Japan - 日本 - Quenched

[porkenbeans]

I wouldn't make any graphics changes, the coordinates fit fine on the current map and there is no reason why the sea of Japan needs to be represented by a dreadnought in a puddle ... but I think there is something to be said about the location of the coordinates. I wasn't going to say anything because, honestly, it doesn't bug me and it works either way. It's not a matter of clarity but rather preference. Your call Red.

Yes, the coordinates is the main sugg. The rest is just Photoshop playfulness.

coord changes I could get behind.

I, too, think a lot of the coordinate changes look good, but I wonder how many of them would work on the small map. Currently the small map is working using what looks like the same size text as the large, and I know porkenbeans and I both appreciate text that is not too small. So the question is, would having the labels in different locations on the large and small maps cause confusion?

ender,
here it is at 90%, small enough for the small version. I threw up some numbers on some of the smallest territs. It looks to me that they will work fine matched up to the alt. coords.

Gee porken. Why didn't ya just use a freaking aircraft carrier? It could be worth 5 bonus.

RBO as far as I'm concerned yours was good to go with a couple tweeks already mentioned. But the coordinate positioning pb did looks good.

Well, how about two or three more and make then an additional bonus area.

Click image to enlarge.

[porkenbeans]

There are a couple like that anyways, I just don't want to have a lot of the coordinates be different between large and small map.

Just to be clear. Is the suggestion(in general) to move, where possible, coordinates(or the name of the territory) closer together?

Hey red,
check out the animation gif that I put up. If you study each territ you will see where I redrew some borders. Fix that on your file to match, then you could overlay my coords, then just move your names and numbers to match over the top of my cords. Then trash my cords, and you will have it.

[natty dread]

the question is, would having the labels in different locations on the large and small maps cause confusion?

I don't think so. Usually people use either the small map or the large map, not both maps together, so they don't need to be all that consistent with each other.

Pork's coordinates seem a good idea to me, but I'm not so sure on enlargening the islands... it seems unnecessary on most places. And some Japanese guy is surely going to complain if the land areas are not accurate...

[Industrial Helix]

Yes... do not enlarge the islands.

[RedBaron0]

Well yeah, that's NOT gonna happen. Same with the Japanese flotilla, but it did make me giggle.

Maybe some border tweaks to accommodate space of territory names and numbers. I wrote this before:

There are a couple like that anyways, I just don't want to have a lot of the coordinates be different between large and small map.

Just to be clear. Is the suggestion(in general) to move, where possible, coordinates(or the name of the territory) closer together?

Simply to state the fact of what I was seeing in the name/coord changes. Names and numbers were generally in close proximity of each other. In a fair amount of cases it can translate to the small map as well. I'll use what you have as a guide pork and see what I can come up with.

[porkenbeans]

the question is, would having the labels in different locations on the large and small maps cause confusion?

I don't think so. Usually people use either the small map or the large map, not both maps together, so they don't need to be all that consistent with each other.

Pork's coordinates seem a good idea to me, but I'm not so sure on enlargening the islands... it seems unnecessary on most places. And some Japanese guy is surely going to complain if the land areas are not accurate...

Slightly altering the shape and/or size of a territ is common operating procedure in cartography. And even more common when maps are used in a board game. Geographical precision and correctness, takes the back seat, when it comes time to make a game, from a map. Try to remember, that this is First a game, and not an exact geographical representation.

For clarity and function, I believe that the smallest "island" territs, should be large enough to fit the numbers inside its borders, and be sufficiently large enough to discern that it is an island, and not appear as some numbers out floating in the water.

As to your first comment about the coords being the same or not from lrg. version to sml. version. Take notice of my last post, the one with the 4 ships. ...It has been reduced 10% in size, so it can be tested with the numbers. I threw a few numbers up, on some of the tightest areas. It seems to me, that while a little tight, they are clear and do not cover any border lines. So this all means that the lrg. and sml. versions, will be identical, when it comes to the names coordinates, and some of the numbers will need to be nudged out of line a hair or two. So much for the perfect Fung-Shway. But, it will not be all that noticeable.

[Industrial Helix]

Slightly altering the shape and/or size of a territ is common operating procedure in cartography. And even more common when maps are used in a board game. Geographical precision and correctness, takes the back seat, when it comes time to make a game, from a map. Try to remember, that this is First a game, and not an exact geographical representation.

For clarity and function, I believe that the smallest "island" territs, should be large enough to fit the numbers inside its borders, and be sufficiently large enough to discern that it is an island, and not appear as some numbers out floating in the water.

As to your first comment about the coords being the same or not from lrg. version to sml. version. Take notice of my last post, the one with the 4 ships. ...It has been reduced 10% in size, so it can be tested with the numbers. I threw a few numbers up, on some of the tightest areas. It seems to me, that while a little tight, they are clear and do not cover any border lines. So this all means that the lrg. and sml. versions, will be identical, when it comes to the names coordinates, and some of the numbers will need to be nudged out of line a hair or two. So much for the perfect Fung-Shway. But, it will not be all that noticeable.

To be honest, I don't care how common or uncommon it is. Misrepresenting the size of stuff is a dangerous game when it comes to maps, in my opinion. I think the numbers fit over the island borders just fine and it still looks good. The numbers could also fit alongside the island if necessary, it's not like they're going to drown. In this case, and I know this is way past due, but Okinawa is bigger than Tokyo when in reality its far smaller. Should it have been enlarged to fit numbers inside of it? In my opinion no, but Red decided yes. Should Rishorito, Sado, Izu-Oshima, ect get a cancerous bulb of land to accommodate numbers, no as it misrepresents the land forms in shape as well as size. Ultimately it breaks the fundamental purpose of maps, games or not.

