WWII - Eastern Front-statistic page 1 [Quenched]5000 finish

by **Nikolai** on Fri May 25, 2007 2:30 pm

The smaller sea labels should probably go - I agree that they make things really cramped. And Guiscard's right about that bevel. The title... I can't even tell that it's supposed to be a hammer and sickle. It doesn't look bad, but I can't see that particular picture.

by **Qwert** on Fri May 25, 2007 4:51 pm

Belive me or not but i realy try to put Saarema close to circle and put submarine to be visible and these not good if somebody can put saarema close and submarine be visible please help.

I see solution for bevels,i will remove bevels in black sea to be same like in baltic sea ok.

Someon like small sea labers and someon dont,these problem can solve only poll vote.

Finally again,now i dont understand why you want to start disscusion for something what pass majority approval, i present many diferent title option and people vote for these option, i will go back to see who vote for these option.
Vote for these title-Andy,Wisse,dcowboys055,Teya,KomradeKloininov,onbekende(its been 10 diferent title style and these get most of votes),You vote agains these title but you agree that people like these title and why you want to drag these issue back,if these not good explanation i realy dont know what to write to you understand.

by **Gwalchmai** on Fri May 25, 2007 5:10 pm

The submarine looks nice and I'm sure a lot of people like it but I don't think anybody would seriously miss it if it were gone and the name put in it's place. That would probably look better since it would remove a little of the clutter in that area but if you really want to keep it, how about moving the army circle so that it covers the right side of the islands and extends into the sea next to Tallin, bringing the name down to where the submarine is, and putting the submarine where the name now is? Not sure how it would look because the name Baltic Sea might run a bit close to it but it might be worth trying out at least.

The only small sea name that looks a little odd to me (but if it stays it's no big deal) is the Gulf of Finland since it is squashed in at the top. The other ones look fine.

by **Qwert** on Fri May 25, 2007 5:36 pm

Now we start some disscusion, and i realy dont know why, nobody can be confused with saarema terittory and i belive that everybody know that these terittory belonge to sarrema, and i realy dont understand why we even start these ridiculose disscusion, now i see several solucions.
1.To somebody help me and put saarema close to circle and to submarine be visible.
2.To erase submarine and put saarema close to circle.
3.To stay like now.

I prefer to stay like now,but if people realy have problem to recognise saarema teritory then i will erase submarine.

by **boberz** on Sat May 26, 2007 1:31 am

hulmey wrote:can u just please shut up....If you have some constructive critiscm to say then say it.

I have said it many times you all know what i think on title, sea labels, bonuses and all the other things mentioned I just wish somebody was able to make this happen fasterwhatever happens i do not want a poll on any of these things

by **hulmey** on Sat May 26, 2007 6:30 am

Title remains as qwwet has said. REason being is that it has already been voted onn by the foundry.

As for sea links, qwert thinks they are important to give people an idea of the geography of the area. Qwert the Teacher maybe. However the good Lord Qwert , oh the Mighty Obeyer said he is willing to remove these as well to appease a few.

So all your issues are being addressed Boberz , so please dont bump tthis thread with meaningless posts

by **KEYOGI** on Sat May 26, 2007 7:10 am

I'm glad to see this map finally has some forward momentum again. I agree with a few of the points mentioned.

The large sea labels are good and do provide that sense of geography for those unfamiliar with the area. The smaller sea labels are not really necessary and I feel don't really offer anything to the map. They're a bit small to be of much use and the ones up the top are crowding things a bit up there.

I agree the Saaremaa label could be moved over and down a little. I don't think it matters if it interferes with the submarine in the background.

The bevel has been mentioned and personally I think the map looked better without it. I think it has more to do with the bottom of the map where it appears as just a thick black border.

While I do believe qwert could come up with a nicer title, the one there does the job and it's been voted on, so I don't think it warrants any further discussion.

As for the other points I mentioned however long ago, I feel they've been reasonably refuted. I'd still like to know what the text under the signature and dates say though, I'm curious! :wink:

by **hulmey** on Sat May 26, 2007 7:35 am

lol keyogi...curoisty killed the panda hehehhe

by **boberz** on Sat May 26, 2007 8:40 am

i think we should agree to disagree, to all those that have argued with me about title.

On a seperate point i really dont like colouring any more the puple blue and grey all look similar to each other, there is no contrast, it is not that i cannot see the continents that is fine i just think it would look better with different organisation of colours.

