Matrix Games Forums

Production Summary. The Soviet Union.

Production Summary. Western Allies.

One request. Please do not use red and green in the same graph, or if you do, run them by a color-blind person first to make sure tha two colors can be distinguished. There are reds and greens I can easily tell apart (traffic lights!). There are reds and greens I can't tell apart at all. The ones you used are marginal. If I work really hard, I can tell them apart, but I would prefer to not have to do so.

(There are some games I can't play at all because of this. Race for the Galaxy comes to mind immediately. I don't even want to think about Through the Desert. I don't know who thought pastels made a good choice for coloring the pieces of a game. Even trichromats have trouble with the pieces in that game.)

ORIGINAL: Courtenay

One request. Please do not use red and green in the same graph, or if you do, run them by a color-blind person first to make sure tha two colors can be distinguished. There are reds and greens I can easily tell apart (traffic lights!). There are reds and greens I can't tell apart at all. The ones you used are marginal. If I work really hard, I can tell them apart, but I would prefer to not have to do so.

(There are some games I can't play at all because of this. Race for the Galaxy comes to mind immediately. I don't even want to think about Through the Desert. I don't know who thought pastels made a good choice for coloring the pieces of a game. Even trichromats have trouble with the pieces in that game.)

Sure. I'll "update", when I get a chance, the summaries plots I've posted so far. To make my graphics "color blind" friendly, I'd appreciate any feedback on RGB line colors if you can for 4 lines.

There are also different kinds of color blindness. Generally speaking, if one uses colors and want to make sure the colorblind see them, one needs to know what to avoid.

https://usabilla.com/blog/how-to-design ... blindness/

I really gave Steve a thumbs up for designing this game with the colorblind in his mind. Since I started testing this game, I (being colorblind) had only a few things to remark on it regarding the colors used.

I used the default colors in Microsoft Paint until I found four that I could easily tell apart.

Blue, Gold, Dark Red, Lavender: 63/62/204, 255/201/14, 136/0/21, 200/191/231.

By the way, the color that Microsoft calls "dark red" does not look red at all to me.

Line width matters. Thicker lines are easier to see. Using the smallest line in paint, the lavender did not stand out well; using the next larger size line worked fine.

To my surprise, a thin yellow line was very hard to see against a white background. This caused me to reject yellow.

Black and white are of course distinguishable. White, though, has a problem -- white on white might just be a little hard to see!

ORIGINAL: Centuur

There are also different kinds of color blindness. Generally speaking, if one uses colors and want to make sure the colorblind see them, one needs to know what to avoid.

https://usabilla.com/blog/how-to-design ... blindness/

I really gave Steve a thumbs up for designing this game with the colorblind in his mind. Since I started testing this game, I (being colorblind) had only a few things to remark on it regarding the colors used.

ORIGINAL: Courtenay

I used the default colors in Microsoft Paint until I found four that I could easily tell apart.

Blue, Gold, Dark Red, Lavender: 63/62/204, 255/201/14, 136/0/21, 200/191/231.

By the way, the color that Microsoft calls "dark red" does not look red at all to me.

Line width matters. Thicker lines are easier to see. Using the smallest line in paint, the lavender did not stand out well; using the next larger size line worked fine.

To my surprise, a thin yellow line was very hard to see against a white background. This caused me to reject yellow.

Black and white are of course distinguishable. White, though, has a problem -- white on white might just be a little hard to see!

Graphics changed (i.e., line colors changed) consistent with these RGB values. Better?

Another option is to change the line type. In my work life I used a lot of dashed lines and dotted lines as well as the solid lines to avoid the issues with color blindness. It is especially important when using different projectors. They all seem to have a different shading to the colors, often very different than what you intended.

ORIGINAL: rkr1958

ORIGINAL: Centuur

There are also different kinds of color blindness. Generally speaking, if one uses colors and want to make sure the colorblind see them, one needs to know what to avoid.

https://usabilla.com/blog/how-to-design ... blindness/

I really gave Steve a thumbs up for designing this game with the colorblind in his mind. Since I started testing this game, I (being colorblind) had only a few things to remark on it regarding the colors used.