[porkenbeans]

Slightly altering the shape and/or size of a territ is common operating procedure in cartography. And even more common when maps are used in a board game. Geographical precision and correctness, takes the back seat, when it comes time to make a game, from a map. Try to remember, that this is First a game, and not an exact geographical representation.

For clarity and function, I believe that the smallest "island" territs, should be large enough to fit the numbers inside its borders, and be sufficiently large enough to discern that it is an island, and not appear as some numbers out floating in the water.

As to your first comment about the coords being the same or not from lrg. version to sml. version. Take notice of my last post, the one with the 4 ships. ...It has been reduced 10% in size, so it can be tested with the numbers. I threw a few numbers up, on some of the tightest areas. It seems to me, that while a little tight, they are clear and do not cover any border lines. So this all means that the lrg. and sml. versions, will be identical, when it comes to the names coordinates, and some of the numbers will need to be nudged out of line a hair or two. So much for the perfect Fung-Shway. But, it will not be all that noticeable.

To be honest, I don't care how common or uncommon it is. Misrepresenting the size of stuff is a dangerous game when it comes to maps, in my opinion. I think the numbers fit over the island borders just fine and it still looks good. The numbers could also fit alongside the island if necessary, it's not like they're going to drown. In this case, and I know this is way past due, but Okinawa is bigger than Tokyo when in reality its far smaller. Should it have been enlarged to fit numbers inside of it? In my opinion no, but Red decided yes. Should Rishorito, Sado, Izu-Oshima, ect get a cancerous bulb of land to accommodate numbers, no as it misrepresents the land forms in shape as well as size. Ultimately it breaks the fundamental purpose of maps, games or not.

I respect your thoughts on this, but consider this. The overall theme of this, (so called) map, is one of an ancient, antique sort of feel. So, if it were to have a more contemporary thing going on, you would be right. As today we have satellites in space, and very accurate means of measuring the globe. Yesterday, we did not possess such things, and therefor, our maps are less accurate the farther you go back in time.

I have included below an authentic, ancient Chinese map. take note of all the inaccuracies.

If this map were to have some inaccuracies represented, I believe that it would NOT be out of line. On the contrary, They would be in perfect sync, with the theme of this game (map).

Click image to enlarge.

[jefjef]

Perhaps RBO would like to tweek his own work. We all chipped in our 2 cents worth. He's at the finish line.

Great work RBO!

[porkenbeans]

Perhaps RBO would like to tweek his own work. We all chipped in our 2 cents worth. He's at the finish line.

Great work RBO!

The only difference between my tweaks and your tweaks, is, mine are offered with illustrations. While you, along with most, do not very seldom, produce an illustrated example of your tweak. Instead we only see people always offering a million different ideas, some good, some bad. Most bad.

I look at it this way, If a person took the time, and went the extra step to make an illustrated example of an idea or two, for one of my projects, I would take it as an "above and beyond" kind of gesture. It surely tells me one thing, that person wants to be on the team, and I will certainly give his posts, a little more than its fair share, of the allocated time for considering ideas and suggs. I may like or hate the idea, but I will appreciate the extra effort. Also it has saved me some time, as now I can quickly judge if it is a sugg that I want to pursue or not.

[jefjef]

Some of us are idea people. Some of my suggs have been incorporated into this map. The 13 colonies map. Fractured America map. Stalingrad.

Why do you feel it necc to attempt to belittle some peoples contributions?

This map began as an idea. So did the USA.

All I am saying is maybe it's time for us to step back and let RBO cross the finish line.

BYE.

[porkenbeans]

Some of us are idea people. Some of my suggs have been incorporated into this map. The 13 colonies map. Fractured America map. Stalingrad.

Why do you feel it necc to attempt to belittle some peoples contributions?

This map began as an idea. So did the USA.

All I am saying is maybe it's time for us to step back and let RBO cross the finish line.

BYE.

Not at all jeff. no belittling from my end. Only testifying to the benefit of the illustrated sugg.

Nothing wrong with "idea" men, and you do not need to be a graphic artist, to contribute good ideas. It can however, allow you to get your point across visually. I know very well that visual suggs will never become more numerous than non-visuals are. But it sure saves time for the map maker, when he can see right away, if it is an idea that he deems worthy of consideration, ...or not.

[MrBenn]

porkenbeans, once again you come late to the forge party suggesting sweeping visual changes to a map. As I stated in the 13 colonies map the other day:
http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=64&t=78339&start=450#p2420324

These comments might have been more welcome at any point during the past couple of months when the map was still in the graphics workshop.

In the forge, the focus is on getting the map working (ie XML), and for fixing any tiny little niggles that will have an impact on gameplay (eg understanding territory connections etc.)

[Aalmeida17]

iam waiting

[porkenbeans]

porkenbeans, once again you come late to the forge party suggesting sweeping visual changes to a map. As I stated in the 13 colonies map the other day:
http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=64&t=78339&start=450#p2420324

These comments might have been more welcome at any point during the past couple of months when the map was still in the graphics workshop.

In the forge, the focus is on getting the map working (ie XML), and for fixing any tiny little niggles that will have an impact on gameplay (eg understanding territory connections etc.)

MR B, My suggs are NOT sweeping changes. They only go to the coordinates of names and numbers. Any other embellishments were only done as a side note, and were NOT seriously being suggested. If you take the time to read this thread and follow along with the conversation, you will find that I clearly stated as much. My illustrated sugg. is only to show name and army placements.