WWI Ottoman Empire [Quenched]

[Androidz]

Cairnswk can you add a little arrow from gelibulo to bursa? On the real map as you got in the insert?


PS: whats the darnenells?

[Merker]

Just so you know, the Allies is WW II for the countries opposing the Axis. Allies in WW I would be Entente, the treaty signed by Russia, France and Great Britian to say they would help each other in war. You got Central Powers right. Good job mate .

Also dardenelles is a strait into Russian waters I think? They needed to capture it so they could send supplies to Russia.

[cairnswk]

Cairnswk can you add a little arrow from gelibulo to bursa? On the real map as you got in the insert?

Yes i'll see to do that

Just so you know, the Allies is WW II for the countries opposing the Axis. Allies in WW I would be Entente, the treaty signed by Russia, France and Great Britian to say they would help each other in war. You got Central Powers right. Good job mate .

Also dardenelles is a strait into Russian waters I think? They needed to capture it so they could send supplies to Russia.

I'll change to Entente, thanks.

PS: whats the darnenells?

From Wiki http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dardanelles

The Dardanelles (Turkish: Çanakkale Boğazı, Greek: Δαρδανέλλια, Dardanellia), formerly known as the Hellespont (Greek: Ελλήσποντος, Hellespontos), is a narrow strait in northwestern Turkey connecting the Aegean Sea to the Sea of Marmara. It is located at approximately [show location on an interactive map] 40°13′N, 26°26′E. The strait is 61 kilometers (38 mi) long but only 1.2 to 6 kilometers (0.75 to 4 mi) wide, averaging 55 meters (180 ft) deep with a maximum depth of 82 meters (300 ft). Water flows in both directions along the strait, from the Sea of Marmara to the Aegean via a surface current and in the opposite direction via an undercurrent.

[Androidz]

ok:P thx=9

[oaktown]

I'd love to see more space given to the mess of territories around Ezurum. And if everything was brought up in size a bit you might not need the inset map, though if you are going to keep it around I'd like to see the Constantinople territory named on it.

I asked this in qwert's map, and I'll ask it again here - what would happen if a territory had two sets of small and large coordinates? Could the army count for that territory be shown on both the main map and the inset? Because that would be nice in this case, where the Constantinople count can't be seen in the inset while Bursa can, and vice-versa on the main map.

[cairnswk]

oaktown, i'll look at this later in the week.

[Qwert]

asked this in qwert's map, and I'll ask it again here - what would happen if a territory had two sets of small and large coordinates? Could the army count for that territory be shown on both the main map and the inset? Because that would be nice in this case, where the Constantinople count can't be seen in the inset while Bursa can, and vice-versa on the main map.

I belive that mine answer is something like "these is question for XML experts"

[yeti_c]

asked this in qwert's map, and I'll ask it again here - what would happen if a territory had two sets of small and large coordinates? Could the army count for that territory be shown on both the main map and the inset? Because that would be nice in this case, where the Constantinople count can't be seen in the inset while Bursa can, and vice-versa on the main map.

I belive that mine answer is something like "these is question for XML experts"

I'm pretty sure that the second set of co-ordinates would be ignored and not shown...

But I cannot guarantee that - you'd have to ask Lack himself.

C.

[Qwert]

I think that these will conflicted situation,because you can not have two coordinates who represent same territory,these is mine oppinion

[cairnswk]

Cairnswk can you add a little arrow from gelibulo to bursa? On the real map as you got in the insert?...

No....that is why the inset is there for that very reason, because i tried to add an arrow on the map but it was not clear enough, so the inset was done.

I wish people would read and understand!

Come on cairns, we're not all perfect. Sometimes we don't have time to read everything you know

Well you should gimil, you could learn a lot

I'd love to see more space given to the mess of territories around Ezurum. And if everything was brought up in size a bit you might not need the inset map, though if you are going to keep it around I'd like to see the Constantinople territory named on it.

The layout of continents is the size it's going to be unless you're going to allow larger map sizes.
I will clean up Around Ezurum a bit, although that is very dense in there and i don't like your chances much.
Constantinople is already in position on the main map.

I asked this in qwert's map, and I'll ask it again here - what would happen if a territory had two sets of small and large coordinates? Could the army count for that territory be shown on both the main map and the inset? Because that would be nice in this case, where the Constantinople count can't be seen in the inset while Bursa can, and vice-versa on the main map.

i think that would only confuse people.
Let's stick to one set of coordinates.

[cairnswk]

Current Version 8 still...

[ZeakCytho]

There's a typo in the info paragraph - near the end, you say (916) where I believe you mean (1916).

I still have trouble telling the continents apart in the northeast.

[cairnswk]

Hey cairns...this map looks great, but why did you use the inset? Couldn't you have fitted the army circles in the main map? A mini map could be used to fill that extra space.

The army circles fitted, but the one-way arrow didn't and it was very cramped compared to the rest of the map.

I also have some big problems to distinguish the colours. Aleppo and Adana regions look a bit similar and the pink British territories are hard to see. Perhaps a darker red would do the trick. I'm sorry to bring this up because the colour scheme is really nice but a bit confusing for my colour blind eyes.

Yes i'm pleased you've happened along for that CB issue. I'll change those colours a bit to suit if i can.

Changed to darker red....

Cairnswk can you add a little arrow from gelibulo to bursa? On the real map as you got in the insert?

Yes i'll see to do that

Done.... but inset now gone.

There's a typo in the info paragraph - near the end, you say (916) where I believe you mean (1916).

I still have trouble telling the continents apart in the northeast.

1916 fixed

Do you still have trouble seeing the difference now with thicker continent borders?

Also oaktown, the wide legend concern has been rectifed.

[bigimg]http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s282/cairnswk/OTTOMAN%20EMPIRE/WW1_Ottoman_V10S.jpg[/bigimg]

[ZeakCytho]

Do you still have trouble seeing the difference now with thicker continent borders?

I can tell them apart perfectly now

[oaktown]

Borders are easier to read, thanks. Maybe we should make sure nobody confuses them for impassables?

Overall layout is better... more playable area = good. And nice work getting everything in the big map.

Some little weird stuff:
"British... Kuwait" - I get that you broke it like that so the army count doesn't cross it, but it looks odd. Also, I get that the Port star is landlocked to avoid the same problem, but again it's odd. What if the army circle just went up (or down) a few pixels, and the star and text went below (or above) where the count will run?

British Somaliland seems to have an attack route directly to the facing port rather than the territory (which we're now calling a region).

The star in Anglo-Egyptian Sudan is very easy to overlook. The stars could be bigger (though they look nice now) or the title of the that region could move up and over to sit closer to the port.

Something happened to your bottom border.

Right now it's just you, me, and Zeak... where is everybody? This place is like a tomb.

[cairnswk]

...
Right now it's just you, me, and Zeak... where is everybody? This place is like a tomb.

Yeh...it's been like that for weeks now

[cairnswk]

Current Version 10
[bigimg]http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s282/cairnswk/OTTOMAN%20EMPIRE/WW1_Ottoman_V10S.jpg[/bigimg]

[whitestazn88]

if i can share my 2 cents... the colors for O. armenia and o. mesopotamia look very similar on the map

as do o syria and hussein of mecca

as well as great britain and russian empire

[cairnswk]

if i can share my 2 cents... the colors for O. armenia and o. mesopotamia look very similar on the map

as do o syria and hussein of mecca

as well as great britain and russian empire

Do you have colour blind issues?

[whitestazn88]

no, they're just somewhat similar, i had to keep making sure i knew what went where, but its not so bad that i would complain about it during gameplay, just something i thought i'd say to bring up the post count

[vonForster]

I like the map, but I feel as though having Italy and France right next to each other gives an easily defensible corner of the map. Perhaps adding Libya next to Egypt as an Italian territory and giving Italy a +2. This would also be historic as the Ottoman Empire until a relatively short time before WWI owned Libya, at least in name.

[cairnswk]

I like the map, but I feel as though having Italy and France right next to each other gives an easily defensible corner of the map. Perhaps adding Libya next to Egypt as an Italian territory and giving Italy a +2. This would also be historic as the Ottoman Empire until a relatively short time before WWI owned Libya, at least in name.

vonForster, thanks for your suggestion.
Libya is "off the map" here and i don't plan on putting it in. I have read up on that aspect about Libya.
In 1915 when the Anzac campaign was started, the idea was to secure a route to the Black Sea so that the British and Russia could link. That didn't happen, so both countries had to battle it out separately.
And that is how this map should be played.
There is a concentration of the Entente in the left lower corner which then battles north through the Ottoman Empire to capture the Middle East and bring down the Ottaman.

[edbeard]

I'm really not fond of the graphics on this map unfortunately.

The borders between continents make sense for clarity issues but they make the borders with the ocean look strange in comparison. The inconsistency stands out and not in a good way.

I'm sorry for saying this many times but I still don't like how the colours on the legend and the colours on the map don't match. I do agree with whiteazn that the colours of Syria and Mesopotamia are too similar on the map. It comes back to how you put the colours on the map. the borders only colouring is kinda cool but I'm not sure it works. Furthermore, the colours of russia and british seems too close. They might look different on the legend but that's because everything is filled in. The deep dark green of Armenia comes across as lighter and more grey like.

I do like the shapes you've got on this map. The playable area. The blocks where you put the continent names and colours. The colours look quite good there. I really wish those colours were on the map but it doesn't feel like they are.

[yeti_c]

Cairns -you're *still* calling "Italian" - "Italy" & "French" - "France".

C.

[cairnswk]

oh dear this is all too depressing, when will they ever be satisifed...i don't know if i can carry on with this stuff of constantly having to please people who constantly complain.