After Long Await, Periodic Madness- v16 p 13[i][vacation]

[yeti_c]

No. That lack of a border is balanced out by La being bordered to Ce.

Which proves my point - there is no way you can say that in the legend either?

C.

[TaCktiX]

Oh I can say that in the legend. As I read that I came up with the wording too. I've got spare space still.

[TaCktiX]

Due to a forced reformat of my computer, Version 16 will be significantly delayed as I reconstruct a PSD from the JPG seen further up this page. Sorry.

[laci_mae]

Hi Tack,

I know you had major technical failures. I was just wondering about the progress in reconstructing your maps. Hopefully, they will be resurfacing soon b/c they're awesome!

LMR

[TaCktiX]

This one will be up much sooner than The Citadel took. I haven't even started work on it, but the excess of solid colors makes rebuilding layers a relative cinch.

[laci_mae]

I really like the broken lines separating the lanthanides and actinides. I would like you to make those symmetrical however. This would mean simply extending the middle border under Dy (making it 4 squares) and moving the right border to the right by one square (under Er, Tm, and Yb).

I also support the background being gray, but a slightly lighter shade of gray. With the passable borders in the same color as the background.

Hopefully these suggestions reach you in time for the rebuild/update!

Best,
laci

[TaCktiX]

My issue with the lighter gray also being the impassable gray: that would look really frigging drab. I would prefer to use black to be thematically consistent with a table, but due to possible gameplay confusion that's a no-no. Gray on the passables would just not work. I'm going to keep it a shade of white, but maybe dull it down a bit.

As for the impassables separating Lanthanides from Actinides, I'm a little cramped for text space there, but I'll see what I can do.

[laci_mae]

I don't think we're imagining the exact same thing. But my main point of contention is that the white is too bright and the gray is too dark. Therefore, I suggested unifying their color in a shade of light gray or off white.

The real discussion is this in terms of the desired visual effect: Are we viewing these passables as borders (which need lines--most likely of a contrasting color) or as spaces between cells (which can logically be crossed and don't need a separate color)? I see them as spaces, and therefore believed the contrasting color (black) should be reserved for impassables. My vision is most closely represented in the image found here: http://www.dayah.com/periodic/

The impassables in the bottom aren't a huge deal. The slight change I suggested shouldn't take more space than the current set-up. It would just balance gameplay for both ends of the section. Otherwise the left side will be easier to hold than the right.

LMR

[TaCktiX]

Version 16, Back and Cleaner!

Updates:
- Dropped the black/white borders in favor of wider gaps with the background color
- Recrafted impassables
- Changed the bonus numbers
- Changed the +/- bonus
- Explained the Transition attack better
- Adjusted where the radioactive elements are in the Actinides
- Removed several elements to make the map more consistent (Tc radioactivity, Kr hydrogen bond, e.g.)
- Toyed with the effects to make continent bonuses easier to see (didn't work that well)
- Recreated various map elements
- Made the map bigger (widened to 600px from 571, heightened to 450px from 424)

Small version (600x450)


To Do:
- Add Army Circles (118 of them, yes there's space)

Discussion Points:
- We need hardcore gameplay discussion. I adjusted the present bonuses to take into account the +/- bonuses at work, but the fact that there are 118 territories hasn't been discussed in a gameplay sense. (possible changing of the territories per bonus army?)
- Drop shadow doesn't work, stroke doesn't work, outer glow doesn't work. I need SOME solution to make ALL continent names show up worth a crap.
- Is the new border look good?
- Are the impassables clear enough without me having to explain them?
- Anything else that my mind is missing at the present time?

[laci_mae]

Awesome Update!! I hate that you had computer problems, but it helped with drastic improvements in your maps. It looks cleaner and is much easier to understand.

I'm a huge fan of the new borders. I also think the impassables are clear. The only thing I'm worried about graphically is the shades of the connector triangles. They kind of blend; however, I think that' something that will shake out (i.e. I don't have a better suggestion right now).

I like the reduction in and strategic placement of the decay.

I think the bonuses are on point. My only question is why is halogens 5 when alkali and alkaline are 4?

Keep up the good work!
LMR

PS--Remember to update the title post!

[TaCktiX]

I can't update the title post, I'm not the topic starter. I told shadowsteel via PM about the new version, so we shall see.

Halogens gets a 5 bonus instead of a 4 bonus because it has 5 borders with 4 different continents, whereas Alkalines have 4 borders and 2 continents, Alkalis 4 and 3.

[laci_mae]

I can't update the title post, I'm not the topic starter. I told shadowsteel via PM about the new version, so we shall see.

