Melee

[quote=aeronautic - Jan 19, 02:45 AM]There's a weird bug somewhere, when I click Urgul's hyperlink above the linked forum looks like this: .. .----. -- / .. -- .--. .-. . ... ... . -.. / - .... .- - / -.--[/quote] lol. It's morse code.

What? A whole thread of Morse Code... WTF for? Okay, that is 10 minutes of my life I won't be getting back! LMFAO. I thought it was an example link in his post! Right, back to reality now! Could someone proof the amendments and see if there are any 4 corner problems with the Melee map? I don't Expect the map to make it to the D12 maps, it's just a one-off hand drawn 81 territory map for extra choice should you wish to use it. If so, let me know and I will add tags?! http://www.the-inkstore.co.uk/frame/Melee%20Flattened.jpg

Well I can't see any 4 corner problem anymore, but that is of course not a proper proof that there aren't any :) Add tags? You mean terirtory circles, read this topic: http://www.dominating12.com/forum/?cmd=topic&act=view&id=589&page=1 You should probably read that topic anyway.

Get the cartoons out...this needs to look like a real map...with textures and have the map not just sitting on top of a texture...this map is good for another site but not this one. Please try to have the colors and textures flow...

[quote=aeronautic ]I don't Expect the map to make it to the D12 maps, it's just a one-off hand drawn 81 territory map for extra choice should you wish to use it[/quote] So why post it?

I'm experimenting as I have never made Maps before.

Thorpe. Vexer has been really clear in the past that the gameplay should be nailed down first before the graphics style is even considered. He made an [url=http://www.dominating12.com/forum/?cmd=topic&id=782]example first post[/url] for the Ancient Realm map and look how that turned out.

@Matty, I don't know the proper terminology, but by tags I mean Territory Identification. However, that is, after I change the style and texture of the Map.

Yes Cireon... but while we are discussing gameplay may be better if Aeronautic gets an idea of how to do a map. Thorpe is right about graphics. The background texture seems like a wall, standards are [url=http://www.dominating12.com/image/map/22.large.jpg]paper[/url] or [url=http://www.dominating12.com/image/map/27.large.jpg]ocean[/url]. That land has no texture, those are only light effects, so it looks completely smooth, it doesn't match with the 'wall' behind. It's like coca-cola mixed with wine! The bridge is nice but too big, mountains are great for me, but they also don't match so much with the land... Graphics is hard here at D12! Be ready to work Aero! I tried to make a map and then quit. By the way I don't know if this is just an experiment or what, but I feel and hope you have the graphics skill required, because you are also in charge to paint my Italian map! :) But I guess it would be better to do not 2 at once. Apart from that, gameplay first! I think you went too far with those mountains: the NE area of the map is now defensible protecting 2 territories only, and now that I look better... same for the West side! I don't think is bad to have macro-regions, but those are too extreme, it's a big part of the map locked inside 2 territories. Nothing is right or wrong for me as a gameplay but people should have the awareness of what they are doing. Do you really want a map so locked to play capitals? Big areas of the map cannot be locked inside 2 territories for me, 3 can be okay, 4 is optimal, also depends how large the area is. My idea was to draw a long river along the red region, almost from sea to sea, and then put 2 or 3 bridges. This would cause your land to not be a compact block anymore but a land cut by a long river. But still the East would look like a block, so I suggested to add some small mountains. For example could be good for me some mountains between yellow and dark-red regions to avoid them to border each other. And also for example between blue and purple region in the NE to reduce their borders a bit. The other small cracks you drew, they were not very needed for me. I wanted to draw it over your 1st version but unfortunately it is not there anymore.

What I was saying was why post if you never want this map used or think it will not be used? If you want to learn ...OK...but do maps that you want to be used...that is what I was saying. As for the graphics...he may as well get use to the feed back on graphics since he put them there.

There has been a fair bit of 'jumping the gun' whilst I was away adding some texture to the basic gameplay test map. Everything has a procedure and has to start somewhere! Here is the latest textured version: http://www.the-inkstore.co.uk/frame/Melee%20Textured.jpg

@The_Bishop, I will try to work what you have suggested into the Map tomorrow. I'm a bit out of time today. By the way, the way I do my texture and layering, allows me to modify anything at any time during the manufacture process. @Thorpe, I never said I don't want this Map used, I said, I don't expect it to be used. My reason is, I don't think it will reach the exacting standards required. This is my first standard map creation and it is just out of my mind on a thought from The_Bishop of an 81 territory map to suit up to 9 players. All I've heard from you is "Graphics, Cartoon, Belongs on another site, PNG best" etc etc... Take a breath and wait until the actual map is ready for viewing before criticising it! That is like criticising a hand drawing because all you can see are the guidelines!

Areonautic, I think the point Thorpe was trying to make (and correct me if I'm wrong, Thorpe, because I don't want to speak for you) is that it takes a ton of work and a ton of criticism to get a map were it belongs both visually and by gameplay to be considered for this site. Many maps have taken well over a year of tweaks and modifications AFTER they were first presented, with a whole lot of constructive criticism in between to even make the final tweak and approval process. Verbally slamming a map in the beginnig is a good way to either discourage continuation or give incentive to the designer to put as much detail in as possible to create a truly outstanding map. It is then a challenge to make a great map worthy of the site:)

I believe discussion and advice is better than critisism, however my point is that the critisism was unwarranted due to the stage the map was at. I read other map threads and nobody else got critisised for lack of texture before they got to the texture/detail stage. I have had to jump over some gameplay amendments to add some texture and detail, just to stop the bombardment of negativity, holding up the thread and any possible constructiveness! I am good with graphics and so, I am able to use quick effects to emphasise things for ease of viewing and understanding instead of a basic line drawing that will be little understood or seen in any future form and for anyone to assume that this is a finished product when gameplay is still being sorted out is quite rediculous! [quote=Thorpe]Get the cartoons out...this needs to look like a real map...with textures and have the map not just sitting on top of a texture...this map is good for another site but not this one.[/quote] [quote=Thorpe]What I was saying was why post if you never want this map used or think it will not be used? If you want to learn ...OK...but do maps that you want to be used...that is what I was saying. As for the graphics...he may as well get use to the feed back on graphics since he put them there.[/quote] Where was the constructiveness in either of those posts? @elysium5 Don't defend those statements, let Thorpe speak for himself. He is in my age group and should know how to conduct himself in life! @The_Bishop, all your constructive points are noted and I will make amendments tonight. I will also keep placing only an amended version of the map as a link to show it's changes and growth and to use for reference of previous conditions.

While there are many varying ways in which the definition can be worded, here are are couple that were intended when I used the word (especially since I included the precursor 'contructive'); "Criticism: is the practice of judging the merits and faults of something or someone in an intelligible (or articulate) way." "Criticism: assessment of creative work: considered judgment of or discussion about the qualities of something, especially a creative work" ...and, uh...ahem...'@elysium5 Don't defend those statements, let Thorpe speak for himself. He is in my age group and should know how to conduct himself in life!'...I clearly stated it MAY or MAY NOT have been the point he was trying to make and I'm pretty sure I haven't told him to never speak again on the subject as I've now decided that my opinion should be his. I stated what I thought was the point he was trying to make and it is my opinion on the subject that followed and I was not being rude about the subject. I was using...wait for it...constructive criticism!:)