(December 1st, 2013, 03:04)Qgqqqqq Wrote: I can work on a second map if you'd prefer that/maps can't work for each set.
Well, I have no direct qualms with it, but it's very hard to make a map that works for two different numbers of players, so if that happens, yeah, your offer would be great.
Merovech's Mapmaking Guidelines:
0. Player Requests: The player's requests take precedence, even if they contradict the following guidelines.
1. Balance: The map must be balanced, both in regards to land quality and availability and in regards to special civilization features. A map may be wonderfully unique and surprising, but, if it is unbalanced, the game will suffer and the player's enjoyment will not be as high as it could be.
2. Identity and Enjoyment: The map should be interesting to play at all levels, from city placement and management to the border-created interactions between civilizations, and should include varied terrain. Flavor should enhance the inherent pleasure resulting from the underlying tile arrangements. The map should not be exceedingly lush, but it is better to err on the lush side than on the poor side when placing terrain.
3. Feel (Avoiding Gimmicks): The map should not be overwhelmed or dominated by the mapmaker's flavor. Embellishment of the map through the use of special improvements, barbarian units, and abnormal terrain can enhance the identity and enjoyment of the map, but should take a backseat to the more normal aspects of the map. The game should usually not revolve around the flavor, but merely be accented by it.
4. Realism: Where possible, the terrain of the map should be realistic. Jungles on desert tiles, or even next to desert tiles, should therefore have a very specific reason for existing. Rivers should run downhill or across level ground into bodies of water. Irrigated terrain should have a higher grassland to plains ratio than dry terrain. Mountain chains should cast rain shadows. Islands, mountains, and peninsulas should follow logical plate tectonics.
Okay, Ellimist, HK, Dantski & Greywolf, are you guys cool with the settings summary I posted? I guess there's no rush if the map won't be done for a week, but I'd like to pick my leader a little in advance of the game launching so I can relearn how to play FFH
Well, this game seems to be about 'Embrace Brokeness' whereas Dave's game is 'Balance Everything' , it looked to me like the games were split along those lines rather than player skill. Since I don't mind which I play, I decided to drop out to even the numbers from a 6-3 split.
I'm happy to swap with GreyWolf though, if he's ok with it.
(December 1st, 2013, 15:14)Bobchillingworth Wrote: Okay, Ellimist, HK, Dantski & Greywolf, are you guys cool with the settings summary I posted? I guess there's no rush if the map won't be done for a week, but I'd like to pick my leader a little in advance of the game launching so I can relearn how to play FFH
Yes those settings are fine.
"We are open to all opinions as long as they are the same as ours."
I think Ellimist wants diplomacy, but limited to one email a turn (no chats). I would be happy with that, or AI diplomacy (with or without a banter thread).
(December 2nd, 2013, 13:53)Bobchillingworth Wrote: I think Ellimist wants diplomacy, but limited to one email a turn (no chats). I would be happy with that, or AI diplomacy (with or without a banter thread).
Close, but not quite.
My preferences:
You can send whatever messages you want, but only on your own turns. This way, messages back and forth are tied to the turn pace.
No talking until contact (and maybe a public banter thread before then)
No screenshots before cartography.
This is what we've done in 20, 25 and 29, and it's worked pretty well.
Active in:
FFH-20: Jonas Endain of the Clan of Embers
EITB Pitboss 1: Clan/Elohim/Calabim with Mardoc and Thoth
