Civilization Wars: Map Development

Moderators: XGDeath3, Quetra

RaptorXI
Treant
Posts: 363
Joined: Thu Dec 20, 2012 5:43 pm
Has thanked: 16 times
Been thanked: 19 times

Re: Civilization Wars: Map Development

Postby RaptorXI » Mon May 25, 2015 4:16 pm

The new positions for these towers.

rmp20002000
Aura Tree
Posts: 26
Joined: Fri Jul 04, 2014 2:11 pm
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 2 times

Re: Civilization Wars: Map Development

Postby rmp20002000 » Mon May 25, 2015 6:01 pm

If the towers are located together, then it makes rushes weaker because you can "Trade lanes", but you can't take a castle. I strongly believe that "rushes" are legitimate strategies, and the rewards vary in terms of 1) Total Lane Control, 2) destroy top/bottom castle, 3) Destroy more than 1 castle. So I would prefer it if the towers remained where they were. If towers that you can build have +50% HP and more armour, then this becomes even more unnecessary.

RaptorXI
Treant
Posts: 363
Joined: Thu Dec 20, 2012 5:43 pm
Has thanked: 16 times
Been thanked: 19 times

Re: Civilization Wars: Map Development

Postby RaptorXI » Mon May 25, 2015 6:25 pm

rmp20002000 wrote:If the towers are located together, then it makes rushes weaker


No. The AI would attack the front towers first, focussing fire more, like a skilled player would do.

because you can "Trade lanes"


There is no "trading lanes", maybe at the map you play on Garena.

rmp20002000 wrote:I strongly believe that "rushes" are legitimate strategies

I do too.

rmp20002000 wrote:and the rewards vary in terms of 1) Total Lane Control, 2) destroy top/bottom castle, 3) Destroy more than 1 castle. So I would prefer it if the towers remained where they were. If towers that you can build have +50% HP and more armour, then this becomes even more unnecessary.


If you are so deep into the game already, why not go even deeper?

supersexyy wrote:The main changes that need to be made are gameplay changes not pointless changes like these.


Based on your history as one of the "best" players:
How often do you play the map?
Do you ever host of one the custom modes you like to see being removed?
You might wanna be the first to announce massing workers and granaries as a new IH strategy? The winter is cold and you will need the food.
I'm all up to make more custom modes and balance those who where created by Dangime and Terrabull (have you ever talked to them? have they asked for your opinion?), so you would be able to play them.
If you really want to make the game better, make serious suggestions, not pointless statements.

This might be too much at the moment, will keep it my mind for later.

DUTCHWEEDLOVE
Armored Tree
Posts: 50
Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2012 6:16 am
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Civilization Wars: Map Development

Postby DUTCHWEEDLOVE » Mon May 25, 2015 7:23 pm

RaptorXI wrote:
rmp20002000 wrote:If the towers are located together, then it makes rushes weaker


No. The AI would attack the front towers first, focussing fire more, like a skilled player would do.

because you can "Trade lanes"


There is no "trading lanes", maybe at the map you play on Garena.

rmp20002000 wrote:I strongly believe that "rushes" are legitimate strategies

I do too.

rmp20002000 wrote:and the rewards vary in terms of 1) Total Lane Control, 2) destroy top/bottom castle, 3) Destroy more than 1 castle. So I would prefer it if the towers remained where they were. If towers that you can build have +50% HP and more armour, then this becomes even more unnecessary.


If you are so deep into the game already, why not go even deeper?

supersexyy wrote:The main changes that need to be made are gameplay changes not pointless changes like these.


Based on your history as one of the "best" players:
How often do you play the map?
Do you ever host of one the custom modes you like to see being removed?
You might wanna be the first to announce massing workers and granaries as a new IH strategy? The winter is cold and you will need the food.
I'm all up to make more custom modes and balance those who where created by Dangime and Terrabull (have you ever talked to them? have they asked for your opinion?), so you would be able to play them.
If you really want to make the game better, make serious suggestions, not pointless statements.

This might be too much at the moment, will keep it my mind for later.

Rmp makes some great points here, I think you are being a little too stubborn on this Raptor.

