Conquer Club

i tried a test 888, they need few adjustments but this is not the right place....anyway S.F. on the small version, I highly suggest to redraw the connection with Oakland not to have it covered by army numbers.

About the xml, VS you should remove the (city) label to the bonuses or put it everywhere, San Diego is not the same of San Diego (city)!, so your bonus will never be assigned cause no one can hold a territory labelled as San Diego (city), etc etc... And also i noticed that overrides are wrong. You should put the override element/text into the correct tag, look the corrections i did on one of your bonuses here below (i've also removed the city label)

<continent>
<name>5 cities</name>
<bonus>5</bonus>
<components>
<territory>San Diego</territory>
<territory>Bakersfield</territory>
<territory>Lampoc</territory>
<territory>Fresno</territory>
<territory>Stockton</territory>
<territory>Monterey</territory>
<territory>Sacramento</territory>
<territory>Redding</territory>
<territory>Eureka</territory>
</components>
<required>5</required>
<overrides>
<override>3 cities</override>
<override>4 cities</override>
</overrides>
</continent>

If you need further help just throw me a PM

About graphics, i personally think that when borders and connection will be fixed the map could be ready for a short sticky period and then moving to the FF.

Nobodies

Yeah, I was gonna put the (city) label on everything but completely forgot. I'll get to it now. Thanks for the <overrides> clarification, thenobodies

What nobodies said, plus this. I'll use this as an example.

<continent>
<name>5 cities</name>
<bonus>5</bonus>
<components>
<territory>San Diego</territory>
<territory>Bakersfield</territory>
<territory>Lampoc</territory>
<territory>Fresno</territory>
<territory>Stockton</territory>
<territory>Monterey</territory>
<territory>Sacramento</territory>
<territory>Redding</territory>
<territory>Eureka</territory>
</components>
<required>5</required>
<overrides>
<override>3 cities</override>
<override>4 cities</override>
</overrides>

5 cities needs to override 4 cities and 3 cities. What you want to put, is this:

<continent>
<name>5 cities</name>
<bonus>5</bonus>
<components>
<territory>San Diego</territory>
<territory>Bakersfield</territory>
<territory>Lampoc</territory>
<territory>Fresno</territory>
<territory>Stockton</territory>
<territory>Monterey</territory>
<territory>Sacramento</territory>
<territory>Redding</territory>
<territory>Eureka</territory>
</components>
<required>5</required>
<overrides>
<override>4 cities</override>
</overrides>

Why, you ask? Look here:

<continent>
<name>4 cities</name>
<bonus>4</bonus>
<components>
<territory>San Diego (city)</territory>
<territory>Bakersfield (city)</territory>
<territory>Lampoc (city)</territory>
<territory>Fresno (city)</territory>
<territory>Stockton (city)</territory>
<territory>Monterey (city)</territory>
<territory>Sacramento (city)</territory>
<territory>Redding (city)</territory>
<territory>Eureka (city)</territory>
</components>
<required>4</required>
<overrides>
<override>3 cities</override>
</overrides>
</continent>

The override you get from the 5 cities bonus overrides the 4 cities bonus - and as seen above, it also overrides the 3 cities bonus all at the same time, so it's redundant to have all of the amounts of cities in one override. All you need is the greatest integer that is lower than the amount of cities in the bonus in the override.

I hope that made sense!

Okay, fixed:

Fileden - http://www.fileden.com/files/2010/12/18/3040650//Cali.xml
Mediafire - http://www.mediafire.com/?pd71g6zyw7od6tc

Which site is better, btw?

-Sully

Gilligan wrote:What nobodies said, plus this. I'll use this as an example.
The override you get from the 5 cities bonus overrides the 4 cities bonus - and as seen above, it also overrides the 3 cities bonus all at the same time, so it's redundant to have all of the amounts of cities in one override. All you need is the greatest integer that is lower than the amount of cities in the bonus in the override.

I hope that made sense!

Oh, well I already kinda did it with all the overrides... It won't matter much, will it?

About graphics, i personally think that when borders and connection will be fixed the map could be ready for a short sticky period and then moving to the FF.

That's awesome to hear. Sorry I've been so absent lately. I have tomorrow off so it'll give me a chance to get caught up and update.

[bigimg]http://img196.imageshack.us/img196/223/californiaupload.jpg[/bigimg]

[bigimg]http://img217.imageshack.us/img217/1298/californiauploadsmall.jpg[/bigimg]

Ok I finally got the time to work on this. Borders were cleaned up, connections were moved, and signatures were added.


Does any one know why I can't inspect the map in the Xml checker? The coordinates show up but when I hoover the curser over a territory it doesn't show it's neighbors?

*Yay for my having a my name on this map!*

Victor Sullivan wrote:*Yay for my having a my name on this map!*

Of course! Bison King gives credit where credit is due. Doing the XML is a big help for me because it shelters me from having to learn new skills.

The Bison King wrote:Does any one know why I can't inspect the map in the Xml checker? The coordinates show up but when I hoover the curser over a territory it doesn't show it's neighbors?

