Conquer Club

Ok, here the update. I'll ask to lackattack to do a test before to upload the small image: I'm pretty sure you will complain becuase you won't be able to read/understand the map when compressed and I will have to rever the images back to the old size.
But I use always big maps so If you are happy....

I like this map.. I like it better than the other one. But do we need 2 africa maps? Or will africa become the new UK in cc, where its cool to make a map for every 20 years of its history?>

thenobodies80 wrote:Ok, here the update.

i took my old intel 286 with 4 mb ram out of the storage and i have to say i'm not impressed with your map at all.
first of all my display only shows 16 colours so your palette is not very friendly in this aspect. i get most of the terits mixed up.
also my resolution is only 640x350px and the map doesn't fit.
i'd like to scroll but that's really hard considering my mouse does not have a scrollwheel.
so please reduce this map even more and adjust the colours to be compatible with my monitor.

DiM wrote:

thenobodies80 wrote:Ok, here the update.

i took my old intel 286 with 4 mb ram out of the storage and i have to say i'm not impressed with your map at all.
first of all my display only shows 16 colours so your palette is not very friendly in this aspect. i get most of the terits mixed up.
also my resolution is only 640x350px and the map doesn't fit.
i'd like to scroll but that's really hard considering my mouse does not have a scrollwheel.
so please reduce this map even more and adjust the colours to be compatible with my monitor.

Well played. I still like it to be small though.

omg this is absolutely absurd.
while in the storage i also found my HC85. while i knew it has an even lower resolution of 256x192px i was mentally prepared to deal with this. however i was not prepared for the absurd size that your map has.
the small one is 865kb while the large one is over 1.8mb. do you sir have any idea that my HC85 works only with cassettes? and do you know that the cassettes only store 660kb of data per side? i bet you didn't, otherwise you would have thought about this sooner and would have accommodated the poor people stuck in the last century.
i expect you come up with something like this:

Hi DiM, welcome to the CC Map Foundry!

I don't know if I'm able to satisfy your request but I can suggest you to play a NEW great game I heard about: TRY IT!!!

On a more serious note, although I agree with you and I dislike the new small version...we should try to listen people.

http://www.fileden.com/files/2012/1/27/3255536/Africa2v2.xml

Sent to nobodies and posting here as well.

thenobodies80 wrote:

show: A_Good_UI

Oh, crap! I almost forgot to take my turns! Brb...

-Sully

thenobodies80 wrote:

cairnswk wrote:11. I realise there may also be some space problems, but putting some nations in and leaving others out i think is a no-no...Malawi, Burundi, Rwanda etc. i think there is space to include them, even if they have to be combined like you have done with Ghana and Togo...but what happened with Equitorial Guinea - it has mainland territory also. You've also included the Seychelles etc, but what about Cape Verde? The Gambia could be included with Senegal - yes?

Gameplay was discussed a lot behind the scenes, but I'll ask to iancanton or Victor Sullivan to explain why we decided to do things in this way.

if there is room, then senegal can be changed to senegal & gambia (the senegambia confederation no longer exists, else we could have used that name) and zambia can be changed to zambia & malawi. i believe that uganda, rwanda & burundi will not fit the map, so it will have to stay as uganda. the purpose of removing mainland equatorial guinea from the map, while keeping the connections the same, was to avoid confusing players; it can be restored if there is a strong opinion about this and we find a good way to represent the country as one region.

mauritius was added for gameplay reasons, to avoid having an attractive 3-region bonus that is somewhat segregated from the main theatre of play. although there is a good argument that cape verde ought to be included because it's closer to mainland africa, its logical connection is with senegal & gambia and we simply don't have the space to fit it in.

são tomé has been misspelled as sao tomé in the xml and as sao tomè on both large and small maps. cote d'ivoire ought to be côte d'ivoire.

ian.

iancanton wrote:são tomé has been misspelled as sao tomé in the xml and as sao tomè on both large and small maps. cote d'ivoire ought to be côte d'ivoire.

ian.

Fixed those spellings in the xml.
http://www.fileden.com/files/2012/1/27/3255536/A2.xml

Hey all! Beautiful Map.

However, I am wondering if you can change the 'interterritory' bridges to a different graphic from the 'intraterritory bridges'. I know the map, but it still is difficult to see sometimes and might make the map more 'n00b-friendly'.

iancanton wrote:if there is room, then senegal can be changed to senegal & gambia (the senegambia confederation no longer exists, else we could have used that name) and zambia can be changed to zambia & malawi. i believe that uganda, rwanda & burundi will not fit the map, so it will have to stay as uganda. the purpose of removing mainland equatorial guinea from the map, while keeping the connections the same, was to avoid confusing players; it can be restored if there is a strong opinion about this and we find a good way to represent the country as one region.

