Conquer Club

since I've left the Mapmaker's Guide post locked, this thread is for comments. It is obviously unfinished - there's at least one entire chapter missing - and other things require work. There are far more terms and definitions that should be included (feel free to suggest some) and I'd like to reorganize the XML section. But feedback will help drive the process,so please have at it!

If you can't find the guide, it's here:
viewtopic.php?f=127&t=81664

Announcement? It'd be viewed more there, I believe.

.44

the.killing.44 wrote:=D> Announcement? It'd be viewed more there, I believe.

I don't think it's quite announcement-ready... too many holes. We started it months ago and let it sit on the shelf all this time, so the fact that it is seeing the light of day is a big step.

maybe you should note that if you don't want to do the xml, there are people willing to do it.

mibi wrote:maybe you should note that if you don't want to do the xml, there are people willing to do it.

that sounds like a good idea, and maybe you could pm people and ask if you could put there names up, as examples of people who can do xml.

great job

tlane wrote:

mibi wrote:maybe you should note that if you don't want to do the xml, there are people willing to do it.

that sounds like a good idea, and maybe you could pm people and ask if you could put there names up, as examples of people who can do xml.

great job

Don't do that.

C.

oaktown, because i believe centering is part of the xml process. I'd like to see something about having to have two images Large and Small of the xml centered with the standard "88" numbers as part of the process BEFORE the xml stamp is issued.

cairnswk wrote:oaktown, because i believe centering is part of the xml process. I'd like to see something about having to have two images Large and Small of the xml centered with the standard "88" numbers as part of the process BEFORE the xml stamp is issued.

good catch... i hadn't really done much with the XML chapter other than copy/format the old XML guides, which never discussed army coordinates.

The XML section needs a lot of work, including descriptions of the various tools available.

As an addendum to cairns's comment, include that images with 888s are also necessary.
And a typo:

Also important is that if you put continents inside of continents you must but the inner continent by itself before the continent(s) you put it inside.

.44

I am guessing this is implied by

oaktown wrote:We started it months ago and let it sit on the shelf all this time,

but some of the names of the forums have changed, like foundry discussion and now there is a viewing gallery

just pointing it out
tlane

the.killing.44 wrote:As an addendum to cairns's comment, include that images with 888s are also necessary.
.44

Actually they are only necessary when the map is very crowded. If there is a possible overlap of names, borders or other "88", then the "888" test is required. It is on a map by map basis.

For instance I don't remember having to do "888" for the USA map pack, but I did need to do them for Midgard.

Well, that's what I get for listening to qwert .

qwert wrote:

888 needed?

Yes you must provide images who will show how 3 digit numbers standing on map. These is some old rule in MAp production. If they look good then you are very close to get XML stamp.

.44

edit: i'm still with benn below

WidowMakers wrote:

the.killing.44 wrote:As an addendum to cairns's comment, include that images with 888s are also necessary.
.44

Actually they are only necessary when the map is very crowded. If there is a possible overlap of names, borders or other "88", then the "888" test is required. It is on a map by map basis.

For instance I don't remember having to do "888" for the USA map pack, but I did need to do them for Midgard.

I always thought that 888s were required before Andy would quench a map?

suffice it to say that three digit numbers should be able to fit on a map without any clarity issues. I tend to check when I'm doing the army coordinates, so unless it is questionable I won't require mapmakers to post the image.

Let's just say it's good form to do so... but not expressly required.

yeti_c wrote:

tlane wrote:

mibi wrote:maybe you should note that if you don't want to do the xml, there are people willing to do it.

that sounds like a good idea, and maybe you could pm people and ask if you could put there names up, as examples of people who can do xml.

great job

Don't do that.

C.

yeti has enough people asking him without publicity

oaktown wrote:suffice it to say that three digit numbers should be able to fit on a map without any clarity issues. I tend to check when I'm doing the army coordinates, so unless it is questionable I won't require mapmakers to post the image.

Let's just say it's good form to do so... but not expressly required.

oaktown, i'd prefer to stick by the old method where 88 and 888 are required.
reason:
88 just tends show centering issues.
888 shows the neighbouring issues with overlaps on other army numbers, text, borders and impassbles.
a lot of players also play with BOB on, and some use the "colour indicators" r,g,b,y etc. this can actually throw a three digit army number out to four digits.
indeed as with WM, some maps probably do not require it, but i think it is a good "cover all" rule to have, that way any "overlaps" can be picked up in the process if the mapmaker has mis-judged a graphic placement.

needing to post those images is just busywork, cairns. they can easily be checked by the person or persons doing the XML check when they're also checking for centering issues and that the XML has no errors (syntax, border, or bonus related).


the XML tutorial should include links to the threads/downloads for the map assist by jota, widowmakers' xml spreadsheet, and mr benn's 88 cursor. these three tools make doing the XML a cinch.



the very last line of the "correct order" part of the XML says

Also important is that if you put continents inside of continents you must but the inner continent by itself before the continent(s) you put it inside.

but should say

Also important is that if you put continents inside of continents you must put the inner continent by itself before the continent(s) you put it inside.




