[Official] Germany Revamp

[pepperonibread]

I wish I perused this thread before this was done, but I'll put my 2c in nonetheless

The new map is not only confusing but also a bad revamp of a solid map.

Sorry, I know you worked hard on this, but change in territory size/shape makes it convoluted.

Any specific ways in which the map is bad or confusing? The changes in territory size/shape were necessary to remain truest to the actual German geopolitical landscape.
I'll admit some borders are a bit tight, again this was required to preserve accuracy. But compare this with borders such as Emden-Bremenhaven, Hannover-Wolfsburg, and Hessen-Dusseldorf (on the old map here), and you'll see that the old map was no better in this regard.

[Supermarioluigi]

I'm having trouble reading the names of territories on the Preussen area of the new map. (borders aren't a problem with me, but I know it is with some)


Also, just another little nit-pick (but mostly because I'm partly OCD, ignore this if you feel so): Bayern and Baden-Wieritemberg are too close in color for my taste.

I can't offer any suggestions on how to fix this quickly, because I'm totally clueless in that matter.

[pepperonibread]

I'm having trouble reading the names of territories on the Preussen area of the new map. (borders aren't a problem with me, but I know it is with some)


Also, just another little nit-pick (but mostly because I'm partly OCD, ignore this if you feel so): Bayern and Baden-Wieritemberg are too close in color for my taste.

I can't offer any suggestions on how to fix this quickly, because I'm totally clueless in that matter.

Thanks for the concerns. When I get a few more comments, I'll try to take all this into consideration and hopeful post an altered image here soon.

[Bruceswar]

Sorry I hate to be the one to rain on your parade. Nice map for sure, but I have now been asked by 3 dutch people why there is the German Eagle on their country. During WW II Germans Occupied Holland aka Netherlands and that eagle was used as a means to show dominance. Many people from Holland to this day still do not like that eagle emblem. With that said it would be like having a map of Israel with the Palestine Flag on top of it. Just not a good idea. Is there nothing that can be done to correct this? I thoughts maps were not supposed to have anything that could be seen as bigotry on it?

I will wait to see what the rest of you all say.

that eagle goes back to the 13th century and probably before that, do your historical lessons

Indeed it does, but the German's did not Occupy Holland then.

[Bruceswar]

Sorry I hate to be the one to rain on your parade. Nice map for sure, but I have now been asked by 3 dutch people why there is the German Eagle on their country. During WW II Germans Occupied Holland aka Netherlands and that eagle was used as a means to show dominance. Many people from Holland to this day still do not like that eagle emblem. With that said it would be like having a map of Israel with the Palestine Flag on top of it. Just not a good idea. Is there nothing that can be done to correct this? I thoughts maps were not supposed to have anything that could be seen as bigotry on it?

I will wait to see what the rest of you all say.

Your analogy is flawed. Certainly a map of Israel, dominated by a Palestinian flag, would be a bad idea. The Germany map, however, is a map of Germany, and the Netherlands are part of the unplayable map background, underneath about as neutral a symbol of modern Germany as you're likely to find.

And honestly, if there are Dutch folks who feel offended, let them come and air their grievances. Outrage is much more credible and pathos-inducing when not conveyed by an intermediary.

I swear, every revamp is like this. One could revamp a map with such skill that the resulting image literally induces religious-experience-type orgasms when gazed upon, and people would still complain.

TBH I agree with you and do not see a problem with it, but I just had to wonder why 3 of my clan mates would find it offensive. As to why they would not post it, well lets just say English is not their strong point. Rather than come into the forum and botch up some English more than needed they asked if I could find out why a bit more.

@ Rjbeals - Rio Negro is the correct name and whoever said it offended them can "suck it up cupcake". 2 totally different things.

