Feudal Epic, L&S, Pg. 49 [D, Gp, Gr]

by **wcaclimbing** on Tue Sep 02, 2008 4:40 pm

Could I request a few name changes? just the locations of the numbers.
I can't count how many times I've attacked Barbarians 6 instead of Lake Minstello 6 on Feudal 1, because they have the same number (6) and are bordering the same territories, leading to lots of mistake attacks.

Its made me do quite a few attacks I didn't like and I'd like it if that problem was fixed on this map.

Just the territories that are bordering two of the same numbers. A simple switch between two numbers is all thats needed, and would help eliminate a lot of mistake attacks that are sent to the wrong territories, just because the numbers are the same.

Tri 12, neighboring two different 10 territories.
Hor 9, bordering two 7 territories.

Those are the only two that I see right now. I'd appreciate it if you would move one of the 10s and one of the 7s, so no territory borders ones that have matching numbers.

by **Ethitts** on Tue Sep 02, 2008 4:47 pm

I second most comments made already, so I don't have to much to say. However, there is 1 thing that I don't think anyone has pointed out yet: it says in the legend "ever two territories", should it not be "every two territories"? Map looks great though, I'm actually a fan of 1 entrance into the castles, but that's because I'm a defense player and like those kinds of things

. It could create a lot of stalemate games though

Edit: should point out that I'm not a fan of the name at all sorry

by **blakebowling** on Wed Sep 03, 2008 1:03 am

omg, I must play it

BTW: Doesn't Fate sound better???

=D>

by **Try Again** on Wed Sep 03, 2008 4:28 am

this is amazing for a first draft and i don't care what the name of the map is i just care that it is a good map

by **yeti_c** on Wed Sep 03, 2008 4:31 am

Yeah - I mentioned "Ever" to gimil the other day and he still didn't fix it...

You missed "Dynsaty" too. (Damn you gimil don't you ever listen?!?!)

C.

by **yeti_c** on Wed Sep 03, 2008 4:34 am

wcaclimbing wrote:Tri 12, neighboring two different 10 territories.
Hor 9, bordering two 7 territories.

Those are the only two that I see right now. I'd appreciate it if you would move one of the 10s and one of the 7s, so no territory borders ones that have matching numbers.

Yeah I pointed these out to gimil too - he's gonna change these - you'll notice that he did try to ensure this didn't happen on this map this time - but missed those 2.

C.

by **gdeangel** on Wed Sep 03, 2008 8:34 am

t-o-m wrote::D

One thing that ive already told you, i dont like the way that there's only one entrance to each castle

I agree with Tom. This is going to have one very clear set of strategies with only one entrance. If you move the castles up near the wall, you can then make a 1-way passage through the wall out of the kingdom into the adjacent plains. That would create a more "attack" friendly environment, and also eliminate some of the significance of catching a bad dice streak early in the game.

Alternatively, you can leave the castles where they are, and create a one way attack in through the wall (i.e., breached wall), which will create a more defensive challenge, but at the same time increase lead time to successful attacks because the would be assailant will need to have enough troops to plug two gaps rather than one to avoid being overrun by another player (could be less relevant for 1v1 but would be very interesting for >4 player games.

by **Androidz** on Wed Sep 03, 2008 8:54 am

Here i will ask you set briges and such to make it no One way to citys:

Great Kingdom 4 to Hor 21.

Rebel 5 to Hor 20 or Tri 12.

Move Barbarian castle to Barbarian 3/6. Then Create a brige to the old Barbarian castle to Cen 14.

Consider moveing Hor Village to 13/16 if you do the one above.

Ga'h 9/10 to Tri 2/1.

If you to this there will only be 3 citites with with one way city but they aint so close to the willage so it isint a big problem. I hope you consider this gimil=)

Hmm maybe i should drop out that a name change would be good. What about Feudal Emperies, Fuedal Kingdoms or something? Fuedal War Kingdom of **** / Fuedal War Chapter 2. ???

by **MrBenn** on Wed Sep 03, 2008 5:40 pm

I'm going to ask for the legend to be at the top of the map rather than the bottom...

by **yeti_c** on Thu Sep 04, 2008 12:34 am

MrBenn wrote:I'm going to ask for the legend to be at the top of the map rather than the bottom...

