Conquer Club

DiM wrote:

yeti_c wrote:

DiM wrote:

yeti_c wrote:Hmmm - yeah the letters in the map do look a bit pixelly!?

Not sure how you'd fix it with that font though!

C.

i fixed the pixelization. see post above with the edited image.

Look at the N's

C.

press F5 to see the new images.

Hmmm - doh - I assumed I wouldn't've had that one cached! n/m

C.

yeti_c wrote:
Hmmm - doh - I assumed I wouldn't've had that one cached! n/m

C.

he he. so the pixelization is gone, right?

DiM wrote:

yeti_c wrote:
Hmmm - doh - I assumed I wouldn't've had that one cached! n/m

C.

he he. so the pixelization is gone, right?

Yeah.

C.

There a bit of sticky tape over lapping the red estate but its not see through.

If this is old white print would a tint of yellow to show age be something to consider.

gimil wrote:There a bit of sticky tape over lapping the red estate but its not see through.

If this is old white print would a tint of yellow to show age be something to consider.

solved the scotch tape transparency and made the paper older.

I prefer the newer, fresh paper. Who wants to play on out of date blueprints.

mibi wrote:I prefer the newer, fresh paper. Who wants to play on out of date blueprints.

gimil wants.

i too prefer the whiteprint because it's very crisp and readable.

Isnt the story behind this some kids making a risk map out of there dads old blueprint found in the loft?

I prefer the older one . .

I also prefer the older paper. It has more charm, in my opinion.

gimil wrote:Isnt the story behind this some kids making a risk map out of there dads old blueprint found in the loft?

I prefer the older one . .

old doesn't necessarily mean it's 50 years old. it can be just a blueprint from 5 years ago.

I'm not saying it's perfect (what map is?), but there's nothing more I really have to say on this one... since the current concerns seem to be primarily visual in nature let's stamp it.

oaktown wrote:I'm not saying it's perfect (what map is?), but there's nothing more I really have to say on this one... since the current concerns seem to be primarily visual in nature let's stamp it.

thanks oak.

The game play looks like it could be fun. I'll be interested on how it plays out later.

The graphics look beyond well suited for the map's theme. When the XML gets worked, we'll have to check to make sure everything fits properly, but I don't see that being so much a problem.

I think I prefer the newer paper...but perhaps a slight alteration of the older paper would suffice. I'd experiment with a few different options, and see which seems to be favored the most (perhaps by doing little blocks of 5X5).


--Andy

AndyDufresne wrote:The game play looks like it could be fun. I'll be interested on how it plays out later.

The graphics look beyond well suited for the map's theme. When the XML gets worked, we'll have to check to make sure everything fits properly, but I don't see that being so much a problem.

I think I prefer the newer paper...but perhaps a slight alteration of the older paper would suffice. I'd experiment with a few different options, and see which seems to be favored the most (perhaps by doing little blocks of 5X5).


--Andy

thanks for stopping by andy.
i too like the newer paper and it seems others like it too. gimil was the one that requested it to be old but frankly an old blueprint will never look or feel like an old treasure map that's why i believe the fresh feel is best suited.

v16
small and large with solved transparency for the sticky tape

i don't really want to make the paper look any older than it is for 2 reasons.
1. it isn't some kind of ancient treasure map it's just a simple 5 years old whiteprint
2. the coffee stains, the fingerprints, the creases, folds and curled corner are enough for the old and used feeling.

large

small


so i guess i only need gimil's stamp and we're off to final forge.

i'll get on with my part of the xml and then yeti_c will take over.

btw. i never thought about this but can lack put the images as png instead of jpg? this way the transparency will be kept.

Lack tends to convert to JPEG so that he can compress them to make the file size smaller. This is to help save as much bandwidth as possible.

gimil wrote:Lack tends to convert to JPEG so that he can compress them to make the file size smaller. This is to help save as much bandwidth as possible.

nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

anyway how about that graphics stamp?

reposting since i got the bottom page post

DiM wrote:v16
small and large with solved transparency for the sticky tape

i don't really want to make the paper look any older than it is for 2 reasons.
1. it isn't some kind of ancient treasure map it's just a simple 5 years old whiteprint
2. the coffee stains, the fingerprints, the creases, folds and curled corner are enough for the old and used feeling.

large

small


so i guess i only need gimil's stamp and we're off to final forge.

i'll get on with my part of the xml and then yeti_c will take over.

btw. i never thought about this but can lack put the images as png instead of jpg? this way the transparency will be kept.

DiM - I'm a shade concerned that your army numbers are going to be too big... especially as we're making the artificially too big as well...

C.

yeti_c wrote:DiM - I'm a shade concerned that your army numbers are going to be too big... especially as we're making the artificially too big as well...

C.

i already posted triple digit armies earlier in the thread and they fit well.

as for the artificially thing i have no idea what you're talking about? what's artificial?

1 small concern before I stamp it, see the whiteness of where the light hits the paper, could this be toned down a little. I have a feeling i may be irratable for some people. Escepially when palying speed games.

gimil wrote:1 small concern before I stamp it, see the whiteness of where the light hits the paper, could this be toned down a little. I have a feeling i may be irratable for some people. Escepially when palying speed games.

the whiteness is already dampened because i wanted everything to be readale. i don't think it is bright at all. compare this undampened image with the ones above.

Ok im happy with that:

I am very surprised about how little discussion there has been about the multiplier used for the bonuses etc...

How has the testing gone DiM?


My biggest concern is that the map will be unplayable without using auto-attack - every turn will just take too long, but that using ato-attack will be the incorrect thing to do a lot of the time.

I'll be OK because I use the Clickable Maps script and can limit the auto-attacking, but most won't.

gimil wrote:Ok im happy with that:

thanks. added to first post.

BENJIKAT IS DEAD wrote:I am very surprised about how little discussion there has been about the multiplier used for the bonuses etc...

How has the testing gone DiM?


My biggest concern is that the map will be unplayable without using auto-attack - every turn will just take too long, but that using ato-attack will be the incorrect thing to do a lot of the time.

I'll be OK because I use the Clickable Maps script and can limit the auto-attacking, but most won't.

yes there's wasn't much of a discussion on this matter because frankly without a testing area nobody can reach a proper conclusion and we can only talk in theory.

i have played a few games with my firends and a few games with myself and everything seemed fine. of course a few games are nothing compared to the thousands that will be played on CC but it's the most i can do.

this is from an earlier post:

yes at first my friends were also troubled by the idea and i noticed some had the first instinct to preserve troops to amass great armies while others went all ballistic from the start rampaging all they could. but in the end the best way to play was a normal way with a bit more aggression. sitting and building may get you a big army fast but that's big compared to normal maps because others that expand and get bonuses will get huge armies.

if after some games it turns out people are uncomfortable with this gameplay, based on suggestions i receive the multiplier will be increased decreased or even taken out completely leaving the map as a normal one.

and then the problem of auto attack remains. frankly i have nothing against it. i use auto attack all the time. but to prevent any problem that might arise i have opted for a 5 multiplier instead of the original 20. this should decrease any possible inconveniences when attacking.
also as i said above the map can be changed after games are played and people give feedback if it turns out the multiplier is bad.