Page 7 of 14
Posted: Fri Oct 05, 2007 12:51 am
by gimil
asl80 wrote:ooo... actually ... [have no experience with graphics creation but; is there any function in your program to make a kind of white "light shadow" (kind of blurry maybe) along either side of the wall - though very very subtely? - this might look abolutely ridiculous, {i.e. one of those things you've just got to give a go in private that are to be kept secret if they go horribly wrong}, but the idea, mostly to bring a little more focus to The Wall, could also reflect the "no-go zones" or "dead land" (especially on the east) that acted as a buffer, keeping people back from the wall.]
outglow i think you may be talking about. This is very much possible with photoshop but i dont think its right for this situation. Instead maybe oaktown could try a 1-2px stroke in black around the wall? This should give it good contrast to the light boarder he has used. Maybe not thou. im not sure lol. definetly worth a try.
As for the river maybe a good inner shadow could work to sink the rivers a little making them fall behind the accutally playable parts of the map?
These sound rediculuse to me but i think htere worth a try. Very difficult to come up with a solution when there isnt really colors to work with (not that thats a bad things
)
Posted: Fri Oct 05, 2007 3:22 am
by yeti_c
gimil wrote:oaktown wrote: 
In testing the XML I am receiving three errors, on the <bonus> tags for the airfields. Has the XML tester not been updated to reflect the addition of territorial bonuses? Or is the tag - which I got from the XML tutorial - incorrect?
If i remeber correctly yeti_c and lack either updated the XML tester for hte latest XML tags or are currently working on it. PM one of them and im sure they can update you better than i can.
Oaktown - (I replied in XML mods thread too)
Can you post up your Airfield territory blocks for me to check?
The Schema has the <bonus> tag in the territory section so it should be OK...
C.
Posted: Fri Oct 05, 2007 8:27 am
by oaktown
yeti_c wrote:Can you post up your Airfield territory blocks for me to check?
The Schema has the <bonus> tag in the territory section so it should be OK...
C.
Thanks Yeti, here they are, without coordinates as of yet.
<territory>
<name>Tempelhof</name>
<borders>
<border>Neukölen</border>
<border>Kreuzberg</border>
<border>Britz-Rudow</border>
<border>Marienfelde</border>
<border>Steglitz</border>
<border>Schöneberg</border>
</borders>
<bonus>1</bonus>
<neutral>3</neutral>
<coordinates>
<smallx></smallx>
<smally></smally>
<largex></largex>
<largey></largey>
</coordinates>
</territory>
<territory>
<name>Gatow</name>
<borders>
<border>Westend</border>
<border>Spandau</border>
</borders>
<bonus>1</bonus>
<neutral>3</neutral>
<coordinates>
<smallx></smallx>
<smally></smally>
<largex></largex>
<largey></largey>
</coordinates>
</territory>
<territory>
<name>Tegel</name>
<borders>
<border>Heiligensee</border>
<border>Reinickendorf</border>
<border>Wedding</border>
</borders>
<bonus>1</bonus>
<neutral>3</neutral>
<coordinates>
<smallx></smallx>
<smally></smally>
<largex></largex>
<largey></largey>
</coordinates>
</territory>
Posted: Fri Oct 05, 2007 8:56 am
by yeti_c
Hmmm
They look good - the Schema has it like this...
Code: Select all
<xs:element name="territory">
<xs:complexType>
<xs:sequence>
<xs:element ref="name" minOccurs="1" maxOccurs="1"/>
<xs:element ref="borders" minOccurs="1" maxOccurs="1"/>
<xs:element ref="bombardments" minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="1"/>
<xs:element ref="coordinates" minOccurs="1" maxOccurs="1"/>
<xs:element ref="neutral" minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="1"/>
<xs:element ref="bonus" minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="1"/>
</xs:sequence>
</xs:complexType>
</xs:element>
So the only thing that it might dislike is the ordering - but XML shouldn't really care...
C.
Posted: Fri Oct 05, 2007 5:48 pm
by oaktown
yeti_c wrote:So the only thing that it might dislike is the ordering - but XML shouldn't really care...
C.
thanks Yeti, I'll swap the ordering by moving the bonus up before the borders and see what happens... it makes more sense earlier anyhow.
Posted: Fri Oct 05, 2007 8:20 pm
by oaktown
Just some little changes as suggested...
