1982 [Quenched]

koontz1973 · Post by **koontz1973** » Mon Jan 23, 2012 2:26 pm

Thanks isaiah, another piece of information that will never leave me.

But in all honesty, it is nice to get official names for splodges.

thehippo8 · Post by **thehippo8** » Mon Jan 23, 2012 3:32 pm

If you liked Gimil, you'll love me. Now that the green is toned down do you think you could make the demarkation between the regions a bit darker so they stand out better? I see no value in dicking with the shading of the regions but that may be better. Frankly I see the regions clearly so I'll leave this to your discretion!!

koontz1973 · Post by **koontz1973** » Tue Jan 24, 2012 12:21 am

There you go hippo. Like the radar green mountains, I have adjusted the colours a tad. Not a lot, but a tad. Each bonus region has a different number / thickness of territ line between any 2 / a distinct name that is used with all territs inside said bonus. Pretty sure they can see them.

[bigimg]http://img684.imageshack.us/img684/6751/1982l.png[/bigimg][bigimg]http://img855.imageshack.us/img855/3006/1982s.png[/bigimg]

thehippo8 · Post by **thehippo8** » Tue Jan 24, 2012 1:07 am

Supercalifragalisticexpialadocious!

koontz1973 · Post by **koontz1973** » Tue Jan 24, 2012 1:08 am

thehippo8 wrote:Supercalifragalisticexpialadocious!

natty dread · Post by **natty dread** » Tue Jan 24, 2012 1:09 am

On the borders between 45c 5, 45c 6 and 6mi 1 there's a small bit jutting out on the Argentine side, like the vertical border is a bit too long... line goes over the lines.

Yes, I notice these things.

pamoa · Post by **pamoa** » Tue Jan 24, 2012 2:35 am

maybe the area behind army number in landing point could be all "white"
so it can't be confused with land behind

koontz1973 · Post by **koontz1973** » Tue Jan 24, 2012 2:37 am

natty_dread wrote:On the borders between 45c 5, 45c 6 and 6mi 1 there's a small bit jutting out on the Argentine side, like the vertical border is a bit too long... line goes over the lines.

Yes, I notice these things.

will edit as soon as I am at home.

koontz1973 · Post by **koontz1973** » Tue Jan 24, 2012 2:40 am

pamoa wrote:maybe the area behind army number in landing point could be all "white"
so it can't be confused with land behind

I take it you mean the LZ's and not the landing points. As for the all white, I would be against it as there is a border, it is a different shade and the white would look garish, with the white along side the british name glow. Will have a look tonight though to see if it would work.

pamoa · Post by **pamoa** » Tue Jan 24, 2012 6:33 am

koontz1973 wrote:
pamoa wrote:maybe the area behind army number in landing point could be all "white"
so it can't be confused with land behind
I take it you mean the LZ's and not the landing points.
As for the all white, I would be against it as there is a border, it is a different shade and the white would look garish,
with the white along side the british name glow. Will have a look tonight though to see if it would work.

yes LZ's
I said this because of the two British LZ's
which borders almost disappear

koontz1973 · Post by **koontz1973** » Tue Jan 24, 2012 12:22 pm

Removed offending territ line.
The town border is now black. The white as I thought was too garish but the black line going around distinguishes it from the region.
[bigimg]http://img834.imageshack.us/img834/6751/1982l.png[/bigimg]
[bigimg]http://img810.imageshack.us/img810/3006/1982s.png[/bigimg]

J_Indr · Post by **J_Indr** » Tue Jan 24, 2012 12:28 pm

I know the arrow issue had been here before, but I still think that the arrow between HMS Sheffield and 1Bn5 is almost invisible (and especially more so on the small map).

Could you maybe end the 1Bn6 peninsula further to the south? I just think that the clarity of this connection is more important than geographical accuracy.

koontz1973 · Post by **koontz1973** » Tue Jan 24, 2012 12:41 pm

I see no real reason to do this. The arrow is very dark on a light background and is more than visible. To say to move part of the light background south and replace it with the light sea background is, in reality of little consequence. If it causes problems then I will do it but I cannot see any other reason to change the layout right now.

koontz1973 · Post by **koontz1973** » Tue Jan 24, 2012 1:22 pm

Did the arrow/land anyway so we can get moving now?
[bigimg]http://img855.imageshack.us/img855/6751/1982l.png[/bigimg]
[bigimg]http://img805.imageshack.us/img805/3006/1982s.png[/bigimg]

J_Indr · Post by **J_Indr** » Tue Jan 24, 2012 1:35 pm

This one's absolutely perfect. =D>

I mean, if I am the only one who thinks that the arrow was an issue, feel free to go back. But, I think that for the sake of easy visibility, the second version is better.

koontz1973 · Post by **koontz1973** » Tue Jan 24, 2012 1:42 pm

Not a problem. If one sees it as a problem wit the few that come here, there will be so many more in the end. Best to do it now than later.

thehippo8 · Post by **thehippo8** » Tue Jan 24, 2012 2:52 pm

From an image perspective the new darkened arrow counter-balances the darker ARA San Luis - that is to say, good work!

pamoa · Post by **pamoa** » Wed Jan 25, 2012 2:47 am

black border for LZ's work good
ALZ2 border incomplete

koontz1973 · Post by **koontz1973** » Wed Jan 25, 2012 1:11 pm

Thanks pamoa for spotting that.
New large, same small.
[bigimg]http://img534.imageshack.us/img534/6751/1982l.png[/bigimg]
[bigimg]http://img805.imageshack.us/img805/3006/1982s.png[/bigimg]

koontz1973 · Post by **koontz1973** » Sun Feb 05, 2012 10:25 am

Not one to push, but last call was 16 days ago.

natty dread · Post by **natty dread** » Sun Feb 05, 2012 11:43 am

On the helicopter, put the british flag to the lower right corner instead of left. That way you'll have the numbers in consistent positions.

Also, try to improve the plane numbers on the small version a bit. They're a little smudgy, especially on the british side.

koontz1973 · Post by **koontz1973** » Sun Feb 05, 2012 12:17 pm

Fixed, same question though.

[bigimg]http://i1050.photobucket.com/albums/s410/koontz1973/1982L-2.png[/bigimg]
[bigimg]http://i1050.photobucket.com/albums/s410/koontz1973/1982S.png[/bigimg]

RedBaron0 · Post by **RedBaron0** » Tue Feb 07, 2012 3:55 am

Sorry for the delay, you're good to go.

koontz1973 · Post by **koontz1973** » Tue Feb 07, 2012 4:14 am

RedBaron0 wrote:Sorry for the delay, you're good to go.

Thanks RedBaron0. No problem.

Should be good to go with the xml today or tomorrow.

koontz1973 · Post by **koontz1973** » Tue Feb 07, 2012 7:38 am

Large869/833.
[bigimg]http://i1050.photobucket.com/albums/s410/koontz1973/1982L-2.png[/bigimg]
Small670/642
[bigimg]http://i1050.photobucket.com/albums/s410/koontz1973/1982S.png[/bigimg]
xml
http://www.fileden.com/files/2012/1/27/3255536//Falklandswar.xml
Neutral starts.
[bigimg]http://i1050.photobucket.com/albums/s410/koontz1973/1982S-1.png[/bigimg]

1982 [Quenched]

Re: 1982 [23/1] Page 1 & 25

Re: 1982 [23/1] Page 1 & 25

Re: 1982 [23/1] Page 1 & 25

Re: 1982 [24/1] Page 1 & 26

Re: 1982 [24/1] Page 1 & 26

Re: 1982 [24/1] Page 1 & 26

Re: 1982 [24/1] Page 1 & 26

Re: 1982 [24/1] Page 1 & 26

Re: 1982 [24/1] Page 1 & 26

Re: 1982 [24/1] Page 1 & 26

Re: 1982 [24/1] Page 1 & 26

Re: 1982 [24/1] Page 1 & 26

Re: 1982 [24/1] Page 1 & 26

Re: 1982 [24/1] Page 1 & 26

Re: 1982 [24/1] Page 1 & 26

Re: 1982 [24/1] Page 1 & 26

Re: 1982 [24/1] Page 1 & 26

Re: 1982 [24/1] Page 1 & 26

Re: 1982 [24/1] Page 1 & 26

Re: 1982 [25/1] Page 1 & 27

Re: 1982 [25/1] Page 1 & 27

Re: 1982 [25/1] Page 1 & 27

Re: 1982 [25/1] Page 1 & 27

Re: 1982 [25/1] Page 1 & 27

Re: 1982 [25/1] Page 1 & 27