

Moderator: Cartographers


You absolutely can have multiple win conditions - see All Your Base, for example.Seamus76 wrote:Also, I don't think you can have two different winning conditions, only one.
That would be a big mistake. The feeling of expectation is a very powerful tool used all over the gaming industry.Butters1919 wrote:I'm not sure I would work on any at the moment. Until the plans for the foundry are made clear by the current admin, it might all be for naught. It would be a shame to see you put a lot of time and effort into a map to only have the foundry shut down permanently.
Apparently, tens of thousands of years before 500BCwaauw wrote:I like the age of man idea, though I have one problem with it. Didn't people migrate into the america's through Alaska?
My favorite too, although somehow feels like a lot less potential work than the others.Seamus76 wrote:I like age of man, but needs a lot of work.
Also, I don't think you can have two different winning conditions, only one.
I feel like you will have to ask for supersized map permissions.Teflon Kris wrote:Thanks for looking-in everyone.
My favorite too, although somehow feels like a lot less potential work than the others.Seamus76 wrote:I like age of man, but needs a lot of work.
Also, I don't think you can have two different winning conditions, only one.
Any suggestions for the next few steps with that one?
Yeah, trying to fit to normal size makes it all a bit squashed, so licence to have a little more width would be cool, maybe not that much extra room needed to reduce the crowded areas though?waauw wrote:I feel like you will have to ask for supersized map permissions.Teflon Kris wrote:Any suggestions for the next few steps with that one?Seamus76 wrote:I like age of man, but needs a lot of work.
Crowded areas shouldn't be too much of a problem. Merging is always an option, not to mention you left immense amounts of space for the legend(especially once you expand your map's width.Teflon Kris wrote:Yeah, trying to fit to normal size makes it all a bit squashed, so licence to have a little more width would be cool, maybe not that much extra room needed to reduce the crowded areas though?waauw wrote:I feel like you will have to ask for supersized map permissions.Teflon Kris wrote:Any suggestions for the next few steps with that one?Seamus76 wrote:I like age of man, but needs a lot of work.
Merging? You mean merging the inset and main map? See below if that is what you mean.waauw wrote:Crowded areas shouldn't be too much of a problem. Merging is always an option, not to mention you left immense amounts of space for the legend(especially once you expand your map's width.
Sorry, what I meant was that you merge territories together. For instance if Australia ever got too crowded you could always merge those 3 into 1(hypothetical example).Teflon Kris wrote:Merging? You mean merging the inset and main map? See below if that is what you mean.waauw wrote:Crowded areas shouldn't be too much of a problem. Merging is always an option, not to mention you left immense amounts of space for the legend(especially once you expand your map's width.
Sorry too, I was editing my above post to explain about removing any regions whilst you were posting:waauw wrote:Sorry, what I meant was that you merge territories together. For instance if Australia ever got too crowded you could always merge those 3 into 1(hypothetical example).Teflon Kris wrote:Merging? You mean merging the inset and main map? See below if that is what you mean.waauw wrote:Crowded areas shouldn't be too much of a problem. Merging is always an option, not to mention you left immense amounts of space for the legend(especially once you expand your map's width.
And by expanding the map's width I was referring to you asking for supersized map permissions.
With conquest-style maps with more regions in each starting 'kingdom', there can be slight variations in numbers but I think it would be too imbalanced in this case if there were any less anywhere?I dont feel there is any leeway to remove any regions where things are a touch crowded (i.e. a West African region) as this would unbalance that starting position: Each starting position (blue 7s) has 3 local regions (including a +1 'centre') for players to get going before they travel to the central mediterranean area through a 3-neutral, or risk trying to hit another starting area though a 7 killer neutral (red 7).
Don't ask me that question. Everybody has their own methods and way of ordering tasks. Just do what you feel you got to do.Teflon Kris wrote:
Anyway, I think we are probably agreeing that the first step is to reduce size, then ask for supersize if still over the 600x630 limit?
Although, you have helped me make my own mind up.waauw wrote:Don't ask me that question. Everybody has their own methods and way of ordering tasks. Just do what you feel you got to do.Teflon Kris wrote:
Anyway, I think we are probably agreeing that the first step is to reduce size, then ask for supersize if still over the 600x630 limit?
Thanks doodFewnix wrote:I am only a game player, not a map maker, not a producer.zero tech skills, I really appreciate all the poduct produced, , what the foundry provides CC. I voted for the Age of Man map and suggest you lobby around this map (and other ideas), Bring them to the bargaining table with BigvWham. Consumer surveys show the people like this model, bring the product to market.
and the players should back the producers.
Appreciate all that you have done are doing and will do.
![]()
![]()
OK, thanks mate, although Age of Man isn't all that complex, its a conquest map - players start on the blue 7s, each with their own corner of the world - all meet in the middle.Dukasaur wrote:Command Centre is the one that has promise.
I really don't like Age of Man. It's basically another World 2.1, except as hard to understand as Dawn of Ages. Would soon become just another farming map -- the normal player wouldn't take the time to figure it out.

Typically, software goes through two stages of testing before it is considered finished. The first stage, called alpha testing, is often performed only by users within the organization developing the software. The second stage, called beta testing , generally involves a limited number of external users.