Conquer Club

Well, moving forward. Here's what we know.

People still seem to want a color change. (A Majority It Seems)
WidowMakers doesn't wish to supply one.
We have no clear policy on how much of the art can change from the original map.

OK. Here we go.

I am posting this to let everyone know I am not going to change the colors from the original map. Here is a portion of the How to make a map Post:

1) Cartographers must be open to any advice and suggestions. 2) Be sure that if you do not implement said advice you must have logical reason for doing so. This rebuttal must be stated either by you, or argued by another Foundry poster who sees the drawbacks or shortcomings in said advice. 3) There will be no rebuttals of ‘It’s my map, let me do it my way.’

So based on that, here we go.

1) It was suggested that I change the color of the territories group to white. I did not like this. I wanted to keep the colors the way the original map was. However, I did make the changes since it is part of the process. Plus I really did not know how I would feel about the change until I did it.

There were then several other suggestions of changes so I made them as well. Overall there where 4 choices: My original based on the pre-vamp map and the 3 suggestion.

So #1 CHECK. I looked at other options.

2) Here are my reasons for keeping the colors from the original.

a) I personally feel the map looks better. Since when does the color of a territory depend on the location on the earth? Arctic was cited as an example but I am pretty sure the colors of the other territories do not represent the colors of the earth. Otherwise we would have green, brown and white.

b) I want to keep the colors from the original map.

c) This is not an aspect of gameplay. It is an aspect of color preference. Regardless of the colors of the territories (with the exception of making borders/names hard to read) the map will play the same.

d)A poll was started (I was not asked if I wanted a poll) and it showed that there was support for each style.

So #2 CHECK. I have stated my case to keep the colors with a logical response.

3) I did not say It’s my map, let me do it my way.’ See #2

So I will begin to work on the large version and make the border and text changes we made in the current small map.

WM

Thats too bad. White on top was looking sharp.

i like # 2 sully's and secound window and i like what you guys done with the graphics i love how its in sperical form definatly playing if it gets in great job v

went over dose with smilies but that's what it deserves

WidowMakers wrote:2) Here are my reasons for keeping the colors from the original.

a) I personally feel the map looks better. Since when does the color of a territory depend on the location on the earth? Arctic was cited as an example but I am pretty sure the colors of the other territories do not represent the colors of the earth. Otherwise we would have green, brown and white.

b) I want to keep the colors from the original map.

c) This is not an aspect of gameplay. It is an aspect of color preference. Regardless of the colors of the territories (with the exception of making borders/names hard to read) the map will play the same.

d)A poll was started (I was not asked if I wanted a poll) and it showed that there was support for each style.

So #2 CHECK. I have stated my case to keep the colors with a logical response.

i'm disappointed by your choice.
a. i feel the map looks worse with your choice. the white was very nice and crisp
b. i don't as they don't fit well with the new style
c. yes it will play the same even if you add little hearts and make the earth pink and put some poneys and unicorns on top but you won't do that would you?
d. there is support for ALL styles not specifically the one you chose so i don't really see this as an argument.

sorry if i'm perhaps too harsh but this is probably the first time i am really disappointed by a revamp and i think this is the first time i'm begining to feel sorry a map is being revamped. sorry but i won't play this one and i hope sometime in the future the revamps will be done as an optional choice where you can select what image to be displayed. the original or the revamp.

DiM wrote:i'm disappointed by your choice.
a. i feel the map looks worse with your choice. the white was very nice and crisp
b. i don't as they don't fit well with the new style
c. yes it will play the same even if you add little hearts and make the earth pink and put some poneys and unicorns on top but you won't do that would you?
d. there is support for ALL styles not specifically the one you chose so i don't really see this as an argument.

sorry if i'm perhaps too harsh but this is probably the first time i am really disappointed by a revamp and i think this is the first time i'm begining to feel sorry a map is being revamped.

I guess I don't understand why white up north is justified as "looking better" because the north is snowy. SO now explain eh yellow , green, cyan, and blue.

DiM, there are lots of things people have said about changing maps.