For instance he calls out "trading lanes". You clearly miss the point here as he doesn't mean some trading lane for income or whatever but the trading of lanes when you rush a lane another lane will fall thus evening out the rush in some way. If your English is not on point do not go all cynical with some rude Garena comment.
reddit.com/r/civilization_wars | twitch.tv/myfuelisweed | Clan TLC Chief | http://i.imgur.com/rDQtSw8.png

RaptorXI
Treant
Posts: 363
Joined: Thu Dec 20, 2012 5:43 pm
Has thanked: 16 times
Been thanked: 19 times

Re: Civilization Wars: Map Development

Postby RaptorXI » Mon May 25, 2015 8:36 pm

Comments like these won't help you to get something into the map at all.

Funny how you state that 2.30 is balanced with all those modes never hosted and strategies that just make you lose. Or have you changed your priororities from playing to be the best to playing for fun suddenly?

DUTCHWEEDLOVE wrote:You clearly miss the point here as he doesn't mean some trading lane for income or whatever but the trading of lanes when you rush a lane another lane will fall thus evening out the rush in some way.

Too much weirdo talking here.
Denying "trading lanes" for now until there is a definition so we can measure the impact on the map and it's outcome.

@DUTCHWEEDLOVE
Your thoughts and suggestions on the current changelog or testing the beta with or against me is more welcome, especially due to all the possibilities you own.

DUTCHWEEDLOVE
Armored Tree
Posts: 50
Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2012 6:16 am
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Civilization Wars: Map Development

Postby DUTCHWEEDLOVE » Mon May 25, 2015 9:05 pm

RaptorXI wrote:Comments like these won't help you to get something into the map at all.

Funny how you state that 2.30 is balanced with all those modes never hosted and strategies that just make you lose. Or have you changed your priororities from playing to be the best to playing for fun suddenly?

DUTCHWEEDLOVE wrote:You clearly miss the point here as he doesn't mean some trading lane for income or whatever but the trading of lanes when you rush a lane another lane will fall thus evening out the rush in some way.

Too much weirdo talking here.
Denying "trading lanes" for now until there is a definition so we can measure the impact on the map and it's outcome.

@DUTCHWEEDLOVE
Your thoughts and suggestions on the current changelog or testing the beta with or against me is more welcome, especially due to all the possibilities you own.

Trading lanes is not a suggestion, it's an possible event what happens in game when a rush occurs, jesus.

Great job too to mention the "awesome" modes you strongly support. As I recall it has been to only time you beat me while not telling anyone it was activated. I remember the disgust by some of the more established players observing (Alter, Braveheart, Razor). You really are a simple creature. Go shape up your English lexicon before mutilating the current version.
reddit.com/r/civilization_wars | twitch.tv/myfuelisweed | Clan TLC Chief | http://i.imgur.com/rDQtSw8.png

RaptorXI
Treant
Posts: 363
Joined: Thu Dec 20, 2012 5:43 pm
Has thanked: 16 times
Been thanked: 19 times

Re: Civilization Wars: Map Development

Postby RaptorXI » Mon May 25, 2015 9:34 pm

[quote"DUTCHWEEDLOVE"]
Great job too to mention the "awesome" modes you strongly support.
[/quote]

Those have been in the map like since forever, why you complain now and not when they were made?

[quote"DUTCHWEEDLOVE"]
As I recall it has been to only time you beat me while not telling anyone it was activated.
[/quote]

Still being traumatized ofter all those years? Q.Q

[quote"DUTCHWEEDLOVE"]
I remember the disgust by some of the more established players observing (Alter, Braveheart, Razor). You really are a simple creature
[/quote]

Must be very true, since you were the same once. Sadly all those old pros don't play anymore.

[quote"DUTCHWEEDLOVE"]
Go shape up your English lexicon before mutilating the current version.
[/quote]

Make valuable contributions or cry your heart out. Keep bashing pubs for your stats, tho.
And please stop picking on me just because I'm "the new guy" who tries get something done while all former mappers have left.

The game as you know it will change. Get it over with.

