[Abandoned] - Trench Warfare!

by **Juan_Bottom** on Tue Aug 26, 2008 8:07 pm

How about two generic colored flags? Blue and black?

by **mibi** on Wed Aug 27, 2008 11:13 pm

Changes:

1. red line is a little more transparent.
2. All the bunkers are lined with wood. Cairns mentioned that some needed extra wood and someone else said it looked like you couldn't attack out of them because of their configuration, so now they all totally lined with wood, making the issue of travelling in and out a bit moot.
3. extra pixels at the bottom of the legend.
4. The machine gun graphic is changed to a farther zoomed out version, I don't know if this is any clearer. I am not a huge fan of it.

Click image to enlarge.

by **Incandenza** on Thu Aug 28, 2008 2:28 am

Juan_Bottom wrote:How about two generic colored flags? Blue and black?

Why? They'd be generic and thus devoid of information. In that case, why bother?

by **Juan_Bottom** on Thu Aug 28, 2008 3:38 am

Incandenza wrote:
Juan_Bottom wrote:How about two generic colored flags? Blue and black?

Why? They'd be generic and thus devoid of information. In that case, why bother?

I don't figgin' know. It's a pretty map and I'm just trying to keep the conversation going......
It would be nice though to know what side you're representing....

by **Incandenza** on Thu Aug 28, 2008 3:43 am

Juan_Bottom wrote:
Incandenza wrote:
Juan_Bottom wrote:How about two generic colored flags? Blue and black?

Why? They'd be generic and thus devoid of information. In that case, why bother?

I don't figgin' know. It's a pretty map and I'm just trying to keep the conversation going......
It would be nice though to know what side you're representing....

Fair enough...

But like I said, that''s why the "German Front" and "Allied Front" are there.

by **wcaclimbing** on Thu Aug 28, 2008 9:04 pm

I still don't know the difference between a bunker and a trench.
I'd like it if that was clarified for those of us (including me) that have absolutely no idea what names go with which parts of the battlefield....

by **ZeakCytho** on Thu Aug 28, 2008 9:07 pm

wcaclimbing wrote:I still don't know the difference between a bunker and a trench.
I'd like it if that was clarified for those of us (including me) that have absolutely no idea what names go with which parts of the battlefield....

The bunkers are the grey buildings - there's one on each side of the map. The trenches are the things dug into the ground in each of the fronts. The foxholes are the things dug into the ground in no-man's land.

by **t-o-m** on Thu Aug 28, 2008 9:13 pm

Just looking at this excites me, think of doubles freestlye on a speed game.
One would take the defending bombard position and the other would go out and attack (kill themselves to the machine guns)

by **Juan_Bottom** on Fri Aug 29, 2008 2:55 am

I have a question about the size of the squares. This map encourages build-up, and gives out huge bonuses.

So my question is:
Is there enough space in those squares to fit 100,000 side by side by side?

by **wcaclimbing** on Fri Aug 29, 2008 2:21 pm

here you go, good luck with the map.

Now one of the CAs needs to move this thread to the main foundry.

by **Incandenza** on Fri Aug 29, 2008 2:35 pm

Juan_Bottom wrote:I have a question about the size of the squares. This map encourages build-up, and gives out huge bonuses.

So my question is:
Is there enough space in those squares to fit 100,000 side by side by side?

It won't be THAT much build-up. None of the bonuses are that big (save the reinforcements), and the only deployable bonus is the terit bonus.

And thankfully, the foundry only requires space for 3-digit numbers...

wcaclimbing wrote:here you go, good luck with the map.

Now one of the CAs needs to move this thread to the main foundry.

Huzzah!

by **mibi** on Wed Sep 03, 2008 9:37 pm

Inca, we should have left in some glaring gameplay or graphics errors so people would have something to talk about.

by **Incandenza** on Wed Sep 03, 2008 10:27 pm

mibi wrote:Inca, we should have left in some glaring gameplay or graphics errors so people would have something to talk about.

Heh, I actually do that professionally. I always make sure there's something wrong, just so my boss can feel like he's earned his paycheck by pointing it out... :lol:

by **wcaclimbing** on Wed Sep 03, 2008 10:50 pm

Should the border between M11 and N11 have a piece of wood on it, to match the others? Cause its the only one left open right now.

Incandenza wrote:
mibi wrote:Inca, we should have left in some glaring gameplay or graphics errors so people would have something to talk about.

Heh, I actually do that professionally. I always make sure there's something wrong, just so my boss can feel like he's earned his paycheck by pointing it out...

Brilliant! :roll:

by **Incandenza** on Wed Sep 03, 2008 10:58 pm

wcaclimbing wrote:Should the border between M11 and N11 have a piece of wood on it, to match the others? Cause its the only one left open right now.

Good catch.

wcaclimbing wrote:
Incandenza wrote:
mibi wrote:Inca, we should have left in some glaring gameplay or graphics errors so people would have something to talk about.

Heh, I actually do that professionally. I always make sure there's something wrong, just so my boss can feel like he's earned his paycheck by pointing it out...

Brilliant!

Hey, it's worked wonders for me. If you ever end up working in TV, and you come up with a better strategy for getting along with a boss like mine that would be more suited to being a shift manager at a Burger King, you let me know.

by **Incandenza** on Sat Sep 06, 2008 12:53 am

Okay, let's talk about the inset graphic:

NEW POLL:

Which machine gun inset graphic do you prefer? If you feel strongly one way or another, please post why! This poll will run for two weeks.

A (closer view)

B (wider view)

(note: this would not be the final wider inset graphic)

by **Juan_Bottom** on Sat Sep 06, 2008 6:38 am

A) looks much nicer, but B) is a much clearer example

by **t-o-m** on Sat Sep 06, 2008 7:00 am

Closer looks better and more clear to me, however i think it needs that sort of thing like this:

Code: Select all: |______| |___| |_| (machine gun here)

edit:
that turned out weirdly, quote me and you'll see what i did really.

by **oaktown** on Sat Sep 06, 2008 11:29 am

hey folks, nice work... haven't looked in on this map yet, so here we go...

Machine gun: I prefer "B" but I think the color needs to pop out just a bit more - tough on the colorblind eyes. And since there are multiple machine guns in that image, you may need to make the others lighter or less opaque to make it clear what you are getting at.

As this is my first real look at this map and I haven't read the entire thread, I have to say that a lot is unclear to the first-timer. I'm hoping that things will become more clear as you post the starting values of neutrals and starting locations for players, since that will give a better sense of how the map will play and how bonuses are structured, but here are some initial questions:

Trenches, I assume, are the three or four territory boxes, making them regions; you get an auto-deployed bonus for holding the entire region, but I don't see how armies can auto-deploy into a multiple-territory region.

The bit about machine guns only bombarding No-Mans land is confusing, because it immediately raises questions about whether or not you can hit the opposing machine guns (which I see that you can from the FAQ). You should either spell out what it can hit, or what it can't hit - right now you do both with no mention of the machine guns.

"Orders" - reinforcements, mortars, and artillery - I assume will become more clear with future versions. Same with foxholes, which I'm guessing are the dark holes in the no-man's land... they'll need to be better distinguished.

by **cairnswk** on Sat Sep 06, 2008 8:22 pm

i prefer the wider view myself, even for the inset. It makes is absolutely clear what can be targeted and leaves no doubt.

perhaps combine the two for the inset.

by **Incandenza** on Sat Sep 06, 2008 8:58 pm

Hey hey oak, thanks for dropping in...

oaktown wrote:Machine gun: I prefer "B" but I think the color needs to pop out just a bit more - tough on the colorblind eyes. And since there are multiple machine guns in that image, you may need to make the others lighter or less opaque to make it clear what you are getting at.

We'll see how the poll plays out, but like I wrote, option B wouldn't be the final image and would be tweaked.

oaktown wrote: I'm hoping that things will become more clear as you post the starting values of neutrals and starting locations for players, since that will give a better sense of how the map will play and how bonuses are structured

Version 2 on Page one has a large map with neutrals for your perusal.

oaktown wrote:Trenches, I assume, are the three or four territory boxes, making them regions; you get an auto-deployed bonus for holding the entire region, but I don't see how armies can auto-deploy into a multiple-territory region.

When you hold the whole trench, each terit would get a +1. It's waiting on some sort of xml thing, yeti would know better than I.

oaktown wrote:The bit about machine guns only bombarding No-Mans land is confusing, because it immediately raises questions about whether or not you can hit the opposing machine guns (which I see that you can from the FAQ). You should either spell out what it can hit, or what it can't hit - right now you do both with no mention of the machine guns.

The "only" is in there to keep people from thinking that machine guns can actually attack. I would say that the fact that the instructions spell out that they can't bombard trenches or foxholes, yet say nothing about machine guns, would be clear with a bit of thought.

oaktown wrote:"Orders" - reinforcements, mortars, and artillery - I assume will become more clear with future versions. Same with foxholes, which I'm guessing are the dark holes in the no-man's land... they'll need to be better distinguished.

Well... the foxholes could stand out a bit more, sure, but I don't see how much more obvious the orders need to be. Everything you need to know about orders are right there in the legend. Certainly it will be a bit confusing with only a cursory glance, but there are several currently quenched maps that are in the same boat. This is not a map where a player will be able to instantly understand everything just by glancing at it. This is by design, since complex maps rock. 8-)

Of course, mibi might have a plan, or there may be a good suggestion in the thread here. Certainly we're not trying to make things intentionally confusing, so stay tuned.

cairnswk wrote:i prefer the wider view myself, even for the inset. It makes is absolutely clear what can be targeted and leaves no doubt. perhaps combine the two for the inset.

