Chinese Checkers [Quenched] May '07 re-opener?
Moderator: Cartographers
Forum rules
Please read the Community Guidelines before posting.
Please read the Community Guidelines before posting.
qwert wrote:oaktownqwert wrote:
Look page 28 and you will see a lot numbers who dont centralised. What centralising point? These you call centralising point.
Qwert, I'm not going to debate you, but I will tell you what I did.
1. I chose a symmetrical one digit number to work with - "8" - because any other number would be appear off-center.
2. I had the benefit of working on a grid, so as long as one number in a row or column lines up they all do.
3. I explained my process along the way and responded to questions/concerns.
I think these look pretty good.
Oaktown, i have same problems, and same explanation, but people dont want to apply my explanation but apply yours, why? These my import question and i will be hapy that someone can explain to me.
Qwert, you have NEVER created a map with just 88 or 8 in army circles.
qwert wrote:Yes i do, if you look in my topic, you will se that i do these, and with several pages of explanation why numbers can be centralising, like oaktown say in hes topic.
Post a link. I dont remember seeing just 8 or 88 in your maps. You always have created a different numbers there. When you have 88 in the map you CAN centralize them perfectly.
-
Qwert
- SoC Training Adviser
- Posts: 9262
- Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 5:07 pm
- Location: VOJVODINA
- Contact:
I've noticed that CC doesn't center a 2-digit number based on the center of the number, but on the location of the space between the two digits. So 25 will look centered, but 15 will look just off to the right because the 1 doesn't fill the space as the 2 would.
As such, I originally centered all numbers using a symmetrical 1 digit number, 8.
edit: This same phenomenon makes it look as if many of the lines intersecting the circles are skewed to the left, but I've gone back many times to play with them and they should be pretty close. Suffice it to say this is the last time I make a map with army circles. (Army pyramids is the way to go, just you wait and see!)
These what oaktown say
i was trying to find qwert's maps in eastern front earlier, but they've been removed. the posts suggest he used all 8s as I did.
What made this map easier was that all of my territories were aligned with other territories - I didn't have to figure out 60 different sets of coordinates, but only about 20, which I then copied across that row or column. If something was off it was very obvious, because it could be compared to the other numbers in that row or column. That's what I meant when I said I was working on a grid.
Qwert, it doesn't look like your current project is on a grid, nor are you using army shadows. I'm now going to take this discussion to your thread, because this one is done.
What made this map easier was that all of my territories were aligned with other territories - I didn't have to figure out 60 different sets of coordinates, but only about 20, which I then copied across that row or column. If something was off it was very obvious, because it could be compared to the other numbers in that row or column. That's what I meant when I said I was working on a grid.
Qwert, it doesn't look like your current project is on a grid, nor are you using army shadows. I'm now going to take this discussion to your thread, because this one is done.
qwert wrote:If you so interesting, why you dont find alone.
If you are complaining, why don't YOU prove it. And in English it is "if you are interested, why don't you find it yourself." I am interesting, students are studying me in a microscope.
But still don't have a clue what you have said about posts...
EvilOtto wrote:AndrewB wrote:qwert wrote:...numbers can be centralising, like oaktown say in hes topic.
...When you have 88 in the map you CAN centralize them perfectly.
When did the words "center" and "centered" fall out of use? As in: "Please center the army numbers in your map" and "I centered them perfectly"?
In British English it is centre, in US English it is center. Both are right
Guiscard wrote:he means coordinates are (grammatically) 'centred' not 'centralized'.
Hm, dictionaries are saying such word exists:
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/centralized
-
Guiscard
- Posts: 4103
- Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 7:27 pm
- Location: In the bar... With my head on the bar
AndrewB wrote:Guiscard wrote:he means coordinates are (grammatically) 'centred' not 'centralized'.
Hm, dictionaries are saying such word exists:
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/centralized
Yeh, the word centralisation exists too its just not the right word. Army coordinates are centred (as in one thing aligned to a central point) whereas if there were many things all moved to the same point they would be centralised. Centralised is used more to refer to actual things such as governments, offices etc. etc.
Anyway, good job Oaktown. It's a nice map and I can't wait to play it.
qwert wrote:Can i ask you something?What is porpose for you to open these Political topic in ConquerClub? Why you mix politic with Risk? Why you not open topic like HOT AND SEXY,or something like that.
Guiscard wrote:AndrewB wrote:Guiscard wrote:he means coordinates are (grammatically) 'centred' not 'centralized'.
Hm, dictionaries are saying such word exists:
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/centralized
Yeh, the word centralisation exists too its just not the right word. Army coordinates are centred (as in one thing aligned to a central point) whereas if there were many things all moved to the same point they would be centralised. Centralised is used more to refer to actual things such as governments, offices etc. etc.
Anyway, good job Oaktown. It's a nice map and I can't wait to play it.
Alright, gotcha, makes sense.
