reverend_kyle wrote:Bad news regarding the notched edges, that's how photoshop draws them it wont do them any other way, and I don't even think they look that bad so unless a good majority objects i'm going to leave them.
The font is vector, so I doubt the pixelyness and I myself don't see it. There is an outer glow with some noise attached because I like the look and that might be what you're talking about.
The font is vector, so I doubt the pixelyness and I myself don't see it. There is an outer glow with some noise attached because I like the look and that might be what you're talking about.
every font is vector but this one seems pixely to me, i can zoom in and take a screen for you if you want proof?
unriggable wrote:I suggest you lower the bonus for centre.
why?? the bonuses have already been discussed and they are balanced
“In the beginning God said, the four-dimensional divergence of an antisymmetric, second rank tensor equals zero, and there was light, and it was good. And on the seventh day he rested.”- Michio Kaku
The font is vector, so I doubt the pixelyness and I myself don't see it. There is an outer glow with some noise attached because I like the look and that might be what you're talking about.
[b]every font is vector [b] but this one seems pixely to me, i can zoom in and take a screen for you if you want proof?
I'm aware.
I'm pretty sure zooming on anything makes it look pixely....
Also, I agree with keyogi and unriggable it will be changed to 5 does that work for you guys? or should we go as low as 4?
i'll update the xml when a clear conclusion is reached.
“In the beginning God said, the four-dimensional divergence of an antisymmetric, second rank tensor equals zero, and there was light, and it was good. And on the seventh day he rested.”- Michio Kaku
The font is vector, so I doubt the pixelyness and I myself don't see it. There is an outer glow with some noise attached because I like the look and that might be what you're talking about.
[b]every font is vector [b] but this one seems pixely to me, i can zoom in and take a screen for you if you want proof?
I'm aware. I'm pretty sure zooming on anything makes it look pixely....
yeah, but this one looks pixely even when i don't zoom in
The font is vector, so I doubt the pixelyness and I myself don't see it. There is an outer glow with some noise attached because I like the look and that might be what you're talking about.
[b]every font is vector [b] but this one seems pixely to me, i can zoom in and take a screen for you if you want proof?
I'm aware. I'm pretty sure zooming on anything makes it look pixely....
yeah, but this one looks pixely even when i don't zoom in
The black outergolw is far to dark on the legends. take the opacity down a notch to two. And the font is to bold and strong. Either take that opacity down or reduce the boldness a little.
I think it will be a great map, although, just to be picky a number of area names seem to be crossing over their borders (Pyrenees, Finestere, Nievre to name 3) and some others could do with some centering.
But looks sharp.
KEYOGI wrote:The map's starting to shape up quite nicely. I don't have time for a detailed look, but something that is quite obvious to me is the placement of territory labels. For example Pyrenees, Garonne, Tarn, Ardeche, Mayenne. There's others as well, but perhaps see if you can better place the labels to not crowd the borders when it's not needed.
I understand you want to keep the english version of the area names, but for the territory names it's just typos:
Haute Vienne, Cote du Nord, Pas de Calais, Lozerre are the correct ones.
