RE: Maps for MWIF (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> World in Flames



Message

stretch -> RE: Maps for MWIF (1/1/2006 5:15:28 AM)

Wow imagine how long we could discuss where sea area boundaries should be placed. Better not open that can of worms right now.

I would like to throw in my 2 cents here and say that I compared your terrain side by side with CWiF and I much prefer yours.

I know the rivers still are to be transformed. Will the color stay the same? To me it seems that when presented with a full map they might be a little hard to see, especially when zoomed out. They don't stand out as well against the terrain next to it as they used to, IMHO.



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: Maps for MWIF (1/1/2006 6:04:43 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: stretch

Wow imagine how long we could discuss where sea area boundaries should be placed. Better not open that can of worms right now.

I would like to throw in my 2 cents here and say that I compared your terrain side by side with CWiF and I much prefer yours.

I know the rivers still are to be transformed. Will the color stay the same? To me it seems that when presented with a full map they might be a little hard to see, especially when zoomed out. They don't stand out as well against the terrain next to it as they used to, IMHO.


The rivers you see on the map are not what we'll use in the long run. I have somehow messed up the colors CWIF used so the rivers and coastlines appear to be using the same color. That doesn't matter though.

The artist's first attempt was to color the rivers the same as from the exterior of the rivers used in WIF FE. That was too dark for my taste. He next tried the color from the interior of the rivers (they are two toned in WIF FE). That might be too light. It is easy to adjust as we go along. MWIF will have a monotone color to the rivers (unless I go off the deep end and try to figure out how to outline them - not very likely).



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: Maps for MWIF (1/1/2006 11:09:58 PM)

Here is the same scrren shot I posted earlier but with many corrections made:

1 - Lighten hexagon outlines; the coastal hex outlines match the all sea area colors so they pretty much disappear there.

2 - Added the 2 coastal hexes that were missing (1 in Ireland, 1 in Scotland.

3 - Enlarged the icons for cities, ports, factories, and resources.

4 - Repositioned the items in 3 to match where CWIF placed them.

5 - Removed some cap coloring that CWIF used for coastal hex borders.

Created a new glitch in Ireland and Scotland for the hexes added in 2. It looks like it might be related to sea area boundaries. Slow it goes.

[image]local://upfiles/16701/296CFF690174466EAECA52898BC8CD54.jpg[/image]



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: Maps for MWIF (1/1/2006 11:25:35 PM)

Here is a picture showing the flags in the hexes the Commonwealth controls. I haven't made any attempt to improve on what CWIF used here. I have simply taken all the icons and flags and doubled their size.

As you can see, the flags can be pretty overwhelming. CWIF used a lot of primary colors for the icons (Chris was working in 8 bit color) and that makes the icons quite forceful on the screen.

I have also shown the rail lines from CWIF. I need to replace them completely making them thicker and shortening the ones that head off into the sea so blissfully. Blub.

All the icons pictures will be reviewed and almost certainly replaced. We don't want to create new icons, just transform how they are rendered on the screen more in keeping with MWIF's evolving color palette. I do want the resource icons more visible - I never liked the ones in WIF FE maps.

[image]local://upfiles/16701/D18AC790EE17433AB762DE2316CEAD30.jpg[/image]



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: Maps for MWIF (1/1/2006 11:51:13 PM)

The last in this 3 screenshot series. The first was at level 4 zoom. The second at level 6, and this is at the maximum - level 8.

I have added the map labels for this screen shot. On the advice of Rob Armstrong (who is doing the graphics) I changed the font. This font has more spacing between the letters which makes it a lot easier to read. It comes across as shorter and wider than Arial.

However, that has loused up all the positioning that had been done for map labels. Essentially, each map label is individually placed to avoid overlaps with icons and other labels. I am sure it took a lot of time. I am going to learn how long it took, because I have to redo them all.

But first I want to reposition the symbols for ports, cities, resources, and factories. CWIF used fixed positions for each: cities in the middle, ports in the upper right, resources upper left, and factories lower left. This had the advantage of making the railroad lines never cross an icon (see the previous screen shot). However, I want the cities to be on land (Belfast is afloat in the previous screen shot).

To accomplish this I will give each icon a designated position between 0 and 24. 0 indicates the center of the hex. 1 - 12 are halfway from the center to the edge of the hexagon in the direction towards the positions 1 o'clock - 12 o'clock, 13 - 24 are 2/3rds of the way from the center to the clock positions.

My current plan is to:

1 - Place the icon in the center of the hex if it is the only icon in the hex. This means I do not have to enter any data for the vast majority of the icons. They will just have a blank (zero) value.

