WWII Europe

[t-o-m]

i was so looking forward to playing this before.
but now...
i dont want to.

its too cramped for me - i think you should wait until you can have the size needed to make this map less cramped.
but you do as you wish.

[Qwert]

by t-o-m on Mon Jul 07, 2008 11:37 pm

i was so looking forward to playing this before.
but now...
i dont want to.

its too cramped for me - i think you should wait until you can have the size needed to make this map less cramped.
but you do as you wish.

I dont belive that you so naive.You honestly belive that these will heppend.
In begining i belive that these is possible,but after 10 month,without any clear answer,i change mine mind,and now i dont belive that lack have in hes plan to alove biger maps(not in near future). Ofcourse miracule is possible,and who know maybe lack come and open say "redesign of site to alove big maps will be finish ...(day)...(month) 20..(years).

[InkL0sed]

Honestly, I could deal with the crampness. The gameplay isn't exactly complicated.

Once larger maps are allowed, we can have a revamp/touch-up. In the meantime, sure it'll be cramped but I think it'll be playable.

[Qwert]

by InkL0sed on Thu Jul 10, 2008 10:29 pm

Honestly, I could deal with the crampness. The gameplay isn't exactly complicated.

Once larger maps are allowed, we can have a revamp/touch-up. In the meantime, sure it'll be cramped but I think it'll be playable.

These is what i repeat constantly,i will rewamp map when biger size map will be aloved,but these can be for 5-10-20 years,and people can lost patience for these long period.

[lt_oddball]

is it just me , or am i missing smthng; couldn't you turn two opposite red & black one-direction attack arrows into one line "connection between two fronts" ?

Please do away with naming provinces with "general this and marshal that front".
It makes no sense in comparison with areas that do have the proper province name, plus it saves you on the abbreviation problems of long names on small locations.
von Leeb wasn't there throughout the 41-45 war..and his area first, becomes Voroshilov area the next..so no sense in using commander names.

And Vichy France is attributed an ALLIED bonus ?? hello ?

I mentioned it long ago on the separate maps already; I don't understand the logic of some/many of the impassable long borders on one hand and limited passes of it on the other hand (going from west germany to east germany is only possible on ONE location ?? getting from paris to the ruhr you cannot go through the siegfried line ?(Aachen was pretty easy those days) etcetera, etcetera...

Please give it more thought..

[oaktown]

just for the sake of your readers, could you include fewer versions in your first post, and use the BigImg tags? I'm still waiting for it to download.

[Qwert]

here you go oak,aim still waiting for central bonus sugestion.
small
[bigimg]http://i195.photobucket.com/albums/z188/Maqerdan/originalne2kartevelika30jun.png[/bigimg]
large
[bigimg]http://i195.photobucket.com/albums/z188/Maqerdan/WWIIEUROPE63026jun.png[/bigimg]

[Qwert]

by lt_oddball on Thu Jul 10, 2008 11:55 pm

is it just me , or am i missing smthng; couldn't you turn two opposite red & black one-direction attack arrows into one line "connection between two fronts" ?

Please do away with naming provinces with "general this and marshal that front".
It makes no sense in comparison with areas that do have the proper province name, plus it saves you on the abbreviation problems of long names on small locations.
von Leeb wasn't there throughout the 41-45 war..and his area first, becomes Voroshilov area the next..so no sense in using commander names.

And Vichy France is attributed an ALLIED bonus ?? hello ?

I mentioned it long ago on the separate maps already; I don't understand the logic of some/many of the impassable long borders on one hand and limited passes of it on the other hand (going from west germany to east germany is only possible on ONE location ?? getting from paris to the ruhr you cannot go through the siegfried line ?(Aachen was pretty easy those days) etcetera, etcetera...

Please give it more thought..

I dont know what you not understand,and i belive that these is not yours first post abouth these things,and i belive that i all ready give you answer(some answer is in Eastern,and western front topic,and some is in Europe topic).You just want to bring these discusion again.

[bryguy]

Dont have time to comment right now....



but you switched the large and small on the first page

[gimil]

Just to let you know im watching. Unfortunatly there is far to much complaining going on about the crampness of the map which is making me uncomfortable about stamping it at all. Unless you can convince some people that this will work I dont feel it has the support it needs to move forward.

Sorry but thats how it stands just now.

[Qwert]

by gimil on Sat Jul 12, 2008 8:36 pm

Just to let you know im watching. Unfortunatly there is far to much complaining going on about the crampness of the map which is making me uncomfortable about stamping it at all. Unless you can convince some people that this will work I dont feel it has the support it needs to move forward.

Sorry but thats how it stands just now.

Gimil,you are not be precise,but some people its imposible to convince,and he will not give me support,but can you tell me names of these people who i must to convince.
I hope that you dont give me a name of people,who dont want to see these map in progres.

[gimil]

Im telling you there is certain people you have to convince

What im saying is anyone who wants this map doesnt want it in its current cramped state, and for that reason I wont stamp the map.

[t-o-m]

Im telling you there is certain people you have to convince

What im saying is anyone who wants this map doesnt want it in its current cramped state, and for that reason I wont stamp the map.

one of those people is me. I wouldnt play it as it is now. I think you should focus on something else and wait until you can make it original size.

