Conquer Club

All thenames and places are based on the Real Periodic Table, thats why he has the spot in the corner, and thats why the names "Other Metals" are thus, i mean why make it if ur gonna change its funtions

CatfishJohnson wrote:All thenames and places are based on the Real Periodic Table, thats why he has the spot in the corner, and thats why the names "Other Metals" are thus, i mean why make it if ur gonna change its funtions

Not really sure who this post is aimed at... but I'm going to assume it is me...

TCX has already answered the "other metals" question... so chill your horses.

C.

oh if it sounded like a hostile shot i didnt mean it like that i was just saying it

yeti always makes non-vehement helpful comments on maps, so don't assault him for helping out.

The only other name for Other Metals that i have heard is Poor Metals, but i'm just throwing that out there

ZeakCytho wrote:The gameplay for this map seems very interesting, but, in my opinion, the graphics need work. I think the background should be something lighter colored; The entire map just seems unnecessarily dark right now. I don't love the font either, but it's not terrible.

Yeah, this quote pretty much sums up how I feel about the map as well so far. I think it has promise, and the fact that this is probably the fifth attempt at a CC periodic table map suggests that it is a popular idea. The question has always been how to take a good idea and make it playable.

The font is a bit clunky, especially in the legend - this is trouble, because making the legend easy to read and understand is what will make or break this map. I think you're going to need additional explanation on the legend about how everything flows around the board. You've got info about special movements across the top as well as buried in with the bonus info, but nowhere on the map does it say that non-transition elements can't attack vertically. When I first read the "8-way attack" I thought you meant everything, until I read your first post.

OK, keep working. And can you please include image size(s)?

Oaktown wrote:Yeah, this quote pretty much sums up how I feel about the map as well so far. I think it has promise, and the fact that this is probably the fifth attempt at a CC periodic table map suggests that it is a popular idea. The question has always been how to take a good idea and make it playable.

We will not rest until Periodic Madness has either been Quenched or forcibly deleted. That better sentiment than the first 4 times?

The font is a bit clunky, especially in the legend - this is trouble, because making the legend easy to read and understand is what will make or break this map. I think you're going to need additional explanation on the legend about how everything flows around the board. You've got info about special movements across the top as well as buried in with the bonus info, but nowhere on the map does it say that non-transition elements can't attack vertically. When I first read the "8-way attack" I thought you meant everything, until I read your first post.

I'll add a white "normal 4-way attack" with image counterpart to a blue-ish "transition 8-way attack". It'll be the same explanation as used before, just smaller and less space-consuming. As for font, I would like to use a font that's slightly "off" to reflect the different source material, so if you have any suggestions for something more readable but still "off", let me know.

OK, keep working. And can you please include image size(s)?

What mean ye, my good man? I've been working purely with the Small map as of yet, but do you mean dimensions? The current small comes in well under the maximums in width and height, but I forget what exactly.

Hey Tack,

I'm the sole vote for white. I think if the passable borders were white it would really help. The current version you have to closely identify what is a thick vs. thin black border.

LMR

I think the white is a great improvement over the black, but I voted to see something grey. I think a very light grey would work the best. I did a very fast scan of colors and #C4C4C4 seems to be a good match to what I was imagining.

TaCktiX wrote:What mean ye, my good man? I've been working purely with the Small map as of yet, but do you mean dimensions? The current small comes in well under the maximums in width and height, but I forget what exactly.

Right, when I look at a map (especially when I'm on my laptop as I was this evening) I sometimes wonder if the image I'm looking at was intended to be the big or small image... i appreciate it when such information is included in the first post.

Everything will be included in the next update

Version 14


Updates:
- Changed background color to the new explosive gray (#C4C4C4)
- Moved bonus text to be near the continent it applies to
- Changed continent colors around to match the new lighter background better
- Changed the font to some much more readable
- Adjusted symbols/text to clean it up
- Added a clearer explanation of what the normal attack directions are and the Transition attack directions
- Made the credits a little less obtrusive
- Made the triangles bigger and more obvious where needed

SMALL Version (Here's looking at you, Oaktown)


TO DO:
- Change borders to something other than black to prevent passable/impassable confusion
- Fix the bizarre Transitions Arrack typo (oops!)

This totally rocks!!

I really like the lighter background. It really makes it easier on the eyes. The new font is totally fun. The white outline around the font might be up for discussion. I tried to pretend that I don't know what it says, so I could decide if it's hard to read. However, I do know, so I couldn't. Finally, I like that you spread out the legend info.

More later--when I'm not all hungover.

Best,
LMR

Woo, this gray is awesome! Which genius suggested it again?

I think the black outline around the entire table is generally too thick. It also seems thicker in some areas than others. For example, left of the Alkali metals and right of the noble gases. If the thickness is because it's an impassable, then I'm not really sure that's needed. I think it's clear you can't wrap around the table except where there are arrows.