• river is a shade darker, but what I think really makes the difference is that I cleaned a lot of the grunge off the river outline/border and the river itself.
• darker stroke on the wall - a shade darker than even the river
• straightened out the "GDR/West Berlin" text
Posted: Sat Oct 06, 2007 4:13 am
by Gnome
Good work Oaktown, I really like this map, I've been following your updated and you made some nice improvements
I'd like to play this as soon as possible
the only thing I see is that your river at Heiligensee isn't flowing to the border , there is still some texture of the land...maybe it isn't meant to be flowing till the edge but it looked a bit weird...
Posted: Sat Oct 06, 2007 4:48 am
by asl80
nice work - the minor touch ups worked wonders
(And in aggreement with Gnome, how's the state of your xml and any other bits you gotta get sorted before it gets that little bit closer to play, or at least final forge?)
Posted: Sat Oct 06, 2007 2:22 pm
by oaktown
Gnome wrote:the only thing I see is that your river at Heiligensee isn't flowing to the border , there is still some texture of the land...maybe it isn't meant to be flowing till the edge but it looked a bit weird...
that's easy to fix... I've been fixing that corner the quick and dirty way without playing with the paths (which at this point would've been less work) so each time i change the river color it looks worse.
XML seems to be alright... thanks to Yeti_C for checking it out. When i get a chance I'll change the order of the bonus and see what happens when I recheck it.
lol
Posted: Sat Oct 06, 2007 3:52 pm
by soundout9
is there going to be color?
Re: lol
Posted: Sat Oct 06, 2007 4:28 pm
by WidowMakers
soundout9 wrote:is there going to be color?
There is color. Black white and Brown. The texture and contrast is the "color" of this map.
I love it.
Re: lol
Posted: Sat Oct 06, 2007 4:42 pm
by Gnome
WidowMakers wrote:soundout9 wrote:is there going to be color?
There is color. Black white and Brown. The texture and contrast is the "color" of this map.
I love it.
This map just looks best with this colours, I love it to this way, Oaktown did a great job on this map!
Re: lol
Posted: Sun Oct 07, 2007 1:39 am
by oaktown
WidowMakers wrote:There is color. Black white and Brown. The texture and contrast is the "color" of this map.
I love it.
Thanks Wid, though there shouldn't even be any black left... the silhouettes are a very dark brown.
Changed the order of the XML lines and I still get "unexpected bonus" errors at the same three territories that Yeti says checked out. I'm guessing it's all fine. Still have to align army counts, but that's dead last.
Cleaned up the edges of the river...
Re: lol
Posted: Sun Oct 07, 2007 1:52 am
by cairnswk
Gnome wrote:WidowMakers wrote:soundout9 wrote:is there going to be color?
There is color. Black white and Brown. The texture and contrast is the "color" of this map.
I love it.
This map just looks best with this colours, I love it to this way, Oaktown did a great job on this map!
Agreed!
Posted: Sun Oct 07, 2007 2:01 am
by Incandenza
Map's looking good, dig the new wall. The question now is, how is the small map looking?
Posted: Sun Oct 07, 2007 2:08 am
by oaktown
Incandenza wrote:Map's looking good, dig the new wall. The question now is, how is the small map looking?
You be the judge...
Posted: Sun Oct 07, 2007 2:11 am
by Incandenza
I'd say you might want to de-grunge the Wannsee and Muggelheim territory names a bit, but other than that, it's all good.
Posted: Sun Oct 07, 2007 8:37 am
by asl80
yeah, comes out nice in the small too
(how true is your scale?)
gee - gameplay looks more exciting every time you look at the possibilities of where the battles are going to be over.
- ther'll be no hiding with the wall disputes in the centre!
[EDIT]: ooo, actually, you have to hold all the checkpoints to get a bonus ... hmmm, maybe they won't be that desirable if you can retreat and take the airfields or the partial sector bonuses?
{to get from Moabit to Kreuzberg might seem a little tough if your based more to the north - or is the idea that each player should try and have multiple attacking positions?}
{Might be more that the checkpints become a kind of continent objective (i.e. all together) in themselves - are you hoping that the battle forms around east-west on the wall - or not too fussed (or there's more to the stratergy than i can see)}
(sorry if this has already been raised and answered - please refer me back if it has)
What do you think? Has it been suggested to have individual bonuses for the checkpoints?
