Page 6 of 15
Re: Classic map touchup, take three!
Posted: Fri Apr 11, 2008 8:40 am
by Alexinho
White 30, it's the clearer to read.
Re: Classic map touchup, take three!
Posted: Fri Apr 11, 2008 8:45 am
by Ruben Cassar
Ruben Cassar wrote:Ruben Cassar wrote:Is a small version of the maps available by any chance?
On a small map the army shadows are more cluttered and that might be a factor worth considering as well when deciding what are the right army shadow.
Quoting myself from page 2 here since no one must have seen this comment.
I believe that using a big version of the map will make everything seem much easier to read. However most people play on the small version to avoid scrolling down.
When using a small version the army shadows are more cluttered so people might have a problem reading the map again. So what might be good for the big version of the map might not be good for the small version which is the one most people use anyway.
Therefore we need a small version of the map as well to be able to vote properly. Most people will not realise this now...but they will realise this later when they are playing.
Also what about neutrals? Will they show up properly using white?
Quoting for the third time, this time from page 7...all I want is an answer. I envisage this will be a problem since even the 60% white which I totally hate seems at least playable on the big version while on the small version of the map it was totally unplayable. The army shadows are much more cluttered on the small version.
Can someone give me a reply please? I don't know who's in charge but all I want is a reply...
Re: Classic map touchup, take three!
Posted: Fri Apr 11, 2008 8:46 am
by hulmey
good call ZawBanjito , i think thats the best thing to. Redesign the clasic from the beginning. Then we could have 22 classics's. Would be interesting to see which one would be most played on!
Re: Classic map touchup, take three!
Posted: Fri Apr 11, 2008 9:00 am
by KLOBBER
Ruben Cassar wrote:
Quoting for the third time, this time from page 7...all I want is an answer. I envisage this will be a problem since even the 60% white which I totally hate seems at least playable on the big version while on the small version of the map it was totally unplayable. The army shadows are much more cluttered on the small version.
Can someone give me a reply please? I don't know who's in charge but all I want is a reply...
No.
Re: Classic map touchup, take three!
Posted: Fri Apr 11, 2008 9:01 am
by alster
Freetymes wrote:First, Thank you for listening...
However...
Why is there not an option to "Leave the map the way it was"???
The whining I have seen throughout all of the forum posts from the people who live in the Cartography forum amazes me. I am having a hard time understanding how self-important they are. leave the original alone, fix the messes you have already spewed out! This one did not need your hand...
Like many have said before... Do you really want this entire community telling you what they think of all of your little projects, every day???
I concur. Jeez... give us the good old Canadian and Classic maps back
Re: Classic map touchup, take three!
Posted: Fri Apr 11, 2008 9:03 am
by Ruben Cassar
KLOBBER wrote:
No.
Thanks Klobber!
Re: Classic map touchup, take three!
Posted: Fri Apr 11, 2008 9:03 am
by alster
ZawBanjito wrote:sarascara wrote:It's called Classic for a reason. Keep it the way it was.
It's called Classic because it copies the classic game board. We can do what we want with the graphic.
LOL... Let's say that the Classic map is
inspired by the classic game board... CC is not associated with Hasbro in anyway...
Re: Classic map touchup, take three!
Posted: Fri Apr 11, 2008 9:18 am
by PLAYER57832
either white 30% (first choice) or no shadows (a very close second) .. which seems to corrospond with the majority.
KUDOS on running this poll, this way.
HOWEVER, I wish you would revisit the player colors again ... and maybe with THIS kind of poll, instead of one buried in the forum (where mostly those with complaints and chatterboxes such as I visit).
I did not like your first 8-player scheme, but this later version is WORSE.
Re: Classic map touchup, take three!
Posted: Fri Apr 11, 2008 9:19 am
by douglasefresh
I guess this is a bit late, but i'm new to the forums: Full respect to all the people who put time and energy into this, but a) I've never liked the classic map and b) these recent changes are not for the better. Europe looks very confused and those missiles/wind farms
add to the confusion. IMHO The World 2.1 map manages to successfully incorporate many continent colours without losing legibility and while I think a different colour scheme is good for Classic - I'm afraid I don't think any of the current options are 'classic' themselves.
Sorry.
Re: Classic map touchup, take three!
Posted: Fri Apr 11, 2008 9:28 am
by norsemsn1066
I voted 60% Black as it is by far the easiest for a sight impared person to read. The no shadows is by far the worst as you can't see the blue armies on Europe at all.
How about making an option button when playing the Classic map that allows no shadows for the majority that want it and second option (whatever get's the second most votes?) Could that be done?
Thank you for your time and attention.
Re: Classic map touchup, take three!
