Charleston, SC [Quenched]

by **ZeakCytho** on Fri Aug 08, 2008 12:55 pm

I rather like the color of the Historic District.

I'm still not a huge fan of the font, but oh well, it works and it's legible.

by **Kemmler** on Fri Aug 08, 2008 5:03 pm

b-e-a-utiful map

I hope it comes out soon cos I'td be the next cairns - e.g. lots of 1v1 speed on it

by **AndyDufresne** on Fri Aug 08, 2008 7:20 pm

I'm thinking the game play looks spot on, especially with the last little change. I don't think I'd have anything more to suggest.

On the graphics, I believe the font works for the map. I've got nothing more to say about the map...and that's not a bad thing.

--Andy

by **RjBeals** on Fri Aug 08, 2008 7:23 pm

Thanks Andy. I'm currently reworking the small map to incorporate the font change, and keeping the army circles. I'll have it posted sometime next week.

by **RjBeals** on Sat Aug 16, 2008 7:54 pm

Can we be okay with this small image? I've been trying to get it right for a long time now, but I can't. I ended up resizing the large map down with the legend AND the territory names resized. I know, I know... I normally would never resize text, but I just couldn't get it right on the small map, without changing the font and really changing the feel.

Now.. the small map, the font is a little blurry in spots. But I believe it's clear enough to pass. There's no strange characters, and the names are pretty common so even if you were unsure looking at the map if it's Wando "Fort" or Wando "Port", one look at the xml drop down and it would be cleared up.

If this doesn't fly for the community, I'm not sure what my next step is.
(I've also rearranged some names & army circle placements since last update, thanks to some of WidowMakers suggestions)

Click image to enlarge.

by **cairnswk** on Sat Aug 16, 2008 10:51 pm

Rj...this map should have been quenched a long time ago.

Don't underestimate the power of the Foundry to hold up a map with lots of changes that are quite un-necessary if you can justify your reasons for not wanting to make those changes. While everyone who comments does have personal opinions, it doesn't mean we have to spend countless hours changing things to satisfy a minority.
Problem now for me though is that the legend font is slightly just too small, and i can hardly read it.
But i won't hold you to changing it, as you've had my support since wayback.

by **Blitzaholic** on Sat Aug 16, 2008 11:32 pm

this map looks awesome, i want to play it right now :mrgreen:

by **RjBeals** on Sat Aug 16, 2008 11:40 pm

cairnswk wrote:Problem now for me though is that the legend font is slightly just too small, and i can hardly read it.

Well that is something I could possibly fix. What about the territory font. Kind of small & blurry, but enough to pass? Thanks for the support cairns.

by **whitestazn88** on Sun Aug 17, 2008 2:02 am

its definitely a tad blurry in the small map

in the map, the font is a good size, but not in the legend

by **gimil** on Sun Aug 17, 2008 2:45 pm

I am truly sorry to come with bad news but there is no way I can see the small passing with its current terr names. For me its not a case of barely readable names. I simply cant read it at all.

Sorry I had to be the ass hole.

love,
gimil

by **RjBeals** on Sun Aug 17, 2008 3:16 pm

You're not being an asshole. You're being truthful. I'll keep working on it - I was just fed up yesterday when I posted that.

by **cairnswk** on Sun Aug 17, 2008 3:43 pm

RjBeals wrote:
cairnswk wrote:Problem now for me though is that the legend font is slightly just too small, and i can hardly read it.

Well that is something I could possibly fix. What about the territory font...

the small map could do with an increase of a couple of points/picas whatever you're using, but the large map is fine

by **RjBeals** on Sun Aug 17, 2008 4:37 pm

It's not that easy though - the font I used was a pixel font only crystal clear at 1 point size (without anti-aliasing). Thats what gives it it's sharpness. But alas, i'll keep on truckin.

by **edbeard** on Mon Aug 18, 2008 9:43 pm

I agree that the small map text can use some work.

