Duck & Cover [Quenched]

d.gishman · Post by **d.gishman** » Tue Nov 06, 2007 6:45 pm

I'm curious what the change will be, but the mushroom clouds are perfect in my opinion.

wcaclimbing · Post by **wcaclimbing** » Tue Nov 06, 2007 6:46 pm

it seems to me that the Yellow mushroom clouds have a sort of shadow behind them, making them stand out more, while the red ones have no shadow. are they supposed to be that way?

1. leaving the color scheme as is
2. leaving the territory arrangement as is
3. changing the mushroom clouds
4. leaving the tree, and maybe inserting the monkey on a trial basis
5. keep plugging away at a winning USA background... I think the idea of a pattern over the yellow is correct, I just have to hit on one that I like. I haven't been in love with any option so far. Maybe I'll post samples of six or seven and run a poll.

1. Good. Dont change the colors.
2. Leave the territories how they are.
3. just add shadows behind the red ones and they will be perfect (IMHO)
4. Leave the tree, dont do any monkeys.Perhaps make the tree a bit bigger, but no monkeys.
5. no pattern on USA. None of the other countries have a pattern, so why should USA be any different? if its because the US had all the Atomics, then why doesnt Russia have a pattern, also?

d.gishman · Post by **d.gishman** » Tue Nov 06, 2007 7:13 pm

Wait, i noticed the design of the mushroom clouds changed

I liked the old version better (like the one in p. 4). Way better

unriggable · Post by **unriggable** » Tue Nov 06, 2007 7:19 pm

d.gishman wrote:Wait, i noticed the design of the mushroom clouds changed

I liked the old version better (like the one in p. 4). Way better

Really? New ones are my favorites so far.

wcaclimbing · Post by **wcaclimbing** » Tue Nov 06, 2007 7:19 pm

we need a poll for this.

Like gishman, i like the old ones better.

oaktown · Post by **oaktown** » Wed Nov 07, 2007 12:13 am

Changes:
• I've dropped one plane from each side of the globe... having two is redundant.
• cropped southeast asia so nobody tries to attack mexico.

• Musical notes
• new improved mushroom cloud shape... forgot to play with the glow around them.

coming shortly: some USA options.

Coleman · Post by **Coleman** » Wed Nov 07, 2007 12:15 am

I'm also in the camp of preferring the pg.4 mushroom clouds. Why was the change made?

oaktown · Post by **oaktown** » Wed Nov 07, 2007 12:18 am

Alright, here are some options for USA texture to talk about... somebody asked why we need it while no other country has a different look, and the answer is that unlike every other country USA gives its own bonus.

#1

#2

#3

#4... this one looks stupid but I'd said i'd try it.

#5

#6

lord voldemort · Post by **lord voldemort** » Wed Nov 07, 2007 12:21 am

i like number 3, its there but it doesnt draw to much attention to it, plus you can still see it. ps my first post on this map. its really good so far. im looking forward to when this gets quenched

AndyDufresne · Post by **AndyDufresne** » Wed Nov 07, 2007 1:10 am

I'm liking #5, but I could settle for 3.

--Andy

oaktown · Post by **oaktown** » Wed Nov 07, 2007 1:27 am

Coleman wrote:I'm also in the camp of preferring the pg.4 mushroom clouds. Why was the change made?

Somebody made the comment that it looked more like a tree than a cloud, and then that was all i could see when I looked at it!

yeti_c · Post by **yeti_c** » Wed Nov 07, 2007 1:31 am

oaktown wrote:
Coleman wrote:I'm also in the camp of preferring the pg.4 mushroom clouds. Why was the change made?
Somebody made the comment that it looked more like a tree than a cloud, and then that was all i could see when I looked at it!

A bit like that song "Arms Race" -> I can still only ever hear "Arse Face"!!!

C.

yamahafazer · Post by **yamahafazer** » Wed Nov 07, 2007 3:02 am

On the USA thing I like No. 1. Personly I'm not so sure on the others but I gues in the end it dosen't make a great deal of diference....

I still like the 2nd mushrooms as I think they look most true to how a nuke looks when it dose go of.... but that too doesn't make a lot of difference.... I gues it's just personal opinion on a not too important detail....

Good Work

asl80 · Post by **asl80** » Wed Nov 07, 2007 9:06 am

hey oaktown, its #5 or #6 from me, but you can probably gauge my bias from my previus suggestions (which these meet).
... The issue for my i guess is mostly that the stars or blotches conflict with the clouds/planes/terr. names too much (all trying to float on the same plane). {if not any of these then i'd try shading the us a different colour - sorry if i'm repeating, but i suppose the issues' still in the air)

Not a fan of the new mushroom clouds. (Though the shape's better then the last - i.e. not so perfect)

Good idea on s.e asia.