Not done, I put the names in the big, but no way to fit them in the small. Moreover if we have to do that just for the sake. Honestly I think that for too long we have allowed to everyone to set as mandatory suggestion even if those didn't had a real technical purpose. This is not Nation Geographic nor a Carthograpy Industry, so we can have a map that is not exactly like reality, specially if it makes the map less cluttered.

iancanton wrote:são tomé has been misspelled as sao tomé in the xml and as sao tomè on both large and small maps. cote d'ivoire ought to be côte d'ivoire

Done, thanks ian.

btw i moved also a couple of names to fit better the new xml.

DoomYoshi wrote: I am wondering if you can change the 'interterritory' bridges to a different graphic from the 'intraterritory bridges'.

I get what you mean, but if i do that i have to add another legend, this because I know that someone with zero brain will come here and say....why you have 2 different bridges? can you explain what is the difference with a legend?....then we will finish to have a group of legends with a map. I had tu cut the map to a size i really dislike...I won't ruin this map anymore than this.

Now, can these versions and the new xml be uploaded or there's something else to fix/change?

democratic republic of congo's lost its coastline! can u put it back? the angola-congo border also needs to be removed from the xml.

ian.

Removed the border from the xml but need to get to work. Will post in a couple of hours.

Border removed.
http://wcforums.org/AfricaFiles/africa.fixed.S.png

thanks ian for your info.

iancanton wrote:democratic republic of congo's lost its coastline! can u put it back? the angola-congo border also needs to be removed from the xml.

ian.

I think I've lost the right psd file so I used a older version.
Ok, I'll double check everything because I don't know how much is old the file, but since 4 eyes are better than 2....a part that coast line do you see something else that is not in the right place?

This map sucks. It is pretty, but borders are unclear. If it wasn`t for Bob, I would never know which teritory attacks which.

Finsfleet wrote:This map sucks. It is pretty, but borders are unclear. If it wasn`t for Bob, I would never know which teritory attacks which.

What is exactly unclear? Not had a problem myself.

This map looks pretty nice, i love it though. Especially artistic measures are well inserted in it. Forests, jungles and so on to give a realistic very well look as if i was looking from space to the continent. Just like google earth scene...I love it. Thanks for the efforts.

One thing if easy to handle, can we resize the map to decrease the size down to % 80 or % 75 of the current size ? Asking this to have the map to fit in screen

koontz1973 wrote:

Finsfleet wrote:This map sucks. It is pretty, but borders are unclear. If it wasn`t for Bob, I would never know which teritory attacks which.

What is exactly unclear? Not had a problem myself.

I think (hope) that with unclear he means un-common. The fact we didn't use colors on the land for continents...because a part for that I don't understand how a black line could be unclear... Oh maybe the inner bridges...i think I'll leave bridges only for connections between different territories, for internal connections I'll do something like this:

HardAttack wrote:One thing if easy to handle, can we resize the map to decrease the size down to % 80 or % 75 of the current size ? Asking this to have the map to fit in screen

Look at page 5, that version is the possible new small, is it good in that size for you?

thenobodies80 wrote:i think I'll leave bridges only for connections between different territories, for internal connections I'll do something like this:

Just going to post my new map in the drafting room. Did something similar in that one. Should make things clearer.

DoomYoshi wrote:Hey all! Beautiful Map.

However, I am wondering if you can change the 'interterritory' bridges to a different graphic from the 'intraterritory bridges'. I know the map, but it still is difficult to see sometimes and might make the map more 'n00b-friendly'.

Maybe, it could have a little bit of connection with the land instead of a bridge... I have been confused by this multiple times while playing.

thenobodies80 wrote:

koontz1973 wrote:

Finsfleet wrote:This map sucks. It is pretty, but borders are unclear. If it wasn`t for Bob, I would never know which teritory attacks which.

What is exactly unclear? Not had a problem myself.

I think (hope) that with unclear he means un-common. The fact we didn't use colors on the land for continents...because a part for that I don't understand how a black line could be unclear... Oh maybe the inner bridges...i think I'll leave bridges only for connections between different territories, for internal connections I'll do something like this:

This could work nicely.


--Andy

thenobodies80 wrote:

koontz1973 wrote:

Finsfleet wrote:This map sucks. It is pretty, but borders are unclear. If it wasn`t for Bob, I would never know which teritory attacks which.

What is exactly unclear? Not had a problem myself.

I think (hope) that with unclear he means un-common. The fact we didn't use colors on the land for continents...because a part for that I don't understand how a black line could be unclear... Oh maybe the inner bridges...i think I'll leave bridges only for connections between different territories, for internal connections I'll do something like this:

the rivers are usually impassables and when you see a river you automatically think that whatever is beyond is a different terit.
this means that some connections aren't visible at a glance.
eritrea to sudan or mozambique to swaziland.

obviously if you pay attention and take your time to study the borders it's all clear but i can see how confusion may appear in a fast paced speedgame.