Conquer Club

Posted: **Fri Apr 11, 2008 4:39 pm**

Exactly Jim. Which is why the "nannny-nanny-boo-boo we won" tirade wasn't really needed or warranted or even correct. I'm quite happy with White 30 as well, but not White 60, aka what's up now.

Posted: **Fri Apr 11, 2008 4:52 pm**

If the White 30 wins, it will be a travesty! The Classic Map should have NEVER been changed!

I really don't think it's fair of the Foundry to change something as important as the Classic Map without asking members if they even think something is wrong with it! Simply change it back to Black 60, and let everyone go about their business like they did before this debacle!...

Life went on with the Classic Map as it was, and life will continue just the way it had before... IF you change it back to the Original!...

Regards,

Snively

Posted: **Fri Apr 11, 2008 4:55 pm**

Snively_Sneed wrote:Life went on with the Classic Map as it was, and life will continue just the way it had before... IF you change it back to the Original!...

I agree with what Snively has to say, cuz i was fine with the way it was before...
but, as of right now, i like white 30%, cuz it doesn't hurt your eyes AND you can see every color fine w/o getting confused or anything

Posted: **Fri Apr 11, 2008 5:18 pm**

A few thoughts...

If this is an interim map until the true Classic redesign comes along, we need to make sure the people who did the "mutton dressed up as lamb polka dots with neon sign" disaster aren't allowed to redesign the Classic without an announcement to the board that the Classic is going to be redesigned and to go to the foundry for input. One thing we've learned from this experience is that regardless of whether it's right or not, most people just come here to play Conquer Club and don't know about or ever look in the foundry. I appreciate the map designer's effort, but CC can't afford to have another stuffed-up classic map on a total redesign.

Another thing is that having some colours more difficult to see than others is part of the *character* of this map. We know that upper north Europe is a hidden-away, it's not the first place the eye looks. Putting your troops there is akin to staking yourself out in the mountains before an ambush. Same with some other territories - the colours gave the map depth and character. The white dots sanitise that character out of it and make the game more plain. We all have a pub round the corner that was "redesigned and improved" by the new owner who didn't *get* the character that made the old dark pub so great.

I initially voted for black 30% circles, but changed my vote to "no circles" because it was obvious that black 30% wasn't going to get a shoe-in. As much as I respect and admire Lack for saying "Right, this is important - general referendum please", it's not a well designed referendum - it pulls apart the vote trunks in a non-even way. I'd have really liked to see a "Black dots (original) or white dots (new)" referendum.

Still, I'll live with 30% white dots. I will wake up every day and think to myself "Thank f**k for no 60% white dots." and then I will think to myself...

"Where on earth is North America??? Oh, there it is. Thank God for this colour coded neon sign key, otherwise I'd never know where North America is...!!" And I thought the map design was about people with poor eyesight and colour-blindness... uh huh...

Posted: **Fri Apr 11, 2008 5:23 pm**

Twill wrote:OK, so, to reply to some of the concerns posted already....

This vote is a muddy mess and tells you nothing but what you want to hear.

* So why no answer to the request too just change it back, by a large number of people?
* Why so many choices to muddy the poll?
* Why not a vote between the actual original and any ONE of your neon uglies?

As for the one person, albeit one of the largest post whores on the site (cough rebel cough), thinking that the original remaining the same is equating to discrimination!?!?!?

You have got to be kidding right??

Stop playing oh me oh my I am a victim and get some glasses or a better screen! And no we should not suffer this neon ugly map so you can play on your phone! And for god sake look up discrimination in the dictionary before you sling it around like it is actually happening. You are not a victim simply because you are not being catered too!

Posted: **Fri Apr 11, 2008 6:36 pm**

Why not have an option in the control panel that allows us to select what color dots we want on our background and how bright we want them? That'd fix everything, and make everybody happy.

Posted: **Fri Apr 11, 2008 6:42 pm**

BrilliantGenius wrote:Why not have an option in the control panel that allows us to select what color dots we want on our background and how bright we want them? That'd fix everything, and make everybody happy.

Agree with the option and would solve alot of the trouble. I voted White 30% though *shrug*

Posted: **Fri Apr 11, 2008 7:08 pm**

White 30 looks the best, no shadows just looks strange.

Posted: **Fri Apr 11, 2008 7:14 pm**

BrilliantGenius wrote:Why not have an option in the control panel that allows us to select what color dots we want on our background and how bright we want them? That'd fix everything, and make everybody happy.

yah dude brilliant has really got the idea now... make everyone happy at the same time in all their maps. No need to argue over piddly stuff like shadows of armies.

Posted: **Fri Apr 11, 2008 8:04 pm**

how about smaller colored circles with smaller black numbers.

Posted: **Fri Apr 11, 2008 8:17 pm**

BrilliantGenius wrote:Why not have an option in the control panel that allows us to select what color dots we want on our background and how bright we want them? That'd fix everything, and make everybody happy.

My initial reaction is that I like this idea, but having made a few maps myself and consulted on, well, many, I fear that this wouldn't be practical. Army circles need to be an element of the map, not of the site, because you need to consider what color circles work on a particular map, not just the intensity. It may be that white circles wouldn't work on a particular map regardless of the intensity.

In a perfect world, there would be enough eyes looking at a map before it goes live to get a good sense of how the circles will be received by the general public. Clearly that wasn't the case with the classic touch-up, but that's the risk you take when you allow a process like this to be in the hands of the users.

Posted: **Fri Apr 11, 2008 8:25 pm**

oaktown wrote:Army circles need to be an element of the map, not of the site, because you need to consider what color circles work on a particular map, not just the intensity. It may be that white circles wouldn't work on a particular map regardless of the intensity.