[tyche73]

what puts me off this map atm is the colouring isn't sharp enough for me
i know you like to put emblems in the backrounds of maps
and i enjoy looking at them but on this map they don't work (for me)

btw the finished map on page 1 looks fantastic till you have to play on it
i had trouble looking at yellows armies on nurnberg and green and blues armies
in the grey area
i think this has to do with emblems in backround to much happening in the colours and throwing my eye

i really like the map and is one of my favourites for singles

(btw the germany away soccer jesery is green after WW11 no one would play them in a friendly match ireland was the first team to do so and as a thanks they wear green as their away colour, if you needed to add another colour with a meaning although i couldn't see it helping i just thought i'd add that incase it helped)

[ben79]

Sorry I hate to be the one to rain on your parade. Nice map for sure, but I have now been asked by 3 dutch people why there is the German Eagle on their country. During WW II Germans Occupied Holland aka Netherlands and that eagle was used as a means to show dominance. Many people from Holland to this day still do not like that eagle emblem. With that said it would be like having a map of Israel with the Palestine Flag on top of it. Just not a good idea. Is there nothing that can be done to correct this? I thoughts maps were not supposed to have anything that could be seen as bigotry on it?

I will wait to see what the rest of you all say.

Your analogy is flawed. Certainly a map of Israel, dominated by a Palestinian flag, would be a bad idea. The Germany map, however, is a map of Germany, and the Netherlands are part of the unplayable map background, underneath about as neutral a symbol of modern Germany as you're likely to find.

And honestly, if there are Dutch folks who feel offended, let them come and air their grievances. Outrage is much more credible and pathos-inducing when not conveyed by an intermediary.

I swear, every revamp is like this. One could revamp a map with such skill that the resulting image literally induces religious-experience-type orgasms when gazed upon, and people would still complain.

TBH I agree with you and do not see a problem with it, but I just had to wonder why 3 of my clan mates would find it offensive. As to why they would not post it, well lets just say English is not their strong point. Rather than come into the forum and botch up some English more than needed they asked if I could find out why a bit more.

@ Rjbeals - Rio Negro is the correct name and whoever said it offended them can "suck it up cupcake". 2 totally different things.

ok since they are complaints about that coat of arms, i wish the foundry people change the name of French Canada ( in the Canada map ) to it's actual name since the creation of Canada = Québec

[TheBro]

Take the Eagle away and put a Scorpion there. Everybody can be happy about that.

[nesterdude]

I wish I perused this thread before this was done, but I'll put my 2c in nonetheless

The new map is not only confusing but also a bad revamp of a solid map.

Sorry, I know you worked hard on this, but change in territory size/shape makes it convoluted.

Any specific ways in which the map is bad or confusing? The changes in territory size/shape were necessary to remain truest to the actual German geopolitical landscape.
I'll admit some borders are a bit tight, again this was required to preserve accuracy. But compare this with borders such as Emden-Bremenhaven, Hannover-Wolfsburg, and Hessen-Dusseldorf (on the old map here), and you'll see that the old map was no better in this regard.

OK I see now
I was under the impression that all of the territories and boarders were the same, which they are not (which, as a side note, is not very cool to do while maps and games are in progress; maybe in the future, when you're going to introduce a new revamp, cease people's ability to join/create on that map).
Anyway, my beef with it is that it is in fact a new map, with new boarders and whatnot. So I think we should keep both maps, as I prefer the old map. Seeing the same country in two different ways is not bad,.

[the.killing.44]

I wish I perused this thread before this was done, but I'll put my 2c in nonetheless

The new map is not only confusing but also a bad revamp of a solid map.

Sorry, I know you worked hard on this, but change in territory size/shape makes it convoluted.

Any specific ways in which the map is bad or confusing? The changes in territory size/shape were necessary to remain truest to the actual German geopolitical landscape.
I'll admit some borders are a bit tight, again this was required to preserve accuracy. But compare this with borders such as Emden-Bremenhaven, Hannover-Wolfsburg, and Hessen-Dusseldorf (on the old map here), and you'll see that the old map was no better in this regard.