That is one of the advantages of B, is that it conveys more information...

by **Tense** on Mon Sep 08, 2008 5:08 am

The angle 90 degrees should be represented as shown here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Right_angle.svg

by **Androidz** on Mon Sep 08, 2008 5:12 am

Tense wrote:The angle 90 degrees should be represented as shown here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Right_angle.svg

Uhm no. Its pretty much 90 degrees what mibi did with A. and that more accurate for this gameplay

Mibi im pretty sure this isint possible in this Xml. But what would be cool is when you've conquered the Machinegun, then all terretories you can bombard with it will turn red as Option B. With this you don't have to add it to Legend.

This would also give it a more warish theme:P

by **yeti_c** on Mon Sep 08, 2008 7:40 am

Incandenza wrote:
oaktown wrote:Trenches, I assume, are the three or four territory boxes, making them regions; you get an auto-deployed bonus for holding the entire region, but I don't see how armies can auto-deploy into a multiple-territory region.

When you hold the whole trench, each terit would get a +1. It's waiting on some sort of xml thing, yeti would know better than I.

Yes essentially each trench would have a bonus * number of squares. The Autodeploy territory would increment through them adding 1...

For example...

Code: Select all: // Helper continent to reduce bloat. <continent> <name>Trench A</name> <bonus>0</bonus> <components> <territory>B4</territory> <territory>B5</territory> <territory>C5</territory> </components> </continent> // auto deploy continent to B4 <continent> <name>Trench A Bonus> <bonus>1</bonus> <components> <continent>Trench A</continent> <components> <deploy>B4</deploy> </continent> // auto deploy continent to B5 <continent> <name>Trench A Bonus> <bonus>1</bonus> <components> <continent>Trench A</continent> <components> <deploy>B5</deploy> </continent> // auto deploy continent to C5 <continent> <name>Trench A Bonus> <bonus>1</bonus> <components> <continent>Trench A</continent> <components> <deploy>C5</deploy> </continent>

Special Note -> The deploy tag is not in existence and is merely an example of what this would look like - the final format for this has not been decided -> or the idea not even approved yet.

C.

by **Incandenza** on Mon Sep 08, 2008 3:47 pm

Androidz wrote:Mibi im pretty sure this isint possible in this Xml. But what would be cool is when you've conquered the Machinegun, then all terretories you can bombard with it will turn red as Option B. With this you don't have to add it to Legend.

This would also give it a more warish theme:P

Yeah, I don't think dynamic graphics are possible... besides, even if it were, we'd still need the info in the legend. One could make an argument that the use of the drop-downs and map inspect will make things very clear once a game is in-progress, but official foundry policy has always been (to my knowledge) that all needed information and instructions should be contained in the legend.

Oh, and new update soon-ish!

[Abandoned] - Trench Warfare!

Re: Trench Warfare! NEW DRAFT Page 1 & 3, FAQ Page 1

Re: Trench Warfare! NEW DRAFT Page 1 & 3, FAQ Page 1

Re: Trench Warfare! NEW DRAFT Page 1 & 3, FAQ Page 1

Re: Trench Warfare! NEW DRAFT Page 1 & 3, FAQ Page 1

Re: Trench Warfare! NEW DRAFT Page 1 & 3, FAQ Page 1

Re: Trench Warfare! V3 Page 1/6, FAQ Page 1

Re: Trench Warfare! V3 Page 1/6, FAQ Page 1

Re: Trench Warfare! V3 Page 1/6, FAQ Page 1

Re: Trench Warfare! V3 Page 1/6, FAQ Page 1

Re: Trench Warfare! V3 Page 1/6, FAQ Page 1

Re: Trench Warfare! V3 Page 1/6, FAQ Page 1

Re: Trench Warfare! V3 Page 1/6, FAQ Page 1 [I]

Re: Trench Warfare! V3 Page 1/6, FAQ Page 1 [I]

Re: Trench Warfare! V3 Page 1/6, FAQ Page 1 [I]

Re: Trench Warfare! V3 Page 1/6, FAQ Page 1 [I]

Re: Trench Warfare! V3 Page 1/6, FAQ Page 1 [I]

Re: Trench Warfare! V3 Pg 1/6, Machine Gun Inset Poll Pg 1/7 [I]

Re: Trench Warfare! V3 Pg 1/6, Machine Gun Inset Poll Pg 1/7 [I]

Re: Trench Warfare! V3 Pg 1/6, Machine Gun Inset Poll Pg 1/7 [I]

Re: Trench Warfare! V3 Pg 1/6, Machine Gun Inset Poll Pg 1/7 [I]

Re: Trench Warfare! V3 Pg 1/6, Machine Gun Inset Poll Pg 1/7 [I]

Re: Trench Warfare! V3 Pg 1/6, Machine Gun Inset Poll Pg 1/7 [I]

Re: Trench Warfare! V3 Pg 1/6, Machine Gun Inset Poll Pg 1/7 [I]

Re: Trench Warfare! V3 Pg 1/6, Machine Gun Inset Poll Pg 1/7 [I]

Re: Trench Warfare! V3 Pg 1/6, Machine Gun Inset Poll Pg 1/7 [I]

Who is online