But in this case, the different maps already exist. No matter which one is chosen, the poll seems to suggest that 70% would prefer a different set up. Since the image doesn't make a difference to the gameplay, surely the site could host all of the available images, and leave it up to the individual to choose which one they wanted to look at.

I'm not saying cartos should make options for every map, but in this case (where players seem to get really mad over any changes and different options are already available) it would help.

Posted: **Fri Apr 11, 2008 8:40 pm**

BaldAdonis wrote:
oaktown wrote: the poll seems to suggest that 70% would prefer a different set up.

how in the hell did you get to this? that is beyond FLAWED logic... stick to the poll and change it. the old map is never coming back. enough people wanted it changed, that it was changed. enough said.-0

Posted: **Fri Apr 11, 2008 9:06 pm**

I hate it. It seems harder to read the colors now more than ever.

Posted: **Fri Apr 11, 2008 9:15 pm**

I'm an old fart and can use the help of the white shadows to see color definition.

Opera Man FL

Posted: **Fri Apr 11, 2008 9:18 pm**

When you get rid of that white spot that makes it so hard to tell who is who I will start playing again. Love the game, but I can't hardly tell red from pink with that silly spot [-X

Posted: **Fri Apr 11, 2008 9:37 pm**

can you also remove the ! mark from the map name. that should be reserved for the best map on here, Siege! ONLY!

Posted: **Fri Apr 11, 2008 10:54 pm**

kj11aw wrote:can you also remove the ! mark from the map name. that should be reserved for the best map on here, Siege! ONLY!

I think they added it for some sort of copyright thing, make sure we arent copying anything from some "other global domination game"...

The shadows. black or white, make it difficult to see different colors. The black circles make blue and grey tough for me, while white circles are difficult for red and pink, while also just standing out in a bad way.

So Id say no shadows or very low black, but I never had a problem seeing anything on the old classic map...

Posted: **Fri Apr 11, 2008 11:36 pm**

Freetymes wrote:
Twill wrote:OK, so, to reply to some of the concerns posted already....

This vote is a muddy mess and tells you nothing but what you want to hear.

* So why no answer to the request too just change it back, by a large number of people?
* Why so many choices to muddy the poll?
* Why not a vote between the actual original and any ONE of your neon uglies?

As for the one person, albeit one of the largest post whores on the site (cough rebel cough), thinking that the original remaining the same is equating to discrimination!?!?!?

You have got to be kidding right??

Stop playing oh me oh my I am a victim and get some glasses or a better screen! And no we should not suffer this neon ugly map so you can play on your phone! And for god sake look up discrimination in the dictionary before you sling it around like it is actually happening. You are not a victim simply because you are not being catered too!

Posted: **Sat Apr 12, 2008 2:09 am**

Freetymes wrote:
Twill wrote:OK, so, to reply to some of the concerns posted already....

This vote is a muddy mess and tells you nothing but what you want to hear.

Is it not the case that the vote is fine - and tells you what you don't want to hear?

C.

Posted: **Sat Apr 12, 2008 2:51 am**

White 60% is easiest to read, IMO.

Posted: **Sat Apr 12, 2008 3:22 am**

This seems like a silly thing to be making a huge deal about... :roll:

It's some flippin' circles on one map. Get over it if you don't like it. There are, in fact, more important things in life.

Posted: **Sat Apr 12, 2008 3:37 am**

To everyone who is saying that Black 60% is the old Classic map, Black 60% is not the old Classic map. Yes, the old Classic used circles shaded 60% Black, but the Black 60% option that they showed to us on page 1 had changes made to it besides just the circles--such as continent colors and the map legend colors. If you want to see the original Classic map, it was posted by yeti_c on page 9 and then reposted on page 10.

I just wanna make sure we're getting our facts straight. If we accuse someone of being wrong, we should make sure that we're in the right.

Just my thoughts,
Poocho

Posted: **Sat Apr 12, 2008 3:46 am**

Wow, 2702 votes in just a couple of days. If every map project in the Foundry got this kind of attention my work would be easy, and our maps would be better for it!

Posted: **Sat Apr 12, 2008 4:49 am**

This poll is useless. I could play on nearly anyone of these maps in their big version shown on page 1 and I would not have any problems.

The small maps are the problem because the army shadows are much more cluttered and for example White 60% is useless in that case since it makes the map unreadable.

Even if the small versions of the map were put on today, too many people would have already voted and the poll would still be flawed.

At this point in time I am hoping that White 30% is decent on the small maps because it's the most popular choice by far.

Conquer Club

Classic map touchup, take three! Live map updated!

Re: Classic map touchup, take three!

Re: Classic map touchup, take three!

Re: Classic map touchup, take three!

Re: Classic map touchup, take three!

Re: Classic map touchup, take three!

Re: Classic map touchup, take three!

Re: Classic map touchup, take three!

Re: Classic map touchup, take three!

Re: Classic map touchup, take three!

Re: Classic map touchup, take three!

Re: Classic map touchup, take three!

Re: Classic map touchup, take three!

Re: Classic map touchup, take three!

Re: Classic map touchup, take three!

Re: Classic map touchup, take three!

Re: Classic map touchup, take three!

Re: Classic map touchup, take three!

Re: Classic map touchup, take three!

Re: Classic map touchup, take three!

Re: Classic map touchup, take three!

Re: Classic map touchup, take three!

Re: Classic map touchup, take three!

Re: Classic map touchup, take three!

Re: Classic map touchup, take three!

Re: Classic map touchup, take three!