The Roman Empire *Page 11* [Vacation]

cairnswk · Post by **cairnswk** » Tue May 29, 2007 2:32 pm

Guiscard wrote: Do you think I should get rid of the pics in the bottom areas? or replace them with similar prints rather than carvings?
Thanks for the comments

Guiscard, for myself....I prefer the prints...they carry the colours of ROME and the legionaires etc. and seem to fit into your overall design....whereas the carvings are difficult to interpret....but that's my opinion...see what other players prefer also. Perhaps nothing under the title except the backdrop the legend is on...that might balance things up.

Ruben Cassar · Post by **Ruben Cassar** » Tue May 29, 2007 3:05 pm

Guiscard wrote:Do you think I should get rid of the pics in the bottom areas? or replace them with similar prints rather than carvings?

I was actually going to ask you to try to put similar prints like the top one in the bottom areas. At least in the bottom right area. Try putting an image of an imperial eagle there...it would look great!

Guiscard · Post by **Guiscard** » Tue May 29, 2007 3:16 pm

Ruben Cassar wrote:
Guiscard wrote:Do you think I should get rid of the pics in the bottom areas? or replace them with similar prints rather than carvings?
I was actually going to ask you to try to put similar prints like the top one in the bottom areas. At least in the bottom right area. Try putting an image of an imperial eagle there...it would look great!

Yeh i'd been looking for a suitable image of the eagle but I've not found one as yet... Can anyone be any help here?

hulmey · Post by **hulmey** » Tue May 29, 2007 3:18 pm

I think the map is too bright and it hurts my eyes a little. Like what you did with the picture top left hand corner. Also like the Roman Numerals but it could confuse a few players (espically the Americans)!!!!

You borders are pixelated as well. But its a grat map and can wait to play it

Gwalchmai · Post by **Gwalchmai** » Tue May 29, 2007 4:35 pm

Guiscard wrote:Do you think I should get rid of the pics in the bottom areas? or replace them with similar prints rather than carvings?

I like the one on the bottom left because it's more subtle than a picture so seems to sit well behind the title. I switch between thinking the one on the right is okay or looks out of place. It could just be the bright white border drawing attention to it though because of the contrast. It would be interesting to see it with that toned down because I like the picture. Something like that just feels more Roman to me.

cairnswk · Post by **cairnswk** » Tue May 29, 2007 4:40 pm

Guiscard wrote:
Ruben Cassar wrote:
Guiscard wrote:Do you think I should get rid of the pics in the bottom areas? or replace them with similar prints rather than carvings?
I was actually going to ask you to try to put similar prints like the top one in the bottom areas. At least in the bottom right area. Try putting an image of an imperial eagle there...it would look great!
Yeh i'd been looking for a suitable image of the eagle but I've not found one as yet... Can anyone be any help here?

Guiscard...there are plenty at this address, but you might have to 'treat" them to blend in with your map.
http://images.google.com.au/images?svnu ... rch+Images

Guiscard · Post by **Guiscard** » Tue May 29, 2007 4:51 pm

cairnswk wrote:
Guiscard wrote:
Ruben Cassar wrote:
Guiscard wrote:Do you think I should get rid of the pics in the bottom areas? or replace them with similar prints rather than carvings?
I was actually going to ask you to try to put similar prints like the top one in the bottom areas. At least in the bottom right area. Try putting an image of an imperial eagle there...it would look great!
Yeh i'd been looking for a suitable image of the eagle but I've not found one as yet... Can anyone be any help here?
Guiscard...there are plenty at this address, but you might have to 'treat" them to blend in with your map.
http://images.google.com.au/images?svnu ... rch+Images

Come on, give me some credit

I had thought to google it, but I'm looking for something with a background context so as to match the top image (rather than to just be a graphic plonked on a brown background).

