Conquer Club

Ruben Cassar wrote: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.

good point Ruben..

On the plus side, they have made the vote changeable, so if we do get to see the smaller maps everyone can react.

jiminski wrote:
good point Ruben..

On the plus side, they have made the vote changeable, so if we do get to see the smaller maps everyone can react.

Yes, but how many people will actually do that? Not many I think. Anyway let's hope for the best.

Ruben Cassar wrote:

jiminski wrote:
good point Ruben..

On the plus side, they have made the vote changeable, so if we do get to see the smaller maps everyone can react.

Yes, but how many people will actually do that? Not many I think. Anyway let's hope for the best.

yeah i heed your concern Ruben .. but i know i would change my vote if it is as you fear!... i think any poll that a person votes in becomes immediately irresistible to the eye ^^, so we could be ok.

all look the same to me...

hairingtons wrote:all look the same to me...

hehe you mapist!

will we get smaller maps to assess?

Ruben makes a sensible point.

i don't see any diffrence

I voted no shadows, but black 60% doesnt look too bad either

Hi all,

I'm really having a hard time with this. I voted for "No Shadows" because - and only because - when I saw the poll options, this seemed most like what the old classic map looked like. I realize some people have said that this might NOT have been what the old classic actually was - but the important thing is that it SEEMED most like what the old classic was.

As others have noted, WHY is there no option to keep the exact same old classic map the exact same way it was? That is what I, and I am SURE many others, want. Not a very confusing poll with so many options that - frankly - cannot realistically gauge what people are thinking.

I'm aware of the point that some people have difficulty reading the map because of vision problems. That's exactly why we have BOB/the color indicators. Why can we simply not use those? It seems a much much simpler fix than this entire extravaganza.

Please, pretty please - just bring back our nice old classic map. That's what I've used in every single one of my games (tried and true), and I just don't want to change it. This seems to be, by far, the majority view of the matter as expressed by posts over the last few days. So instead of tinkering with something that's obviously a good thing, let's just remind people of the color-coded options regarding armies.

If WORST comes to WORST, whey can't we just make Europe a lighter shade of blue on the map, without these horrible shaded circles (of any color, of any sort)?

Sincerely trying to protect his favorite map from all of this seemingly unnecessary craziness,

Bringiton4

I think the point is to vote with your eyes and head, not your heart... We all have an affinity with what we perceive to be the traditional classic map.
(I believe the map was updated from 'no shadow' some moths ago to include '60% black' circles to aid the visibility of troop numbers.. i am sure someone will correct me if i am wrong)

the point has been made and you make it again, that the large vote for 'no shadow' may well be about bias towards what we 'think' we were using before. (this is likely because the previous circles did not jump out at you and scramble your brain, via your mangled sight receptors... and after a brief time we did not notice the dots)

It may be, that if we just take away our preconception, we can have a circle which improves the visibility of the number but which does not encroach upon the rest of the map.... i.e. circles which we can ignore.
The ones we have at present are not ignorable at 60% white; it is a polka-dot nightmare.

So really, what is 'perhaps' best is if we can all just vote on what instinctively and without the prejudice of tradition, looks best. ..

However and very importantly, i would like to see the effect of the smaller map size on the impact of the circles.
is it as easy on the eye?
and is there a limitation on opacity reduction at this size?

small map versions are in the works. and yes you can change your vote at any time.

Total votes : 2758

we don't even have that many people posting in the forums.

I don't know if someone mentioned this, but I think the numbers need to be bigger.

seems like the real problem is the blue text. why not just pick another color?

white at any % is an improvement. if people have a problem with the 60%, scale it back. i understand the desire to keep the "classic" the way it is but everyone would have to admit that blue armies are hard to see in europe. if a subtle change improves everyones gaming, go for it. my vote goes for white 30%.

black 60%

Red/green is the most common form of color blindness. This is what I have and the colors that I have the most problems with are your dark grays and dark greens. The red is okay but if you could stay clear of more than one dark green and gray combo in your color codes it would really help.

white is better ... 60%

I'm for white 40

owenshooter wrote: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

I was saying that, if one of these options is chosen, only (at most) 27% of people would support that one, so that leaves the rest (70%) with something suboptimal. It wasn't a long stretch, I'm sure you could've figured it out.

At any rate, I think this whole thing about "needing to see the map" and "the circles cluttering things" is silly. I could play classic blindfolded; the map is only useful for army sizes, and the text map does that fine. If you're new to the game, then maybe you need to look at it, but then it won't make a difference how it looks, because you haven't seen anything else to judge it against.

Lack,

Although I have already voted, I think that after April 17th you should narrow the voting down between the top 2 or 3 choices of this poll. That way people that that did not get their first choice could have a second choice. I think that this way you would have more buy in from the whole CC community.

Just my 2 cents.

you all are bitching about minute changes.

Dekloren wrote:Let's change it back to normal.
Colour codes are for people who can't see well, besides, why are people who can't see colour, playing a game of colour?? And complaining about it??

It isn't a game of color you idiot, it's a game of strategy. Anyone should be allowed to play however your IQ makes me wonder considering you think this is a "game of colour".

IS IT FIXED YET???

LOOKS LIKE WE NEED A RUN OFF POLL BETWEEN NO SHADOWS AND WHITE 30!!!

bringiton4 wrote:'m aware of the point that some people have difficulty reading the map because of vision problems. That's exactly why we have BOB/the color indicators. Why can we simply not use those? It seems a much much simpler fix than this entire extravaganza.

BOB is not an adequate fix because:
1. BOB is an unofficial add-on, used by SOME members of the site using specific browsers. The site should never have to rely on a user script for playability.
2. BOB doesn't address the problems specific to the classic map - the color indicators don't tell you the count, or make it easier to read the count. Using the samples on Page 1 as an example, I have trouble reading the army count in Northwest Ter. against the darker backgrounds because, to my challenged eyes, the number bleeds right into the territory. Also, the blue in Europe is close enough to the blue army counts and the green in N. Am close enough to green army counts that some folks have trouble with them.

jazzsnob wrote:t isn't a game of color you idiot, it's a game of strategy. Anyone should be allowed to play...

Other than the "idiot" part, jazz has the point. The colors exist to make it easier to play the game, not harder. For me, and others like me who are mildly color-blind, the old Classic map could often be frustrating because the army circles didn't do anything.