Why?

C.

by **hulmey** on Thu Sep 04, 2008 1:33 am

It looks so much like the original..Cant you add some new features to make it slightly different, like the AoR series for example...

by **gimil** on Thu Sep 04, 2008 1:37 am

hulmey wrote:It looks so much like the original..Cant you add some new features to make it slightly different, like the AoR series for example...

The point of this was to give an 8 player option to the Feudal gameplay, while Realm was intended to be a series of maps that differ in gameplay from each other. my plan is to not add any new gimmicks to this map

by **Incandenza** on Thu Sep 04, 2008 1:47 am

yeti_c wrote:
MrBenn wrote:I'm going to ask for the legend to be at the top of the map rather than the bottom...

Why?

C.

Benn has a point. It's easier to scroll down past the legend once you know the map rather than have it clutter the bottom... I made the same request for drug war.

by **yeti_c** on Thu Sep 04, 2008 3:19 am

Incandenza wrote:
yeti_c wrote:
MrBenn wrote:I'm going to ask for the legend to be at the top of the map rather than the bottom...

Why?

C.

Benn has a point. It's easier to scroll down past the legend once you know the map rather than have it clutter the bottom... I made the same request for drug war.

It really ruins the aesthetics of the map though?

C.

by **Ethitts** on Thu Sep 04, 2008 3:42 am

yeti_c wrote:
Incandenza wrote:
yeti_c wrote:
MrBenn wrote:I'm going to ask for the legend to be at the top of the map rather than the bottom...

Why?

C.

Benn has a point. It's easier to scroll down past the legend once you know the map rather than have it clutter the bottom... I made the same request for drug war.

It really ruins the aesthetics of the map though?

C.

Sorry to be a pain, but I'd have to agree on the legend being better up the top. Along with the points stated above, I personally think it would be more aesthetically pleasing to.

Edit: it would also keep consistency with Feudal War

by **yeti_c** on Thu Sep 04, 2008 3:54 am

Ethitts wrote:
yeti_c wrote:
Incandenza wrote:
yeti_c wrote:
MrBenn wrote:I'm going to ask for the legend to be at the top of the map rather than the bottom...

Why?

C.

Benn has a point. It's easier to scroll down past the legend once you know the map rather than have it clutter the bottom... I made the same request for drug war.

It really ruins the aesthetics of the map though?

C.

Sorry to be a pain, but I'd have to agree on the legend being better up the top. Along with the points stated above, I personally think it would be more aesthetically pleasing to.

Edit: it would also keep consistency with Feudal War

Completely disagree...

The legend is now above the title - this is shit.

C.

PS - you'll also have to ignore the faded landscape below the legend as that's from below.

by **hulmey** on Thu Sep 04, 2008 4:39 am

better the legend at the bottom!!!

by **Androidz** on Thu Sep 04, 2008 8:28 am

yeti_c wrote:

Completely disagree...

The legend is now above the title - this is shit.

C.

PS - you'll also have to ignore the faded landscape below the legend as that's from below.

Its better now on the top as long as you put the Title in the same "Legend Box" And on the top. And then the minimap below the legend as now. But the terretorie lines in legendbox is wrong now.

Again i had another suggestion above which you missed obliveously:(

by **yeti_c** on Thu Sep 04, 2008 8:30 am

Androidz wrote:Again i had another suggestion above which you missed obliveously:(

That's upto Gimil to respond to.

C.

by **Androidz** on Thu Sep 04, 2008 8:33 am

yeti_c wrote:
Androidz wrote:Again i had another suggestion above which you missed obliveously:(

That's upto Gimil to respond to.

