WWII: Battle of Gazala [Quenched]

[cairnswk]

umm cairnswk.

if you eliminate the other players, then you do not need to take over the neutrals.

we've had this discussion before!

Yes i know we've had this discussion before...so do you have a suggestion as to how this can be achieved...

I don't think that taking Tobruk alone will be enough for either side - it would be too easy for anyone starting on the Allied side and too hard for anyone starting on the Axis side.

The neutrals are going to have to be taken by whoever is playing the germans otherwise they don't get those cont. bonuses.

It would seem silly to me to have all Axis plus Tobruk as the objective as the Allies got severely defeated in this battle. so it makes sense that all Allies positions are part of the objective.

I might need to speak with lackattack on this one, but your thoughts would be welcome on what might be a suitable objective (sorry if i have glossed over this before, but am more concentrated to work on this aspect now)

[edbeard]

well honestly, I don't know why there has to be an objective on this one


you've had other battle maps with no objective


but, maybe make it something like holding Tobruk, all the airfields, and all the towns

[cairnswk]

well honestly, I don't know why there has to be an objective on this one


you've had other battle maps with no objective


but, maybe make it something like holding Tobruk, all the airfields, and all the towns

Well there has to be Tobruk as the objective (to start with) because this is what this map is all about - the taking of tobruk by the Axis partners.

Perhaps this is what the objective actually has to be as a win condition.

So, ...maybe objective is:
All Axis Partner, Gazala and Tobruk.

[cairnswk]

Version 22

Objective set...as stated in both sizes.

[lanyards]

Hey, I am done with the XML, except for the objectives. I am not familiar with them so could someone please tell me how to use them?

Also, when you scaled the small map up to the large, it stretched some of the army ovals and boxes and circles out of a even number of pixels, so it is impossible to center the coordinates on the large map. But the coordinates are roughly centered so anyone can check it using the Kevin C checker thingy.

Link to the XML:
http://h1.ripway.com/lanyards/BattleofGazala.xml

A few mistakes I think I found:

1) Did you spell El Adem wrong? Because the Airfield right next to that town is called "Airfield El Adam", so shouldn't the town be called "El Adam"?

2)On the legend, where you are naming the things you need to hold for the "Axis Partners", you spelled "Airfield Rotonda Segnali" wrong. You spelled it "Airfield Rotondo Segnali".

3)All the text that says "Bir el Gobi" on the map, shouldn't the "e" in "el" be capitalized? Because you capitalized the "el" in Adam.

4)The territory naming text for "Airfield Rotonda Segnali", "Rommel", "Panzerarmee Africa", and "Italian Mot. Div." all have a lighter grayish color and the rest of the map the territory naming text is black.

5)The territory Italian 101st Mot. Division has a different army box than the rest of the Italians.

6)You forgot a space on the naming text for "SA 32nd Arm. Tank Brigade". Right after the "Arm." there needs to be a space.

7)You forgot a space on the naming text for "British 7th M. Brigade". Right after the "M." there needs to be a space.

Why should Bir el Gobi be able to be bombarded by Indian 7/7th Division? They are right next to each other.

9)In the bottom legend, it says that some tanks start with a neutral of 2. I thought you earlier said 1 neutral and everyone agreed?

Here are the XML coordinate tests for the small, the large test will be posted when army circle sizes are fixed:

Small 88:


Small 888:


Note: On the 3 digit test, some numbers overlap.


--lanyards

[yeti_c]

Hey, I am done with the XML, except for the objectives. I am not familiar with them so could someone please tell me how to use them?

1) Objectives work in the same way as Continents... (Without bonus, required or overrides though)

2) You may need to change your contienents...

Anything that was written <component> is now <territory>

Note you can also use <continent> in your components if your logic needs it!!

C.

[lanyards]

Hey, I am done with the XML, except for the objectives. I am not familiar with them so could someone please tell me how to use them?

1) Objectives work in the same way as Continents... (Without bonus, required or overrides though)

2) You may need to change your contienents...

Anything that was written <component> is now <territory>

Note you can also use <continent> in your components if your logic needs it!!

C.

Thanks, and I figured it had to be like that now with nested continents. When I put it in the XML validator, it wouldn't work if they still said <component>.

[lanyards]

Hmmm, I wounder if you can have nested continents in the objectives.

[yeti_c]

Hmmm, I wounder if you can have nested continents in the objectives.

You can.

C.

[lanyards]

Is this correct for objectives?