Halogens gets a 5 bonus instead of a 4 bonus because it has 5 borders with 4 different continents, whereas Alkalines have 4 borders and 2 continents, Alkalis 4 and 3.

That's all fine and well by me. I don't see any points of major contention remaining with regards to bonues.

LMR

[RjBeals]

This is so not my style, but here goes...

1. At first look I see crossword, but a lot messier. My first thought would be to put all the legend / wording together. Right now it's scattered all over the place, and it's hard to connect it all. Your signature(s) down in the bottom right also look cluttered.
2. Another thought is to have actual atom bonuses somehow (sort of like the hydrogen bonds). Like if you occupy twice as many armies on Hydrogen as you do Oxygen (H2O) then you get the water bonus of +1. Or if you occupy 3 times as many Hydrogens as Nitrogens, you get the Ammonia (H3N) bonus of +2..
3. I'm not a fan of the colors. I know sometimes bolder is better, but to me it just makes the map that much more distracting. What about some pretty atoms in the background. I know your pressed for space, but you need something to make this map pop. They grey background and flat grid are just boring. Also... NO ARMY CIRCLES. It will just look like a bunch of circles rather than the periodic table. Just change your colors so the armies will clearly show up on them.
4. Instead of the arrows connecting the edges, why not just have the corners able to attack all other corners. Like the pellets in conquerman.
5. Also your font doesn't quite fit. It looks more computeresqe or digital, rather than scientific.

What about something like this, with a very slight bevel on each square, then an overall bevel / drop shadow to the entire table?

[ZeakCytho]

Could you add impassables to clarify the 8/4 way attacks out of the transition metals? You went over this before, but I didn't follow it

For example, right now it seems to me that Zn could attack Al, since Zn can 8-way attack, but that Al cannot attack Zn, because it can only 4-way attack. To clarify this, you could put one of those quarter-sized impassable-things like what you have between Y and Zr or Cd and In. This same problem occurs between Sc and Mg.

I agree that the legend would be better all together, but I'm not sure how that can be done realistically. There just isn't that much room to move around. Maybe if you move the bonuses all to the area right below the Title, and move the Transition metals attack instructions above the title, that could work? I'd put the transition metals' attack instructions right next to the Normal Attack instructions, maybe even in the same "cell".

[TaCktiX]

Could you add impassables to clarify the 8/4 way attacks out of the transition metals? You went over this before, but I didn't follow it

For example, right now it seems to me that Zn could attack Al, since Zn can 8-way attack, but that Al cannot attack Zn, because it can only 4-way attack. To clarify this, you could put one of those quarter-sized impassable-things like what you have between Y and Zr or Cd and In. This same problem occurs between Sc and Mg.

Couple of words known as "each other" in the 8-way attack description. That somewhat precludes Zn being able to attack Al.

I agree that the legend would be better all together, but I'm not sure how that can be done realistically. There just isn't that much room to move around. Maybe if you move the bonuses all to the area right below the Title, and move the Transition metals attack instructions above the title, that could work? I'd put the transition metals' attack instructions right next to the Normal Attack instructions, maybe even in the same "cell".

I was told before that having the bonuses and all the general information together made it hard to tell which continents went with which text. Though the present way could be improved somewhat, I think it's more clear with bonuses near their bonus regions than in one monolith block. This map is pushing the wall-of-text paradigm already.

At first look I see crossword, but a lot messier. My first thought would be to put all the legend / wording together. Right now it's scattered all over the place, and it's hard to connect it all. Your signature(s) down in the bottom right also look cluttered.

I'll see what I can do about making the signatures smaller if not simpler. The style of this map seems to preclude a form more elaborate than straight text.

Another thought is to have actual atom bonuses somehow (sort of like the hydrogen bonds). Like if you occupy twice as many armies on Hydrogen as you do Oxygen (H2O) then you get the water bonus of +1. Or if you occupy 3 times as many Hydrogens as Nitrogens, you get the Ammonia (H3N) bonus of +2..

How would you own two Hydrogens? And if you meant number of armies, the XML can't adjust for that, and I'm making the map to be do-able with the present XML. Sorry, even if this suggestion were possible, it would be more confusing than I could write down in any simple legend form.

I'm not a fan of the colors. I know sometimes bolder is better, but to me it just makes the map that much more distracting. What about some pretty atoms in the background. I know your pressed for space, but you need something to make this map pop. They grey background and flat grid are just boring. Also... NO ARMY CIRCLES. It will just look like a bunch of circles rather than the periodic table. Just change your colors so the armies will clearly show up on them.