OK I see now
I was under the impression that all of the territories and boarders were the same, which they are not (which, as a side note, is not very cool to do while maps and games are in progress; maybe in the future, when you're going to introduce a new revamp, cease people's ability to join/create on that map).
Anyway, my beef with it is that it is in fact a new map, with new boarders and whatnot. So I think we should keep both maps, as I prefer the old map. Seeing the same country in two different ways is not bad,.

No, the borders and continents are the same.

.44

[Bruceswar]

No, the borders and continents are the same.

.44

Incorrect to a degree... Take a look at Game 2196288 He had been stacking men right behind his front line in Postdam. Now look were those 97 men moved to... Point being if this was escalating it would surely throw your game into pieces. To say otherwise is ugh

[pepperonibread]

No, the borders and continents are the same.

.44

Incorrect to a degree... Take a look at Game 2196288 He had been stacking men right behind his front line in Postdam. Now look were those 97 men moved to... Point being if this was escalating it would surely throw your game into pieces. To say otherwise is ugh

Nope.

Hey everybody. More than other maps, revamps like this have certain restrictions on how they are developed. One of the most important of these is that a revamp cannot change the "gameplay" of the map being revamped. Basically, which territories border which other territories and which continents they are contained in must remain the same as in the original map.

Take the dark gray continent Preussen (the red continent Prussia in the old map). If you take a look at the two maps, you can see that each territory on the old map directly corresponds to one territory on the new map. For example, Potsdam on the old map, bordering three territories of other continents and two in its own, is equivalent to Magdeburg on the new map, which has the same border configuration. Dresden on the old map, which borders three territories in its own continent, corresponds to Potsdam on the new map, which also has these borders.

Here are a few more examples to clarify:
Old map's Donrath = New map's Koblenz
Old map's Erfurt = New map's Zwickau
Old map's Augsburg = New map's Bayreuth
Old map's Niedersachsen = New map's Bremen
etc.

In this way, while names have been changed and border shapes have been altered, the gameplay of the map remains identical. So if I want to make the map more accurate, I have to make sure that there are no gameplay changes while I edit it.

If everyone could try and make sure that their suggestions don't break any of these "rules", that would be great

In fact, the above quote actually covers the exact example you're referring to. The Potsdams on the old and new maps are not the same. Potsdam on the old map is equivalent to Magdeburg on the new, which is why the 97 was "moved" to Magdeburg. No effects on the gameplay, because with identical border configurations the old Potsdam and new Magdeburg are the same territory, only under different names.
Confusing yes, but that confusion is temporary and is more an issue of mid-game map switches.

[pepperonibread]

Hold on this is all hella confusing. Give me a minute to see if I got that explanation right. ^^^^

[pepperonibread]

Ok Bruce so your concern is that the 97 was on the OLD MAP'S Potsdam, but is now on Berlin.
If that's the case, then I've got no idea what happened there. I rechecked the XML's and everything, and Berlin is one of the those territories that is named the same on both maps - so if it's on a "Berlin" territory now, then it also should have been on "Berlin" prior to the switch. Are you sure that you guys didn't misread the map or accidentally fort or anything?

[Bruceswar]

Ok Bruce so your concern is that the 97 was on the OLD MAP'S Potsdam, but is now on Berlin.
If that's the case, then I've got no idea what happened there. I rechecked the XML's and everything, and Berlin is one of the those territories that is named the same on both maps - so if it's on a "Berlin" territory now, then it also should have been on "Berlin" prior to the switch. Are you sure that you guys didn't misread the map or accidentally fort or anything?

That game has been over for months. Nothing has changed in about a year, I just remember stacks being left in that game so I checked.

Edited to add those 97 were just behind the front line. Those men were on Dresden, which would be the modern Postdam

[laddida]

give me old germany back too many jagged lines and it looks like a 5 year old took crayons and went to town on it. I will probably eventually get used to this map but i have the same feeling about this map now that i did when classic went to classic shapes and i feel about as helpless about it as i did about classic as well. Wish there was a choice between using the revamp and the old some of us like to stick to what were used to. Some revamps are great like BI Canada and brazil but this one doesnt rate well with me sorry.