Code: Select all

   <objective>
      <name>All Axis Partners, Gazala, Gazala Line, and Tobruk</name>
      <components>
         <continent>Axis Partners</territory>
         <territory>Gazala</territory>
         <continent>Gazala Line</continent>
         <territory>Tobruk</territory>
      </components>
   </objective>

--lanyards

[yeti_c]

Is this correct for objectives?

Code: Select all

   <objective>
      <name>All Axis Partners, Gazala, Gazala Line, and Tobruk</name>
      <components>
         <continent>Axis Partners</territory>
         <territory>Gazala</territory>
         <continent>Gazala Line</continent>
         <territory>Tobruk</territory>
      </components>
   </objective>

--lanyards

Bang on - assuming the Axis Partners & Gazala Line are continents - and Gazala & Tobruk are territories...

One thing that the checker might not like - is the order - But try it and see...

C.

[cairnswk]

Further comments anyone?

[rebelman]

will there be any starting neutrals if yes can you outline your intentions in this regard (im asking this in the context of the objective)

[onbekende]

Is this correct for objectives?

Code: Select all

   <objective>
      <name>All Axis Partners, Gazala, Gazala Line, and Tobruk</name>
      <components>
         <continent>Axis Partners</territory>
         <territory>Gazala</territory>
         <continent>Gazala Line</continent>
         <territory>Tobruk</territory>
      </components>
   </objective>

--lanyards

Bang on - assuming the Axis Partners & Gazala Line are continents - and Gazala & Tobruk are territories...

One thing that the checker might not like - is the order - But try it and see...

C.

1 thingy, needs to be continent after Axis Partners

[cairnswk]

will there be any starting neutrals if yes can you outline your intentions in this regard (im asking this in the context of the objective)

the neutral positions are written on the map.

[cairnswk]

Is this correct for objectives?

Code: Select all

   <objective>
      <name>All Axis Partners, Gazala, Gazala Line, and Tobruk</name>
      <components>
         <continent>Axis Partners</territory>
         <territory>Gazala</territory>
         <continent>Gazala Line</continent>
         <territory>Tobruk</territory>
      </components>
   </objective>

--lanyards

Bang on - assuming the Axis Partners & Gazala Line are continents - and Gazala & Tobruk are territories...

One thing that the checker might not like - is the order - But try it and see...

C.

1 thingy, needs to be continent after Axis Partners

Agreed!

[lanyards]

Hey, I am done with the XML, except for the objectives. I am not familiar with them so could someone please tell me how to use them?

Also, when you scaled the small map up to the large, it stretched some of the army ovals and boxes and circles out of a even number of pixels, so it is impossible to center the coordinates on the large map. But the coordinates are roughly centered so anyone can check it using the Kevin C checker thingy.

Link to the XML:
http://h1.ripway.com/lanyards/BattleofGazala.xml

A few mistakes I think I found:

1) Did you spell El Adem wrong? Because the Airfield right next to that town is called "Airfield El Adam", so shouldn't the town be called "El Adam"?

2)On the legend, where you are naming the things you need to hold for the "Axis Partners", you spelled "Airfield Rotonda Segnali" wrong. You spelled it "Airfield Rotondo Segnali".

3)All the text that says "Bir el Gobi" on the map, shouldn't the "e" in "el" be capitalized? Because you capitalized the "el" in Adam.

4)The territory naming text for "Airfield Rotonda Segnali", "Rommel", "Panzerarmee Africa", and "Italian Mot. Div." all have a lighter grayish color and the rest of the map the territory naming text is black.

5)The territory Italian 101st Mot. Division has a different army box than the rest of the Italians.

6)You forgot a space on the naming text for "SA 32nd Arm. Tank Brigade". Right after the "Arm." there needs to be a space.

7)You forgot a space on the naming text for "British 7th M. Brigade". Right after the "M." there needs to be a space.

Why should Bir el Gobi be able to be bombarded by Indian 7/7th Division? They are right next to each other.

9)In the bottom legend, it says that some tanks start with a neutral of 2. I thought you earlier said 1 neutral and everyone agreed?

Here are the XML coordinate tests for the small, the large test will be posted when army circle sizes are fixed:

Small 88:


Small 888:


Note: On the 3 digit test, some numbers overlap.


--lanyards

I guess this wasn't seen or something because I don't think any of them were answered or fixed in the last update. Just check the mistakes I found.

--lanyards

[cairnswk]

Hey, I am done with the XML, except for the objectives. I am not familiar with them so could someone please tell me how to use them?