Posted: Fri Apr 11, 2008 9:29 am
by norsemsn1066
Sorry miss spoke there should read 30% white instead of No Shadows
Re: Classic map touchup, take three!
Posted: Fri Apr 11, 2008 9:48 am
by milwood
Well, there are a lot of factors that affect my strategy. But admittedly, I have often tried to capture and hold Europe when playing as BLUE because I feel I won't be as noticeable... I first started trying that after noticing how difficult it was for me to read those numbers with my opponents. Of course, this factor is lower on my list vs. the all important starting position or opening moves of preceding players or tendencies of players I am familiar with.
Like Roger Clemens, I'm always looking for an edge!
Re: Classic map touchup, take three!
Posted: Fri Apr 11, 2008 9:55 am
by jiminski
yeti_c wrote:jiminski wrote:But 'No shadows' (surely that is the original map?) is beating the combined 50% + 60% White vote (i think the first Re-touch ended with 55.5% or something close so i added them together.)
So are you telling me that now you can't even remember what your beloved classic map used to look like?
[bigimg]http://www.conquerclub.com/maps/Classic.S.jpg[/bigimg]
C.
Easy there slugger, my fighting really is done.. I really shouldn't have stuck my big nose in that time..
I am simply happy that a more inclusive decision is now being made.
Both sides fought the good fight so that those without vested interest or bruised ego (me included) could take part.
it looks like something, almost exactly in the middle of our diametrically opposed views, will prevail.
Re: Classic map touchup, take three!
Posted: Fri Apr 11, 2008 9:57 am
by justhavinfun
This is what I love about CC. Responsiveness and willingness to make changes even after having spent months working on something. Not to be a real pain, but would it be possible to get the Poll maps with 8 players. For the last set of changes, I was negative primarily because of the difficulty distinguishing grey, yellow, and orange. The Poll Maps don't have samples of Orange and Grey, so its hard to say which one will fix the problem for me, personally. I know, I know its not all about me, but I figure if I have this problems others may as well.
Re: Classic map touchup, take three!
Posted: Fri Apr 11, 2008 10:03 am
by Robinette
ZawBanjito wrote:Ludicrous! This circle debate is a stop gap measure and silly too. Redesign the WHOLE map. It looks positively cartoonish next to some of the more recent user created maps. Every other older map is getting a facelift, some of them hideous but others quite nice, really very nice in fact. Why not the Classic map too? Someone says, "I have a problem with borders and colors and circles" and your response is to jigger the circles and give the names a new font, and then come to us and say, "Your complaints have been directly addressed, and now you have new ones?" as if no one could have foreseen this after the previous awkward attempt to plaster stuff on top of the old map. If a house is poorly designed, giving it a garish lick of paint around the window frames ain't going to make the wife happy when the rain drips in through the roof. All it will get her to do is shut up for a month or so. "See? You wanted a change, I gave you a change! And you're still complaining?"
The problems with the Classic map are that it is too small and cramped in on itself. Even World 2.1 with its myriad of tiny countries manages to feel more expansive than Classic does with just the standard number. Redesign the WHOLE MAP. Start a competition, get all the map makers involved, it'll be a riot, we'll vote on the proposals, everyone will have a grand old time.
You should all read this again... slowly... and try to absorb it's meaning...
Meanwhile, just to make this map playable for the short term, based on the votes so far it looks like you'll have the best compromise by blending the leaders... i suppose that would be White at 15%.
Re: Classic map touchup, take three!
Posted: Fri Apr 11, 2008 10:03 am
by yeti_c
norsemsn1066 wrote:Sorry miss spoke there should read 30% white instead of No Shadows
I agree with this - I think 40% white is the lowest you can go for Blue to be visible on Europe.
C.
Re: Classic map touchup, take three!
Posted: Fri Apr 11, 2008 10:35 am
by jiminski
Robinette wrote:ZawBanjito wrote:Ludicrous! This circle debate is a stop gap measure and silly too. Redesign the WHOLE map. It looks positively cartoonish next to some of the more recent user created maps. Every other older map is getting a facelift, some of them hideous but others quite nice, really very nice in fact. Why not the Classic map too? Someone says, "I have a problem with borders and colors and circles" and your response is to jigger the circles and give the names a new font, and then come to us and say, "Your complaints have been directly addressed, and now you have new ones?" as if no one could have foreseen this after the previous awkward attempt to plaster stuff on top of the old map. If a house is poorly designed, giving it a garish lick of paint around the window frames ain't going to make the wife happy when the rain drips in through the roof. All it will get her to do is shut up for a month or so. "See? You wanted a change, I gave you a change! And you're still complaining?"
