Conquer Club

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.

Very nice, tnb.

One quick question, however;

Just out of interest, did you intentionally blur the texture of the ground in the small image, or was some detail lost when scaling ?
(I think the texture on the small image looks fine)

Unfortunately details got lost with the small....that's why I hate small versions...you work a lot to have a pretty maps, work on details, etc etc.
Then when you scale it down and you lose some of them, then when lack applies the jpg compression....you lose all them.

Small versions can't always be tremendous works of art (but I think a lot of ours are), but that is one of the reasons why we also have large versions! So those who want to play on small maps can do so, and those who want to take in the work can play on the large.


--Andy

chapcrap wrote:

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.

I feel like this is being ignored... DiM addressed it though.

DiM wrote: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.

That's the issue...

Not ignored, I'll fix it.

thenobodies80 wrote:Not ignored, I'll fix it.

This is great news!!

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:

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?

Yup bud, the smaller version in page 5 is pretty nice looking...
That is what i exactly desire to see to be the final size bud

This is the latest xml for this map.
http://www.fileden.com/files/2012/1/27/3255536/A2.xml

In that xml congo borders with angola....i remember you fixed it but i can't find the link

http://www.fileden.com/files/2012/1/27/3255536/Africa3.xml


Angola / Congo removed.

The new images are in the OP, for now I've left the bridges....the option I've proposed above looks terrible on the map...I have to think a bit about it and find something that really works.
Btw, files sent to Lack!

thenobodies80 wrote:The new images are in the OP, for now I've left the bridges....the option I've proposed above looks terrible on the map...I have to think a bit about it and find something that really works.
Btw, files sent to Lack!

Great job!! Apart from the fonts not being the same, the bridges are the only issue I have left.

cairnswk wrote:3. The title is too close to the right hand border, and doesn't have the same spacing that it has on the top side. I can appreciate that it is probably trying to be fit on the land mass there, but it simply looks odd to me.

Debatable...I think the title is ok in the current position

tnb80...i'd still like to see this one happen...the title needs to move left by the same margin that is at the top.

Will do cairnswk, will do. Just trying to get rid of some things on my to do list before to work again on the map.

Btw, are the new size better? Is people happier with this small version?

thenobodies80 wrote:Will do cairnswk, will do. Just trying to get rid of some things on my to do list before to work again on the map.

Btw, are the new size better? Is people happier with this small version?

I am so much happier. Evidence: