Conquer Club

yeti_c wrote:
Press the upgrade button... 4.2.1 won't be providing you with the correct stats anyway - so it is "broke".

C.

.

Stats seem correct to me...only turn elimination out of wack.....

I'll wait....Army/Terry count right on...good enough for me....................

TY...Now how do I get rid of flashing update???.................

LetGodSortThem wrote:

yeti_c wrote:
Press the upgrade button... 4.2.1 won't be providing you with the correct stats anyway - so it is "broke".

C.

.

Stats seem correct to me...only turn elimination out of wack.....

I'll wait....Army/Terry count right on...good enough for me....................

TY...Now how do I get rid of flashing update???.................

Upgrade - your Stats ARE wrong...

At the moment - your BOB wil only be processing 50 lines of log - the new version downloads the log to process it all - thus ensuring your stats are correct. Territory count will not be correct in FOW games too.

C.

So I switched my monitor size from 1280x960 to 1600x1200. Now the army numbers are "off". I never understood why this happens in the first place? But my problem is that every single time I need to align armies right and down, not left and up! Any chance the map align can be changed or modified to do this? So instead of hitting the mouse 80 times to correct armies on maps...only a few will do? Love AJAX BOB but this is my only gripe.... not very user friendly at 1600x1200. Cheers.

yeti_c wrote:The army circles are part of the map. - The map itself can have it's opacity changed - but indiviual areas of the map can't.

Supposing that CC hosted all the different images for circle opacities, could you rig it to change the image on the user's end?

BaldAdonis wrote:

yeti_c wrote:The army circles are part of the map. - The map itself can have it's opacity changed - but indiviual areas of the map can't.

Supposing that CC hosted all the different images for circle opacities, could you rig it to change the image on the user's end?

Of course.

C.

casper wrote:So I switched my monitor size from 1280x960 to 1600x1200. Now the army numbers are "off". I never understood why this happens in the first place? But my problem is that every single time I need to align armies right and down, not left and up! Any chance the map align can be changed or modified to do this? So instead of hitting the mouse 80 times to correct armies on maps...only a few will do? Love AJAX BOB but this is my only gripe.... not very user friendly at 1600x1200. Cheers.

Hi - there isn't a global offset functionality I'm afraid... the offsets do save though - so once set - they will always be correct.

C.

yeti_c wrote:

casper wrote:So I switched my monitor size from 1280x960 to 1600x1200. Now the army numbers are "off". I never understood why this happens in the first place? But my problem is that every single time I need to align armies right and down, not left and up! Any chance the map align can be changed or modified to do this? So instead of hitting the mouse 80 times to correct armies on maps...only a few will do? Love AJAX BOB but this is my only gripe.... not very user friendly at 1600x1200. Cheers.

Hi - there isn't a global offset functionality I'm afraid... the offsets do save though - so once set - they will always be correct.

C.

It is possible to set one as a global value, but you'll need to edit the about:config settings for BOB

yeti_c wrote:

BaldAdonis wrote:Supposing that CC hosted all the different images for circle opacities, could you rig it to change the image on the user's end?

Of course.

Have you offered this solution to the classic map crisis then? The maps are already there, so everyone who uses BOB would finally shut up about the image, and anyone who doesn't would have another reason to get it. Also would stop people whining when their favourite map is revamped (I'm thinking of Canada, but I bet British Isles gets the same reception).

BaldAdonis wrote:

yeti_c wrote:

BaldAdonis wrote:Supposing that CC hosted all the different images for circle opacities, could you rig it to change the image on the user's end?

Of course.

Have you offered this solution to the classic map crisis then? The maps are already there, so everyone who uses BOB would finally shut up about the image, and anyone who doesn't would have another reason to get it. Also would stop people whining when their favourite map is revamped (I'm thinking of Canada, but I bet British Isles gets the same reception).

Can't rely on BOB to provide a Site fix...

C.

It's not really a site problem though: the map is fine, some people just don't like how it looks. No matter how much accommodation goes into it, whichever map they end up with will be "not the best" to the majority of people. I'm saying you could fix the problem for those people by switching the images on the user's end. (Plus the added function of reverting to old maps after a revamp, provided you liked the old map more).

BaldAdonis wrote:It's not really a site problem though: the map is fine, some people just don't like how it looks. No matter how much accommodation goes into it, whichever map they end up with will be "not the best" to the majority of people. I'm saying you could fix the problem for those people by switching the images on the user's end. (Plus the added function of reverting to old maps after a revamp, provided you liked the old map more).

It ain't gonna happen. I'm not arguing with you - but it just isn't.

If Lack wanted to deal with the army images like that - then he would code it into the site... BOB wouldn't have anything to do with it!!

C.

yeti_c wrote:

BaldAdonis wrote:It's not really a site problem though: the map is fine, some people just don't like how it looks. No matter how much accommodation goes into it, whichever map they end up with will be "not the best" to the majority of people. I'm saying you could fix the problem for those people by switching the images on the user's end. (Plus the added function of reverting to old maps after a revamp, provided you liked the old map more).

It ain't gonna happen. I'm not arguing with you - but it just isn't.

If Lack wanted to deal with the army images like that - then he would code it into the site... BOB wouldn't have anything to do with it!!

C.

Besides not everyone runs BOB, and some refuse to....

yeti_c wrote:

casper wrote:So I switched my monitor size from 1280x960 to 1600x1200. Now the army numbers are "off". I never understood why this happens in the first place? But my problem is that every single time I need to align armies right and down, not left and up! Any chance the map align can be changed or modified to do this? So instead of hitting the mouse 80 times to correct armies on maps...only a few will do? Love AJAX BOB but this is my only gripe.... not very user friendly at 1600x1200. Cheers.