2 - Violate rule #1, if that places a non-port icon in the ocean.

3 - Violate rule #1, and place ports at the intersection of the land and sea. For example, Portsmouth will be at position 18, 2/3rds of the way towards 6 o'clock. That should place it a little below the 1st O in the label Portsmouth. Pembroke will be at position 6. Holyhead and Harwich at position 9.

4 - When there is more than 1 icon in the hex, try to achieve the same results that rules #2 and #3 are aiming for.

What is especially important here is that every thing be arranged as much in advance as possible for when I put in the railroads. The flexible positioning design for the icons will let me shove them around easily to minimize obscuring them with railroads.

Lastly will come adding the map labels/names.

Oh, there are rivers too, but they will go whereever they want to. Rivers are like that.

[image]local://upfiles/16701/DA5B23F916144A21BB5DD3547855D760.jpg[/image]



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: Maps for MWIF (1/1/2006 11:59:37 PM)

I meant to mention that the underlying terrain is going to have to be reviewed after we get everyting else in place. I find the clear terrain too monotonous when there are broad swatches of it. I have also looked at the area around the Caspian sea where a lot of swamp and clear are juxtaposed and it is hard to distinguish the one from the other. The swamp definitely has to become more distinctive. And adding some gray to the mountains will be investigated too. This is an iterative process.

Posting screen shots doesn't get code written. On the other hand, working in isolation has some serious dangers about heading off in the wrong direction and wasting hundreds of hours of effort meaninglessly. There actually is a solid productivity gain in posting all these screen shots.



stretch -> RE: Maps for MWIF (1/2/2006 12:12:20 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

There actually is a solid productivity gain in posting all these screen shots.



not to mention I (we) love seeing them, and then I can post back how much I love the maps and shower you with compliments.

Then, I can say something kinda silly which will make your head explode, like "don't forget to make the hexside south of Hull clearly impassable like Froonp commented the other day".

And then I duck and run for cover. [:)]

But seriously, I love the way these look and IMHO they are going to be a vast improvement on CWiF. The CWiF map always makes me jump a little when I open a game and see it. Yours on the other hand are smooth and mellowing and pleasing, which it needs to be considering how long we're all going to be looking at it.








Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: Maps for MWIF (1/2/2006 12:36:39 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: stretch
Then, I can say something kinda silly which will make your head explode, like "don't forget to make the hexside south of Hull clearly impassable like Froonp commented the other day".


Danke schoen.

I will have the artist revise the map between Sheffield and Hull so it is clear. Leed's hex is not a coastal hex though, so it is a little tricky to render.

Are their other hexes like this? I seem to recall reading a list of them somehwere once upon a time. I can have the artist make them clearer than the paper maps.

No substantitive changes though - just improved clarity.



Glen Felzien -> RE: Maps for MWIF (1/2/2006 12:40:01 AM)

quote:

I find the clear terrain too monotonous when there are broad swatches of it.

Before making any changes, may I suggest having the finalized rivers in place. I think they will go a long way to breaking up the clear swaths. Regarding the mountains, what bothered me most about the brain terrain of the paper map was the shades of grey used. Very jarring to my eye. May have been better if it used shades of brown instead? Same textures different colour shades maybe.



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: Maps for MWIF (1/2/2006 1:21:52 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Glen Felzien

quote:

I find the clear terrain too monotonous when there are broad swatches of it.

Before making any changes, may I suggest having the finalized rivers in place. I think they will go a long way to breaking up the clear swaths. Regarding the mountains, what bothered me most about the brain terrain of the paper map was the shades of grey used. Very jarring to my eye. May have been better if it used shades of brown instead? Same textures different colour shades maybe.


I would like to have 6, maybe more, clear terrain hex templates all taken from the same cloth (so to speak) so the pattern isn't identical in every clear terrain hex. I agree that England will look better with the rivers done more artistically, but the Ukraine has an awful lot of clear terrain unbroken by any other features.

Yeah, there is something about the mountains that doesn't look very "mountain like". And I don't think it is the color alone. Adding stripe-like ripples in brown doesn't appeal to me though (CWIF did that, with mediocre results at best).



stretch -> RE: Maps for MWIF (1/2/2006 2:59:13 AM)

Well I'm no graphic artist, but how about using 3 or 4 different texture effects instead of one? Maybe I'm just reaching here... since I'm bored.