If you tested this http://www.fileden.com/files/2010/12/18 ... //Cali.xml, it's because there're some errors
XML Test results:

show

btw, stickied

Nobodies

Sorry for the double post, but i notice now that there's a difference between the main map and the minimap. The border between sierra nevada and mojave desert on the minimap must be fixed, specially because those two colors are the worst testing the map on vischeck

thenobodies80 wrote:Sorry for the double post, but i notice now that there's a difference between the main map and the minimap. The border between sierra nevada and mojave desert on the minimap must be fixed, specially because those two colors are the worst testing the map on vischeck

Done and Done:

[bigimg]http://img153.imageshack.us/img153/223/californiaupload.jpg[/bigimg]

[bigimg]http://img137.imageshack.us/img137/1298/californiauploadsmall.jpg[/bigimg]

Change all your Times New Roman fonts to the font on the map. Not the Hollywood font, but the other font.

Maybe use red stars like the one in the flag?

I liked the old logo and not sure why you ditched it... but meh. I can go either way.

Change all your Times New Roman fonts to the font on the map. Not the Hollywood font, but the other font.

I am done discussing fonts.

I liked the old logo and not sure why you ditched it... but meh. I can go either way.

Which one? the cat riding a rhino?

What's to discuss. Just change it to the map font because it looks cheap an unimaginative in Time New Roman.

And I liked the old logo with the mountain and the watermelons and all that. I thought that was pretty cool.

What's to discuss. Just change it to the map font because it looks cheap an unimaginative in Time New Roman.

It's not times new Roman and we already discussed it.

And I liked the old logo with the mountain and the watermelons and all that. I thought that was pretty cool.

Yeah it was kind of cool but I just couldn't really make it work for this.

Well whatever it is, it's awfully lame and I think the font on the map would be a better match.

A sans serif font might work better.

I'm fine with the current font though, as long as you get rid of that monotype corsiva from the title... Corsiva is so awful: it's not quite script, it's not quite ornamental... it's just something between and it really doesn't fit almost anything.

And TBK, just a hint... a mapmaker can't really say "I'm done with discussing topic X", as long as you are in graphics workshop all aspects of your map graphics are open to criticism... you know

Yeah, I agree with Helix on this one, the legend fonts can be improved, and "The Golden State" title I think is redundant. It would be cleaner and more attractive with just the "California."

The stars I can go either way with, I wouldn't mind seeing what a red star would look like; not unlike the star in your signature with the gold, or possibly a black border around it.

I guess I just don't see why every single font needs to be flashy and eye catching. My whole philosophy is that the map should be the big noticeable thing and that the legend should recede into the background, yet be easily reference and easy to read. I believe I have achieved this by using the "showy" fonts on the map and using more reserved utilitarian fonts for the legend.

The stars are fine as gold as well. It lends to the gold motif. (I did try them red though and I didn't think they looked very good)

I'm not getting rid of "the golden state of" but it will shush natty up about corsiva (honestly I don't know what Corsiva did to your family but I'm sorry for the pain it must have caused you ) I'll post another option as far as title goes.

[bigimg]http://img703.imageshack.us/img703/4963/californiauploadf.jpg[/bigimg]

I see you added a weird slant on the golden state text... at first I was like "eww, it looks way too unsymmetric" but actually it's not that bad, kinda grows on you... if you'd just move it to the right a bit so it's lined up with the main title... also, you should make it the same colour as the main title.

I guess I just don't see why every single font needs to be flashy and eye catching.

That's just it... corsiva tries to be "flashy and eye catching" but then it also tries to be "casual" at the same time, and the result is something that doesn't work, neither as a casual font nor an ornamental font.

Anyway, you could try a sans serif font for the legend. And maybe give the text a slight white glow, so it's easier to read over the colourful minimap.

I still think the legend and background leave a lot to be desired - the whole thing doesn't look like it gels together very well, and the legend (the text particularly) looks very unfinished.

MrBenn wrote:I still think the legend and background leave a lot to be desired - the whole thing doesn't look like it gels together very well, and the legend (the text particularly) looks very unfinished.

How about a live background. (Actual photo instead of the art look - like the Title/bridge/sunset. Expand it from that.

The palm tree doesn't really have a living tree feel to it at all.

[bigimg]http://img24.imageshack.us/img24/223/californiaupload.jpg[/bigimg]

[bigimg]http://img818.imageshack.us/img818/1298/californiauploadsmall.jpg[/bigimg]
I did change the header font, and added glows to the legend. I also increased the color intensity on the main map.

I guess I don't really agree with the comments about the legends background. It's not really supposed to be the focus and if I added more to it, it would look crowded and gaudy. Sort of like "less is more" in this instance. I mean there's already a lot going on.

How about a live background. (Actual photo instead of the art look - like the Title/bridge/sunset. Expand it from that.

This especially doesn't make sense to me because the background is made from photographs and you even acknowledge that in you're comment. Basically you said:

"Make the background live instead of art, like your background which is live instead of art"???

I thought the final step in Map Foundry would be all about logistics and game strategy, leading up to the Beta test. Instead, people are still quibbling about fonts and backgrounds and such. This California map is good enough -- let's try it out!