Guiscard · Post by **Guiscard** » Tue May 29, 2007 4:54 pm

Gwalchmai wrote:
Guiscard wrote:Do you think I should get rid of the pics in the bottom areas? or replace them with similar prints rather than carvings?
I like the one on the bottom left because it's more subtle than a picture so seems to sit well behind the title. I switch between thinking the one on the right is okay or looks out of place. It could just be the bright white border drawing attention to it though because of the contrast. It would be interesting to see it with that toned down because I like the picture. Something like that just feels more Roman to me.

I like them as well. They're all carvings from Trajan's Column, which seems very fitting, but I'm not sure they match whatsoever if we have the picture up top...

Guiscard · Post by **Guiscard** » Tue May 29, 2007 5:09 pm

OK then three little versions to test out some of your suggestions:

Darker sea with no inner shadow:

Toned down borders:

Black borders:

Discuss.

Gozar · Post by **Gozar** » Tue May 29, 2007 5:12 pm

The black borders look quite sharp.

Also, I find they take away some of the stinging brightness of the other two.

Looking good!

Ruben Cassar · Post by **Ruben Cassar** » Tue May 29, 2007 5:16 pm

Hmm...it's a close call but I prefer the black borders.

You won't find a decent Roman Eagle with google. I have been trying to find one for years. Maybe you can scan one from a book?

Edit: If you don't find an eagle you can always use my avatar...Augustus Caesar!

Guiscard · Post by **Guiscard** » Tue May 29, 2007 5:19 pm

Gozar wrote:The black borders look quite sharp.
Also, I find they take away some of the stinging brightness of the other two.

Looking good!

The black borders can be given glow / blurred and made to look more decent, I'm just really loathe to get rid of the white because I really think it makes the map stand out from all the other standard geography maps on the site. I really don't see it as being too bright! I've been working on it for a fair few hours and it hasn't hurt my eyes! I just think the black borders make it look dingy. I want the map to be something special, especially as we've been wanting a Roma map for a very long time!

Gwalchmai · Post by **Gwalchmai** » Tue May 29, 2007 5:54 pm

Black definitely works much better so far as the small islands are concerned. You can't really see their colour with the white and they just look like bright blobs in the sea. It is tight overall though, but I think I prefer the black.

I'm just wondering if part of the reason why that picture on the bottom right stands out to me is because of the contrast with the pinky purple of the continent next to it. The picture on the bottom right doesn't look out of place to me at all but that is framed by a much more subdued colour.

Is having two continents with the same name as territories going to be a problem? Could be a little misleading but I can't think of anything much better to suggest. Could the pink continent possibly be called Asia Minor? I know part of it didn't come under that name but wasn't Asia Minor pretty much that whole peninsular area around the top (Anatolia?). It all gets confusing because they could simply use the word Asia to describe either the province, the whole of Asia Minor, or the continent of Asia.

The Blue area I suppose could be termed the Balkans but I can't think of a Roman term for the area.

Ruben Cassar · Post by **Ruben Cassar** » Tue May 29, 2007 6:14 pm

Gwalchmai wrote:Is having two continents with the same name as territories going to be a problem? Could be a little misleading but I can't think of anything much better to suggest. Could the pink continent possibly be called Asia Minor? I know part of it didn't come under that name but wasn't Asia Minor pretty much that whole peninsular area around the top (Anatolia?). It all gets confusing because they could simply use the word Asia to describe either the province, the whole of Asia Minor, or the continent of Asia.

The Blue area I suppose could be termed the Balkans but I can't think of a Roman term for the area.

I don't think that's a problem. There are other maps that have continent names as territories. And Balkans sucks...it definitely wasn't used at that time.

Gwalchmai · Post by **Gwalchmai** » Tue May 29, 2007 6:27 pm

Yeah, I know. What I was thinking about with that one though is that Achaia in the strict sense is only really Greece as it was then rather than everything else. Could call the area Greece, I suppose, but then you could also stick with Achaia and maybe bring back Aegaeum for the territory since that seems to include Crete as well

KEYOGI · Post by **KEYOGI** » Tue May 29, 2007 8:17 pm

The middle option with the toned down borders is my clear favourite. The black borders really don't suit this map at all and the brighter borders are a fresh change.

hulmey · Post by **hulmey** » Tue May 29, 2007 8:31 pm

i prefer the black borders..........much nicer and it takes away the glow from the map as well

t.e.c · Post by **t.e.c** » Tue May 29, 2007 9:20 pm

i like the middle one, but i think the glow around the names would need to be toned down as well.

