Charleston, SC [Quenched]

by **RjBeals** on Tue Jun 10, 2008 5:40 pm

i don't think so, but I'll let the colorblind answer

by **AndyDufresne** on Tue Jun 10, 2008 9:13 pm

Things are coming along nice, RJ! If I had some more time I'd take more of a look over...but I've got trust a lot good is going on.

--Andy

by **RjBeals** on Tue Jun 10, 2008 9:15 pm

I think these bonuses would be more appropriate but I would like your opinion as well...

Charleston

West Ashley - 2
East Ashley - 3
St. John’s Island - 4
North St. James - 4
South St. James - 2
Folly Beach - 2
North Charleston - 3
Historic District - 5
East Cooper - 2
Mount Pleasant - 5
Isle of Palms - 2

NOTE: THIS WAS CREATED ON THE PREVIOUS UPDATE, NOT THE MOST RECENT DARKER VERSION

Click image to enlarge.

This image should make the new bonus suggestions a little easier to follow.

I personally think Folly Beach and Isle of Palms should remain +3 (not +2). But a few more +2 bonuses I guess would be alright.
I'm okay with taking the Johns Island bonus down to +4 (from +5).
I'm undecided on west Ashley going down to a +2 (from +3). It seems like a lot of work for a +2.
Historic District - I guess a +5 (instead of +6) is okay. I don't think I would ever be able to hold that anyway. Plus it's directly in the center of the map so a lot of movement will pass through there. I would kind of like it to remain a +6 just because it's the heart of Charleston.
I think Point Pleasant should be a +4.

Before any of this is implemented, I would like to bring this to the thread for discussions. I would hope Oaktown (or Andy) would chime in with their thoughts about bonuses.

by **oaktown** on Tue Jun 10, 2008 9:19 pm

hey folks, somebody called for the colorblind? Some of the colors are indeed close, but the mini-map makes the problem moot - I can look at the small map and instantly see what regions are together and what they are worth.

bonues: +6 might be a bit high for the Historic District since it only has three border to hold; either add an attack route or bring it down a peg. Think of it like this - if you hold both of the green regions in the top right of the map you'd get a total of +6 for holding 10 territories with four borders, which makes a +6 for 8 territories and three border seem pretty high.

If you're bringing the Historic bonus down you should maybe bring the +5 St. Johns down to a +4. Think of it like Classic Africa with one seven territories instead of six; adding one more terit shouldn't bump it from +3 to +5.

And the +4 on North St James bugs me because it's only a five territory region - you can take centerville and you only have three borders, yet you still get the +4 and you're on your way to an additional +2... not sure about this one.

Otherwise, I like it. The other bonuses look fine and there should be plenty of good starts on this map, and lots of avenues to victory.

by **RjBeals** on Tue Jun 10, 2008 9:30 pm

Thanks Oak.
The +5 for Historic makes sense to me. I'm not to keen on adding another attack route.
The +4 for St. John's island also makes sense. That can be changed.

What about the other bonus suggestions?
West Ashley (Dark Purple in top left). Should that be a +2 as was suggested?
Mt.Pleasant a +5?
Folly Beach & Isle of Palms both a +2?

by **AndyDufresne** on Tue Jun 10, 2008 9:51 pm

RjBeals wrote:Thanks Oak.
The +5 for Historic makes sense to me. I'm not to keen on adding another attack route.
The +4 for St. John's island also makes sense. That can be changed.

What about the other bonus suggestions?
West Ashley (Dark Purple in top left). Should that be a +2 as was suggested?
Mt.Pleasant a +5?
Folly Beach & Isle of Palms both a +2?

Okay, I lied. I'm going to make some time to comment.

I agree wit Historic and St. John's 5 and 4 respectively.

West Ashley I'd make a 2...simply because it has two borders while East Ashley has three and is a bonus of 3.

I could see Mt. Pleasant being a 4, when comparing it to N. St. James...but maybe a 5. I'm undecided on the bonus I think here...but I think I'm leaning towards 4 arbitrarily. On a graphics note, the Dark Green for Mt. Pleasant in the legend doesn't seem to look like the color on the map, but I assume it's an illusion or my bad eyes, due to the only small color spread available.

Folly and Isle...hm, I could see 2 also, but part me wants them 3...I just don't want that many 2's on the map!

But 2 might be better.

On another graphics note, I think I like the lighter water more than the dark. Maybe a little more happy medium between the two?

--Andy

by **edbeard** on Tue Jun 10, 2008 10:06 pm

MP is worth +4

The rest are good (in the version you changed them I mean).

Also, darker colours are better.

