[Abandoned] - Europe 1099 - The 1st Crusade

by **pamoa** on Tue Jun 30, 2009 12:08 pm

nice to see you again
I like very much the one way viking attack route from norge to england
for the river you should work with some bevel so it look like it is engraved in the land
it also should start thin and sharp so it is not like a lake starting it
watch out to remove black border when it comes to the sea
your mountain are currently floating over the land
the shadow should gradually fade into the land
maybe add some pikes to them so they don't seem clouds

by **Beko the Great** on Tue Jun 30, 2009 12:36 pm

pamoa wrote:nice to see you again
I like very much the one way viking attack route from norge to england
for the river you should work with some bevel so it look like it is engraved in the land
it also should start thin and sharp so it is not like a lake starting it
watch out to remove black border when it comes to the sea
your mountain are currently floating over the land
the shadow should gradually fade into the land
maybe add some pikes to them so they don't seem clouds

Actualy I'm not satisfied with my mountains, it's just my first try in doing something like mountains and I still don't know what style give to my mountains, so... about the river I'll see what I can do.

Cheers!

by **Beko the Great** on Tue Jun 30, 2009 12:36 pm

jefjef wrote:Ha.. fooled ya... you thought i was done. Think its worth a Look at scandanavia being worth 2 also.....

That was also discussed and I think one is fairest.

by **Aline_Cedrac** on Tue Jun 30, 2009 3:09 pm

WOW WOW WOW! The new version of the map is so clear and bright! I want to play on it really bad...! :oops:

About the mountains...maybe a little black or dark colours would make them more visible *.*
Congratulations once again, comrade Beko the Great...!

Good work*.*

Kiss, :oops:

Aline

by **jefjef** on Tue Jun 30, 2009 3:25 pm

Oops.... 1 more passing thought.. Shouldnt the Swiss alps be represented & a barrier between some areas?

by **Beko the Great** on Tue Jun 30, 2009 3:44 pm

jefjef wrote:Oops.... 1 more passing thought.. Shouldnt the Swiss alps be represented & a barrier between some areas?

Dividing the HRE? It would make the gameplay odd. Please read the posts on page 12 and 13 about impassables and all the discussion it might help you understand

by **jefjef** on Tue Jun 30, 2009 5:06 pm

actually i see you do have the impassable portion of the alps represented......(east side)........ sorry.. it didnt click

by **Beko the Great** on Wed Jul 01, 2009 4:44 am

Aline_Cedrac wrote:WOW WOW WOW! The new version of the map is so clear and bright! I want to play on it really bad...! About the mountains...maybe a little black or dark colours would make them more visible *.*
Congratulations once again, comrade Beko the Great...!

Good work*.*

Kiss,

Aline

Thanks for all the support since the beginning Aline

About the mountains I'm just making a new ones

jefjef wrote:actually i see you do have the impassable portion of the alps represented......(east side)........ sorry.. it didnt click

Sorry no problem

Thanks for so much exciting commenting this!

by **Beko the Great** on Wed Jul 01, 2009 5:48 am

"If Mohammed will not go to the mountain, the mountain must come to Mohammed"

So, it's all this is about... mountains!
Here is V15 with brand new mountains... or maybe it's better say, this has real mountains and not some cloud-form objects

Enjoy!

Click image to enlarge.

Gameplay
Added one-way attack Norge -> England
British Isles are worth of +3

Graphics
Changed mountains graphics;
Changed river;
Added blue outer-glow to see routes.

by **jefjef** on Wed Jul 01, 2009 9:11 am

NICE... I'm ready to play... Wanna dubs with me? Instead of two about the same shade of green bonus areas ya could use a dark blue or bright red.............. 5 stars

by **Blitzaholic** on Wed Jul 01, 2009 9:47 am

looking real good beko, nice work =D>

by **Beko the Great** on Wed Jul 01, 2009 1:46 pm

Thanks blitz and jefjef for the support

I think I'm just ultimating gameplay details and I don't know but I think I'll add Jordan River and Dead Sea between Dimashq and Yerushalayim so that Seljuk Turks don't be so hard to defend. Need your opinion folks!

Cheers!

by **jefjef** on Wed Jul 01, 2009 7:35 pm

Beko the Great wrote:Thanks blitz and jefjef for the support

I think I'm just ultimating gameplay details and I don't know but I think I'll add Jordan River and Dead Sea between Dimashq and Yerushalayim so that Seljuk Turks don't be so hard to defend. Need your opinion folks!

Cheers!