Froonp -> RE: Maps for MWIF (1/2/2006 3:51:59 PM)

quote:

My current plan is to:

1 - Place the icon in the center of the hex if it is the only icon in the hex. This means I do not have to enter any data for the vast majority of the icons. They will just have a blank (zero) value.

I would like it better if the icon (even if it is the only icon in an hex) was placed in the most geographically accurate position inside the hex.
And if you don't please make this "position inside the hex" a value that can be modified by the players, so that we can create a mod where all the cities & ports are in their most accurate geographical place.

quote:


2 - Violate rule #1, if that places a non-port icon in the ocean.

3 - Violate rule #1, and place ports at the intersection of the land and sea. For example, Portsmouth will be at position 18, 2/3rds of the way towards 6 o'clock. That should place it a little below the 1st O in the label Portsmouth. Pembroke will be at position 6. Holyhead and Harwich at position 9.

4 - When there is more than 1 icon in the hex, try to achieve the same results that rules #2 and #3 are aiming for.



Froonp -> RE: Maps for MWIF (1/2/2006 3:53:37 PM)

quote:

Posting screen shots doesn't get code written. On the other hand, working in isolation has some serious dangers about heading off in the wrong direction and wasting hundreds of hours of effort meaninglessly. There actually is a solid productivity gain in posting all these screen shots.

Posting screen shots is also great for us [:D][:D].



Froonp -> RE: Maps for MWIF (1/2/2006 3:55:48 PM)

[:D]
quote:

Then, I can say something kinda silly which will make your head explode, like "don't forget to make the hexside south of Hull clearly impassable like Froonp commented the other day".

It was not silly, and he still hasn't corrected it [:-]

It is important that the maps shows things such as invadable hexes and impassable hexsides.
Too bad to set up an invasion and discover on D-Day that the place is not invadable [sm=Christo_pull_hair.gif]



Glen Felzien -> RE: Maps for MWIF (1/2/2006 4:55:39 PM)

quote:

It is important that the maps shows things such as invadable hexes and impassable hexsides.
Too bad to set up an invasion and discover on D-Day that the place is not invadable


LOL excellent point Froonp. I agree that placing the icons on the geographically correct location within each hex would be best but I cant help but wonder what it might look like. Using Steve's location rules there would be uniformity throughout the map. With this there would be a certain tidiness that would over all look good. With the icons placed more accurately based on each hex itself, it might look very haphazard. It would be nice to see Europe or the Med in both formats.

The down side of course, is that I imagine the time needed to review every hex for every possible icon and rail line would take a lot of time. The payoff would have to be well worth it. It the hexes themselves where modable, the community might be able to spend the time experimenting I suppose.



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: Maps for MWIF (1/2/2006 5:40:13 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Glen Felzien

quote:

It is important that the maps shows things such as invadable hexes and impassable hexsides.
Too bad to set up an invasion and discover on D-Day that the place is not invadable


LOL excellent point Froonp. I agree that placing the icons on the geographically correct location within each hex would be best but I cant help but wonder what it might look like. Using Steve's location rules there would be uniformity throughout the map. With this there would be a certain tidiness that would over all look good. With the icons placed more accurately based on each hex itself, it might look very haphazard. It would be nice to see Europe or the Med in both formats.

The down side of course, is that I imagine the time needed to review every hex for every possible icon and rail line would take a lot of time. The payoff would have to be well worth it. It the hexes themselves where modable, the community might be able to spend the time experimenting I suppose.


You are right to mention the rail lines. I want the rail lines to terminate at the city icon (or port icon if no city is present) (or resource icon if neither a city nor port is present). The way I intend to achieve that is to write code that draws the rail lines differently depending on the position of the terminous. This will be a little tricky given all the diverse combinations of rail lines possible.

If you look at the paper map and start counting the number of unique rail line images used within 1 hexagon, you'll find it is quite large. The irregularity used by the artist when drawing the raillines adds a lot to the map's beauty. The rigid 60 degree angles used by CWIF has a mathematical beauty but not an aesthetic one (IMO).

The positioning of the cities (and other icons within a hex) will be available for modification by the players using the 25 points within a hex that I described earlier. All the data related to cities will be available in a separate CSV file. This means that Patrice will be able to eliminate the new city CWIF added to the map in Germany, or reposition it to a different hex, or add a couple more to keep it company. That will also enable players to eliminate the extra cities we plan to add in China. You can think of all of these as part and parcel of deciding on 'options' before startng a game.



Froonp -> RE: Maps for MWIF (1/2/2006 6:07:11 PM)

quote:

If you look at the paper map and start counting the number of unique rail line images used within 1 hexagon, you'll find it is quite large. The irregularity used by the artist when drawing the raillines adds a lot to the map's beauty. The rigid 60 degree angles used by CWIF has a mathematical beauty but not an aesthetic one (IMO).