C.

kk:D thx for answearing:)

by **gimil** on Thu Sep 04, 2008 8:39 am

Androidz wrote:
yeti_c wrote:
Androidz wrote:Again i had another suggestion above which you missed obliveously:(

That's upto Gimil to respond to.

C.

kk:D thx for answearing:)

Firstly, I see no real gain in moving the legends to the top, seems like extra work for no gain. It looks prettier and for inclusive at the bottom.

On your double entrance idea, at the moment I thing that people are sitting 50/50 on the subject, for this reason I will stick with the 1 entrance, since that was my intention from the start

by **Androidz** on Thu Sep 04, 2008 8:43 am

gimil wrote:
Androidz wrote:
yeti_c wrote:
Androidz wrote:Again i had another suggestion above which you missed obliveously:(

That's upto Gimil to respond to.

C.

kk:D thx for answearing:)

Firstly, I see no real gain in moving the legends to the top, seems like extra work for no gain. It looks prettier and for inclusive at the bottom.

On your double entrance idea, at the moment I thing that people are sitting 50/50 on the subject, for this reason I will stick with the 1 entrance, since that was my intention from the start

Okey Well if you ever change you mind about those attackroutes you got my post in here somwhere.^^

by **Androidz** on Thu Sep 04, 2008 9:56 am

Btw you got a terretorie in Hor not named above 12 and 11:O

by **bryguy** on Thu Sep 04, 2008 2:08 pm

Looks good

1) I dont really like how there is so much water

2) the villages look different somehow than the ones in the original feudal.
3) I dont like the cliffs that much right now.... they just dont seem as good as the ones in the original
4) Maybe instead of being able to bombard non-adjacent territories in their kingdom, maybe have 1 catapult territory in each kingdom that can bombard some areas in the valley below the cliff right on the edge of their kingdom?
4) Cen rocks!

by **gimil** on Thu Sep 04, 2008 2:47 pm

bryguy wrote:Looks good

1) I dont really like how there is so much water
2) the villages look different somehow than the ones in the original feudal.
3) I dont like the cliffs that much right now.... they just dont seem as good as the ones in the original
4) Maybe instead of being able to bombard non-adjacent territories in their kingdom, maybe have 1 catapult territory in each kingdom that can bombard some areas in the valley below the cliff right on the edge of their kingdom?
4) Cen rocks!

1) Their is hardly any water?
2) Becasue its a new map...
3) There are by far an improvement, these ones look ALOT more like cliffs than any previous attempt.

4) You wouldnt have your catapult outside the castle, thats just silly!

Feudal Epic, L&S, Pg. 49 [D, Gp, Gr]

Re: Feudal-ate The sequal to Feudal War!

Re: Feudal-ate The sequal to Feudal War!

Re: Feudal-ate The sequal to Feudal War!

Re: Feudal-ate The sequal to Feudal War!

Re: Feudal-ate The sequal to Feudal War!

Re: Feudal-ate The sequal to Feudal War!

Re: Feudal-ate The sequal to Feudal War!

Re: Feudal-ate The sequal to Feudal War!

Re: Feudal-ate The sequal to Feudal War!

Re: Feudal-ate The sequal to Feudal War!

Re: Feudal-ate The sequal to Feudal War!

Re: Feudal-ate The sequal to Feudal War!

Re: Feudal-ate The sequal to Feudal War!

Re: Feudal-ate The sequal to Feudal War!

Re: Feudal-ate The sequal to Feudal War!

Re: Feudal-ate The sequal to Feudal War!

Re: Feudal-ate The sequal to Feudal War!

Re: Feudal-ate The sequal to Feudal War!

Re: Feudal-ate The sequal to Feudal War!

Re: Feudal-ate The sequal to Feudal War!

Re: Feudal-ate The sequal to Feudal War!

Re: Feudal-ate The sequal to Feudal War!

Re: Feudal-ate The sequal to Feudal War!

Re: Feudal-ate The sequal to Feudal War!

Re: Feudal-ate The sequal to Feudal War!

Who is online