DUTCHWEEDLOVE
Armored Tree
Posts: 50
Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2012 6:16 am
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Civilization Wars: Map Development

Postby DUTCHWEEDLOVE » Mon May 25, 2015 9:52 pm

Yes, just quote everyone sentence and take it out of context. There is no point to keep in mind or balancing -timeless or other modes which have never seen any form of competitive play. Even though the version is up for many years now the metagame is still developing. But I don't think you would understand.

Good job skipping the initial point of the post which was clarifying rmp's point what you frankly can't even comprehend. How do you expect to interpret the community's suggestions if you can not even understand the elected language?
reddit.com/r/civilization_wars | twitch.tv/myfuelisweed | Clan TLC Chief | http://i.imgur.com/rDQtSw8.png

RaptorXI
Treant
Posts: 363
Joined: Thu Dec 20, 2012 5:43 pm
Has thanked: 16 times
Been thanked: 19 times

Re: Civilization Wars: Map Development

Postby RaptorXI » Mon May 25, 2015 10:07 pm

Is your English perfect? Are you the community?
Much of the suggestions and feedback so far is valuable and made me re-consider my own point of view.
Most of your comments are trash. You had 5 years time to get contact on of the former mappers and get your own shit done.

Feel free to stick with the reddit forum and hope for an independent game or that ltd2 mod.

we-giv-up-u-win
Forest Walker
Posts: 114
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2012 10:23 pm
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 2 times

Re: Civilization Wars: Map Development

Postby we-giv-up-u-win » Mon May 25, 2015 10:25 pm

@raptorxi , would you mind linking a full list of changes again? The last one was a few pages back and I'm not sure if it is current.

Also, let's stop with the giant FAQ listings. Both the grammar and the answers made my eyes bleed. Besides, only players who know the answers are reading this thread right now.

You know my position on changing the map (which is to say, don't), but I would still like to give my input on changes because I would prefer NOT to quit this game if the new version is destroyed.

RaptorXI
Treant
Posts: 363
Joined: Thu Dec 20, 2012 5:43 pm
Has thanked: 16 times
Been thanked: 19 times

Re: Civilization Wars: Map Development

Postby RaptorXI » Tue May 26, 2015 3:12 am

Since it seems some guys have a problem with me as the new mapper:
I'm no longer reading posts where i'm getting flamed for something that others (namely Dangime and Terrabull) have created, like unbalanced modes and fun stuff. It's my job to take care about these things, so let me do it.
Make suggestions and give feedback if there is something you would like to see "the game should be like".
Accept the fact that it's part of the map. Or find out how to contact them, and ask them to give you their open versions. Or flame them too, kiddos.

Most posts have been related to things like builds and metagaming, so probably Civiliaztion Wars is a pro game now where new players aren't welcome.

Still i would like your opinions on suggestions like this:

supersexyy wrote:The main changes that need to be made are gameplay changes

Changes into which direction?
Like
More fun? less fun?
Shorter games? Longer games?

Since IH games weren't hosted anymore after clan pope was disbanded, i can only rely on feedback of public games.
@uakf.b @Agreements @aRt)Y @matdas @nabo.
Would you please post the average waiting and game time on Ent16, since it is by far the most popular autohosting bot on Battle.net at the moment?

@we-giv-up-u-win
Beta 41 and 42 including changelog are some posts above, but i'm not considering every change made there anymore
Only thing that every agreed by now was to remove damage for workers

supersexyy
Donator
Posts: 3484
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2012 9:26 pm
Has thanked: 12 times
Been thanked: 40 times

Re: Civilization Wars: Map Development

Postby supersexyy » Tue May 26, 2015 3:23 am

I can't give you any specific ideas until I have time to give it thought.

You should be thinking along the lines of what aspects of civ wars deters players.

Personally the lack of skill involved in top and bottom lanes is apparent. Following standard build orders without any thought ie 6 savages into 6 longbows into grens without marketing, mass pents, 3 trireme etc. None of this actually requires any skill.

