so...FINAL FORGE..right?AndyDufresne wrote:Things are looking good, Qwert. Keep it up.
--Andy
WWII - Eastern Front-statistic page 1 [Quenched]5000 finish
Moderator: Cartographers
Forum rules
Please read the Community Guidelines before posting.
Please read the Community Guidelines before posting.
-
ParadiceCity9
- Posts: 4239
- Joined: Thu Feb 15, 2007 4:10 pm
you dont have to do it this is just my opinion and suggestion, but my opinion still stands on all the issues i have talked aboutqwert wrote:Well you see that title can not bee biger,and you ask to be biger?
Well you are first who can not recognise colours, i think that colours is good and everybody can see a large diference with terittory colours.I realy dont understand why i must change something what good look.
yes me but please no poll the last thing anyone wants is a pollqwert wrote:Most people? For now only you and Keyogi think that i must erase sea labels(and maybe boberz).
Well solution for these can be poll,because i realy think that these sea labels look good in map.What you think Guiscard are you agree with these.Guiscard
Have we come to any conclusion about the smaller sea labels though Qwert?
boberz wrote:you dont have to do it this is just my opinion and suggestion, but my opinion still stands on all the issues i have talked aboutqwert wrote:Well you see that title can not bee biger,and you ask to be biger?
Well you are first who can not recognise colours, i think that colours is good and everybody can see a large diference with terittory colours.I realy dont understand why i must change something what good look.
ignore boberz, qwert he is just trying to wind you up it looks good at the mo, when andy says he wants the smaller he means he wants the larger version
- Guiscard
- Posts: 4103
- Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 7:27 pm
- Location: In the bar... With my head on the bar
I like the sea labels, but I feel the smaller ones clutter the map up and look squashed in, especially the gulf of finland... The Gulf of Riga almost looks like its own territory because it is almost encolsed.. But the large ones are fine.Coleman wrote:Mountains out of mole hills people. Why are the sea labels unnecessary? Quick, someone go fix classic! It has sea labels!!!unriggable wrote:Really? I find them unnecessary and think that they waste space. The only answer to this dilemma would be to hquench two versions of the map.DiM wrote:i like the sea labels and i'd hate to see them be removed.
Leave qwert the hell alone about this crap and find a real problem. I have to side with DiM on this one.
Yes Qwert, a vote would be fine in this case as we have split opinions. may I sugest:
Should the smaller sea labels (Gulf of Finland, Gulf of Riga & Sea of Azov) be deleted?
Yes
No
Or perhaps just delete them (should take only a few seconds) and give a simple choice
Which is better?
a)Small sea labels
b)No small sea labels
qwert wrote:Can i ask you something?What is porpose for you to open these Political topic in ConquerClub? Why you mix politic with Risk? Why you not open topic like HOT AND SEXY,or something like that.
i dont see why a poll is necessary....Theres not a split discussion whatsoever. More people like the titles than do not!!!
Its not a graphics issue, is it????
Well then it should be left up to the Map maker to make a balanced decision
Its not a graphics issue, is it????
Well then it should be left up to the Map maker to make a balanced decision
[img]http://img801.imageshack.us/img801/9761/41922610151374166770386.jpg[/mg]
- Guiscard
- Posts: 4103
- Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 7:27 pm
- Location: In the bar... With my head on the bar
That's what a poll will tell us. If you're right then you've got nothing to worry about have you!hulmey wrote:More people like the titles than do not!!!
qwert wrote:Can i ask you something?What is porpose for you to open these Political topic in ConquerClub? Why you mix politic with Risk? Why you not open topic like HOT AND SEXY,or something like that.
honestly not but i am exasperated as i say my word is not law but i still think my opinion is valid, as therre is no support end of discussion i dont mindnagerous wrote:boberz wrote:you dont have to do it this is just my opinion and suggestion, but my opinion still stands on all the issues i have talked aboutqwert wrote:Well you see that title can not bee biger,and you ask to be biger?
Well you are first who can not recognise colours, i think that colours is good and everybody can see a large diference with terittory colours.I realy dont understand why i must change something what good look.
ignore boberz, qwert he is just trying to wind you up it looks good at the mo, when andy says he wants the smaller he means he wants the larger version
Why you need a poll for such a petty thing as Sea names is beyond me. They are nice and add geograhical awarness to the Map. Which is war important for a war map....I think it should be left up to the map maker to decide.
i am inclined to agree about removinf the Gulf of Finland sea label. Wouldnt that help and be a comprise
i am inclined to agree about removinf the Gulf of Finland sea label. Wouldnt that help and be a comprise
[img]http://img801.imageshack.us/img801/9761/41922610151374166770386.jpg[/mg]
Qwert has had pettier polls than this.hulmey wrote:Why you need a poll for such a petty thing as Sea names is beyond me.
I think the large sea labels give the geographical awareness needed. The small labels are cramped.
Something else that is bothering me is the Tula and Oryol labels in Moscow Army. They are both quite close to each other and the border, and I think The Oryol label might benefit being moved a little bit to the left.
