.2 - Page 2]

Re: Ukraine & Moldova [Version 4 - Page 2]

Re: Ukraine & Moldova [Version 4 - Page 2]

Re: Ukraine & Moldova [Version 4 - Page 2]

Re: Ukraine & Moldova [Version 4 - Page 2]

Re: Ukraine & Moldova [Version 4 - Page 2]

Re: Ukraine & Moldova [Version 4 - Page 2]

Re: Ukraine & Moldova [Version 4 - Page 2]

Re: Ukraine & Moldova [Version 4 - Page 2]

Re: Ukraine & Moldova [Version 4 - Page 2]

Re: Ukraine & Moldova [Version 4 - Page 2]

Re: Ukraine & Moldova [Version 4 - Page 2]

Re: Ukraine & Moldova [Version 4 - Page 2]

Re: Ukraine & Moldova [Version 4 - Page 2]

Re: Ukraine & Moldova [Version 4 - Page 2]

Re: Ukraine & Moldova [Version 4 - Page 2]

Re: Ukraine & Moldova [Version 4 - Page 2]

Re: Ukraine & Moldova [Version 4 - Page 2]

Re: Ukraine & Moldova [Version 4 - Page 2]

Re: Ukraine & Moldova [Version 4 - Page 2]

Re: Ukraine & Moldova [Version 4 - Page 2]

Re: Ukraine & Moldova [Version 4 - Page 2]

Re: Ukraine & Moldova [Version 4 - Page 2]