Secondly there are two parts about updating a map.
1. Balancing units: balancing units where everything is equally viable is obviously an important aspect of a map. Ie mauso is weak, big Ben is weak.
2. Reworking units: Ensuring each unit/wonder serves it's purpose. Reworking something changes its purpose in a game and how it interacts with the map. Wonders need to be unique. Mauso presents an early game opportunity with mid game drawbacks where gens are stronger. When you change the mauso you have changed its purpose which is a big negative to the map. Mauso needed balancing not a rework.
3. A combination of these two aspects is deciding what needs to be changed. Obelisk is strong but do people 2 worker rush it every game? No, because rushing obelisk has drawbacks. The same can be said about other wonders such as lighthouse, bazaar and zip. They aren't op, they're in a good spot. Megallans, big ben, Hoover dam etc need balancing (a buff).
Image

RaptorXI
Treant
Posts: 363
Joined: Thu Dec 20, 2012 5:43 pm
Has thanked: 16 times
Been thanked: 19 times

Re: Civilization Wars: Map Development

Postby RaptorXI » Tue May 26, 2015 4:17 am

But you suggested it, why don't you have time now?
After 1000-2000 games played, I have some experience of "how to play".

I read statements like
Mauso needed balancing not a rework.

all the time.
You have an idea of you how want to see this wonder like. Tell me what it is and we can talk about it:
Current Mausoleum costs 1400 gold and gives a damage aura (+10%) with unlimited range to all allied units. All units that require leadership technology have the same aura, so a pro only does either Mauso or a leader, else it would be a waste of gold. Since units can't deactivted and reactivated without losing anything, those leader strategy is more common to push lanes.

supersexyy wrote:Personally the lack of skill involved in top and bottom lanes is apparent. Following standard build orders without any thought ie 6 savages into 6 longbows into grens without marketing, mass pents, 3 trireme etc. None of this actually requires any skill.


Absolutely agree, those builds have been proven as the strongest to lock lanes.
Free lane = market it = more income = outplaying the enemy more and more (unless they do a successful rush) = win
If we make a script for this it would be an unbeatable AI. In my opinion very boring. That's why i remade dromons, for example. You didn't build them, since were noobstuff, hard to save for and easy to counter by penteconter or even galley. Only "useful" ting about this was maybe it could be upgraded into any unit, but not part of builds pros use. You would be forced to find out on your own now how they could be used.

All these strategies haven't been invented over night, the game is like 9 years old now.

That was why i claimed the 2.30 final is explored, after being hosted a million times and no one found out something new. But then i wonder, why there is so much resistance against a new version, since i'm actually asking for suggestion and feedback, trying to involve you?
That's also why i keep asking questions like if Dangime or Terrabull asked before creating something new? I guess they didn't, they made, and you found out what can be done by playing and replying.

supersexyy
Donator
Posts: 3484
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2012 9:26 pm
Has thanked: 12 times
Been thanked: 40 times

Re: Civilization Wars: Map Development

Postby supersexyy » Tue May 26, 2015 4:27 am

Balancing = changing numbers
Rework = changing the concept.
Put Mauso at 1000 gold and see what happens.
Make big Ben 60% of the cost
Magellans spawn 4 cavs and up price by 300
Hoover etc 50% cost


The whole point of civ is there should be an 'unbeatable strategy'. What about markets give +50% income for side lane players.
What about increasing movement speed auras for bottom lane (which will nerf the effectiveness of range units).
What about increasing heavy armour to take less more pierce and more from shock to counter mass longbows.
Grenadiers requiring machinery as their main advantage is the easy tech route.
Etc

The actual changes are easy. But you're skipping the first step which is asking 'what aspects need to be addressed in the new version. Playing around with obelisk and lighthouse is not required.
Image

RaptorXI
Treant
Posts: 363
Joined: Thu Dec 20, 2012 5:43 pm
Has thanked: 16 times
Been thanked: 19 times

Re: Civilization Wars: Map Development

Postby RaptorXI » Tue May 26, 2015 4:42 am

supersexyy wrote:You should ask yourself 'what makes civ boring' and work on those. Things such as following 'perfect' build orders as top and bottom. Such as lane locking, etc


I was about to present something but now you tell me again.

supersexyy wrote:The whole point of civ is there should be an 'unbeatable strategy'.


If the aim is to win, yes. I don't like those guys that just mass workers from the start either and doing nothing with them. People with a sick sense of humor may even find it funny, but it's nothing build up professional gameplaying on, like leagues and tournaments.
So what do we do?


Return to “Civilization Wars”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest