Conquer Club

pink is kicking some major ass in that game

White and Black 30% are much better than the new update. I still prefer the old classic though. The names and the army circles have been moved around and since i am the only one who doesn't like it, it looks like they're here to stay. I understand that the army circles had to be shuffled around so that the names could be seen better, but i much prefer it with the circles centered in the territories and the names behind them. Oh well... you can't have everything. I'm looking forward to playing on classic again... without the blinding dots

Btw.... this must be the most people that have voted on a single poll at cc, right? 810 votes...

whats the difference?

I went to vote, then realised that due to my relatively good eyesight - I'm not colourblind, and I can see the map clearly - I'm inherently biased; I'll choose what I personally think is the prettiest, ignoring the very important concern of helping people with poor eyesight to play.

Then I read a forum post which got me thinking, about templates.

This issue about reading numbers can't be map specific; other (although possibly less popular) maps must suffer from the same problem. It seems unfeasible to me to try and maximise both visibility AND beauty in every map, especially since both are going to be subjective issues, specific to the user.

Why not include, as part of user account information, a way to specify which shadow you prefer? This could be used by all maps, since all maps must have some way to represent troop information. You could include an extra option, "default", which lets the map artist decide. Ideally, you would instead include this for all maps, so I could have different schemes for different maps, but that would take a bit more work.

Meantime, I'm going to vote selfishly in the poll, and hope that visibility will take care of itself.

Edit: Would now be a good time to raise other concerns? I'd also like control over the font; I for one have difficulty distinguishing e.g. "3" and "8" in Classic's current font. While we're at it, control over font colours would be nice too; orange and yellow, and grey and white are too similar right now for my taste. Again, these are very subjective things, so I'd prefer personal control over my scheme to an overall change that affects everyone.

It looks like white 30% is going to win. I have difficulties taking information from the map with just a quick scan of it still... None of the options are as good as the old classic.

WHITE STINKS WHAT ARE YOU PPL LOOKING AT IT MAKES IT CONFUSING BLACK 40% is perfect its a lil shadow it's perfect press that these ppl are crazy who want white

old classic way bettr

lackattack wrote:... because the old Classic was black 60%

Hmm. I picked Black 40% - I was close!

Maybe I haven't been playing long enough to have become as attached to the old classic map as some of you are, but I like the change to white. It is much easier to read the numbers on white.

My vote: White 40

I just noticed that you can vote multiple times. These Results Could be Scewed. Sorry to be the Bearer of Bad News.

Maybe have 2 options for classic?
the original original
And whatever gets chosen here?

Just want to say thanks for putting this up for a vote.
I like no shadows or white 30%.

Senfive wrote:I just noticed that you can vote multiple times. These Results Could be Scewed. Sorry to be the Bearer of Bad News.

That's not true. I just tested it, and it won't accept repeats.

However, a voting system is definitely an inaccurate representation of the opinions of the people who play here, since it is a sure thing that not everyone is voting. Some of the people who play here are not even aware of the voting process, I'm sure. Therefore, it is definitely a skewed system for determining the look of the new map, and is not representative of all the people who play here.

white 60 looks PIMP

KLOBBER wrote:

Senfive wrote:I just noticed that you can vote multiple times. These Results Could be Scewed. Sorry to be the Bearer of Bad News.

That's not true. I just tested it, and it won't accept repeats.

However, a voting system is definitely an inaccurate representation of the opinions of the people who play here, since it is a sure thing that not everyone is voting. Some of the people who play here are not even aware of the voting process, I'm sure. Therefore, it is definitely a skewed system for determining the look of the new map, and is not representative of all the people who play here.

Dude... there's an announcement at the top of the MyGames page about it! In less than a day, we've had 200 votes! I'd say people are noticing...

white is horrible it hurts the eyes and is to bright does not highlight the numbers well bad choice .Please go back

InkL0sed wrote:

KLOBBER wrote:

Senfive wrote:I just noticed that you can vote multiple times. These Results Could be Scewed. Sorry to be the Bearer of Bad News.

That's not true. I just tested it, and it won't accept repeats.

However, a voting system is definitely an inaccurate representation of the opinions of the people who play here, since it is a sure thing that not everyone is voting. Some of the people who play here are not even aware of the voting process, I'm sure. Therefore, it is definitely a skewed system for determining the look of the new map, and is not representative of all the people who play here.

Dude... there's an announcement at the top of the MyGames page about it! In less than a day, we've had 200 votes! I'd say people are noticing...

Dude, you state what everyone in this forum already knows, and is 100% irrelevant to my point. Thank you for stating the obvious and the irrelevant so well, and having no discernible point.

The only thing worse than 60% white are the top two vote getters: white 30% and no shadows. I better get my petition ready

Since alot of people aren't going to be happy either way....
Maybe have 2 options for classic?
the original original
And whatever gets chosen here?
Then everyone is happy!

black 60 colors stand out better... I would not go crazy over any others (super disappointed or super pleased), I think no shadows don't look that good either...

Senfive wrote:I just noticed that you can vote multiple times. These Results Could be Scewed. Sorry to be the Bearer of Bad News.

Not true. The poll options allow you to change your vote. So it appears like you can keep voting for the same option, but it will only count if you change your vote. The new pick will go up by 1 vote, while your original pick will go down.

fer chrissake you don't even need army shadows aslong as the terrain supports it. Is it really necessary to have a big black hole right under the army digit in NW territories?

First, Thank you for listening...
However...

Why is there not an option to "Leave the map the way it was"???

At least you are looking for a popular solution. Sadly I still do not think there should be a need for a "Solution".

If someone is colorblind then they can use the letters. There seems no need to make all these changes except that there has been months spent on it. Time wasted I feel and not a reason in itself to change.


Edit:
The whining I have seen throughout all of the forum posts from the people who live in the Cartography forum amazes me. I am having a hard time understanding how self-important they are. leave the original alone, fix the messes you have already spewed out! This one did not need your hand...

Like many have said before... Do you really want this entire community telling you what they think of all of your little projects, every day???

KLOBBER wrote:

Senfive wrote:I just noticed that you can vote multiple times. These Results Could be Scewed. Sorry to be the Bearer of Bad News.

That's not true. I just tested it, and it won't accept repeats.

However, a voting system is definitely an inaccurate representation of the opinions of the people who play here, since it is a sure thing that not everyone is voting. Some of the people who play here are not even aware of the voting process, I'm sure. Therefore, it is definitely a skewed system for determining the look of the new map, and is not representative of all the people who play here.

By that logic, we shouldn't listen to anything anyone says because it will never involve everyone and will always come from a biased and motivated (thus skewed) perspective.

but, you are right, and by that same token, the shouts for "it sucks change it back" are just as inaccurate. People always tend to voice their opinion more when they are negatively affected than when positively affected.

We have never based anything purely on voting, we take comments, private consultation, and super duper veto power into consideration as well.

That being said, I'm pretty sure everyone who plays here is aware of the voting process - seeing as it says "vote here, now" at the top of the my games page...which everyone here sees I promise you

Oh, and be nicer when people reply to you (especially when they are pointing out where you made a mistake which makes you look like a bit of an idiot )

Have a good one
Twill

KLOBBER wrote:

Senfive wrote:I just noticed that you can vote multiple times. These Results Could be Scewed. Sorry to be the Bearer of Bad News.

That's not true. I just tested it, and it won't accept repeats.

However, a voting system is definitely an inaccurate representation of the opinions of the people who play here, since it is a sure thing that not everyone is voting. Some of the people who play here are not even aware of the voting process, I'm sure. Therefore, it is definitely a skewed system for determining the look of the new map, and is not representative of all the people who play here.

Though I agree with you that the vote is technically inaccurate; there is only so much the site can do to direct its users to the poll. Perfection is impossible. Possibly a suggestion to strengthen the votes? Forgive me for my next suggestion, as ignorance of the map system and site as a whole leads me to the following idea: Make the opacity an option for each individual player...kind of like the color code option.

1 cent...the other cent is coming...somewhere...not necessarily soon