I'll keep the army circles off then, thank goodness I forgot about them in excitement of releasing a version finally. I need some color suggestions, as my current method of getting colors is bringing up the color picker and adjusting the slider until I find something that looks good. Lighter versions of the more bold colors should work fine, so any tricks you know to messing with RGB, CMYK, or Hue/Saturation would be appreciated.

Instead of the arrows connecting the edges, why not just have the corners able to attack all other corners. Like the pellets in conquerman.

Explaining that would be more difficult than the simple arrows-arrows idea. As it stands, I use one bit of text to explain two different mechanisms.

Also your font doesn't quite fit. It looks more computeresqe or digital, rather than scientific.

Back to the drawing board.

[BrianHoef]

Definitely don't do army circles.

As far as the colors are concerned, have you thought about color-coding the elements' abbreviations, rather than the squares? You could then greyscale the squares, and the table would look less jarring. It would still have those little bits of color, and you could put something chemistryesque and colorful in the background. It would help the visual balance, and you wouldn't have to worry about the numbers disappearing into the colored squares without the white background of the army circles.

This could also work by color-coding the outlines of the squares and greyscaling the squares themselves (sort of the inverse of what you have now), although I think coloring the letters would be easier and look better.

[laci_mae]

I don't necessarily agree with all of the points made by RjBeals, but I do really like the picture. When compared beside the current version of the map, the sample picture is worlds better. I like the pastel-ish colors with the slim border. A new version might need to retain somewhat thick borders so as to properly distinguish passables from impassables. I also like the pattern background so long as it's not overwhelming.

I think the miniature impassables between transitions and non-transitions would be more effective than "each other". You would only need to add 4.

Keep the connections (shown with arrows) b/c it keeps with the standard periodic table.

No army circles is definitely the way to go.

There's not enough discrimination among the colors for just the territory names to be color coded. I think you keep with a solid color, but maybe back them off some.

Best,
LMR

[killmanic]

From a game play point of view the map is huge already, giving the person going first a big advantage, then also the easy to get bonuses (1 per 3) will give whom ever goes first a major, if not unstopable advantage.

[gimil]

I feel nothing when I look at this map. Its flat and has far, far to many instructions for something that seems relativly simple. I would definetly go the way RJ proposed with the squares. This will add a good bit of life and difference to the map which it really is going to need to get started.

[Joodoo]

Why not call the semiconductors "metalloids" instead?

[pepperonibread]

Why not call the semiconductors "metalloids" instead?

Yep, as "semiconductivity" is a property of many of those elements, not a actual group name.
Could semimetals work to? I've heard the group called both before.

[TaCktiX]

Metalloids is more standard, and thus I shall use it when I release version 17. Expect a major overhaul on the graphics (and resultant wait time equivalent).

[laci_mae]

Metalloids is more standard, and thus I shall use it when I release version 17. Expect a major overhaul on the graphics (and resultant wait time equivalent).

Metalloids is a funner word anyway!

[cairnswk]

Small version (600x450)


Discussion Points:
- We need hardcore gameplay discussion. I adjusted the present bonuses to take into account the +/- bonuses at work, but the fact that there are 118 territories hasn't been discussed in a gameplay sense. (possible changing of the territories per bonus army?)
- Drop shadow doesn't work, stroke doesn't work, outer glow doesn't work. I need SOME solution to make ALL continent names show up worth a crap.
- Is the new border look good?
- Are the impassables clear enough without me having to explain them?
- Anything else that my mind is missing at the present time?

Here's my 2 cents worth....
1. i think you could make the map overall higher to give it some real estate space....you not so crowded with all the wirting etc at the top.
2. i had to take a second look at the map to recognise where the impassables were....i take it, it is the black line line....that need putting into the legend
3. you've got pink and green arrows, but black arrows in the legend...had to really look to find that one also
4. how about giving the continent names a black drop shadow to pur behind them
5. N and O are moarked with hydrogen bonds attack symbol, where are the others?
I think as it stands now TaCktix, it is very 'fusing to look at and would definitely do with some "eye space"
Hope this helps

[laci_mae]

Here's my 2 cents worth....
1. i think you could make the map overall higher to give it some real estate space....you not so crowded with all the wirting etc at the top.
2. i had to take a second look at the map to recognise where the impassables were....i take it, it is the black line line....that need putting into the legend
3. you've got pink and green arrows, but black arrows in the legend...had to really look to find that one also
4. how about giving the continent names a black drop shadow to pur behind them
5. N and O are moarked with hydrogen bonds attack symbol, where are the others?
I think as it stands now TaCktix, it is very 'fusing to look at and would definitely do with some "eye space"
Hope this helps

Points 1 through 4 will most likely be addressed (even if not purposefully) in the graphical overhaul that Tack promised in this last post.
LMR