When this is done is there going to be a guide to giving good feedback (I'm not volunteering).

cairnswk wrote:a lot of players also play with BOB on, and some use the "colour indicators" r,g,b,y etc.

Just to point out - Colour codes are actually part of the site these days - so 100% of people could use the colour codes... not just the BOB acolytes.

C.

cairnswk wrote:oaktown, i'd prefer to stick by the old method where 88 and 888 are required.

I don't think it is written anywhere that the mapmaker is "required" to show versions of their maps with 88s and 888s, is it? Like most other "rules" around here we've come up with this informally - why 888? Why not 555? Why not a two digit count with am "r" or "g" to demonstrate how the map would look with color codes, which is how I play every game?

The rule - which again I don't think is written - should get to the heart of the why we want mapmakers to show the 888s, not the minutiae of actually showing them; something like this:

Two digit army counts should be centered in army shadows if shadows are used, or in a logical and visually appealing position when army shadows are not being used. Three digit army counts should fit cleanly into the map and territories as much as possible. No map elements should interfere with the reading of two or three digit army counts. Mapmakers should provide evidence that their map conforms to these specifications.

It is certainly good form for a mapmaker to post their large and small maps with three digit counts, as it guarantees quality control. I think that we can say this without making it a hard and fast rule; strict rules lead to strict interpretation, which is not what we've been about around here. I don't mind asking a mapmaker to post such a file in the Forge so that more sets of eyes than just mine can look at a map on which three digit counts might be a problem. Likewise, I've stamped a maps in the Foundry that haven't posted such an image because it seemed pretty clear from the map that three digit counts wouldn't be a problem, and I was able to confirm that in about four minutes while I was checking the centering.

Most of our "rules" around here are really expectations that began as community agreements... might be time for a blue ribbon panel to figure out what all of these "rules" are.

oaktown wrote:

cairnswk wrote:oaktown, i'd prefer to stick by the old method where 88 and 888 are required.

I don't think it is written anywhere that the mapmaker is "required" to show versions of their maps with 88s and 888s, is it? Like most other "rules" around here we've come up with this informally - why 888? Why not 555? Why not a two digit count with am "r" or "g" to demonstrate how the map would look with color codes, which is how I play every game?

The rule - which again I don't think is written - should get to the heart of the why we want mapmakers to show the 888s, not the minutiae of actually showing them; something like this:
......

Most of our "rules" around here are really expectations that began as community agreements... might be time for a blue ribbon panel to figure out what all of these "rules" are.

88 give the best centering options in the army circle if you're using the army circle.
555 or r88 or b33 doesn't matter as along as it happens and someone can see the graphics.

is that not what we/you're doing here...trying to figure it all out. but let's not toss the baby out with the bath water simply because some of us are/appear to be too lazy to do the job properly because they're too busy.

edbeard wrote:needing to post those images is just busywork, cairns. they can easily be checked by the person or persons doing the XML check when they're also checking for centering issues and that the XML has no errors (syntax, border, or bonus related).
....

i always thought it was the mapmaker's job or whoever is doing the xml to sort these issues out (not the checker, the checker is simply there to check the darn stuff and mke sure it is OK), and it's not like we've got deadlines to meet ed....you've got all the time in the world to get these things done.

gees, i never thought i'd have to fight so hard to keep some old traditions alive.

yeti_c wrote:

cairnswk wrote:a lot of players also play with BOB on, and some use the "colour indicators" r,g,b,y etc.

Just to point out - Colour codes are actually part of the site these days - so 100% of people could use the colour codes... not just the BOB acolytes.

C.

i'm sorry C....but don't take it personally, it wasn't aimed at you.

cairnswk wrote:gees, i never thought i'd have to fight so hard to keep some old traditions alive.

If you make a tradition a rule, it is no longer seen as a tradition

If we want to go down the road of adding more rule this this one (which I am going to argue is a little petty), then all we do is add more red tape from things that are more or less common sense.

gimil wrote:

cairnswk wrote:gees, i never thought i'd have to fight so hard to keep some old traditions alive.

If you make a tradition a rule, it is no longer seen as a tradition
...

OK smartie pants. you know what i mean

gimil wrote:

cairnswk wrote:gees, i never thought i'd have to fight so hard to keep some old traditions alive.

If you make a tradition a rule, it is no longer seen as a tradition

If we want to go down the road of adding more rule this this one (which I am going to argue is a little petty), then all we do is add more red tape from things that are more or less common sense.

I hate red tape

cairnswk wrote:

yeti_c wrote:

cairnswk wrote:a lot of players also play with BOB on, and some use the "colour indicators" r,g,b,y etc.

Just to point out - Colour codes are actually part of the site these days - so 100% of people could use the colour codes... not just the BOB acolytes.

C.

i'm sorry C....but don't take it personally, it wasn't aimed at you.

No offense even considered!!

C>