I guess I don't like the fact that the table border and the impassables are the same color/style. Maybe make the border around the table a silvery thing, and leave the impassables as thick black lines? That might not be keeping in the spirit of the simple textbook table, though. I'd suggest adding some bevel to the entire table, but you probably won't want to do that for the same reason.

Could you increase the color difference between the transition metals, other metals, and semiconductors? I'm having a bit of a hard time telling where some things are based on the map; I'm mostly using my knowledge of the periodic table to assume groupings. I think a clearer color difference would be a big improvement.

ZeakCytho wrote:Woo, this gray is awesome! Which genius suggested it again?

I think the black outline around the entire table is generally too thick. It also seems thicker in some areas than others. For example, left of the Alkali metals and right of the noble gases. If the thickness is because it's an impassable, then I'm not really sure that's needed. I think it's clear you can't wrap around the table except where there are arrows.

I guess I don't like the fact that the table border and the impassables are the same color/style. Maybe make the border around the table a silvery thing, and leave the impassables as thick black lines? That might not be keeping in the spirit of the simple textbook table, though. I'd suggest adding some bevel to the entire table, but you probably won't want to do that for the same reason.

See the To Do comments in Tack's post. They're below the gray map. The impassables should be the same color as the background to keep with the "you'd see it in a textbook" theme.

ZeakCytho wrote:Could you increase the color difference between the transition metals, other metals, and semiconductors? I'm having a bit of a hard time telling where some things are based on the map; I'm mostly using my knowledge of the periodic table to assume groupings. I think a clearer color difference would be a big improvement.

I agree. Possibly you could switch the semiconductor color with either the alkali metals or noble gases color.

Best,
LMR

Version 15

Updates:
- Changed borders to white
- Narrowed the external black borders
- Changed colors around to help with red-green colorblindness

Small (571x424)


Discussion Points:
- Could we get a bonus discussion going? I know that with exception of the Transitions they SEEM very high. Should we go with partial-hold bonuses a la Berlin 1961? Lower them in general? Keep them as is?
- Are the colors contrasted enough for the colorblind?
- Are explanations of unique features clear?
- Are the Lanthanides and Actinides TOO isolated from the rest of the map? If so, any way we could fix that?

Looking MUCH sharper...

Couple of things...
a) The +'s and -'s are still a bit messy -> Not sure how to tidy them up though...
b) the Radioactive signs are different sizes.
c) There is no mention of whether or not Transitions attack 8 way out of their zones of not? (i.e. Cd -> Ga)
Perhaps "Transitions attack each other 8-way"

Either that - or you could break the table round the transitions with a couple of gaps - then add in some arrows from Ca -> Sc, Sr -> Y, Zn -> Ga, Cd -> In?
Like this


C.

a) The +'s and -'s are still a bit messy -> Not sure how to tidy them up though...

Oops, forgot to address that. Will do.

b) the Radioactive signs are different sizes.

A relic of the font change, I'll make them uniformly smaller.

c) There is no mention of whether or not Transitions attack 8 way out of their zones of not? (i.e. Cd -> Ga)

They can. Bonuses are calculated based on that. It IS limited by the border of the table, so Zn cannot attack Al, and Sc cannot attack Mg. That seems like something very complex now that I write it out. So I suppose we'll go with your wording and re-evaluate the bonuses for Alkaline Earth and Other Metals.

Hmmm what about La to Zr for instance then...

C.

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

I'm a huge fan of the lighter borders and background. I'd like to see them the same color, and maybe a gray that's one or two shades lighter.

The picture that Yeti put up is a neat idea. I particularly like how that territories that can attack one another are matching color. This would be better than the arrows. I don't know, however, how that might play into keeping with the continent colors.

Several of the colors are not easily readable in the legend, especially the greens.

Bonuses are a little high. Maybe all in the top block could be knocked down one except for hydrogen, transitions, and organics.

Keep plugging along, another good update should really show some progress.

Best,
LMR

laci_mae wrote:Several of the colors are not easily readable in the legend, especially the greens.

I agree with this. The text of the Lanthanides bonus is especially hard to read as well.

Most of what I had to say has been said by others already, though. Hope to see an update soon.

TaCktiX wrote:Small (571x424)

Ah, now that's what i was looking for! You've got a lot going on in this map - wouldn't hurt to push it out to 600 (or up to 630) pixels wide for the small. You've got pixels to play with - may as well use them.

TaCktiX wrote: Are the colors contrasted enough for the colorblind?

My biggest problem with the colors has been mentioned - legend text against the background. As long as the bonus information is displayed in a way that it is clear which region it goes with - as is the case with the Lanthinides and Actinides, for example, where or not I can tell which color goes with which legend line doesn't matter so much.

on regards to the bonus legend, why not change the outer glow to like black or something dark, that way they'd stand out

I tried that, but on a lot of the colors it washes them out even worse. I think I'm going to have to come up with a different solution entirely other than a glow.