Maps for MWIF

[pak19652002]

I agree that forest is easily distinguished from swamp. Also, the mountains have gained some depth and snow caps. This is aesthetically pleasing although I might still like to see a little more. That's a matter of taste, however.

But, the big problem now...and I haven't noticed it before... is that the swamps have become hard to distinguish from the clear hexes.

Sorry[:(]

I remember in the old days the swamp hexes actually had some swampy looking weeds. I'm not proposing THAT necessarily, but they need something to set them off a little from the clear.

Peter

[YohanTM2]

Colour Blind checking in <g>

I actually find all the current hex schema to work well and have no difficulty seeing a difference between clear/swamp/forest.

I have another buddy who is more colour blind then me, I will have him review.

[c92nichj]

But, the big problem now...and I haven't noticed it before... is that the swamps have become hard to distinguish from the clear hexes.

I think I liked the lighter version of the clear terrain better than the current slightly darker variant, will make the clear terrain stand out from the swamp better.

[Ballista]

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

Last in the series.

One of the goals for changing the bitmap for Forest terrain was to differentitate them from Swamp. This is one of the hardest tests for that.

The Forest still looks quite different from Jungle. In the future I'll try to include a screen shot which includes both of them - when I have something else to show.

The resource icons still have the number 1 on them. I'll get the artist to remove it from both the oil and non-oil resources. But that got me to thinking, ....

How about removing the numbers completely and just placing multiple copies of the icon in a hex that has more than 1? 2, 3, and even 4 resource icons would be easy to fit into a hex - with no overlap. That's because the hexes that have multiple resources have little if anything else in them. Wadda ya think?

I like the square resource icons and think this is a good idea aesthetically.....

[Froonp]

Hindenburg up in flames! For Patrice.

Great !

Here are the darker rivers with darker clear and forest terrain. I believe the difference between the forest and swamp is more noticeable now.

Well, I love those forest hexes. They are now much more different from Swamps. Great !!!

[Froonp]

Here are the lakes and rivers with darker blue outlines. I have modified the coastal hexes so they match.

I'm not convicted by those darker blue outlines.

Notice the new iced-in port symbols for both minor and major ports.

This symbol is perfect to me [:D]

[Froonp]

Metz is still misplaced. I have only messed around with it about 20 times. I have put in the ability to position icons at 25 different points within a hex. It is letting me improve the placements of some icons, but mainly helps with the rail lines.

I find factories great on this shot.
You seem to have corrected the pixel shift they had.

[Froonp]

Last in the series.

One of the goals for changing the bitmap for Forest terrain was to differentitate them from Swamp. This is one of the hardest tests for that.

I believe it's a success.

The resource icons still have the number 1 on them. I'll get the artist to remove it from both the oil and non-oil resources. But that got me to thinking, ....

How about removing the numbers completely and just placing multiple copies of the icon in a hex that has more than 1? 2, 3, and even 4 resource icons would be easy to fit into a hex - with no overlap. That's because the hexes that have multiple resources have little if anything else in them. Wadda ya think?

I agree, and I refrained from proposing that, thinking you would say no because the hexes would become cluttered. Anyway, I doubt there are hexes with more than 3 resources in them. I think 3 is the maximum.

Anyway, those dark resources graphics do not show sufficiently for my taste in the hexes.

[Froonp]

I think the resource thing might work. How about this.. use the current icon for a single resource, and a slightly larger one for multiples and put a number under it. Single resources have no number, only multiple.

This is also a good idea.

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: stretch

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
Last in the series.

One of the goals for changing the bitmap for Forest terrain was to differentitate them from Swamp. This is one of the hardest tests for that.

The Forest still looks quite different from Jungle. In the future I'll try to include a screen shot which includes both of them - when I have something else to show.

The resource icons still have the number 1 on them. I'll get the artist to remove it from both the oil and non-oil resources. But that got me to thinking, ....

How about removing the numbers completely and just placing multiple copies of the icon in a hex that has more than 1? 2, 3, and even 4 resource icons would be easy to fit into a hex - with no overlap. That's because the hexes that have multiple resources have little if anything else in them. Wadda ya think?