I think I understood that you are developping a map overlay to draw the rivers on the map.
Why not use the same (or another) overlay to draw the rail lines too ?
After all, it's just 2 parallel black lines with small lines crossing them regulary. I believe this should be easy for a graphic artist to do that ?
The map is what can make people wanting to play the game, so let's have it the best we can.
I for one was appealed to the games of "Gary Grisby World at War" and "Heart of Iron games" because of the map & the graphics. Sure, after playing a few turns to the former, and 1 full campaign of the latter I never started them up again, but I would not have played them in the first place if not for the graphics.



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: Maps for MWIF (1/2/2006 7:54:55 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

If you look at the paper map and start counting the number of unique rail line images used within 1 hexagon, you'll find it is quite large. The irregularity used by the artist when drawing the raillines adds a lot to the map's beauty. The rigid 60 degree angles used by CWIF has a mathematical beauty but not an aesthetic one (IMO).

I think I understood that you are developping a map overlay to draw the rivers on the map.
Why not use the same (or another) overlay to draw the rail lines too ?
After all, it's just 2 parallel black lines with small lines crossing them regulary. I believe this should be easy for a graphic artist to do that ?
The map is what can make people wanting to play the game, so let's have it the best we can.
I for one was appealed to the games of "Gary Grisby World at War" and "Heart of Iron games" because of the map & the graphics. Sure, after playing a few turns to the former, and 1 full campaign of the latter I never started them up again, but I would not have played them in the first place if not for the graphics.


Too many rail lines.

I already have the graphics guy doing all the coastal hexes (5070 at last count). The British Isles only have 76.

And besides, you are imputing that my automation of the rail lines will be tacky. Wait until you see it to say that.[;)]

I created the Gulf of Mexico today. Or at least I added it as a new sea area for the MWIF map. Now the MWIF map has the same sea areas as the America in Flames map - with a few minor differences far out at sea. I'll review those in detail some day. Or perhaps have the playtesters critique them.



Froonp -> RE: Maps for MWIF (1/3/2006 11:57:54 AM)

quote:

And besides, you are imputing that my automation of the rail lines will be tacky. Wait until you see it to say that.

Wow wow, I am imputting nothing in regards to your automation of the rail lines which I did not understood was underway [;)] until now [:D]
Cheers !



composer99 -> RE: Maps for MWIF (1/4/2006 8:54:33 AM)

quote:

I am really impressed with the pics. It looks great - I mean it.

Some nitpicking on the China image:

2. Chunking MIL hasn't got an R sign whereas Canton's does. The 5-1 GAR label reads "(Res)" instead of a right wing "R". Some lack of consistency here.

Cheers,

Daniel


The Chungking MIL unit is not a reserve unit, whereas the Canton MIL is; hence the lack of an "R". Also, the "Res" part of Chinese unit names does not make them reserve units in WiF FE. The cardboard counter reserve units have "Res" on the back of the counter, and in CWiF they had the "R". This is just one of the (admittedly many) idiosyncracies of WiF.



composer99 -> RE: Maps for MWIF (1/4/2006 8:57:45 AM)

The maps are really looking nice - far less garish than CWiF, especially once the flag control, port & whatnot icons are adjusted to the MWiF colour palette.



Frederyck -> RE: Maps for MWIF (1/4/2006 10:23:25 AM)

I am very very impressed with everything I have seen this far!



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: Maps for MWIF (1/4/2006 12:43:56 PM)

And here is today's project: the sea boxes.

As you can see, I am going with two sets so the Axis and Allied units will occupy separate boxes, never mixing. Neutrals will go into the side that they are likely to join (Italy - Axis; USA - Allied).

[image]local://upfiles/16701/E3BFED368239443AA15E780E6A0BD3F2.jpg[/image]



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: Maps for MWIF (1/4/2006 12:46:17 PM)

Here is one of the two problem children. I have yet to add the names of the sea areas. they will go in underneath the bottom boxes.

[image]local://upfiles/16701/3AF7C38597614772965E5847BCEB086D.jpg[/image]



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: Maps for MWIF (1/4/2006 12:48:43 PM)

The other problem child. For the Baltic and the Red Sea you will not be able to change the locations of the sea boxes. These look a little crowded against the shoreline but that will be lessened when the pretty coastline is added.