Dead sea was definitely an obstacle & should be incorperated.... Great idea....... jordan river was never really a barrier........ What do ya think about christian Iberia +3 & all of Iberia +5? (christian has 5 terts & the other 3) = 8 terts

by **Beko the Great** on Thu Jul 02, 2009 6:14 am

jefjef wrote:
Beko the Great wrote:Thanks blitz and jefjef for the support

I think I'm just ultimating gameplay details and I don't know but I think I'll add Jordan River and Dead Sea between Dimashq and Yerushalayim so that Seljuk Turks don't be so hard to defend. Need your opinion folks!

Cheers!

Dead sea was definitely an obstacle & should be incorperated.... Great idea....... jordan river was never really a barrier........ What do ya think about christian Iberia +3 & all of Iberia +5? (christian has 5 terts & the other 3) = 8 terts

I would say jordan river was not a great problem for soldiers but jordan valley was it surely. About the bonus you purpose, those are overvalued. Christian Iberia has 5 territs indeed but only one territory (Aragon) defends. So it's only worth of +2. All Iberia is worth of +4, so it's worth to conquer it to the moors. And if you see well, if you hold Yerushalayim, Rome and Christian Iberia you get +4 for holding Christian Iberia due to Castela

by **jefjef** on Thu Jul 02, 2009 9:49 am

OK.. I'm gonna bother you one more time.....

What would you think of connecting Corsica to Burgund instead? More accessable to france (as it truely is).. Just a tweak ya know.............................. Thank you.

by **Beko the Great** on Thu Jul 02, 2009 10:59 am

jefjef wrote:OK.. I'm gonna bother you one more time..... What would you think of connecting Corsica to Burgund instead? More accessable to france (as it truely is).. Just a tweak ya know.............................. Thank you.

Nice point

Consider it done 8-)

by **Incandenza** on Thu Jul 02, 2009 6:59 pm

Glad to see you pick this one up again, Beko... soothes the hurt of getting my ass kicked in aor2...

I like the new mountains... I think the Rhine could use a bit more work to make it blend better with the sea at its mouth, but not a big thing.

Gameplay-wise, a couple things. I'm not sure that the Jordan is a good idea, Jerusalem is powerful enough that it should be attackable from a variety of terits. I'm also not sure why a connection from Corsica to Burgundy is preferable to Corsica-Lombardy, unless you're planning on having both, which would be fine by me.

Finally, I'm not wild about the new one-way between scandan and england. Not only does it give the holder of the scandan bonus a very easy way to move into another small bonus region, but it kind of negates the advantage of starting in england in the first place. One thing that this map has going for it is the multiplicity of ways that someone can go about gathering bonuses, especially when they don't have an immediate outlet to Jerusalem... I just don't think the connection really adds much, either in gameplay or thematically (yes, I know the history, but also bear in mind that after the Norman Conquest, England began to be drawn into the cultural and political orbit of Europe and away from Scandanavia).

One small graphics thing: you might want to widen Normandy a bit, just to ensure that the white background can be seen clearly on the small map and people won't mistakenly think it's not part of the england bonus.

by **jefjef** on Thu Jul 02, 2009 8:05 pm

[Icandenza quote]Gameplay-wise, a couple things. I'm not sure that the Jordan is a good idea, Jerusalem is powerful enough that it should be attackable from a variety of terits. I'm also not sure why a connection from Corsica to Burgundy is preferable to Corsica-Lombardy, unless you're planning on having both, which would be fine by me.

Finally, I'm not wild about the new one-way between scandan and england. Not only does it give the holder of the scandan bonus a very easy way to move into another small bonus region, but it kind of negates the advantage of starting in england in the first place. One thing that this map has going for it is the multiplicity of ways that someone can go about gathering bonuses, especially when they don't have an immediate outlet to Jerusalem... I just don't think the connection really adds much, either in gameplay or thematically (yes, I know the history, but also bear in mind that after the Norman Conquest, England began to be drawn into the cultural and political orbit of Europe and away from Scandanavia[/quote]
Well HISTORICALLY dead sea was a barrier to all armies & Scandanavia did invade/sack England a couple diff times witout it being reciprocated. And he has Scandanavia as 1 bonus which does not make it a large threat at all (I still think it should be 2) And Corsica to burgandy is also more "correct" after all it is a french occupied tert which it has mostly been historically....

by **Incandenza** on Thu Jul 02, 2009 8:41 pm

jefjef wrote:Well HISTORICALLY dead sea was a barrier to all armies & Scandanavia did invade/sack England a couple diff times witout it being reciprocated. And he has Scandanavia as 1 bonus which does not make it a large threat at all (I still think it should be 2) And Corsica to burgandy is also more "correct" after all it is a french occupied tert which it has mostly been historically....