I have no trouble separating the swamp from the forest. But I have 20-20 eyes and no color blindness, so I am easy to please.

I think the resource thing might work. How about this.. use the current icon for a single resource, and a slightly larger one for multiples and put a number under it. Single resources have no number, only multiple.

I like this idea of the number outside of the icon; but would leave the size of the icon the same at all times.

1 - It means the numbers do not interfere with the graphics of the icon.

2 - There is plenty of room for adding an external little square with a number in it.

3 - I can use high contrast colors for the number and background without messing up the icon graphics

4 - It is the same solution as is used for stacked units in a hex.

5 - I can use true type fonts, which will improve the legibility of the number at different levels of zoom.

Single quantities of resources would not have an external box (the same as for the units). I would place the box above the icon (the same as for the units). I would probably use distintive/dramatic colors: red on white for regular resources, and red on a light tan for oil resources.

This does not solve my problem of needing two icons when a multiple oil resource hex gets damaged. But I had that problem anyway - this doesn't introduce any new ones.

Right now, I am strongly inclined (picture of person on a steep slope) to go with this representation of multiple resources in a hex. If you do not like the idea, this is the best time to let me know.

[stretch]

stop the presses! one of my ideas pleases other people. [:D] Now if I can just carry that over to dealing with the wife.....

[c92nichj]

I agree, and I refrained from proposing that, thinking you would say no because the hexes would become cluttered. Anyway, I doubt there are hexes with more than 3 resources in them. I think 3 is the maximum.

3 is not really the maximum as Baku has 4 oil resources,(Venezuela has 6 in the same hex on the the american map but that map resolution is a bt extreme)

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: c92nichj

I agree, and I refrained from proposing that, thinking you would say no because the hexes would become cluttered. Anyway, I doubt there are hexes with more than 3 resources in them. I think 3 is the maximum.

3 is not really the maximum as Baku has 4 oil resources,(Venezuela has 6 in the same hex on the the american map but that map resolution is a bt extreme)

With the unified scale world map, the 6 Venezeula oil resources are spread out into 4 different hexes.

The Baku oil resources are spread into 2 hexes. Desptie that Baku is my primary concern for this change. It also has a port and city in the hex and is on the coast. If the amount of land in the hex ends up being small, then the city + port + oil resources (2) could be hard to fit in. If need be, I'll put both the port and oil rescource icons in the water.

[Incy]

I think the swamps could still need some reworking. It's not obvious from the graphics that it is a swamp hex. I would suggest changing the blue in the swamp hexes into something more similar to the blue of rivers & lakes. I.e. the same green color, but stronger blue and more contrast, that way one gets the idea that water is present.

Incy

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: Incy

I think the swamps could still need some reworking. It's not obvious from the graphics that it is a swamp hex. I would suggest changing the blue in the swamp hexes into something more similar to the blue of rivers & lakes. I.e. the same green color, but stronger blue and more contrast, that way one gets the idea that water is present.

Incy

Possibly.

I am actually content with the swamps as they are, except: the problem that Peter (pak19652002) has with them. He sees colors differently and can't differentiate the clear from the swamp given the current terrain bitmaps. Any change we make to the Swamps has to solve that problem first and foremost.

Perhaps replacing the darker blue in the swamps with a lighter shade of blue will do that. This is a newly identified problem - he just posted it yesterday. So, I will wait a while before charging off with any proposed solution. I have a couple of other ideas, but I don't like either of them enough to try them or post them.

[pak19652002]

Thanks for the effort. This is not a make-or-break problem but could be easily solved by making one or the other darker or lighter. Differential shading would set up a contrast between the two hex types. Messing around with colors is probably a lost cause, for all the well-publicized reasons. Maybe just make the clear hexes a little lighter and/or the swamp a little darker (seems appropriate, no?) and it should be fine.

Peter

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: pak19652002

Thanks for the effort. This is not a make-or-break problem but could be easily solved by making one or the other darker or lighter. Differential shading would set up a contrast between the two hex types. Messing around with colors is probably a lost cause, for all the well-publicized reasons. Maybe just make the clear hexes a little lighter and/or the swamp a little darker (seems appropriate, no?) and it should be fine.

Peter

The graphics artist did some work in this area last summer. He is going to look up his notes. There is no rush on this.

[dhatchen]

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets


I like this idea of the number outside of the icon; but would leave the size of the icon the same at all times.

1 - It means the numbers do not interfere with the graphics of the icon.

2 - There is plenty of room for adding an external little square with a number in it.

3 - I can use high contrast colors for the number and background without messing up the icon graphics

4 - It is the same solution as is used for stacked units in a hex.

5 - I can use true type fonts, which will improve the legibility of the number at different levels of zoom.

Single quantities of resources would not have an external box (the same as for the units). I would place the box above the icon (the same as for the units). I would probably use distintive/dramatic colors: red on white for regular resources, and red on a light tan for oil resources.

This does not solve my problem of needing two icons when a multiple oil resource hex gets damaged. But I had that problem anyway - this doesn't introduce any new ones.

Right now, I am strongly inclined (picture of person on a steep slope) to go with this representation of multiple resources in a hex. If you do not like the idea, this is the best time to let me know.

I think that this is something to try. Could you get us a shot of it?

I like the changes you have shown with these screen shots, specifically:

1 - Iced in ports, great.
2 - Forest, good contrast with swamp now.
3 - Your earlier change to clear terrain, super.
4 - Darker blue outline on rivers, etc, too garish.
5 - The square resource is fine but does not stand out enough, backgound too dark. They are lost in the mountains in Spain (post# 511).
6 - I don't know if you are changing the factory icons yet, but they are poor and inconsistent. In the screen shot in post #510, the factory stack in Leipzig is crooked but one hex to the east the stack is straight. This particular problem is not evident in posts 508 and 509.

Thanks to pak19652002 for keeping us informed of the useability of these maps for colour-blind people. There are a couple of different types of colour-blindness and it would be good if all kinds were covered. Thanks Steve for being open to this. It would be terrible if anyone was excluded for such a thing.

Dan

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: dhatchen

I like the changes you have shown with these screen shots, specifically:

1 - Iced in ports, great.
2 - Forest, good contrast with swamp now.
3 - Your earlier change to clear terrain, super.
4 - Darker blue outline on rivers, etc, too garish.
5 - The square resource is fine but does not stand out enough, backgound too dark. They are lost in the mountains in Spain (post# 511).
6 - I don't know if you are changing the factory icons yet, but they are poor and inconsistent. In the screen shot in post #510, the factory stack in Leipzig is crooked but one hex to the east the stack is straight. This particular problem is not evident in posts 508 and 509.

Thanks to pak19652002 for keeping us informed of the useability of these maps for colour-blind people. There are a couple of different types of colour-blindness and it would be good if all kinds were covered. Thanks Steve for being open to this. It would be terrible if anyone was excluded for such a thing.

Dan

#4 - the artist just informed me that he used anti-aliasing in generating the bitmaps I recieved for the rivers and lakes. That was done against a white background and it causes a blurring around the outside at lower levels of zoom. He is going to send me a revised copy without the anti-aliasing. That should help (a lot, I believe).

#6 - the distortion you are seeing in the factories is wholely the result of conversion to jpg - the reds and blues against a white background get particularly messed up. They are fine on the screen at all levels of zoom.

#5 - I see your point, but just barely. There are two opposing goals: maintaining a consistent ambience versus making things noticeable. You are saying the resources are not noticeable enough, I do not want to lose the consistency. But we are just 2 viewers. I would like to hear more opinions on this.

[Besenwesen]

I don't have much to add, so I just want to tell you Shannon that I really really like the Map! The Rivers, the Coastal Shore, the Railways ... it just looks great [:)]
One of the main reasons I never really liked the Old CWif was because of the poor Map. I have a very good feeling about MWif !!!