Overland map

[Iane]

I like the idea of keeping the game ISO but not running around within a world map - The idea of the world map would be as an indication of where you are within the whole world - while playing book 1 I would get confused sometime as too where I was within the world itself - to be able to bring up a world map that indicates where I am would have been a nice touch

[Rune_74]

Well, I'm not against not using it. Obviously I would love to keep it at one level and be able to make a large area. I think we all agree it needs a few large cities. The one city it did have was nice, but was still not what you would call a large city. I guess it all really comes down to Basilisk being able to create areas fast enough;)

There was an idea earlier in the thread about having a randomly generated areas inbetween to make it take longer between areas...that might work to help, but I could see some horrible problems with having areas blocked off....plus those areas would be rather borring.

The number one complaint for the first game(contructive) was that it was too short, and didn't have an epic feel to it. When I was talking to basilisk before I was under the belief that it took awhile to make each map, so an overland map was an option in my mind.

[PhilosophiX]

You know, condescending attitudes towards people do not make them even want listen to you. I'm offering ideas that may make it in to book 2 maybe not, but you are not the end all be all guy of ideas. Every time I post an idea you are there to say well if you don't like it leave.

I don't care if you listen to me or not. My counterpoint isn't to convert you into a contiguous map connoisseur, I doubt that's even possible, it's to balance the debate.

I'm not here every time you post an idea. You joined a month after me, and you've already very almost got more posts than me (100+) and I can't honestly remember debating a point with you more than 3-4 times, so come off it! Most of my posts were made before you were even here. I've not been as active of late.

I have a feeling you are used to getting things your way all the time, which is fine if you were in charge, but you are not. Its an idea, which is what this forum is about.

Yes, you are right, I do get my way all the time. And the way I do it is by going along with anything. I'm very easy going. Sure I debate topics that I care about, but at the end of the day I'll be appreciative of Book II, however it turns out. I'm the kind of person who can find the value in almost anything. Because everything has value, if you know where to look.

This is not even a radical redesign of the engine, this is a simple change of size of the tile when you are outside. So instead of one tileset you use another. All in all though its up to Basilisk and not you or Me.

Then if it is that simple what is the point? Because it sounds to me like a way of making a smaller map seem bigger. Bit of a rip off really. Like I said earlier in my satirical dialog, "woo hoo, I can't wait to quest my way across those 20 tiles to the next village." That about sums up the world map issue it only seems bigger, it's actually smaller...

Oh and for the record, this is the first thread dedicated to it...and if it annoys you...easy enough don't read it.

Oh this is the first thread dedicated to it? Is it? I'm quoting you from your first post in this same thread:

I've heard it here mentioned that some people would like a overland map ofa different scale of what is used for when in dungeons/cities/etc...

So if you heard it mentioned that some people would like an overland map, what was wrong with continuing this discussion on those threads?

[alpha]

Avernum sucks. Nowhere near Exile III.

[Rune_74]

You know, condescending attitudes towards people do not make them even want listen to you. I'm offering ideas that may make it in to book 2 maybe not, but you are not the end all be all guy of ideas. Every time I post an idea you are there to say well if you don't like it leave.

I don't care if you listen to me or not. My counterpoint isn't to convert you into a contiguous map connoisseur, I doubt that's even possible, it's to balance the debate.

I'm not here every time you post an idea. You joined a month after me, and you've already very almost got more posts than me (100+) and I can't honestly remember debating a point with you more than 3-4 times, so come off it! Most of my posts were made before you were even here. I've not been as active of late.

I have a feeling you are used to getting things your way all the time, which is fine if you were in charge, but you are not. Its an idea, which is what this forum is about.

Yes, you are right, I do get my way all the time. And the way I do it is by going along with anything. I'm very easy going. Sure I debate topics that I care about, but at the end of the day I'll be appreciative of Book II, however it turns out. I'm the kind of person who can find the value in almost anything. Because everything has value, if you know where to look.

This is not even a radical redesign of the engine, this is a simple change of size of the tile when you are outside. So instead of one tileset you use another. All in all though its up to Basilisk and not you or Me.

Then if it is that simple what is the point? Because it sounds to me like a way of making a smaller map seem bigger. Bit of a rip off really. Like I said earlier in my satirical dialog, "woo hoo, I can't wait to quest my way across those 20 tiles to the next village." That about sums up the world map issue it only seems bigger, it's actually smaller...

Oh and for the record, this is the first thread dedicated to it...and if it annoys you...easy enough don't read it.

Oh this is the first thread dedicated to it? Is it? I'm quoting you from your first post in this same thread:

I've heard it here mentioned that some people would like a overland map ofa different scale of what is used for when in dungeons/cities/etc...

So if you heard it mentioned that some people would like an overland map, what was wrong with continuing this discussion on those threads?

Might want to recheck my join date....specifically the year. And I thought making it its own thread was fine, is there a reason not too?

I pots earlier I stated why I think it would work, not that it was an ideal situation.

[vid]

I'm not here every time you post an idea. You joined a month after me, and you've already very almost got more posts than me (100+) and I can't honestly remember debating a point with you more than 3-4 times, so come off it! Most of my posts were made before you were even here. I've not been as active of late.