[Edit of Edit]: What did they say in the forum guidelines : don't use the forum as place for your mental diahorea - sorry, just interested in the map. And just to reiterate in support; Color scheme's great!
Re: lol
Posted: Sun Oct 07, 2007 11:25 am
by soundout9
cairnswk wrote:Gnome wrote:WidowMakers wrote:soundout9 wrote:is there going to be color?
There is color. Black white and Brown. The texture and contrast is the "color" of this map.
I love it.
This map just looks best with this colours, I love it to this way, Oaktown did a great job on this map!
Agreed!
I think its a good map i just think instead of brown and white there needs to be idk blue red and green. (just throwing stuff out) I really dont like these "dark" maps that are just kinda plain in detail (age of merchents) I like the strategy and stuff thats involved just really want color!
Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:18 am
by oaktown
Incandenza wrote:I'd say you might want to de-grunge the Wannsee and Muggelheim territory names a bit, but other than that, it's all good.
Sure, why not... fixed a few other little things as well, but nothing anybody will probably catch (no this isn't a challenge). Wannsee is still a bit muddy, so I'll hit it again with the next update.
As for adding color and the way the bonuses are as they are, I refer both soundout and asl80 back to pages 1-11 of this thread. How true is the scale? Well, imagine this is an image of a map spread out on a table before the commanders of the western forces in berlin and it might work.
Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:32 am
by Unit_2
oaktown wrote:Incandenza wrote:I'd say you might want to de-grunge the Wannsee and Muggelheim territory names a bit, but other than that, it's all good.
Sure, why not... fixed a few other little things as well, but nothing anybody will probably catch (no this isn't a challenge). Wannsee is still a bit muddy, so I'll hit it again with the next update.
As for adding color and the way the bonuses are as they are, I refer both soundout and asl80 back to pages 1-11 of this thread. How true is the scale? Well, imagine this is an image of a map spread out on a table before the commanders of the western forces in berlin and it might work.
you shouls keep the map teh way it is, but here is what i think you need to do:
-Brighten the French alittle.
-Make Russian and British darker.
-Make it easyer to see the water.
like i said, you should keep the "old" look, it looks cool.
Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2007 3:22 am
by Incandenza
Not to be the turd in the punch bowl (since this map couldn't be more forge-ready if you draped it in bananas), but how's BOB going to react to the zone bonuses? I'm wondering if BOB will have the same issues as it does with the partial airplane group bonuses in pearl harbor.
Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2007 4:43 am
by yeti_c
Incandenza wrote:Not to be the turd in the punch bowl (since this map couldn't be more forge-ready if you draped it in bananas), but how's BOB going to react to the zone bonuses? I'm wondering if BOB will have the same issues as it does with the partial airplane group bonuses in pearl harbor.
BOB has no code to deal with any of the new XML features... as it was written before they were released...
The new AJAX compatible version of BOB will need to cover this stuff...
C.
Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2007 4:56 am
by yeti_c
OK the ordering of the schema is thus... (This is a new schema that Lack wrote based on my schema)
Code: Select all
<define name="territory">
- <element name="territory">
- <element name="name">
- <data type="normalizedString">
<param name="minLength">1</param>
</data>
</element>
<ref name="borders" />
- <optional>
<ref name="bombardments" />
</optional>
- <element name="coordinates">
- <element name="smallx">
<data type="unsignedShort" />
</element>
- <element name="smally">
<data type="unsignedShort" />
</element>
- <element name="largex">
<data type="unsignedShort" />
</element>
- <element name="largey">
<data type="unsignedShort" />
</element>
</element>
- <optional>
- <element name="neutral">
<data type="unsignedShort" />
</element>
</optional>
- <optional>
- <element name="bonus">
<data type="short" />
</element>
</optional>
</element>
</define>
C.
Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2007 5:11 pm
by oaktown
Incandenza wrote:Not to be the turd in the punch bowl (since this map couldn't be more forge-ready if you draped it in bananas), but how's BOB going to react to the zone bonuses? I'm wondering if BOB will have the same issues as it does with the partial airplane group bonuses in pearl harbor.
Inc, I suspect this is not the first time you've been the turd.
But yes, until BOB is updated to reflect the XML additions it will have issues with this and other maps... I don't think that should limit me or anyone else as a mapmaker who is trying to take advantage of the play features of the site.
Thanks again, Yeti, for the above info... once I swap the bonus and neutral tags it should be fine (i hope).