Believe me, if you want to get into a big historical discussion, I could do this all day. But the point is that I don't think that it's good for gameplay for the one-way attack to be there. Plus, scandan's bonus is just fine, a 3-terit 1 border bonus should only be a +1. And I'm not opposed to a Corsica-Burgundy link, but let's not muddy the waters by bringing events that happened long after 1099 to bear in your argument. At the time depicted in this map, "France" was pretty much just the Ile-de-France, and Burgundy and Corsica were no more considered part of France than Normandy (or England for that matter). If you have a solid gameplay reason for preferring that Corsica link to Burgundy and not to Lombardy, I'm all ears.

The upshot is that while I like historical authenticity as much as the next history weenie, it had to take a back seat to gameplay.

by **jefjef** on Fri Jul 03, 2009 1:52 am

Strategically Corsica water passage to Burgund not only increases the value of the already important burgand it also is obviously a shorter path (greater threat) to invasion of france & spain. It's just an idea... Don't wanna argue with ya.....And the one way attack... I love it...... It puts some importance in control of norge in an otherwise dead part of the map. Have a nice day.

by **Incandenza** on Fri Jul 03, 2009 5:48 am

jefjef wrote:Strategically Corsica water passage to Burgund not only increases the value of the already important burgand it also is obviously a shorter path (greater threat) to invasion of france & spain. It's just an idea... Don't wanna argue with ya.....And the one way attack... I love it...... It puts some importance in control of norge in an otherwise dead part of the map. Have a nice day.

Sorry, didn't mean to come on that strong... IMHO I think Corsica could connect to both Lombardy and Burgundy, both are next to port terits, and it might improve the flow through the area... as far as norge, think of it like oceania in classic: eas to grab, easy to hold, but it takes some doing to expand out beyond the large adjacent bonus (in this case HRE)... tho it's worth pointing out that norge is very close to england without with one-way... Given that norge will be an obvious early bonus to fight for, plus given the fact that there'll be at least a small chance that someone could get it on the drop (too lazy to break out the spreadsheet right this second), I don't think it should be too useful, know what I mean?

btw, I'm obliged to ya for coming in and commenting on the map. The more opinions we can get in here, the better the final product will be, and I'm convinced that Beko has an excellent map on his hands.

by **Beko the Great** on Fri Jul 03, 2009 7:09 am

Thank you very much, incandenza and jefjef for this amazing shock of ideas. As Heraclitus said:

"Opposition brings concord. Out of discord comes the fairest harmony."

So this struggle of ideas benefits you me and all users of CC in general.
So here are my thought on the discussed topics:

One-way attack Norge-England - It was already purposed and rejected. Though, I considered it again once jefjef as spoken about it and tried to put a poll, but this has some kind of bug and I can't get a poll working fine so I just followed his opinion in version 15. Though, after hearing Incandenza good arguments, I'm pretty decided to leave it without the one-way atack.

think of it[norge] like oceania in classic: easy to grab, easy to hold, but it takes some doing to expand out beyond the large adjacent bonus (in this case HRE)

I totally agree with this and this helped my decision.

Corsica - Burgund/Lombardei - This is a minor issue. For me, both connections option is excluded. With one attack route I prefer Burgund, because it allows 5 territories in a raw from diferent "continents" (Medina Mayurca - Aragon - Toulouse-Burgund-Corsica) and takes "weight" to the Lombardei which will be always threatened by the +1 Autodeploy of Roma.

Jordan valley/Dead Sea - This was from the three the last discussed topic, though, I think it's the more important, and in this one I disagree with Incandenza.

I'm not sure that the Jordan is a good idea, Jerusalem is powerful enough that it should be attackable from a variety of terits.

Jerusalem can be attacked and attack all the adjacent territories, that is, from Cyprus (Bizantine Empire), from Al-Qahirah(Islamic Caliphates) and from Dimashq, Al-Madinah and Antakya (Seljuk Turks), but can also be attacked from every corner of Europe, from Toulouse, Normandy and Venice, that makes 8 territs that can attack Jerusalem, 5 that can be attacked. This way (the way it is) or you don't have Jerusalem and it's impossible to hold Seljuk Empire, or you have Jerusalem and the Seljuk Empire and you have won the game. Adding Jordan valley/Dead Sea between Jerusalem and Al-Madinah+Dimashq, reducing Seljuk bonus to 4, leaves Seljuk Turks a fair bonus and gives balance to the area.