Guiscard · Post by **Guiscard** » Wed May 30, 2007 5:38 am

Gwalchmai wrote:Yeah, I know. What I was thinking about with that one though is that Achaia in the strict sense is only really Greece as it was then rather than everything else. Could call the area Greece, I suppose, but then you could also stick with Achaia and maybe bring back Aegaeum for the territory since that seems to include Crete as well

I think Aegaeum seems like the best option for territory name whilst retaining Achaia for the continent...

As for the Byzantium problem, it is further complicated by the fact that the territory is not within the continent itself! Would naming the territory Constantinople, as it is a timeless map (as it were) be a solution? I'm not too keen on calling the whole area down to Egypt Asia Minor, but none of the other options seem overly attractive.

As for the borders, I'd like to go with some form of map makers prerogative and go with white borders, obviously toned down to satisfy everyone. It is a fundamental map choice really, and I'd like to stay with white (or else grey) because of the reasons stated earlier.

Ruben Cassar · Post by **Ruben Cassar** » Wed May 30, 2007 5:41 am

If you decide to stay with white it's fine but you will have to do something about the white borders. Just look at the islands when the white borders are used...they are completely deformed. Are you using some effect with the white borders that you aren't using with the black borders?

Guiscard · Post by **Guiscard** » Wed May 30, 2007 5:59 am

Ruben Cassar wrote:If you decide to stay with white it's fine but you will have to do something about the white borders. Just look at the islands when the white borders are used...they are completely deformed. Are you using some effect with the white borders that you aren't using with the black borders?

It's just outer glow. It makes the borders stand out more and makes them smoother. I'm toning it down on the next version though.

Ruben Cassar · Post by **Ruben Cassar** » Wed May 30, 2007 6:52 am

Guiscard wrote:
Ruben Cassar wrote:If you decide to stay with white it's fine but you will have to do something about the white borders. Just look at the islands when the white borders are used...they are completely deformed. Are you using some effect with the white borders that you aren't using with the black borders?
It's just outer glow. It makes the borders stand out more and makes them smoother. I'm toning it down on the next version though.

Yes try that. The islands and small territories get deformed because of the glow. Maybe you could try removing the effect completely or is it a must have?

Guiscard · Post by **Guiscard** » Wed May 30, 2007 7:48 am

Ruben Cassar wrote:
Guiscard wrote:
Ruben Cassar wrote:If you decide to stay with white it's fine but you will have to do something about the white borders. Just look at the islands when the white borders are used...they are completely deformed. Are you using some effect with the white borders that you aren't using with the black borders?
It's just outer glow. It makes the borders stand out more and makes them smoother. I'm toning it down on the next version though.
Yes try that. The islands and small territories get deformed because of the glow. Maybe you could try removing the effect completely or is it a must have?

Well the black example had no glow, and as you can see it looks too sharp and thin. The white looks much the same without the glow.

hulmey · Post by **hulmey** » Wed May 30, 2007 7:55 am

There is no map maker's preogative........When more than 3 or 4 people are saying they prefer the black borders. You will have to put it to a vote!!!

Ruben Cassar · Post by **Ruben Cassar** » Wed May 30, 2007 8:06 am

hulmey wrote:There is no map maker's preogative........When more than 3 or 4 people are saying they prefer the black borders. You will have to put it to a vote!!!

Hehe. Can't argue with that Guiscard after what happened in other maps.

Personally I believe that the map maker should have the right to make some decisions himself, but in doing so we would not be consistent with what happened elsewhere. I guess that's what you meant with this post hulmey?

The Roman Empire Page 11 [Vacation]

The Map...