Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
AnthArmo

What's happening with Cartography?

Recommended Posts

Hey everyone, this is my first post! Yay for me.

I've spent a little over a year following this game. Although I love the concept for the game as a whole, cartography was a big personal draw for me and I decided to get into pre-alpha to see what the state of cartography was myself, as there was very little information to be found on the forums and it's rarely mentioned in the Q&A's. 

I've been playing for about a month now and I...it's not there?

Has it been removed?

What's going on?

I get that the team have bigger priorities on their plate (I'm in Australia and boy is this game slow for me). I'm just curious what's going on with this specific part of the game that's a big draw for me. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, AnthArmo said:

Hey everyone, this is my first post! Yay for me.

I've spent a little over a year following this game. Although I love the concept for the game as a whole, cartography was a big personal draw for me and I decided to get into pre-alpha to see what the state of cartography was myself, as there was very little information to be found on the forums and it's rarely mentioned in the Q&A's. 

I've been playing for about a month now and I...it's not there?

Has it been removed?

What's going on?

I get that the team have bigger priorities on their plate (I'm in Australia and boy is this game slow for me). I'm just curious what's going on with this specific part of the game that's a big draw for me. 

also 'fog of war' exploring the map is now gone as well. (and seeing snapshots of resources/buildings on the map too)

would be good to hear something from @jtoddcoleman about it - either in a text article or their pre recorded monthly Q&A video.

i vaguely asked him via twitter, but not the right place for an answer!

 

 

Edited by Tinnis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I have a problem.  I have two different design goals and they are diametrically opposed.  I want to be able to expose the strategy game information to everyone, even to people who aren't even playing in the Campaign -- but if I show the maps, that makes it pretty impossible to hide them at the same time.  So instead I was leaning towards a hybrid approach: show the maps and the major features (mountains, roads, strongholds, etc) and hide the details until someone claims them (outposts, etc).  I could also throw other things into the mix, like resources and mob spawners -- you'll probably recall they had them in previous versions.

We had fog of war, and it was kind of cool, but frankly it didn't last more than hour once a new map came up.  so when I hit the conflict between these two design goals, I decided that showing the strategy game was more important, and I gave that priority.  I like the idea, though, so I will continue to look for opportunities to use it (or a variation of it) in the future.

Todd

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think relaying the general topography of the map to everyone while leaving the details of outposts/forts/resources/etc. to those with a cartographer friend is a good middle ground. You can even split the granularity of the current PvP situation by letting everyone see the current score breakdown via the scoreboard but obfuscating which fort/keep/etc. is currently owned by whom without a cartographer update.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jtoddcoleman said:

Yeah, I have a problem.  I have two different design goals and they are diametrically opposed.  I want to be able to expose the strategy game information to everyone, even to people who aren't even playing in the Campaign -- but if I show the maps, that makes it pretty impossible to hide them at the same time.  So instead I was leaning towards a hybrid approach: show the maps and the major features (mountains, roads, strongholds, etc) and hide the details until someone claims them (outposts, etc).  I could also throw other things into the mix, like resources and mob spawners -- you'll probably recall they had them in previous versions.

We had fog of war, and it was kind of cool, but frankly it didn't last more than hour once a new map came up.  so when I hit the conflict between these two design goals, I decided that showing the strategy game was more important, and I gave that priority.  I like the idea, though, so I will continue to look for opportunities to use it (or a variation of it) in the future.

Todd

 

Oh man first post and I get a reply from j todd coleman. I must be doing something right.

Reading this explanation felt strange to me because it completely clashes with my experience of playing strategy games. 

Normally in a strategy game, the early game is all about 1) consolidating your base and 2) exploring/understanding the map for mid-game. The obvious example is most RTS games - the early game involves sending out a scout to clear fog of war while you build up a basic base. But even in a strategy board game like Chess, Settlers of Catan or Diplomacy I still feel like this same dynamic is in play. I'll go through each as an example so you see where I'm coming from. 

In Chess, I have absolutely no clue how I'm going to checkmate my opponent on turn 1. This is because I don't actually know what the board is going to look like past the opening moves. Once both players have done their openings we can then get an idea of what the mid-game looks like, and can start planning for checkmate. But before that? Who knows. In a metaphorical sense the early-game involves two players having the fog-of war of the mid-game revealed to them as they develop their pieces. 

In Diplomacy, the first two turns are 90% me and the other players talking to each other trying to appraise one another. Forget the physical board - what are the other players planning? Who's going for Belgium? Do I need to fight Turkey for the Black Sea? What are the early game alliances? It's only after the first few turns when the early-game alliances have settled do we then actually look at the board and start making long-term plans regarding how we win the game. Before that though it's gathering intel on what the other players plan on doing. The exploration comes in finding out who's a jerk and who's trustworthy. 

Then there's Settlers of Catan. The early game is me and my friends looking at the board and trying to appraise it. What resources are going to be in high demand? Which ports are in a good strategic position? Where will there be space to expand? I also try to meta-game who's going to place what where, and they're doing the same to me. It's only once everyone has placed their first settlements and begun expanding do we have something that resembles a mid-game.

Basically, my experience of strategy games is that the early game is all about discovering the map, and coming up with long-term strategies as I do so. You seem to find these two elements (planning and discovering) as diametrically opposed when normally the two are embedded into the same activity. Mid-game is then when all of the nitty-gritty action takes place. 

If I were to use Crowfall's current pre-alpha design philosophy for Settlers of Catan, then the beginning of the game would be the players putting not just two starting settlements, but putting down enough starting settlements to completely fill up the board. At that stage the game is already finished and the winner is more or less already decided. Everything happens all at once at the beginning. That may be why campaigns so quickly tilt in favour of one faction early on. Forts and keeps can be captured almost immediately, so it's a mad dash in the beginning. Everyone is rushing to capture things so there's no chance to slowly discover, plan, discuss and strategise. 

So I have a tentative suggestion:

Spring: Players can explore areas adjacent to their temple. These areas have a fog of war and forts/keeps can't be captured by anyone. Runegates connecting these places to further areas are locked.

Summer: Players can capture forts/keeps in the areas adjacent to their beach-head and the fog of war is lifted in these areas. Runegates to the next-adjacent areas are open for exploration, but not capture. 

Fall: Same as before - by this point almost everything can be captured.

Winter: Everything can be captured, no fog of war. 

My thinking is that this gives players time to breath, explore, plan and meta-game in the early seasons of a campaign without it being a mad dash. It also makes things not look so hopeless for those who've fallen behind in the early seasons, as they still have a chance to catch-up in later seasons. The slow reveal can be both engaging for everyone while giving cartographers a long-term role to play. 
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Damn... 

JTC, you really ought to try it out one campaign with some crafting mechanics. This would probably be one of the first games that would reward scouts in game rather than just word of mouth within a guild. It's a cool concept. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...