Conquer Club

hulmey wrote:lol guiscard...i know im not mant to say this but they left and right look the same heheheh

the right image has obvious smoother edges for the river and for the sea coastline.
the borders aren't blurred so they are the same.
look closely at the coastline and at the river.

the smooting is a significant improvement and i do not understand why you cannot just do it to shut everybody up even if you believe it is worse.

hmmm...now i can see it..Its a improvement. yes sireeeeee

the map is good!!!!!you don't need to improve it...
the borders are good like they are

Guiscard, you want me tell that people who carry magnifying glass can see diference, becouse when i look normal view of my map bouth left and right are same, and i must say that you present how to my borders look worse, and you show that my borders better, then your bluries borders,Thanks.

I read all 69 pages. Really. And I only have four things to say :

1. From what I know of any image editing program, blurring takes about 4-5 clicks at most. (maybe about 15 seconds?)
2. The debate about the border has gone on for at least 5 pages, I'm not gonna check how far back. (about 1-2 months ago)

3. So, if you blur the border, you can make everyone shut up. Isn't that a wonderful thing, qwert?

And of course,

4. If a POLL, not a POOL.

IT DOES NOTICE IN THE REAL SIZED VERSIONS OF THE MAP!!!

please qwert just change it or abandon this map it wil not get quenched with those borders i had noticed it before as well but hadnt commented but it really is noticeable

Thanks Nerimus my english not good.

Boberz if these a will of all in map foundry,then i will not change borders to be worse, becouse these my author right, and i will abandoned these map, ofcourse if majority vote for yours sugestion.

qwert if you keep arguing about the rights of the map makers you might start a real problem here. if andy let's you quench this map other map makers will start arguing.

take for example antjo's maps they are really ugly. but if he sees your map is quenched because you invoked map maker/artist rights he'll do the same. he'll say his maps are not ugly because they are artistic. you follow my point here?
you could set a dangerous precedent here that might destroy the whole foundry concept.

qwert wrote:Boberz if these a will of all in map foundry,then i will not change borders to be worse, becouse these my author right, and i will abandoned these map, ofcourse if majority vote for yours sugestion.

Dude, your map looks great either way. Can you not just make the minor changes requested so that we can all play it?

Nice joke Dim, now you my map compare with some map who dont like so good like my map. Every normal person can see that Andy have no reason to prolonge my map, even Guiscard with hes experiment show that map with bluries borders look double bad. Andy must have a VERY BIG REASON WHY NOT WANT TO QUENCHE THESE MAP.

If i remember Samus want to se map with army numbers.
Here map.

qwert, you have now been asked repeatedly to blur the borders, and you have been shown an example of exactly what that means. Since seeing the example, everyone who has posted has said that the blurring is an improvement. That would in fact be the MAJORITY. The foundry has asked you to make a change....the foundry foreman has asked you to make a change. If you continue to refuse to make changes how do you expect the map to be quenched?

I know you are mad about this whole situation, but you have to understand how infuriating it is to be on the other side. The time you have taken to post that you will not change your map has taken many times longer than the time you would spend on changing the map. Please just make the changes as it will improve the overall look of your map.

btw qwert why use 22 not 8 or 88 this is not to spark a debate but i was interested seeing as most people use 8 or 88

Soory sully, some people must undersand that these problem was solve before 2 month, and andy can see these, and these not polite to 1 problem who solve Andy want to reopened again. And you say majority, these mean that before 2 month majority dont count?

boberz
btw qwert why use 22 not 8 or 88 this is not to spark a debate but i was interested seeing as most people use 8 or 88

What! Again new rule! Now some guys will demand to put 8 or 88. I just take 22 with no reason,its these agains rule?

22 uses the same number of pixels horizontally as 88 does, so its the same symmetry in that regard.

I think most people use 88 because it is almost symmetrical vertically, but that doesn't really matter. You can still see the 22's are lined up vertically as well as you can with 88's.

The important thing is to not use a combination of say 88 and 17's because 17 as less pixels horizontally and therefore will center differently (a problem that caused a lot of debate earlier in this thread).

Yes, and when i say that imposible put numbers like 17 to bee centralised, some people say that these posible,

qwert wrote:

boberz
btw qwert why use 22 not 8 or 88 this is not to spark a debate but i was interested seeing as most people use 8 or 88

What! Again new rule! Now some guys will demand to put 8 or 88. I just take 22 with no reason,its these agains rule?

He wasn't trying to make you follow a new rule, he was just asking why you happened to choose that number

And qwert, I understand that you settled the border thickness issue two months ago, but that isn't the problem at hand. The new debate is over the pixelized lines and currently the majority thinks it looks better with a slight blur effect. If you need help doing that just as Guiscard how he managed it. Then all you will need to do is select all the border lines, add the slight blur and that issue will be settled.

I would like to note that its still no guarantee the map will be finished (as another issue could be raised) but since this is the only topic at hand its all you need to fix to be able to move on. I think by this point people are satisfied with rest of the map though

qwert wrote:Yes, and when i say that imposible put numbers like 17 to bee centralised, some people say that these posible,

Yes, we know the problems that happened earlier. I don't think people were trying to argue with you, I think there was just miscommunication in what the true problem was.

You were right in what you were saying all along and that is no longer an issue so don't harbor any bad feelings about it

Dont wory Sully i dont put these isue again, but you must know that i get insult of some guys becouse these, and i hope that he will apology for that.

I will put vote pool, to see what majority thinks, is my map ready for play or not, i belive that map ready and i belive that real majority also think that my map ready for play.

Page 70...only 10 more to go...

qwert, the poll you need to put up is

do people want me to blur the borders?

yes
no

Should the borders be smoothed out?

Yes
No

Should be the poll. Blur has negative connotations and people who just skip in and don't look at my example will obviously vote 'no'.

I'm out of this thread again now. I thought Qwert would have shown a bit of maturity, especially as he managed to change the borders as requested before his last outburst... Apparently he still can't get his head round the foundry process.

Qwert: If you think the borders look WORSE blurred then you seriously need your eyes testing.

Qwert, Don't make maps if you are offended by constructive criticism and suggestions.

No i dont need these, but showing people part of enlarge map to see diference with blur or without blur, that funny, becouse if i put you question and only insted put question"what you think who version is best" "A" or"B"people will no see diference, only if take magnifying glases. If you send me these small part of yours experiment, i can arange pool vote question, and lett people to guess who version is best.