[pepperonibread]

what puts me off this map atm is the colouring isn't sharp enough for me
i know you like to put emblems in the backrounds of maps
and i enjoy looking at them but on this map they don't work (for me)

btw the finished map on page 1 looks fantastic till you have to play on it
i had trouble looking at yellows armies on nurnberg and green and blues armies
in the grey area
i think this has to do with emblems in backround to much happening in the colours and throwing my eye

i really like the map and is one of my favourites for singles

(btw the germany away soccer jesery is green after WW11 no one would play them in a friendly match ireland was the first team to do so and as a thanks they wear green as their away colour, if you needed to add another colour with a meaning although i couldn't see it helping i just thought i'd add that incase it helped)

Thanks for your interest in the map.
Unfortunately, I think I'll have to disagree with most of your post. It seems that you don't like the coats of arms on the map, though this seems like a subjective stylistic preference to me: cleaner map vs. more textured map. Believe me, there's been no shortage of posts regarding those emblems in this thread - about if they should be more visible, less so, or not there at all. But I think we in the end struck a compromise pretty well: they don't detract from visibility (for me) any more than patterns or symbols on other maps do, but they are visible enough to be seen as symbols and not merely clutter.
Though it's still an opinion issue, so I guess we'll wait more some more comments.

give me old germany back too many jagged lines and it looks like a 5 year old took crayons and went to town on it. I will probably eventually get used to this map but i have the same feeling about this map now that i did when classic went to classic shapes and i feel about as helpless about it as i did about classic as well. Wish there was a choice between using the revamp and the old some of us like to stick to what were used to. Some revamps are great like BI Canada and brazil but this one doesnt rate well with me sorry.

It doesn't look like we'll have the option to choose between maps, as that's been discussed with every revamp and has never become an option. And truthfully, I think if you play the map a bit until you can see it from a more objective point of view, you'll see that it's a bit than a 5-year-old's job.

[laddida]

like i thought it is pointless to post in any of these cause never really makes a difference just wasting my time

[tyche73]

like i thought it is pointless to post in any of these cause never really makes a difference just wasting my time

i agree

we are here because we're not happy with the map it's not clean and sharp
it's not easy to read,it looks muddled and too much happening in the colours

[Bruceswar]

like i thought it is pointless to post in any of these cause never really makes a difference just wasting my time

i agree

we are here because we're not happy with the map it's not clean and sharp
it's not easy to read,it looks muddled and too much happening in the colours

While it will take some getting used to I do have one major complaint. That font used to name the territories is absolutely an eye sore. I find myself struggling to read what the names are. Being that I do not speak German these names do not come easy to me. With that said I am sure there could have been a better font chose and better bonus colors chosen.

BTW I liked Version 1 of this revamp much better. Those bright colors made it easy to see it all, rather than now which is hard to see.

I will quote what someone told me on MSN about this map in one word... "Clusterf*ck" I happen to agree with them on this one. While I have been a fan of most of the revamps this is not one I can support. This is nothing personal at you, just my views on the map as it stands.

[nesterdude]

Old Deutchland
Ich Bin Ein Berliner.
Ugh.

[jghost7]

like i thought it is pointless to post in any of these cause never really makes a difference just wasting my time

i agree

we are here because we're not happy with the map it's not clean and sharp
it's not easy to read,it looks muddled and too much happening in the colours

While it will take some getting used to I do have one major complaint. That font used to name the territories is absolutely an eye sore. I find myself struggling to read what the names are. Being that I do not speak German these names do not come easy to me. With that said I am sure there could have been a better font chose and better bonus colors chosen.

BTW I liked Version 1 of this revamp much better. Those bright colors made it easy to see it all, rather than now which is hard to see.

I will quote what someone told me on MSN about this map in one word... "Clusterf*ck" I happen to agree with them on this one. While I have been a fan of most of the revamps this is not one I can support. This is nothing personal at you, just my views on the map as it stands.