Also, when you scaled the small map up to the large, it stretched some of the army ovals and boxes and circles out of a even number of pixels, so it is impossible to center the coordinates on the large map. But the coordinates are roughly centered so anyone can check it using the Kevin C checker thingy.

Cool, lanyards, this happens with scaling anyway, so when i split the maps into two single units, then i have to re-do all the large boxes etc anyway, so just bare with this aspect for now.


Link to the XML:
http://h1.ripway.com/lanyards/BattleofGazala.xml

A few mistakes I think I found:

1) Did you spell El Adem wrong? Because the Airfield right next to that town is called "Airfield El Adam", so shouldn't the town be called "El Adam"?

Correct spelling is El Adem. Fixed.

2)On the legend, where you are naming the things you need to hold for the "Axis Partners", you spelled "Airfield Rotonda Segnali" wrong. You spelled it "Airfield Rotondo Segnali".

Fixed.

3)All the text that says "Bir el Gobi" on the map, shouldn't the "e" in "el" be capitalized? Because you capitalized the "el" in Adam.

No, the El in El Adem is at the beginning of the town name and therefore gets capitalised. The el in Bir el Gobi is in the middle therefore doesn't get capitalised.

4)The territory naming text for "Airfield Rotonda Segnali", "Rommel", "Panzerarmee Africa", and "Italian Mot. Div." all have a lighter grayish color and the rest of the map the territory naming text is black.

Fixed, good pickup.

5)The territory Italian 101st Mot. Division has a different army box than the rest of the Italians.

Fixed.

6)You forgot a space on the naming text for "SA 32nd Arm. Tank Brigade". Right after the "Arm." there needs to be a space.

Fixed.

7)You forgot a space on the naming text for "British 7th M. Brigade". Right after the "M." there needs to be a space.

Fixed.

8)Why should Bir el Gobi be able to be bombarded by Indian 7/7th Division? They are right next to each other.

Removed.

9)In the bottom legend, it says that some tanks start with a neutral of 2. I thought you earlier said 1 neutral and everyone agreed?

1 is correct. Fixed.

Note: On the 3 digit test, some numbers overlap.
--lanyards

OK, some coordinate changes made to those thate overlap, and text re-aligned where necessary. See how this goes.

Large map size will be 750x688

[cairnswk]

Lanyards can you post the xml link please, i assume you have it done as you have triple 8s generated.

Version 24....added some small packets of land relief.

[DiM]

the graphics are top notch except for 2 minor issues

first the land mines. they should be dark green camouflage or desert camouflage not purple. as they are they don't look too pretty because they draw your attention away. so i think a brown green thing would work better.

second, each arrow on the map has a white tail. why? i mean i love the way the tan trails blend into the arrows but that bit of white spoils the effect.

[yeti_c]

Thirdly - the mines on the smaller map are much easier to distinguish than the ones on the larger map.

C.

[cairnswk]

that map looks kick ass. can't wait to thump you and lack on it!-0

[cairnswk]

the graphics are top notch except for 2 minor issues

first the land mines. they should be dark green camouflage or desert camouflage not purple. as they are they don't look too pretty because they draw your attention away. so i think a brown green thing would work better.

second, each arrow on the map has a white tail. why? i mean i love the way the tan trails blend into the arrows but that bit of white spoils the effect.

Done!

Thirdly - the mines on the smaller map are much easier to distinguish than the ones on the larger map.

And Done!

Version 25

[edbeard]

don't you think it's confusing that the background of the Cauldron on the legend is the same colour as the Gazala line on the map?

And, vice versa


I realize the names help distinguish this, but still. It seems like an unnecessary possible confusion.


I know why you have the colours that way on the legend though. Gives a bit of contrast. At least that's my impression.

[cairnswk]

don't you think it's confusing that the background of the Cauldron on the legend is the same colour as the Gazala line on the map?

And, vice versa


I realize the names help distinguish this, but still. It seems like an unnecessary possible confusion.


I know why you have the colours that way on the legend though. Gives a bit of contrast. At least that's my impression.

Actually edbeard, in don't find anything wrong with it.
In fact, and don't take offense, i find that the number of people out there who don't read instructions, and can't distinguish certain things on maps....i wonder if there is a totally dislexic generation raoming about that are simply too lazy to figure some things out for themselves without having everything spelled out for them in black and white when real estate is limited.

You already know the issues that have been raised by waterloo, just before i posted this, someone PMed em to say "what contintent is waterloo in"

I just about bloodywell give in.

However, i will change them around just for you.