[Qwert]

Im telling you there is certain people you have to convince

What im saying is anyone who wants this map doesnt want it in its current cramped state, and for that reason I wont stamp the map.

so these mean you newer will give permision,when you on charge here,its these correct?

tom
one of those people is me. I wouldnt play it as it is now. I think you should focus on something else and wait until you can make it original size.

These will never heppend,because Lack will not work on these.
First Ca ,and Andy tell that these map will not go,only if i resize map,and now when i resize Gimil not want to give permision.Now these is not right.

[gimil]

Stop twisting words to make you sound like the victim qwerts. You were told it will NOT be allowed in the current size. You were told it will NOT be allowed if people are generally not happy with it being cramped. I do not recalling telling you to resize the map either.

[Qwert]

some guys sugested numbers instead names(i think edbeard),well i will try with that,maybe i will get more clear space to border be more visible.

[Qwert]

new option numbers instead names,for more clear space.For example i change only most cramped area-western front,i hope that these can bring more positive,and aceptabile feedback for these map to move forward.
[bigimg]http://i195.photobucket.com/albums/z188/Maqerdan/originalne2kartedim630sabrojevimame.png[/bigimg]

[Coleman]

It might not be a terrible idea to do numbers across the board and then in xml have the actual names as seen by the other maps.

For instance.

France 1 on the map could be this in xml:

France 1 - Paris

Or considering you aren't reusing numbers at all it could be:

Western Front 1 - Paris
or just
WF 1 - Paris

If you catch my drift. Then we are keeping all the information while still making the map easier to read.

[Qwert]

by Coleman on Sun Jul 13, 2008 10:21 pm

It might not be a terrible idea to do numbers across the board and then in xml have the actual names as seen by the other maps.

For instance.

France 1 on the map could be this in xml:

France 1 - Paris

Or considering you aren't reusing numbers at all it could be:

Western Front 1 - Paris
or just
WF 1 - Paris

If you catch my drift. Then we are keeping all the information while still making the map easier to read.

Hie Coleman,where are you,things going very slow,where you not here,and yes you read mine mind.Well i just thinking that is simple: 1-Paris,will be enough in XML.Well these will be no first map when numers is in map and in XMl is names of terittories.
Examlpe
on map:
1
2
3
4
On xml
1-Paris
2-Milano
3-Venice
4-Trieste

But still its very dificulty to convince Gimil,i hope that these map with number is more aceptabile for hem and several person.

[Qwert]

I need more opinions abouth transforming names to numbers.

[AndyDufresne]

I'm not too excited about the number idea, but I've a feeling that it would make the map less cluttered. It all depends on if the numbering system is consistent and even flowing...I.E. #6 isn't in the western area while #8 appears across the board.


--Andy

[Qwert]

by AndyDufresne on Tue Jul 15, 2008 6:51 pm

I'm not too excited about the number idea, but I've a feeling that it would make the map less cluttered. It all depends on if the numbering system is consistent and even flowing...I.E. #6 isn't in the western area while #8 appears across the board.


--Andy

well andy,option with names is not aceptabile,so i use second sugestion numbers,and i belive that is more aceptabile for people.Now i only must waith to Gimil say hes opinion abouth numbers.

[whitestazn88]

i like the idea of the numbers. for most of us, we have seen the other maps, and it wouldn't be all that hard to grasp where each bonus would be based on prior play as well as the color schemes.

there have been maps where the territs were just numbers also... i'm thinking mostly oasis, and kinda feudal war...

if it gets this map closer to being quenched, i'm all for it, because these maps have been a joy to play

[The Viking]

I think numbers for the western front would work best, but you need to arrange them better.
For example, 1 is Paris, then 2-6 are way over in Italy, 7 in Belgium, 8 in Vichy France, etc.
I don't know if that was something you were meaning to fix later, but it needs to be fixed.

The legend is hardly readable at certain areas, especially the bombardment part. I shouldn't have to squint my eyes and lean forward to be able to read it.

[Qwert]

by whitestazn88 on Tue Jul 15, 2008 11:34 pm

i like the idea of the numbers. for most of us, we have seen the other maps, and it wouldn't be all that hard to grasp where each bonus would be based on prior play as well as the color schemes.

there have been maps where the territs were just numbers also... i'm thinking mostly oasis, and kinda feudal war...

if it gets this map closer to being quenched, i'm all for it, because these maps have been a joy to play

Yes,that why i thinking that can be aceptabile for people,feudal war have numbers and all terittories is same colour,but these is not problem for play.

by

The Viking on Tue Jul 15, 2008 11:45 pm

I think numbers for the western front would work best, but you need to arrange them better.
For example, 1 is Paris, then 2-6 are way over in Italy, 7 in Belgium, 8 in Vichy France, etc.
I don't know if that was something you were meaning to fix later, but it needs to be fixed.

The legend is hardly readable at certain areas, especially the bombardment part. I shouldn't have to squint my eyes and lean forward to be able to read it.

well Viking,now is main problem aceptabilite for play,numbers will be in all map.Everything can be fix,if Gimil is satisfy with that,so far i get positive feedback abouth numbers instead names.