DiM wrote:it's the 3rd or 4th time that i post something and you either don't respond at all or respond to just some parts of my message and delete what you wish to ignore.
A+ for attitude and setting an example.
I quoted the major points. To be honest, since it was a repost I skimmed it to find this out, and I might have missed something.
the excuse of the attack lines being obstructed by the names is the crappiest one i've ever heard so far. i had the exact same issue in the drafting room and i had to fix it. attack lines are very important and NOTHING should obstruct them.
Are you serious? What about THIS quote that I JUST made says they are attack lines?
TaCktiX wrote:The lines aren't even meant to denote attackability, just to ground the research territories to the map so they're not floating in space.
The legend explains what attacks what, and right now with minimal chance of confusion. I'd love to totally axe the lines, as apparently they are only going to cause people to think the legend in the bottom right, something written in plain English, is wrong and some lines are right.
terit names on the research tree would not look ridiculous at all if you were willing to actually do some work to make them fit nicely. of course if you just squeeze them in right now they'll look bad but increase the map size by a few px in each direction and you'll have plenty of space for simple names like SC-N for Secret Conscription North.
But those territory names would still have to be directly below the research name with its full description, as well as below a straight line pointing straight up to the origin lab. If people can't read a 300-pixel line and correlate, then how on earth are maps that use pure (and big) grids. Or how about maps that don't explicitly note each and every territory name? Chinese Checkers doesn't, it assumes people can understand the Color region is part of the name, as well as that the middle section is the Center. Do you see people clamoring about how unclear this is? Or how about Conquer 4? It's got a grid layout very similar to R&C's, it's just R&C's grid is shifted for the rows to be directly in line with the columns. Do you see people complaining about the fact they didn't understand where G5 was? Granted those are the only grid-based maps I can find that don't have explicit territory names on them all, but there are no complaints about being unable to tell which territory is what, period.
but hey ever since the first draft no update ever required more than 10-15 minutes of work so it's obvious you won't strain so hard now and actually do something about it. you can apply as many adjustment layers as you want, you can lighten or darken the image as you please but a turd no matter how much you polish it will still be a turd.
and you are very wrong, not everybody is happy how the map looks. in fact only the die hard fans that have been with this map from the start are saying it's ok. most of the other people want improvements which you constantly fail to deliver as you're always hiding behind poor excuses.
Personal attacks, yay! Because obviously, since YOU could do it in 10-15 minutes, EVERYONE can. I just am astonished at the logic of that, I never realized. And of course everyone else has been vehemently nay-saying anything I change just like you have. It's a total loss, a complete waste of everyone's time. Quite a shame, I should just go out back and shoot myself in the head and be done with it all.
I said before, and I'll say again: if you're only going to retread your ground and assume that your opinion is God's Gift to the Foundry I will begin ignoring your posts. So far I have been kind enough not to, and there are a lot of people who would've a long time ago.