I agree, when you first open up this thread and the maps at the beginning show, the one hoff gave where all the different colors was the best one. It is easy to read, and the color scheme made it easy to differentiate continents and borders. Also it was very asthetic.

J

[pepperonibread]

like i thought it is pointless to post in any of these cause never really makes a difference just wasting my time

i agree

we are here because we're not happy with the map it's not clean and sharp
it's not easy to read,it looks muddled and too much happening in the colours

While it will take some getting used to I do have one major complaint. That font used to name the territories is absolutely an eye sore. I find myself struggling to read what the names are. Being that I do not speak German these names do not come easy to me. With that said I am sure there could have been a better font chose and better bonus colors chosen.

BTW I liked Version 1 of this revamp much better. Those bright colors made it easy to see it all, rather than now which is hard to see.

I will quote what someone told me on MSN about this map in one word... "Clusterf*ck" I happen to agree with them on this one. While I have been a fan of most of the revamps this is not one I can support. This is nothing personal at you, just my views on the map as it stands.

I agree, when you first open up this thread and the maps at the beginning show, the one hoff gave where all the different colors was the best one. It is easy to read, and the color scheme made it easy to differentiate continents and borders. Also it was very asthetic.

J

Hey guys, what do you mean by the one that Hoff made? He created the old map, but he hasn't been on CC for years except to stop by this thread once or twice I think.

[captainwalrus]

Lol, it is funny when people decide to never go in the foundery then are annoyed when something changes with a map and nobody asked them.

[pepperonibread]

like i thought it is pointless to post in any of these cause never really makes a difference just wasting my time

i agree

we are here because we're not happy with the map it's not clean and sharp
it's not easy to read,it looks muddled and too much happening in the colours

laddida, you've posted no constructive criticism whatsoever, so I don't know what I'm supposed to do with your post. While other people have got specific concerns about the borders, or the font, or the areas that are tough to look at, this really doesn't help me make the map better at all.

tyche, your post was perfectly fine. It wasn't my intention to dismiss your comment entirely, like I said I had to disagree with your opinion that the map isn't clean enough, but that we should wait for more comments on the issue anyway. I won't change the map based on one opinion, as the foundry process works best when you can get a significant discussion going and see what people want most.
Obviously though, I understand that you aren't you only one with feelings against the new map. But I also have to take into account that prior to the map's quenching, nearly everyone who looked over the map saw few or no problems with it (otherwise it wouldn't have been quenched). So though it seems like there's been a huge unanimous outcry over this map as soon as it was released, we really have to wait for all opinions to come in and then strike a fair compromise based on that.

While it will take some getting used to I do have one major complaint. That font used to name the territories is absolutely an eye sore. I find myself struggling to read what the names are. Being that I do not speak German these names do not come easy to me. With that said I am sure there could have been a better font chose and better bonus colors chosen.

BTW I liked Version 1 of this revamp much better. Those bright colors made it easy to see it all, rather than now which is hard to see.

I will quote what someone told me on MSN about this map in one word... "Clusterf*ck" I happen to agree with them on this one. While I have been a fan of most of the revamps this is not one I can support. This is nothing personal at you, just my views on the map as it stands.

I'll look at some different fonts to possibly replace the current one, I think it looks quite good stylistically though I can see how it could make reading tougher.
Secondly, what is it exactly about the current colors that make it hard to see? Certainly, all maps don't need to be brightly colored to differentiate bonuses, in fact sometimes this is actually hindering to players. If you look at the original draft, if you can picture different colored army numbers besides the yellow I used, you can imagine how red numbers would be hard to see on Prussia, blue could be tough in Bavaria, and so on. So if anything, the pale colors on the left of the new map should aid visibility during games.
Or is it more an issue of distinguishing the pairs of bonuses which are similar in color to one around? If that's the case, I could slightly lighten the leftmost bonuses and/or thicken the lines between bonuses, to make them more distinct.