So looking at the map, do you think we need a bigger map than 20x14? Even if we make distances to each castle equidistant, we could be laying seige on the closest castle in like 5 days. Maybe we should go with 32x22?
Yes, we might need a bigger map. But for the first version of this event, it might be better to start with a smaller one. Best plan would probably be to run a beta event for a month, then make changes for a couple of weeks, and finally launch the WoE 1.0.
About that map of yours. It looks pretty good but the problem I see with it is that's it looks really small. I don't get an epic feeling out of it.
Well, the map is just a reference design to help everyone get a visual for what people are describing. It's definitely not supposed to be a final version. I actually zoomed out a bit to take 1 screen grab of the whole map. I could zoom back in and take several screenshots and then stitch them into one big panorama too.
Great job Dragoon on digging up Battle for Wesnoth! That was an epic game!
Question for this whole map system: is map going to be just a pretty picture to look at, or will we see units on it? And umm... how will someone draw and move all players every turn? ???
Yeah, it's been a while since I last played it but it was pretty epic.
As far as drawing and moving players, that could be pretty time-consuming. But if someone wanted to, you could start a game with the map and then move people around in-game and grab a screenshot at the end of the turn. And since you can generate new creatures at every base, that'd answer the problem of adding new players as the game goes on. It's just an idea.
I'll post an example in a bit once I get a game going.
Edit:
I used a different map with close to equidistant castles. Yeah, and actually using the game engine won't work because you can only have 9 teams and you can only have 1 unit per space. So forget about using the game to keep track of WoE.
Edit2: SG, here's
a large 1280x1244 map.