Other than that, I dont see anything wrong. And after some maps that have recently been forged, Im actually surprised this hasnt been.
Last edited by Teya on Tue May 29, 2007 6:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.
I agree with Teya - Cn you move Oryol name to the left
If there is gonna be a poll it should be as such;
Should the smaller Sea Labels be deleted;
Yes, but only delete Gulf of Riga
Yes, but only delete Gulf of Finland
Yes but only delete Sea only Sea of Azov
Yes, delete ALL the Sea Labels
No, DONT Delete any of the Sea Labels
This will give the Map Foundry a more precise decision on what the Map Foundry members ACTUALLY want
If there is gonna be a poll it should be as such;
Should the smaller Sea Labels be deleted;
Yes, but only delete Gulf of Riga
Yes, but only delete Gulf of Finland
Yes but only delete Sea only Sea of Azov
Yes, delete ALL the Sea Labels
No, DONT Delete any of the Sea Labels
This will give the Map Foundry a more precise decision on what the Map Foundry members ACTUALLY want
[img]http://img801.imageshack.us/img801/9761/41922610151374166770386.jpg[/mg]
- Ruben Cassar
- Posts: 2160
- Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 6:04 am
- Gender: Male
- Location: Civitas Invicta, Melita, Evropa
- AndyDufresne
- Posts: 24932
- Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2006 8:22 pm
- Location: A Banana Palm in Zihuatanejo
- Contact:
Try KISS, hulmey. That's why I favor Guiscard's approach. If a lot of people express problems with just one of the small sea labels, fine, but for now, there has been no such distinction. Your way would require at least two more options to be perfectly balanced, and all you're trying to do is split the vote for change so that you can claim majority with a smaller number of people voting for no change. CC members aren't stupid, hulmey... give them a straightforward poll.
- Ruben Cassar
- Posts: 2160
- Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 6:04 am
- Gender: Male
- Location: Civitas Invicta, Melita, Evropa
- Steel Panzer
- Posts: 459
- Joined: Sun May 13, 2007 4:24 am
- Qwert
- SoC Training Adviser
- Posts: 9262
- Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 5:07 pm
- Location: VOJVODINA
- Contact:
AndyDufresne
Zookeeper & Foundry Foreman
Joined: 04 Mar 2006
Posts: 4216
Location: A Banana Palm in Zihuatanejo
Posted: 29 May 2007 22:58 Post subject:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No, qwert said he was going to get cracking on both versions of the map (large and small), and I told him I'd wait to see what he's got, as he's only posted one version thus far.
--Andy
Like i say before my modem problem(i dont be here in 13 days)i want to finish all problems with small version of map,and then i will working in large version of my map.
These is a small version of map.

I see that problems is sea labels and i see two option-to stay and to remowe.
I will apply Guiscard sugestion for these issue.Guiscard wrote
Should the smaller sea labels (Gulf of Finland, Gulf of Riga & Sea of Azov) be deleted?
Yes
No
Eastern Front
When is the map done? I like WW2 maps very much and i want to play it now
!
I cant find a picture on the IWO JIMA map...does it exist?
I cant find a picture on the IWO JIMA map...does it exist?
- Steel Panzer
- Posts: 459
- Joined: Sun May 13, 2007 4:24 am
- Qwert
- SoC Training Adviser
- Posts: 9262
- Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 5:07 pm
- Location: VOJVODINA
- Contact:
joel07
Joined: 22 Apr 2007
Posts: 3
Location: Kalmar, Sweden
Posted: 10 Jun 2007 20:06 Post subject: Eastern Front
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
When is the map done? I like WW2 maps very much and i want to play it now !
I cant find a picture on the IWO JIMA map...does it exist?
I dont know.
Yes,but later when these map finish.
- lt_oddball
- Posts: 364
- Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 11:17 am
- Location: Fortress Europe
the bonus for stalingrad area is 1 too much:
3 border lands to defend and 5 internal lands (divided by 3 =) yields 1.
So a bonus of 4 is appropriate.
besides; having the Stalingrad zone means you'll have 1/3 of the 3 cities bonus points also in your pocket for "free".
Also Von Leeb Area should get one extra :
2 border lands and 3 internal lands should yield 2 + 3/3 = 3 in total.
Never mind the "historical" importance of the city of Stalingrad (actually overrated military speaking) or lands like China in the Far east Map, etc..
In the end we are playing a board game with a collection of placement dots.
Only that mathematical number should count in addressing the correct balanced number of bonuspoints per region.
3 border lands to defend and 5 internal lands (divided by 3 =) yields 1.
So a bonus of 4 is appropriate.
besides; having the Stalingrad zone means you'll have 1/3 of the 3 cities bonus points also in your pocket for "free".
Also Von Leeb Area should get one extra :
2 border lands and 3 internal lands should yield 2 + 3/3 = 3 in total.
Never mind the "historical" importance of the city of Stalingrad (actually overrated military speaking) or lands like China in the Far east Map, etc..
In the end we are playing a board game with a collection of placement dots.
Only that mathematical number should count in addressing the correct balanced number of bonuspoints per region.







