world 2.2

miniwally · Post by **miniwally** » Mon Mar 16, 2009 3:19 am

porkenbeans wrote:Or maybe change the whole border layout and call it World 2109 A.D.
Then we can create our own countries and borders to represent a world 100 years from now.

Or call it World 1000 B.C. We can then represent all the earths early tribes of man.

no lets keep with original idea

john9blue · Post by **john9blue** » Mon Mar 16, 2009 3:59 am

porkenbeans wrote:Or maybe change the whole border layout and call it World 2109 A.D.
Then we can create our own countries and borders to represent a world 100 years from now.

That might get out of hand...

porkenbeans · Post by **porkenbeans** » Mon Mar 16, 2009 5:44 am

I don't know, both options give us the flexibility of creating our own borders. Which means that we can control the sizes of the countries. It also separates us far enough from 2.1, that it becomes a whole new map in itself. This I am sure would bring more supporters to this project.
We can even go for the most territories of any CC map.

I have a feeling that the foundry will will have a more positive stance as well.

ustus · Post by **ustus** » Mon Mar 16, 2009 8:33 am

personally, i think either idea (1000 B.C. or AD 2109) could make a pretty sweet map, and either would allow you to make the terits as large or small as you want. However, either is a tangent from what we have been aiming at. John9Blue, when i saw your idea another occurred to me which would allow us to not have the alphabetical listing of countries. personally, i think the alphabetical listing will make game play very very difficult. i think it's best to stick with something that gives all of a country's information in one area I'm thinking a rectangle that displays name, army number, continent, and sub continent. The cont and sub cont would be abbreviations and the name would be across the top of the big rectangle. I'll throw something together in Paint later today - classes from 10 to 5 30 today, but one's a CAD class, so i might get it done in there...

umm... I'd also like to get a map of my own started at some time... so... if i have enough time, on wed or thurs i may start the 1000 B.C. map... sounds like a really interesting idea to me. Sorry, Pork, but i have just enough background in Photoshop that i would like to do the graphics myself... unless you want to run with the idea...

miniwally · Post by **miniwally** » Mon Mar 16, 2009 1:47 pm

:'( i want a world map

ustus · Post by **ustus** » Mon Mar 16, 2009 3:20 pm

miniwally wrote::'( i want a world map

me too...

SO LET'S MAKE ONE!!!

ustus · Post by **ustus** » Mon Mar 16, 2009 3:44 pm

I've made Switzerland's placard for the map, but idk how to paste it here. I just want to make it available for whoever it is that makes the map, or even for all of you to say "i like this about it, i don't like that about it" (preferably in that order, that order makes me happier

)...

any help would be grand... PM or post, either works

miniwally · Post by **miniwally** » Mon Mar 16, 2009 3:50 pm

put it on photobucket then post img link here

ustus · Post by **ustus** » Mon Mar 16, 2009 4:16 pm

thanks miniwally

http://s677.photobucket.com/albums/vv13 ... lacard.jpg

that's what i've done, i'm thinking the background and country color match the actual map, the continent and sub continent each have a designated color.

now, how do i display it on the page? i can only list it as a link.... sorry for being so igorant

john9blue · Post by **john9blue** » Mon Mar 16, 2009 4:32 pm

ustus wrote:thanks miniwally

http://s677.photobucket.com/albums/vv13 ... lacard.jpg

that's what i've done, i'm thinking the background and country color match the actual map, the continent and sub continent each have a designated color.

now, how do i display it on the page? i can only list it as a link.... sorry for being so igorant

Nice, but that's too big imo. I made them the absolute smallest size possible and could barely fit the west African coastline.

To display it, you need to use HTML tags. Put [img]and[/img] around the link, or if it's a big image, put

Click image to enlarge.

. Quote someone's reply who's posted an image to see what I mean.

Although, the link you posted wasn't strictly an image, it was a link to an album page. I use http://www.imageshack.us for posting images.

miniwally · Post by **miniwally** » Mon Mar 16, 2009 5:01 pm

Click image to enlarge.

There anyway can't we use john's idea i'd guess pork could make it look nicer

ustus · Post by **ustus** » Mon Mar 16, 2009 5:49 pm

well, originally i thought this WAS john's idea... but from what he said last time he posted, he's just thinking of abbreviating and putting the army circles somewhere else on the map... i think that idea would not work out so well, not because it wouldn't look pretty, but because it would be confusing. a lot of cross referencing to see what can attack what which has how many troops... not as fun as just following a line to a list of all the information you could possibly need about a terit.

just my oppinion though, and this won't be my map.

john9blue · Post by **john9blue** » Mon Mar 16, 2009 5:52 pm

Well we could do it like Rail USA/Europe, where the country's name isn't spelled out and a 3 letter abbreviation is given. That would save space. Damn my not having Photoshop...

ustus · Post by **ustus** » Mon Mar 16, 2009 6:29 pm

sorry john, photoshop rocks...

anyway, the idea of not spelling out the name could be used to save space, if necesary

it would just be better to spell out the names wherever possible to eliminate confusion. I'm thinking from a purely aesthetic sense here, as far as the game's concerned having USA attack CAN works fine, or GRM attacking POL as seen in WWII... some names end up working quite nicely, such as USA or PRC, and RUS, but i don't think the abbreviation idea looks nearly so nice as a flowing script artistically depicting the name of the terit. and no, i'm not just pushing this cuz i want my idea used. remember, i thought it was John's idea at first...

john9blue · Post by **john9blue** » Mon Mar 16, 2009 6:32 pm

Lol, I meant that I don't have access to Photoshop right now. I will in a week.