About graphics I'll just give some small touches

Cheers! And thanks for all the support!

by **jefjef** on Fri Jul 03, 2009 9:49 am

I can't wait for the map. I do hope you consider leaving England as 3 and keeping a sea route (be it 2 way) between It and Scandanavia... I like the strategic aspect of England & Scandanavia not being stuck in a corner. =D>

by **Aline_Cedrac** on Fri Jul 03, 2009 10:59 am

Oh there's a really hot discussion in here! I have to say I can't bear the one way-attack Norge->England. It makes the area too 'tight' to play in!
I think the whole strategy is very balanced now...but...what are you planning to do now, Major? :oops:

Moving forward to the approval and Beta Zone? 8-)

Really excellent work *.*

Kisses,

Aline *.*

by **Beko the Great** on Fri Jul 03, 2009 11:18 am

jefjef wrote:I can't wait for the map. I do hope you consider leaving England as 3 and keeping a sea route (be it 2 way) between It and Scandanavia... I like the strategic aspect of England & Scandanavia not being stuck in a corner.

I did not through that option away yet, but strategicly speaking, England & Scandinavia stuck in a corner might mean blocking spots which are really needed in Esc games.

Aline_Cedrac wrote:Oh there's a really hot discussion in here! I have to say I can't bear the one way-attack Norge->England. It makes the area too 'tight' to play in!
I think the whole strategy is very balanced now...but...what are you planning to do now, Major? Moving forward to the approval and Beta Zone?

Really excellent work *.*

Kisses,

Aline *.*

I want this map playable miss Cedrac, but let's take it easy, now we're just trying to decide and refine Gameplay, I hope get the Gameplay stamp pretty soon, then is just work out the graphics, then the XML, a lot of work to do yet, but step by step I think I can make it.

Cheers!

[Abandoned] - Europe 1099 - The 1st Crusade

Re: Europe 1099 - The 1st Crusade (V14 - Pg.1&13) - 30-06-2009

Re: Europe 1099 - The 1st Crusade (V14 - Pg.1&13) - 30-06-2009

Re: Europe 1099 - The 1st Crusade (V14 - Pg.1&13) - 30-06-2009

Re: Europe 1099 - The 1st Crusade (V14 - Pg.1&13) - 30-06-2009

Re: Europe 1099 - The 1st Crusade (V14 - Pg.1&13) - 30-06-2009

Re: Europe 1099 - The 1st Crusade (V14 - Pg.1&13) - 30-06-2009

Re: Europe 1099 - The 1st Crusade (V14 - Pg.1&13) - 30-06-2009

Re: Europe 1099 - The 1st Crusade (V14 - Pg.1&13) - 30-06-2009

Re: Europe 1099 - The 1st Crusade (V14 - Pg.1&13) - 30-06-2009

Re: Europe 1099 - The 1st Crusade (V15 - Pg.1&14) - 01-07-2009

Re: Europe 1099 - The 1st Crusade (V15 - Pg.1&14) - 01-07-2009

Re: Europe 1099 - The 1st Crusade (V15 - Pg.1&14) - 01-07-2009

Re: Europe 1099 - The 1st Crusade (V15 - Pg.1&14) - 01-07-2009

Re: Europe 1099 - The 1st Crusade (V15 - Pg.1&14) - 01-07-2009

Re: Europe 1099 - The 1st Crusade (V15 - Pg.1&14) - 01-07-2009

Re: Europe 1099 - The 1st Crusade (V15 - Pg.1&14) - 01-07-2009

Re: Europe 1099 - The 1st Crusade (V15 - Pg.1&14) - 01-07-2009

Re: Europe 1099 - The 1st Crusade (V15 - Pg.1&14) - 01-07-2009

Re: Europe 1099 - The 1st Crusade (V15 - Pg.1&14) - 01-07-2009

Re: Europe 1099 - The 1st Crusade (V15 - Pg.1&14) - 01-07-2009

Re: Europe 1099 - The 1st Crusade (V15 - Pg.1&14) - 01-07-2009

Re: Europe 1099 - The 1st Crusade (V15 - Pg.1&14) - 01-07-2009

Re: Europe 1099 - The 1st Crusade (V15 - Pg.1&14) - 01-07-2009

Re: Europe 1099 - The 1st Crusade (V15 - Pg.1&14) - 01-07-2009

Re: Europe 1099 - The 1st Crusade (V15 - Pg.1&14) - 01-07-2009

Who is online