[image]local://upfiles/16701/2E169468225145038941D7C379A0D438.jpg[/image]



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: Maps for MWIF (1/4/2006 12:52:08 PM)

Here is an example of how you can look at two sea areas at once. You will be able to reposition the sea boxes at any time. Just right click on a sea dot and the an option will pop up that lets you plae the upper left sea box in there. It has to be such that the rest of the sea boxes will fit in the 2 rows by 5 columns layout though.

[image]local://upfiles/16701/5531131F124F44E28B11ED28D4F2AB50.jpg[/image]



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: Maps for MWIF (1/4/2006 1:00:50 PM)

The last in this series. Here the sea boxes for all three sea areas have been positioned close to Honolulu. There isn't any code written for actually moving units into these sea areas. But that shouldn't be too hard. Essentailly it will be a hybrid of the routines that (1) move them into ports and (2) out to sea. This map is defective. The Hawaiian island chain is nothing like this past Kauai (the leftmost jungle hex).

I have entered in starting locations for all 83 sea areas, so it is just placing the units in them that remains to be done.

I am thinking about maybe changing the outline colors depending on what units are in the sea box. Perhap a red outline if there are units capable of invading. Or something special to indicate convoys or submarines present. Nothing really thought through yet. It's just that there is a lot of open space around these boxes that offer the opportunity for adding stuff. Then not again, the starkness has an austere beauty.

[image]local://upfiles/16701/C8084B64DBD044448D592579C2E7DD21.jpg[/image]



Froonp -> RE: Maps for MWIF (1/4/2006 1:13:55 PM)

These are great, yes, great great great !!!

To tone it down, I would have one comment / request : Have them contiguous. Separate the Axis / Allied boxes, but keep the 0, 1, 2, 3 & 4 boxes contiguous if possible for each of them.
Have the Axis & Allied set of boxes more far away too if possible, to allow for greater stacking of counters ?

The idea of a changing color for the box outline is great too !

Another idea : You could center the texts & numbers on top & bottom of the box, maybe it is even more beautiful.

Last note about the terrain aspect : The desert seems pretty good to me, but the desert mountains (post 234) seems not dark enough.



Froonp -> RE: Maps for MWIF (1/4/2006 1:16:07 PM)

quote:

Just right click on a sea dot and the an option will pop up that lets you plae the upper left sea box in there. It has to be such that the rest of the sea boxes will fit in the 2 rows by 5 columns layout though.

Maybe the option could also give the choice to lay down the boxes verticaly or horizontaly, as the player wants.



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: Maps for MWIF (1/4/2006 6:35:00 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

Just right click on a sea dot and the an option will pop up that lets you plae the upper left sea box in there. It has to be such that the rest of the sea boxes will fit in the 2 rows by 5 columns layout though.

Maybe the option could also give the choice to lay down the boxes verticaly or horizontaly, as the player wants.


I was following the example in the paper maps of only centering the sea box number and right justifying the invasion information. Centering everything is a good idea. I am thinking of making the sea box font bold - it gets kind of lost versus the white and yellow.

I also like the idea of vertical as well as horizontal arrangement for the sea boxes.

Pushing them altogether I think will detract from their appearance. The paper maps of WIF FE obviously were drawn using a template that was overlaid onto existing graphics. They also were oversized because placing physical counters in the hex required more room. You will never have to neaten the stacks of naval units in MWIF. Also, keeping the sea boxes separate lets me outline the boxes individually as a clear indication of which contain carriers or naval air (for example).

Still undecided is how to let the player view all the units in a sea box simultaneously: spread out, grouped by Axis versus Allied, and arranged by unit type. You want to see invading land units on tranports, carrier air units on carriers, the convoy war (convoys, convoy escorts, ASW, submarines, surface raiders), and land based aircraft.

I do not believe it is feasible to do that without taking over most of the screen. Some of the sea areas are very small and yet there can be a lot of units in them (the Med comes to mind). If I try to do this within the sea area, I will fail. If I try using the surrounding land hexes I run the risk of the units on land being confused with the units at sea. Therefore I am assuming that the visual will have to be an opaque box with the units spread out inside of it.

I want to make the box moveable and not fill the entire screen, so the player can see where he is invading (for example). Beyond that I haven't gone. At present, my design is just a large white rectangle with 50 or more units floating around in it. I believe it is a challenging problem for how best to communicate information. As such, I think it has great potential for having an elegant solution. I won't be satisfied with any less. My motivation here is the forum member that complained that the naval war got short shrift in CWIF. If possible, I want to go over the top in responding to that well justified criticism.



Page: <<   < prev  6 7 [8] 9 10   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.875