missing connection

Assalni-Eicoa

First of all: i like the map. It's kind of cute how the symetric is hidden and it has potential for cool games.
But i have some questions/points of criticism:

- There are also more missing connections:
Isumi - Tomisato
Bhuj - Dalhousie

- Why are the hexagons so huddled?

- Why are so many map-creators not reading the [Guidelines for making a great map](http://warlight.net/ViewHelp.aspx?s=MapDesignGuidelines)?
Under "Border overlap" you can read: *"the borders of territories in different bonuses should be adjacent"*
If you don't do this you sometimes have the problem that you can't see directly which bonus to a territory belongs.

- And finally i would like to see a new distribution with only four territories, each in one corner. This would give totally fair starts for 4players or 2vs2.

Thanks for listening.

I totally agree with you, Metaltubbie. I think the issue is the hex maps are being created with a hex grid generator (maybe the one recently posted on the forums), which doesn't account for overlap. I know it would be quite a bit of work to do, but fixing the overlap would improve the playability of this map **immensely**. At a glance, I really, really like the map. But I haven't even tried it yet, because I'm not looking forward to the bonus confusion.

I am always clicking the bonus rectangles anyways to make sure i know exact locations of bonuses, so it barely affects me, but i must still agree..

Hey guys! I appreciate the feedback on my map. I made the map essentially by hand, by copy and pasting hexes until I filled the entire area, then removed the ones I wanted to get the landscape I liked.

I did notice the missing links, I'll try and fix these soon. I'm not sure how to edit it after I've launched it, but I'll try and figure it out.

As for the overlap, I did read the guide, and I wanted to include this. However, there are a couple of reasons I did not. The first being, that it's an accurate hex map. Anytime you have a tileable map of any sort, it becomes essentially impossible to follow this rule. Imagine having a puzzle, taking out a few pieces, and then try shifting things around. It just doesn't work. The moment you shift one part, the puzzle no longer fits together. If you have a good idea to get around this, I'd love to hear it. The second reason I didn't do this is I wasn't sure how to represent regions with multiple bonuses. If you have a standard shift width, what does two borders look like vs one? How do you know which border applies to which bonus?

I really do appreciate the feedback on the map! Glad to hear people other then me are playing on it.

You can edit your map by making a duplicate version of it (e.g. 1.1) in the map design dialog, then make the changes to it. Once you publish it the old version gets archived.

As for creating the overlap:
Say your hexgrid is 100 units wide, and you want tiles to overlap by 2 units, then select two neighboring tiles in Inkscape if you use that and Transform->Scale them individually by 102%.
Only problem I see then is having the tiles NOT overlap at the Bonus border, since scaling works in all directions equally ... maybe scale border pieces only by 101% and move them 1 unit away from the bonus border? I think it can be done.

Maybe just makes the hexes smaller? Wider borders, or a bit of empty space between them is not an issue in terms of playability, while overlap is.

Missing links are pending the map going public.

Scaling and repositioning doesn't work in a tiled map. Not sure how to explain without making some images, so maybe if my description isn't clear, I'll proceed to drafting up some stuff.

The basic problem comes when multiple pieces interlock. Scaling down all the tiles will work, the problem comes in when you reposition them to be adjacent to their fellow bonus members. Once you do that, the integrity of the "puzzle" is no more, and things will visually no longer connect. Adjacent hexes will no longer be adjacent, so you'd need to draw links manually from ever tile to every adjacent bonus tile. Additionally you'll get corners clipping with other tiles.

Probably the best way to do this is plan for it from the ground up and not use a tile based map, or if you do, make the bonus borders not interconnect at all. Meaning, straight borders are ok, puzzle pieces are not.

Hope this makes sense. If not, I'll draw something up in inkscape when I have some time.

I'm also still curious what the best way to handle multi-bonus borders is.

Rowen, you're right that repositioning will not work, but there are other ways to do this. I don't have time to open Inkscape right now and figure out how to do it there, but here is how I would do it in AutoCAD:

1. Start with what you have now, hexagons with overlapping boundaries (green and red are two separate bonuses):

2. Draw a polyline that traces the border between the bonuses:

3. Offset the polyline in both directions:

4. The white polylines represent the new extents of the bordering hexagons. Trim those hexes back to define the gap between bonuses:

5. Finished product:

Here's what I would do in Inkscape, the cheap, easy way:

1. I have an ugly overlapping grid (sorry, couldn't be arsed to align them correctly)

2. I do Path -> Inset on all hexagons.

3. I repeat a few times until i get the desired effect.


The amount by which it insets the path can be changed somewhere in Options.



This is the simplest way that keeps hexagons hexagonal and make borders not overlap. This can also be used with any other map.

(Aw, sorry, these images shouldn't be that big :( But I can't edit the post now.)

That certainly works, and is preferable to having them all overlap. But then territories in the same bonus do not have overlapping borders, and I tend to think that ends up looking sloppy. Personally (and this is just my opinion) I'd rather use my method and have slightly irregular hexagons along borders. My way is admittedly more work, though.

both valid solutions, the preferred one is based on personal preference... I thought the main problem we had was with overlapping bonuses however?
IE, the central island..

I'd argue that crafty35a's method doesn't work, and this is what I mentioned previously about requiring non-puzzle borders, and the need for straight borders. Just pulling things apart works fine, unless your pieces are interlocked.

Take this base grid:



Just moving them doesn't work in cases like this:

or worse this:


Scaling down and repositioning also doesn't work, as in the first bad case, you'll end up with overlap anyways, and in the second case, you can't reposition it and still maintain the border.

I fail at the internets... try #2


Rowen, I think you are misunderstanding my method. I am not moving/re-positioning any hexes at all. The hexes along the border are just being trimmed back. Does this image make it any more clear?


The vertices of the hexes that are along the border are just being pulled back to match the white dashed line.

Got it. I misunderstood. That would work I suppose. How do people handle multiple bonus borders?

Idk precisely how you'd do it, as I haven't been able to do much in Inkscape successfully, but perhaps purely a dotted line where the borders end, but another border crosses over?

That's a tough call, Rowen. I don't think there's any perfect way to handle it. Most maps with overlapping bonuses, it's just larger bonuses that consist of multiple small bonuses. Off-hand, I can't think of another map with bonuses intertwined like your center island. I'd probably try to indicate the borders with some additional graphics on the SVG -- maybe lines or brackets that wrap around each bonus? And the bonus indicator box would be attached to these brackets.

Not a bad idea, thanks. Is that where people are most confused with the map? The center? There are also bonuses made up of smaller bonuses(each element island). Are those confusing?