Might want to recheck my join date....specifically the year. And I thought making it its own thread was fine, is there a reason not too?

owned!

Honestly Philosophix, you should grant other users the same freedom of speech you take for yourself to discuss matters in this forum.

[PhilosophiX]

I'm not here every time you post an idea. You joined a month after me, and you've already very almost got more posts than me (100+) and I can't honestly remember debating a point with you more than 3-4 times, so come off it! Most of my posts were made before you were even here. I've not been as active of late.

Might want to recheck my join date....specifically the year. And I thought making it its own thread was fine, is there a reason not too?

owned!

Honestly Philosophix, you should grant other users the same freedom of speech you take for yourself to discuss matters in this forum.

Okay, so I just looked at the month, so what? The point is, he has 100+ posts and so do I. The following is an exaggeration:

Every time I post an idea you are there to say well if you don't like it leave.

I only pop up on this World Map Idea thread (three or four threads out of the scores of threads I've posted in) because I think it would ruin Eschalon, and someone has to present the opposite viewpoint. If he doesn't like discussions what's he doing on a discussion forum?

[Rune_74]

Did you even read the qoute you used? I said that everytime I say something that you don't like you say well if you don't like it eave....that was my problem, you have an elitist attitude towards people, it irritating and not required. I have been here awhile now and I suport the game alot, I have no problem discussing ideas, as you can see I did with t he othe posters within this thread even comming to alternative ideas. See that is a discussion.

[BasiliskWrangler]

Okay guys- now this conversation isn't going anywhere. We're all here to give ideas for Book II, not to argue over who has the better idea. So, let me give you my thoughts since I have the final say!

I think a world map would be okay, although I probably won't do that for Book II. Besides being more complicated to have to scale in and out of cities and dungeons, I prefer the way I have it now. That is not suggesting that there is any flaw in Rune_74's suggestion; it's just not what I would call a necessary addition to Book II.

What I would really like to do is get rid of the individual zones that Eschalon now uses and go with a seamless, truly connected world- but I am not sure exactly how to get that done without completely rewriting the map editor from the ground up. It may be beyond the scope of Book II.

So, to end the conversation- I doubt Book II will use a overland map. It is a fundamental change to the game that would add much more development time, while gaining very little gameplay value.

[Necromis]

hey BW just a question. The one in game map you get from the taverns. Is there any possible way to include where you are in relation to that on it. Say have a shaded area relative to what map section you are in on that big map?

[BasiliskWrangler]

Yes, that would be possible. I think for Book II it would be cool to link this to Cartography, so that the more skill you have, the more exact your location can be determined on the regional map.

In terms of making this a Book I addition, I don't know if I will do it. Again, everything comes down "does this really improve gameplay for the amount of time it would take to implement?". I think I'd rather spend the time adding to Book I's content and improving balancing, rather than add a small (although helpful) feature like this.

[vid]

Yes, that would be possible. I think for Book II it would be cool to link this to Cartography, so that the more skill you have, the more exact your location can be determined on the regional map.

In terms of making this a Book I addition, I don't know if I will do it. Again, everything comes down "does this really improve gameplay for the amount of time it would take to implement?". I think I'd rather spend the time adding to Book I's content and improving balancing, rather than add a small (although helpful) feature like this.

Hm, i just get the impression that you shove aside every single suggestion we make to be included in book2 and that its not worth anymore for book1. I dont see that, because there is some replayability and if you have some small feature, which you would have to program anyways for book2, why not let us have it for 1 already?
Do you really see no benefit of it, or is it too costy (time/money(value))?

Why not start a poll with lets say 3-5 of the best little suggestions the community made, and let them decide which one would be the coolest to have for book1 already? (just an idea)

[Rune_74]

I think that would be costly in time and money....especailly if you want him to make book 2. Trust me all these comments will be making it too him as I am gathering them up to send to him and he does go through them all, and even discusses them. I have been discussing things with him f or a numbe of mont hs now for not just book 1 but also book 2.

[BasiliskWrangler]

Hm, i just get the impression that you shove aside every single suggestion we make to be included in book2 and that its not worth anymore for book1.

Dude, not at all! Seriously, I have received a ton of ideas here in this forum thread and through emails, that are all great. I'd love to add every one to Book I.

But, I really have to figure out what is best for there series. I have cataloged almost 50 very good ideas for Book II, many of which stem from "this would be good for Book I". Every idea that comes my way I have to figure out roughly how long it would take to implement, what potential issues might come from implementing it, and how much this new idea would improve gameplay. In Necromis' suggestion above, the answer is that it would take a sizable investment time while yielding very little improvement to gameplay.

No one, especially me, wants to waste time adding small things to Book I when the effort can go into getting Book II done. That doesn't mean I am dismissing ideas for Book I improvements, I just want to make sure that any improvements for Book I are worthwhile and directly improve the game, for everyone.

[vid]

Ok, that sounds reasonable.

How long do you think will that "figuring out" take, until you (hopefully) will tell us which ideas will make it into book1, if any.