Do you like having four continents that are worth +2? You could add another defending route to Isle of Palms to make three +2 and three +3 continents. Or choose another of the +2's to edit.

by **zimmah** on Thu Jun 12, 2008 7:49 pm

another nice map, but one thing, could you please make the text in general more readable, i can really hardly read the territory names. really. maybe the font is just a little bit too small or something but i'm sorry i can hardly read it.

for the rest it looks very nice but i didn't expect anthing else from your map anyways.

by **RjBeals** on Thu Jun 12, 2008 8:45 pm

zimmah wrote:another nice map, but one thing, could you please make the text in general more readable, i can really hardly read the territory names. really. maybe the font is just a little bit too small or something but i'm sorry i can hardly read it.

That's the first i've heard the text is not clear / readable. Is it the font style I used? I tried to use a very blocky plain small font. I turned anti-aliasing off, so it's a very hard edge on the font. Is it because of the backgrounds the font is sitting on? Are some regions harder to read than others?

ATTENTION
If people do have a hard time with this font style - please speak up. It's not too late. Zimmah - please clarify what is wrong with the font. Thanks.

Click image to enlarge.

by **ZeakCytho** on Thu Jun 12, 2008 11:00 pm

The font you have now isn't bad, but it's not great. I can read it, but it's not really easy on the eyes. And is there anything particularly Charlestonian (is that the right word?) about it? I'd suggest finding a new font, or, at the very least, increasing the size of the current one.

by **Ruben Cassar** on Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:18 am

Can you give us some other font options so that we can compare them?

I think the font is legible but it's not great. Actually I hadn't noticed that before but after zimmah brought it up I realised I was straining myself a bit to read some of the territories. I think it's mainly due to the font used.

by **RjBeals** on Fri Jun 13, 2008 7:23 am

I'll experiement with some new fonts. It will most likely be a small arial or sans-serif font.

by **RjBeals** on Fri Jun 13, 2008 8:47 am

Here's a plain font. Is this any better? Honestly I prefer the original - but that's just me.

I also adjusted the bonuses. I left the Folly Beach and IOP bonuses at +3 instead of dropping to +2.

Click image to enlarge.

PREVIOUS IMAGE

Click image to enlarge.

by **TaCktiX** on Fri Jun 13, 2008 9:01 am

Some of the text is harder to read with the new font you're using. It's got pretty much the same problem as the previous one, just different cases (particularly West Ashley in the new case).

by **Ruben Cassar** on Fri Jun 13, 2008 6:21 pm

RjBeals wrote:Here's a plain font. Is this any better? Honestly I prefer the original - but that's just me.
I also adjusted the bonuses. I left the Folly Beach and IOP bonuses at +3 instead of dropping to +2.

I still think Folly Beach and especially IOP should be +2 not +3. I mean there's not much difference between IOP and West Ashley except for an extra attack route. I don't think that justifies an extra bonus unit.

The new font is more legible but there's something about it that does not convince me. Can you remove the italics of the font or give us a couple more options?

by **edbeard** on Fri Jun 13, 2008 6:34 pm

old font

by **Optimus Prime** on Wed Jun 18, 2008 10:51 pm

Yep, go with the old font, works much better.

by **yeti_c** on Fri Jun 20, 2008 10:54 am

edbeard wrote:old font

by **wcaclimbing** on Fri Jun 20, 2008 10:55 am

I like the new font, but it looks like i've been outvoted....

by **RjBeals** on Fri Jun 20, 2008 11:48 am

I'm sticking with the old font. sorry guys.

by **RjBeals** on Fri Jun 20, 2008 11:49 am

Ruben Cassar wrote:I still think Folly Beach and especially IOP should be +2 not +3. I mean there's not much difference between IOP and West Ashley except for an extra attack route. I don't think that justifies an extra bonus unit.

Anyone else wish this change?

by **Optimus Prime** on Fri Jun 20, 2008 12:08 pm

RjBeals wrote:
Ruben Cassar wrote:I still think Folly Beach and especially IOP should be +2 not +3. I mean there's not much difference between IOP and West Ashley except for an extra attack route. I don't think that justifies an extra bonus unit.

Anyone else wish this change?

It seems like a logical choice to me.

by **edbeard** on Sun Jun 22, 2008 3:15 pm

As I've said before, I'd rather you edit the area (new attack route to the continent) and make it a true +3 because while it is worth +2, I think it's closer to being a +3 than any of the other +2 regions.

by **RjBeals** on Mon Jun 23, 2008 10:56 am

edbeard wrote:As I've said before, I'd rather you edit the area (new attack route to the continent) and make it a true +3 because while it is worth +2, I think it's closer to being a +3 than any of the other +2 regions.

So West Ashley should connect to another region (maybe north charleston) and become a +3 instead of +2?

by **Blitzaholic** on Tue Jun 24, 2008 12:12 am

RjBeals wrote:
Ruben Cassar wrote:I still think Folly Beach and especially IOP should be +2 not +3. I mean there's not much difference between IOP and West Ashley except for an extra attack route. I don't think that justifies an extra bonus unit.

Anyone else wish this change?

I think ruben has a good point here.

I do like your map rjbeals, nice job