[Abandoned] - Gettysburg

[Victor Sullivan]

I think the dotted lines could stand to be a lighter grey. There still isn't quite enough contrast between the dotted and solid lines IMO.

-Sully

[Minister X]

I disagree on two counts: 1st, the difference is clear enough with dots vs solid lines with glow, but 2nd, there's no need for any huge difference - both dotted lines and roads behave exactly the same, connecting terts. That said, I agree that the dots being a bit lighter might be a general aesthetic improvement. Easy to do.

[lostatlimbo]

...when I had the highlight more rounded/informal I got called on it. :D
(I'll work on some alternatives)

For the record, I said:

I'd just use a clean, rounded box there or change the font color.

The early version of those highlights just looked a little too sloppy. The areas on the map are loose, but deliberate. If you can replicate that in the legend, it would look great. (Though I still think a font color would suffice - to each their own).

[lostatlimbo]

About this road v dotted line business...

I'm not sure that changing the opacity of these will solve the problem. Unfortunately, the roads look like background decor, partly because they are in some spots (Gettysburg), but mostly because the dots are so pervasive, they really just overwhelm the roads no matter what shade.

There are other issues to consider - namely that the road connections really disappear behind the union bonuses (particularly the Center & Left titles). No matter how you shade those, it will be easy to glance over that spot and miss the connection.

I'm also confused by the relationship between YP3, YP2 & HUN2. Obviously YP3 & YP2 connect, but do they both attack HUN2 and vice versa?

I think you should try two things:
1) replace all the straight line with a dashed line. I think this will help them stand out evenly.
2) move the Union Center & Union Left to the side, off the road.
3) clarify the YP-HUN connections by connecting HUN2 directly to the appropriate territories, rather than using the fork.

Hope that helps

[Minister X]

I think you should... replace all the straight line with a dashed line.

What straight line(s)? The roads?? Make them dashed lines?

[Minister X]

Draft #10

On the small map, dotted lines have been lightened a bit, and were added where road connections were ambiguous. Roads were strengthened under the flank shadings. (Flanks can't be moved off the road - they included road terts which MUST be on the roads.) Army circles were removed. Result: roads stand out more.

On the large map the ambiguous connections were fixed and the legend shading rounded.

I think this satisfies all the points made above - at least the ones I could grasp. Any more graphics complaints/criticisms/corrections?

Click image to enlarge.

Click image to enlarge.

[RedBaron0]

Looking pretty good. The paths on the small map look better, they're darker, should really apply that to the large map.

Oh, and on the large map, the story, should the last line read"...Army of the Potomac?"

[isaiah40]

This has been nagging me for a while now. It seems that the Confederate Left and Right Flanks should be switched around. It seems funny having the left flank on the right and the right on the left. Any historical reason for this?

[gimil]

I am trying to understand what i going on in the background graphics. Is it suppose to be some kind of terrain feature? Hills and stuff?

[Victor Sullivan]

This has been nagging me for a while now. It seems that the Confederate Left and Right Flanks should be switched around. It seems funny having the left flank on the right and the right on the left. Any historical reason for this?

Well, it depends on what direction your looking at. It seems to me the Confederates are going North to South, so naturally, their left and and right would be as depicted on the map.

-Sully

[Minister X]

Flanks are defined by where the enemy is. One faces the enemy, then, as one is facing that way, one has a left and right flank.

The background is indeed terrain (hills) - it was decided that was better than not having them.

"Army of the Potomac" would be correct, but so is "army of Lincoln" with a small 'a'. Many pages ago I was told that I should take nothing for granted regarding knowledge of the battle since so many members of CC would be quite unfamiliar with it. Some kid from Finland might not know that "Army of the Potomac" meant the north's forces; "army of Lincoln" is a bit more likely to make sense to someone who's never heard of the "Army of the Potomac". If it were up to me I'd go either way happily; I'm just explaining why I chose the wording I did. Lee, I presume, is more widely known to have been a southern general than Meade to be a northern one.

[isaiah40]

So this is looking at it from the Union's perspective then?

[Minister X]

No. Say I'm facing you. Which is my left hand? You're facing me. Which is your left? Your left is near my right; my left is near your right.

[Victor Sullivan]

Well, I think you misunderstood, Minister X. You are right, you just misunderstood him, I think.

Yes, isaiah.

-Sully

[isaiah40]

No. Say I'm facing you. Which is my left hand? You're facing me. Which is your left? Your left is near my right; my left is near your right.

Sounds like some square dance routine.