Can the title be larger it does not look important enough

by **Qwert** on Sat May 26, 2007 9:50 am

Dates 2006-2007 well these everybody know.
Деспотово These present my place.

Boberz i read but i dont understand what you mean.

here new update i put sarema close to circle and i erase bevels down in black sea.

by **Guiscard** on Sat May 26, 2007 12:18 pm

qwert wrote:Dates 2006-2007 well these everybody know.
Деспотово These present my place.

Boberz i read but i dont understand what you mean.

here new update i put sarema close to circle and i erase bevels down in black sea.

That's exactly what I was meaning, Qwert. the submarine is still visible but the name looks much more attached to the island.

Just the small sea labels to sort out and then I think we're done, at least from my perspective.

by **hulmey** on Sat May 26, 2007 1:15 pm

I think he wants to leave them....I dont mind myself either way.

But map is looking good and i think al major issues have been looked at now...

by **AndyDufresne** on Sat May 26, 2007 1:57 pm

Do you have the smaller version, qwert?

--Andy

by **Qwert** on Sat May 26, 2007 3:35 pm

AndyDufresne
Zookeeper & Foundry Foreman

Joined: 04 Mar 2006
Posts: 4104
Location: A Banana Palm in Zihuatanejo
Posted: 26 May 2007 18:57 Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Do you have the smaller version, qwert?

Smaller version? What you mean?

These is a small version of map 629x459

by **boberz** on Sun May 27, 2007 4:53 am

Can the title be bigger

Can the colours (especially blue and purple) be more contrasted, or re0organise the colours.

That is what i meant

by **Fritsvg** on Sun May 27, 2007 5:34 am

Nice map!

I'm looking forward to play it!

by **hulmey** on Sun May 27, 2007 6:44 am

Honestly boberz, don post rubbish. Are you looking at the map????

Do you honestly think there is room to make the title bigger?

by **Qwert** on Sun May 27, 2007 6:48 am

Well you see that title can not bee biger,and you ask to be biger?

Well you are first who can not recognise colours, i think that colours is good and everybody can see a large diference with terittory colours.I realy dont understand why i must change something what good look.

by **Guiscard** on Sun May 27, 2007 10:45 am

qwert wrote:Well you see that title can not bee biger,and you ask to be biger?

Well you are first who can not recognise colours, i think that colours is good and everybody can see a large diference with terittory colours.I realy dont understand why i must change something what good look.

OK I'll retract my comment about the title. Leaving it is fine.

Have we come to any conclusion about the smaller sea labels though Qwert?

Most people who have posted seem to think it would be better without.

by **hulmey** on Sun May 27, 2007 10:48 am

I would just leave out the Gulf of Finland sea label because that looks very cramped. The other 2 sea labels i think add character to the map

by **Qwert** on Sun May 27, 2007 12:15 pm

Most people? For now only you and Keyogi think that i must erase sea labels(and maybe boberz).

Guiscard
Have we come to any conclusion about the smaller sea labels though Qwert?

Well solution for these can be poll,because i realy think that these sea labels look good in map.What you think Guiscard are you agree with these.

by **unriggable** on Sun May 27, 2007 9:32 pm

qwert wrote:Most people? For now only you and Keyogi think that i must erase sea labels(and maybe boberz).

Guiscard
Have we come to any conclusion about the smaller sea labels though Qwert?

Well solution for these can be poll,because i realy think that these sea labels look good in map.What you think Guiscard are you agree with these.

I disagree about the sea labels. I think you should remove them.

by **DiM** on Sun May 27, 2007 9:41 pm

i like the sea labels and i'd hate to see them be removed.

:cry:

by **unriggable** on Sun May 27, 2007 9:59 pm

DiM wrote:i like the sea labels and i'd hate to see them be removed.

Really? I find them unnecessary and think that they waste space. The only answer to this dilemma would be to hquench two versions of the map.

by **Coleman** on Sun May 27, 2007 10:40 pm

unriggable wrote:
DiM wrote:i like the sea labels and i'd hate to see them be removed.

Really? I find them unnecessary and think that they waste space. The only answer to this dilemma would be to hquench two versions of the map.

Mountains out of mole hills people. Why are the sea labels unnecessary? Quick, someone go fix classic! It has sea labels!!!

Leave qwert the hell alone about this crap and find a real problem. I have to side with DiM on this one.

WWII - Eastern Front-statistic page 1 [Quenched]5000 finish

Who is online