Hi - there isn't a global offset functionality I'm afraid... the offsets do save though - so once set - they will always be correct.

C.

Can you explain please? Once set, they should be correct on all maps? Because that is not the case. They stay correct on some maps but not all. I end up having to adjust the armies all the time. click click click click............

casper wrote:

yeti_c wrote:

casper wrote:So I switched my monitor size from 1280x960 to 1600x1200. Now the army numbers are "off". I never understood why this happens in the first place? But my problem is that every single time I need to align armies right and down, not left and up! Any chance the map align can be changed or modified to do this? So instead of hitting the mouse 80 times to correct armies on maps...only a few will do? Love AJAX BOB but this is my only gripe.... not very user friendly at 1600x1200. Cheers.

Hi - there isn't a global offset functionality I'm afraid... the offsets do save though - so once set - they will always be correct.

C.

Can you explain please? Once set, they should be correct on all maps? Because that is not the case. They stay correct on some maps but not all. I end up having to adjust the armies all the time. click click click click............

The Map Offsets *should* save on a per map basis - if this isn't happening then their might be a bug...

C.

Here's a good suggestion that should be really simple to implement:

List the province names in alphabetical order on the Text Map.

When I am deciding which cards to play I try to maximize my future +2 benefits. Of the cards that I don't own, I determine which ones I might likely conquer in the near future, so I hunt through the text map looking to see where certain provinces are. It often takes *forever* to do this on the big maps, which I am not familiar with.

I am sure an alphabetical listing would be of benefit to other people for other reasons.

Thanks for all your hard work on this most excellent plug-in!

T.

Teutonics wrote:Here's a good suggestion that should be really simple to implement:

List the province names in alphabetical order on the Text Map.

When I am deciding which cards to play I try to maximize my future +2 benefits. Of the cards that I don't own, I determine which ones I might likely conquer in the near future, so I hunt through the text map looking to see where certain provinces are. It often takes *forever* to do this on the big maps, which I am not familiar with.

I am sure an alphabetical listing would be of benefit to other people for other reasons.

Thanks for all your hard work on this most excellent plug-in!

T.

The problem is - this isn't very easy to do... at present the system outputs the data in XML order... which is - easy...

To sort said data would be time consuming.

C.

never mind about the previous suggestion -- it took me 150 games before I realized that holding the mouse pointer over the card highlighted its position on the map...

but what about this --- having a toggle for the map inspect function that allows one to flip from its current settings, in which the connecting territories are color highlighted according to the player owning them, to a new color scheme that would differentiate the connecting territories by virtue of whether they can be attacked or must only be defended against.

Such a feature would help out in complicated maps, such as waterloo, where the map inspect often highlights a dozen plus territories. It would also be useful on maps that utilize many one-way lines on attack, such as on WWII Gazala and Draknor.

Thanks Once Again,

T.

Teutonics wrote:never mind about the previous suggestion -- it took me 150 games before I realized that holding the mouse pointer over the card highlighted its position on the map...

but what about this --- having a toggle for the map inspect function that allows one to flip from its current settings, in which the connecting territories are color highlighted according to the player owning them, to a new color scheme that would differentiate the connecting territories by virtue of whether they can be attacked or must only be defended against.

Such a feature would help out in complicated maps, such as waterloo, where the map inspect often highlights a dozen plus territories. It would also be useful on maps that utilize many one-way lines on attack, such as on WWII Gazala and Draknor.

Thanks Once Again,

T.

He he he!! Smooth!!

Hmmm - colour based on attack type... that could work... good thing also about it - is that it wouldn't need to update with the game...

C.

Apologies if this has already been discussed, but it would be nice to be able to set up BOB so that it automatically takes a snapshot of the game when it fills up. T'would even out the fog a touch as far as people joining a game then going first. At least the other player(s) would be able to see what the virgin board looked like.

Incandenza wrote:Apologies if this has already been discussed, but it would be nice to be able to set up BOB so that it automatically takes a snapshot of the game when it fills up. T'would even out the fog a touch as far as people joining a game then going first. At least the other player(s) would be able to see what the virgin board looked like.

Unfortunately BOB couldn't do that...BOB only runs in your browser, when you're looking at the map. So there's no way BOB could take a snap of the "virgin" board, unless you were looking at it in your browser at the time (in which case you could take a manual snap anyway).

Possibly a site suggestion, though.

LC

Incandenza wrote:Apologies if this has already been discussed, but it would be nice to be able to set up BOB so that it automatically takes a snapshot of the game when it fills up. T'would even out the fog a touch as far as people joining a game then going first. At least the other player(s) would be able to see what the virgin board looked like.

Hopefully - when log 2.0 comes out - this will be doable anyway...

C.

yeti_c wrote:Hopefully - when log 2.0 comes out - this will be doable anyway...

C.

You'll forgive me if I don't hold my breath. I don't think I've had a healthy relationship that's lasted longer than log 2.0's been on the to-do list.

Incandenza wrote:

yeti_c wrote:Hopefully - when log 2.0 comes out - this will be doable anyway...

C.

You'll forgive me if I don't hold my breath. I don't think I've had a healthy relationship that's lasted longer than log 2.0's been on the to-do list.

I saw Lack say in Live Chat that it's next on his list.......

C.

I'm not super familiar with the cc forms, but after scaning 20 or so pages of this thread i didn't find my answer. i found some code for card set estimate, but not a definition. if some one could fill me in on what the number mean and how they affect play i would be stoked. thanks.

Hey yeti, what's the status on that next update? I'm just assuming it's still in the testing phase, right?