I have a gameplay point though...why is Historical District worth +5 again? I realize it borders 6 continents but it only has 3 borders. Seems like a +4 to me. I suppose others will argue it's in the middle of the map and a pathway continent but I'm sure I buy that so much. I'm not necessarily saying +5 is wrong. I guess I just want a reminder as to why it's a +5.

by **RjBeals** on Tue Aug 19, 2008 7:30 am

I guess mainly because of the 8 territories, and the fact that it's the center of the board. Ed - you know gameplay better than me. If you do not think it's the correct bonus - speak now. It's not too late to change the legend.

by **sam_levi_11** on Tue Aug 19, 2008 8:07 am

i say lower it to +4 however its not a big thing. There are many continents worth 3/4, maybe make another worth +5. N. saint james should be worth 5 for sure. Then maybe make drum island attackable from hobcaw point. This will justify historical having +5.

by **edbeard** on Tue Aug 19, 2008 1:18 pm

you might be right, RJ. the lower left continent is a +3 but with so many territories (7) it got bumped to a +4. So, bumping an 8 territory continent seems OK too. I mean I think it's borderline either way so the +5 isn't a huge deal. Just one of those 'hard to get but once you get it it's quite good' continents I guess.

by **Ruben Cassar** on Tue Aug 19, 2008 1:37 pm

I think the bonuses are fine as they are right now.

There's a decent balance between territories to hold, attack routes and defence routes.

by **RjBeals** on Tue Aug 19, 2008 3:57 pm

HERE'S THE LAST IMAGE

Here's what I have so far as far as the territory font. I think I have too much outer glow on some, but overall, it's readable. I had to change font styles to a simple arial. Hope this is getting better.

by **Ruben Cassar** on Tue Aug 19, 2008 4:01 pm

The first image is better but I still have to strain my eyes to read it.

by **sam_levi_11** on Tue Aug 19, 2008 4:02 pm

the font needs going up a size, and the first colour and font is bettrt

by **RjBeals** on Wed Aug 20, 2008 12:51 pm

Okay... Here it is. I'm happy with this. It has the same "darker" feel as the large map. Some text is a bit dark in areas, but I like it that way. I may lighten Folly Beach just a smidge.

Here's the other 2.

RjBeals wrote:

HERE'S THE LAST IMAGE

by **ZeakCytho** on Wed Aug 20, 2008 12:56 pm

My only comment is that your signature is awfully small. Otherwise, it's a beautiful map!

by **RjBeals** on Wed Aug 20, 2008 2:20 pm

ZeakCytho wrote:My only comment is that your signature is awfully small. Otherwise, it's a beautiful map!

Thanks Zeak - my sig is kinda small, and Andy brought that up before also. It's fine with me. It fills an empty slot in the legend also. Otherwise it wouldn't look even.

by **Ruben Cassar** on Wed Aug 20, 2008 4:00 pm

RjBeals wrote:
ZeakCytho wrote:My only comment is that your signature is awfully small. Otherwise, it's a beautiful map!

Thanks Zeak - my sig is kinda small, and Andy brought that up before also. It's fine with me. It fills an empty slot in the legend also. Otherwise it wouldn't look even.

RJ is such a modest man...

Charleston, SC [Quenched]

Re: Charleston, SC (pg. 1 & 15) [I]

Re: Charleston, SC (pg. 1 & 15) [I]

Re: Charleston, SC (pg. 1 & 15) [I]

Re: Charleston, SC (pg. 1 & 15) [I]

Re: Charleston, SC (pg. 1 & 15) [I]

Re: Charleston, SC (pg. 1 & 16) [I]

Re: Charleston, SC (pg. 1 & 16) [I]

Re: Charleston, SC (pg. 1 & 16) [I]

Re: Charleston, SC (pg. 1 & 16) [I]

Re: Charleston, SC (pg. 1 & 16) [I]

Re: Charleston, SC (pg. 1 & 16) [I]

Re: Charleston, SC (pg. 1 & 16) [I]

Re: Charleston, SC (pg. 1 & 16) [I]

Re: Charleston, SC (pg. 1 & 16) [I]

Re: Charleston, SC (pg. 1 & 16) [I]

Re: Charleston, SC (pg. 1 & 16) [I]

Re: Charleston, SC (pg. 1 & 16) [I]

Re: Charleston, SC (pg. 1 & 16) [I]

Re: Charleston, SC (pg. 1 & 16) [I]

Re: Charleston, SC (pg. 1 & 16) [I]

Re: Charleston, SC (pg. 1 & 16) [I]

Re: Charleston, SC (pg. 1 & 16) [I]

Re: Charleston, SC (pg. 1 & 16) [I]

Re: Charleston, SC (pg. 1 & 16) [I]

Re: Charleston, SC (pg. 1 & 16) [I]

Who is online