ORIGINAL: Courtenay

I used the default colors in Microsoft Paint until I found four that I could easily tell apart.

Blue, Gold, Dark Red, Lavender: 63/62/204, 255/201/14, 136/0/21, 200/191/231.

By the way, the color that Microsoft calls "dark red" does not look red at all to me.

Line width matters. Thicker lines are easier to see. Using the smallest line in paint, the lavender did not stand out well; using the next larger size line worked fine.

To my surprise, a thin yellow line was very hard to see against a white background. This caused me to reject yellow.

Black and white are of course distinguishable. White, though, has a problem -- white on white might just be a little hard to see!

Graphics changed (i.e., line colors changed) consistent with these RGB values. Better?

Yes... [&o]

ORIGINAL: rkr1958
Graphics changed (i.e., line colors changed) consistent with these RGB values. Better?

Much. Thank you. [&o]

Just really went back and looked. (The previous post was made after only a brief glance.) Before, it took effort for me to look at the graphs; more effort than I wanted to spend. Now it's easy, I just look at them. Again, thank you.

@ ashpa (Pat), great tip. Thanks!

@ Centuur, Courtenay. Glad the plots are easier to read. I'll stick to those colors.

[:)]

Impulse Summaries.

# Impulse pairs/halves is equivalent to the number of weather rolls made for a given turn. In general this applies to two impulses (hence impulse pair) but occasionally on applied to one impulse (hence impulse pair/halve) because of the turn ending.

The last three columns, respectively, in the table are the average number of weather rolls made, average number of axis impulses and average number of allied impulses for each turn and overall (i.e., total).

My impression until I compiled these stats was that the axis went first more than the allies and had significantly more impulses than the allies did. However, the allies actually moved first on 23 of the 41 turns (or 56% of the time). Over 41 turns, the axis had a total of 141 impulses and the allies 139. To a precision on 1-decimal place that's statically the same number of impulses per turn (i.e., 3.4) for both the axis and allies.

Weather Summaries.

This table provides a breakdown of the weather number of impulse pairs/halves (left side) and percentage (right side) actually seen over the entire game by turn and zone.

Action Summaries

The table provides the action summaries by country and turn (and overall (total)). The left side of the table are the raw number totals and the right side are the averages.

An interesting fact, and this is entirely a reflection on my play, no one took an air impulse the entire game.

Though I'd post my latest iteration of my "Historical World in Flames (HWIF)" rule set. Be advise all this is, and will continue to be, a work in progress.

...

...

I don't like the CW not being able to interfere with a German invasion of Norway. Take a look at the historical German naval losses during the Norwegian campaign.

Also, I disagree with your H.2.1a: If the Baltic is not frozen, the Germans could and did ship the iron ore through the Baltic. Also, I would hadd to H.2.1b that the Allies must have an SCS in the Norwegian sea.

ORIGINAL: Courtenay

I don't like the CW not being able to interfere with a German invasion of Norway. Take a look at the historical German naval losses during the Norwegian campaign.

Also, I would hadd to H.2.1b that the Allies must have an SCS in the Norwegian sea.

Thanks for the feedback. I agree with these two points and will update accordingly. With respect to an allied SCS in the Norwegian sea what do you think about 1 Swedish RP lost per SCS, or should all 3 be lost if only 1?

ORIGINAL: Courtenay

Also, I disagree with your H.2.1a: If the Baltic is not frozen, the Germans could and did ship the iron ore through the Baltic.

My though there is that if the British control Narvik then through diplomatic pressure on Sweden they're able to stop the iron ore shipments to Germany. Or should Britain have to invade Sweden to do that? Historically, what was Churchill's plan to stop the iron ore if the Brits had been successful in Narvik? Would that have required war with Sweden?