Here is a GIMP'ed version of what I was sort of going for (two Angola's, idk what's up with that). Like Rail USA/Europe, the territory names will be ANG Angola, EGN Equitorial Guinea, etc.. This is the strategy that combines efficiency with ease of use.

ustus · Post by **ustus** » Mon Mar 16, 2009 7:10 pm

hmm... that could work nicely, i like the way it looks. Maybe add a little room for the color code so we can have a 4 or 5 letter abbreviation... And let's find some better colors for the real version, that looks like something out of a children's atlas.

i say that harshly figuring you were already planning on changing them.... anyway, we need to at least change the colors of the countries so that the sub-continents are each a color and the continents are a color group, like 2.1

wait, are we gonna do bonuses like 2.1, or just single group continents? I like the way 2.1's building process works... but while we're at it, i'd also like to try mainly primary and secondary colors for the continents... i think it might look nicer, but idk if it will or not, have to see it to find out.

porkenbeans · Post by **porkenbeans** » Mon Mar 16, 2009 8:21 pm

Before we roll down this road, (and it looks like it just my be the right way to go), Maybe there is a better alternative.

Its just that, I would really like to see this become the best and most played map at CC. I do not think that this will be a very easy map to play. At a glance it will be difficult to read what is going on in the game. That in itself, is not necessarily a bad thing for a map, but, it may turn off those that just don't want to expend the brain power.

I have an idea that would solve this riddle, but, I do not know very much about HTMLs' and what supports what. I do know that it could be done. I just don't know if they would want to write the code or whatever it is that they do.

If you have been to Google Earth or the like, You will see the answer right there. Simply have a gif with a few frames of the globe as it turns. A slider bar or whatever can be used to turn the globe. you simply stop where you want. This allows us the opportunity to have twice the area for our map without increasing the size.

Hey if this stuff was easy, the girl scouts would be doing it.

ustus · Post by **ustus** » Mon Mar 16, 2009 8:26 pm

hmm... would that work? i don't know if that would be allowed. I don't think the CC interface accounts for scrolling built into a map... i don't know if the XML can deal with that. it's a good idea, but i'm not sure it's possible.

RjBeals · Post by **RjBeals** » Mon Mar 16, 2009 8:46 pm

nice thought - but neither the image nor the xml will support that.

I suggest to use very tiny pixel fonts, and clean crisp PLAIN graphics.

porkenbeans · Post by **porkenbeans** » Mon Mar 16, 2009 9:20 pm

RjBeals wrote:nice thought - but neither the image nor the xml will support that.

I suggest to use very tiny pixel fonts, and clean crisp PLAIN graphics.

Thanks RJ, what small font would you suggest ?

porkenbeans · Post by **porkenbeans** » Mon Mar 16, 2009 9:24 pm

ustus wrote:hmm... would that work? i don't know if that would be allowed. I don't think the CC interface accounts for scrolling built into a map... i don't know if the XML can deal with that. it's a good idea, but i'm not sure it's possible.

It IS possible, but it would probably take too much coding. Who knows maybe lack or someone would be up for the task ?

john9blue · Post by **john9blue** » Mon Mar 16, 2009 9:28 pm

I guess the small and large versions of this map will be the same?

RjBeals · Post by **RjBeals** » Mon Mar 16, 2009 9:36 pm

john9blue wrote:I guess the small and large versions of this map will be the same?

They will not let that happen. Must have large & small.

And as far as the fonts, any small pixel font will do.
like go the http://www.fontsforflash.com/ page
click on the FONTS menu
click on the SUPER PIXEL fonts, and check out FFF MINUTE (towards the bottom). It's tiny. But it's $20. So if you can find something like that for free, it would work well.

porkenbeans · Post by **porkenbeans** » Wed Mar 18, 2009 12:26 am

john9blue wrote:I guess the small and large versions of this map will be the same?

There can be small and large. No problem.

john9blue · Post by **john9blue** » Wed Mar 18, 2009 2:50 am

I guess the real question is, will the small map have to fit within the size restrictions? If so, there is almost no way this is going to happen. If we can get extended boundaries like 2.1, then we're good.

world 2.2

Re: world 2.2

Re: world 2.2

Re: world 2.2

Re: world 2.2

Re: world 2.2

Re: world 2.2

Re: world 2.2

Re: world 2.2

Re: world 2.2

Re: world 2.2

Re: world 2.2

Re: world 2.2

Re: world 2.2

Re: world 2.2

Re: world 2.2

Re: world 2.2

Re: world 2.2

Re: world 2.2

Re: world 2.2

Re: world 2.2

Re: world 2.2

Re: world 2.2

Re: world 2.2

Re: world 2.2

Re: world 2.2