The problems with the Classic map are that it is too small and cramped in on itself. Even World 2.1 with its myriad of tiny countries manages to feel more expansive than Classic does with just the standard number. Redesign the WHOLE MAP. Start a competition, get all the map makers involved, it'll be a riot, we'll vote on the proposals, everyone will have a grand old time.
You should all read this again... slowly... and try to absorb it's meaning...
yas agreed with all of it.
i saw it earlier .. but i thought i better not comment so soon after World War III
Re: Classic map touchup, take three!
Posted: Fri Apr 11, 2008 11:02 am
by Snowman
As the white shadows make the numbers slightly less crisp and the black shadows make seeing blue with my wizened eyes slightly less easy, I'd go for no shadows.
But I wouldn't be too bothered if any of them won if I'm honest.
Re: Classic map touchup, take three!
Posted: Fri Apr 11, 2008 11:04 am
by norsemsn1066
Sfter looking at it some more I still prefer the 60% Black as the contrast is best for me to read the info. I know that's not popular so I think I could get by with 30-40% white. It's a little more difficult for me to see but, It is much easier to see then the No Shadows. If No Shadows was the one adopted I'd have to stop playing on the Classic map as I wouldn't be able to see what was going on
This is just MHO as a person with limited sight that really likes this opportunity to play a game that he's had since the mid '70's.
Re: Classic map touchup, take three!
Posted: Fri Apr 11, 2008 11:09 am
by firstholliday
How many posts will it takes.....
I,m losing all my games here, stevie wonder is playing.....
Re: Classic map touchup, take three!
Posted: Fri Apr 11, 2008 11:16 am
by wicked
If some of you play from multiple computers/browsers, I suggest checking it out from everything before voting (or after voting, since you can change your vote). I was wondering why so many people were voting no shadows until I got to work and looked at it, and no shadows DOES look better on this computer with IE than it did at home on my laptop with FF. Of course, it also looks huge, so is very crisp and clear. I too would like to see the small maps, i.e. what we mostly all play on, before I vote.
Re: Classic map touchup, take three!
Posted: Fri Apr 11, 2008 11:20 am
by Freetymes
It is not just the circles it is the ugly color changes and the clutter added for no reason but the ego of the makers.
If there was any real thought of questioning this change and if the community wanted it then the only two choices in this poll would be the original and the cluster you switched things too.
PLEASE GO BACK TO THE OLD MAP UNTIL YOU COME UP WITH A SUITABLE FIX THAT CAN BE VOTED UP OR DOWN AGAINST THE ORIGINAL!As for any respect possibly owed the cartographers and their programmers? It is pretty much lost...
yeti_c wrote:I find it Ironic that White 60 (new classic) is beating Black 60 (old classic)...
Therefore any and all posts I made about the people who hated the new map being in the minority - were all fully justified... I will accept apologies now.
C.
My friend if you are not 13 years old you certainly act that way.
My apologies to 13 year olds...
Re: Classic map touchup, take three!
Posted: Fri Apr 11, 2008 11:28 am
by TheWreckless1
White 30% for readability. But since I can see just fine either way.The best look overall is black 30%.
Re: Classic map touchup, take three!
Posted: Fri Apr 11, 2008 11:28 am
by firstholliday
wicked wrote:If some of you play from multiple computers/browsers, I suggest checking it out from everything before voting (or after voting, since you can change your vote). I was wondering why so many people were voting no shadows until I got to work and looked at it, and no shadows DOES look better on this computer with IE than it did at home on my laptop with FF. Of course, it also looks huge, so is very crisp and clear. I too would like to see the small maps, i.e. what we mostly all play on, before I vote.
Hmmm I think Wicked has a point here.
Can we PLEASE chance it back in the meantime?
Re: Classic map touchup, take three!
Posted: Fri Apr 11, 2008 11:54 am
by rebelman
as someone with extreme difficulty with contrasting colours - i voted white 60 as it finally address the contrasting colours problem, white 50 is ok too but white 40, white 30 and all the black options are more or less as bad as the way classic was and for the likes of me will mean despite a revamp this map will still be more or less unplayable - so unless its white 50 or white 60 people with eyesight like mine will continue to avoid classic (except when we have no choice eg tournies etc. That said based on the results of the poll those of us with problems with contrasting colours will still have problems with this map - if you do opt for another option as the poll seems to be indicating you could do people like me a favour by doing the following;
stop using this map in tournies (not going to happen i know, but those of us with visual impairments like mine are being discriminated against)
put a warning on the map eg "not suitable for some with less than perfect eyesight"*
*this may help stop the trend of new members leaving after just one game as they may wrongly assume this problem exists with all maps, i have no doubt it is currently a factor in attrition on this site.