Losing the plane on russia means that someone who held that as a border to america now no longer has the advantage of been a bombarder too - which was vice versa for greenland ... hmmmm ... yeah - i think that'll make taking the us/russia much more appealing and better for this style of desired gameplay (i.e. east v west) ... but, contrary to an earlier suggestion of mine, maybe reducing the no. of territories between the west's plane and its border could make more sense, giving both only one move between holding their plane and holding a border? ... i dunno, at least consider how that'll play out.

p.s. Like the musical notes. ( be wary all, this is just one more step towards implanting the tune in the deep recesses of our minds forever - i've seen this kind of whitchcraft before - you have been warned )

yeti_c · Post by **yeti_c** » Wed Nov 07, 2007 9:18 am

The Stars in #1 fit the theme (although you could say that with stripes too?) perhaps a approximation of a flag underneath?

But I prefer the Asterisks in #3 for visibility reasons?!

If you understand what I mean?!

C.

asl80 · Post by **asl80** » Wed Nov 07, 2007 9:28 am

asl80 wrote:Losing the plane on russia means that someone who held that as a border to america now no longer has the advantage of been a bombarder too - which was vice versa for greenland ... hmmmm ... yeah - i think that'll make taking the us/russia much more appealing and better for this style of desired gameplay (i.e. east v west) ... but, contrary to an earlier suggestion of mine, maybe reducing the no. of territories between the west's plane and its border could make more sense, giving both only one move between holding their plane and holding a border? ... i dunno, at least consider how that'll play out.

Actually, if something like that is the case - would a similar argument for moving the cloud on quebec to greenland balance the fact that russia gets two clouds that are borders and north america none? (equatting these as the bonuses are between n.america - 5, and russia - 4)

spiesr · Post by **spiesr** » Wed Nov 07, 2007 5:03 pm

You need to use a white one if you want all people to see it with minimal diffulcty. I prefer 2...

wcaclimbing · Post by **wcaclimbing** » Wed Nov 07, 2007 5:34 pm

number 3

oaktown · Post by **oaktown** » Wed Nov 07, 2007 5:50 pm

spiesr wrote:You need to use a white one if you want all people to see it with minimal diffulcty. I prefer 2...

(deep sarcasm on)
No way, spiesr, and screw you for posting here, newb!
(deep sarcasm off)

Come on, I'm just trying to bring some fun back to this process.

ps2civxr20 · Post by **ps2civxr20** » Wed Nov 07, 2007 7:00 pm

if you could i think that you should connect japan to the western USA. that way it would be touching every continent (except the Mideast) like the USSR. Also it would give it another border and balance things out more. If you do this then i also think you should increase the Asia bonus.

oaktown · Post by **oaktown** » Thu Nov 08, 2007 1:10 am

asl80 wrote:hmmmm ... yeah - i think that'll make taking the us/russia much more appealing and better for this style of desired gameplay (i.e. east v west) ... but, contrary to an earlier suggestion of mine, maybe reducing the no. of territories between the west's plane and its border could make more sense, giving both only one move between holding their plane and holding a border? ... i dunno, at least consider how that'll play out.

the West's plane is next to Eastern USA, which is a border.

asl80 wrote: would... moving the cloud on quebec to greenland balance the fact that russia gets two clouds that are borders and north america none? (equatting these as the bonuses are between n.america - 5, and russia - 4)

Hmm, while it might add balance, it wouldn't make sense historically to make greenland a nuclear target.

I was hoping that by taking the russian plane of the border state it will make it a bit easier to hold N. America, but I see that it is still a problem. I think that balance could also be achieved by dropping a western target entirely - I think I'll take the cloud off Quebec and see how that goes over.

oaktown · Post by **oaktown** » Thu Nov 08, 2007 1:49 am

And a small map...

• Took the cloud out of Quebec for balance. I know, different # of clouds east and west, but the western ones are potentially more damaging.
• Stroked the path of the clouds to achieve the look I was going for - i don't know why I forgot to do this last night. Sleepy I guess. I love that they now look like they're smiling!
• Poured the white asterisk stars into the US, since that seems to have received the best response. It can still change.

I'm considering another change: having Turkey connect to Western Europe rather than Eastern Europe. Either way - or both - could be argued to be historically correct, but a W. connection gives the european player one more continent to attack - and to be attacked by. It may be six of one, half a dozen of the other. ??

yamahafazer · Post by **yamahafazer** » Thu Nov 08, 2007 4:08 am

It's looking very good. I agree with taking out one of the weston clouds... as russa only has 3 plus two of them are on border states. The astarixes look good to now there in the map as a whole. The clouds also look much better... they look more real but at the same time fit with the gerneral look of the map.

yeti_c · Post by **yeti_c** » Thu Nov 08, 2007 4:29 am

Drop the 's' from "planes" (2 occurences) - as this implies there are more than one -> thus makes it less of a connection to the "plane" territory for each side... (I didn't realise that was what it meant until I read a bit more of the thread)

C.

oaktown · Post by **oaktown** » Fri Nov 09, 2007 12:14 am

yeti_c wrote:Drop the 's' from "planes" (2 occurences) - as this implies there are more than one -> thus makes it less of a connection to the "plane" territory for each side... (I didn't realise that was what it meant until I read a bit more of the thread)

C.

Right - only one plane now. Hmm, I'll probably reword it completely and say "aircraft" or "air force" because it would be stupid to warn an entire country of attack from one plane. Good catch Yeti.