I wanted Portugal to have more texture. It was deemed not needed by the map maker and others. OK by me. My opinion.

I suggested that Eastern Front have some better lines and center the legend (heck I even did the small map to get the process moving again). Some of those items were fixed, the other s not. Oh well.

And I am sorry you don't like this revamp. There have been 5 I think and I have done 4 of them. Batting .750 against you is OK by me. The more maps I make, the less likely everyone is going to like them all.

I was trying to think and work outside the box. I feel I have achieved that. Some people may not like it but I need to be happy with my work. Just like you need to be happy with yours.

DiM wrote:sorry but i won't play this one and i hope sometime in the future the revamps will be done as an optional choice where you can select what image to be displayed. the original or the revamp.

I am sorry you won't play it because it does not look the way you like it. That is like saying you won't read a book because they changed the cover.

Anyway I think this would be a great idea to have multiple images. The only issue is how many versions does a map have?

WidowMakers wrote:

DiM wrote:.... i hope sometime in the future the revamps will be done as an optional choice where you can select what image to be displayed. the original or the revamp.

I think this would be a great idea. The only issue is how many versions does a map have?

as many as are produced. i really don't care if there are 10 versions of canada or 3 versions as long as i can pick the one i like best.

DiM wrote:

WidowMakers wrote:

DiM wrote:.... i hope sometime in the future the revamps will be done as an optional choice where you can select what image to be displayed. the original or the revamp.

I think this would be a great idea. The only issue is how many versions does a map have?

as many as are produced. i really don't care if there are 10 versions of canada or 3 versions as long as i can pick the one i like best.

The problem is who regulates the number and who approves them? In theroy everyone could make there own map and the foundry would lose it purpose.

You would spend all you time making AoR and I would revamp it so I could make it the way I want. Then others might like mine more and your would never get used. That could happen. That is why I like the idea but there are too any issues involved.

WM

WidowMakers wrote:

DiM wrote:

WidowMakers wrote:

DiM wrote:.... i hope sometime in the future the revamps will be done as an optional choice where you can select what image to be displayed. the original or the revamp.

I think this would be a great idea. The only issue is how many versions does a map have?

as many as are produced. i really don't care if there are 10 versions of canada or 3 versions as long as i can pick the one i like best.

The problem is who regulates the number and who approves them?

i already suggested this in the foundry revamp
but here it is:

anybody can do a revamp as long as he/she gets permission from the original cartographer and obeys the restrictions set by the cartographer. once permission is obtained the map goes through the foundry process as any other map. where it may pass or not. during the production time of that revamp or even after it is quenched somebody else can ask and obtain permission for the revamp and do it. and again the map will be put through the same foundry process.

this way each map can have as many versions as the foundry permits. i'm sure the foundry will do a fine job of keeping the number pretty low by refusing maps that are identical or poorly done. only really good ones will be chosen.

for example on canada i'd like to see the original, your version and i think 1 or 2 more from what was proposed.

and because we don't want to have 10 different canada maps displayed in the same place as the other maps the solution is really simple. on the start a game or game finder screen we'll see only 1 image of canada and when we click on it we'll have left-right arrows to scroll through the different versions. the versions can also be interchanged during a game by simply selecting the one we want from a few buttons placed below the large/small buttons.

this way i think we will have no more complaints about the various versions or because of the loss of the original version.

just like sometimes nostalgia kicks in and i start up and old videogame and enjoy it despite it's hideous graphics i also want to be able to start a game on an old and crappy looking map that brings back memories.

DiM wrote:

WidowMakers wrote:

DiM wrote:.... i hope sometime in the future the revamps will be done as an optional choice where you can select what image to be displayed. the original or the revamp.

I think this would be a great idea. The only issue is how many versions does a map have?

as many as are produced. i really don't care if there are 10 versions of canada or 3 versions as long as i can pick the one i like best.

And that works as long as there are absolutely NO changes other than graphics. Changing anything (attack routes, types of attacks or names of territories) would mean the old maps wouldn't work. But I think its a good idea to play on either version if they are the same. I know yahoo chess has an option to switch between a wood board or a green and white board, and this would be the same idea.

WM- Despite everyone calling white-in-the-north my idea, I am not entirely set on that design. For one thing, I think the image you created is too dark. The "white" blends with the dead territories and it darkens the whole map since its more of a medium gray. If you have the time I would like to see a whiter version, but I'm sure you've already played around with the colors so maybe that one just looked best to you.

I think I'd be happiest with white in the north, but I think keeping the original colors is fine as well. If a brighter white doesn't look better, than original colors is probably best since public opinion is split and the mapmaker just have a weighted input in such cases.

sully800 wrote:

DiM wrote:

WidowMakers wrote:

DiM wrote:.... i hope sometime in the future the revamps will be done as an optional choice where you can select what image to be displayed. the original or the revamp.

I think this would be a great idea. The only issue is how many versions does a map have?

as many as are produced. i really don't care if there are 10 versions of canada or 3 versions as long as i can pick the one i like best.

And that works as long as there are absolutely NO changes other than graphics. Changing anything (attack routes, types of attacks or names of territories) would mean the old maps wouldn't work. But I think its a good idea to play on either version if they are the same. I know yahoo chess has an option to switch between a wood board or a green and white board, and this would be the same idea.

of course nothing but graphics should be changed.

WidowMakers wrote:gimil (Yellow and White)

Wow this is pretty cool.

And that's from a canadian, Honestly I don't think the purple fits, I think the white does a great job of neutralizing the brightness of the blue you chose. It overall looks better and smoother.

reverend_kyle wrote:And that's from a canadian, Honestly I don't think the purple fits, I think the white does a great job of neutralizing the brightness of the blue you chose. It overall looks better and smoother.

yep i agree purple sucks white rules.

one more thing. why does the title say:

[Official] Canada Revamp - Pic page 24

we didn't even get to page 24

The purple makes the map look fruity.

Here is how it should be,

White for the frozen north territories.
Green for B.C. with its lush dense old growth forests.
Yellow for the prairies because they are.. well.. prairies and gas feilds.
Red for ontario because it has the most and densest population.
Blue for quebec because their flag is blue.
And Aqua for the Maritimes because its ocean going.

it all fits! but as soon as you throw a huge purple blog in there your in some serious WTF skittles territory.

We've had non-revamps in the past where the forum as a whole wanted a particular change, but the cartographer dug in their heels and resisted. Eventually, the cartographer wins. Every time, it seems. And that's fine, except now certain people who wanted what the cartographer did were happy before, and now they're not.

Like the colors or not, it seems inconsistent to knock WM for the major graphic changes and then tell him to change the colors, when he wants to keep them the same as the original. And we also need to keep in mind that the WM won the revamp contest. To a large degree the map has to remain faithful to THAT more than the original.


Either way, it seems that there needs to be a decision on who has the ultimate authority on a map - cartographer, CA's or the forum, although I don't think that should be hashed out in the midst of this (or any other) map thread.

I agree With Widow... Keep the colors... 1st of all the colors are only there to designate the difference between territorial zones... They are not a representation of the Vegetation or Climate or population or ETC. So it really doesn't matter what colors are used...SOOOO You might as well keep them faithful to the original map since SO many people played it and SO Many people argued about the revamp, and SO many people Like Widow's Version... Let him make the map and keep something of what it used to be

GOOD JOB WIDOW.... It is a great map

OK here is the newest version 14

In an effort to try and find some middle ground on the purple white issue. I tried to tone the purple down and make it more of a frosted purpley white.
Good? Bad? What?

But I got the actual XML done and here are the results
XML:http://www.fileden.com/files/2007/6/15/1180567/Canada_revamp_01.xml
Large


Small

I do like the Frosted Purple more so than the previous purple...I think I like it.


--Andy

good enough compromise.

and RK, i am canadian and i like the original

me too, that looks good

I think he's been more understanding of the issue then he needs to be.

So where are we now? Ready for FF? Anything else?

Has anyone noticed that "Fort Seven" should be "Fort Severn"? Or is that error some kind of inside joke left untouched on purpose?