Conquer Club

ok,here it map with clear half of names,so everybody can experiment to find better solution then what i create.Dont forget require text style is-Book Antiqua Italic,no shadows(its not realistic if names have shadows.
Good luck to all who want to help. note:just copy and paste images.

Qwert, here is an example of what I've been talking about - look at the difference between the two font styles.

I have uploaded the PSD here. It expires in 3 days

In my example, there is still room for improvement, but this is the sort of thing I've been trying to get at...

well its easy to use only these part of map when you have space to do what you want,you have so many terittories to fill.Also names must go L I K E T H E S E.
You will se that is not easy to create names to stay good in all provinces.

new update,i change names outer glow,and now its same like nonplayabile area(except colour of text) note,all names(except non playabile)its same size,colour(except names in sea),and outer glow,so if you see that some not look same,these is probably eye feel(i have these with lusitania).

That actually hurts my eyes now.

C.

by yeti_c on Wed Jul 16, 2008 10:48 pm

That actually hurts my eyes now.

Yeti,now i have desire to say some very bad things on mine language.What is problem now

There is nothing wrong with it any more, QUENCH!

qwert wrote:

by yeti_c on Wed Jul 16, 2008 10:48 pm

That actually hurts my eyes now.

Yeti,now i have desire to say some very bad things on mine language.What is problem now

What I'm saying is that the previous version is better than that version.

C.

What I'm saying is that the previous version is better than that version.

what previous version?

max is gr8 wrote:There is nothing wrong with it any more, QUENCH!

I agree...get this into FF.

Yeti_c...i'm not being a smartass..perhaps if you don't wear them already, you could join the glasses club like MrBenn and myself.

This version...
Is MUCH better than this version...
This new one hurts my eyes.

C.

PS - Cairns I had them tested the other day - I have -0.25 -0.25 eyes -> as near as makes no difference 20/20.

yeti,i like bouth version. You change yours thinking like other people tell,First you dont like first version,and now you say that first version is better,and that you dont like second version.I think that second version is better,names is much bigger and better for read.
Now aim understand why is yours European revolution map is so dark,because your eyes can look on ligh maps.Try to use sun glases.

qwert wrote:yeti,i like bouth version. You change yours thinking like other people tell,First you dont like first version,and now you say that first version is better,and that you dont like second version.I think that second version is better,names is much bigger and better for read.
Now aim understand why is yours European revolution map is so dark,because your eyes can look on ligh maps.Try to use sun glases.

Better - is subjective -> Vomitting at the end of a night of drink is Better than vomitting the next day... still not a pleasant experience...

Euro Rev - isn't my graphics - in fact - I told Gimil that it was too dark to start with. (Not in thread via Skype)

1st version is OK - it is better than the 2nd version - I wouldn't be able to play on the second version as it hurts my eyes.

C.

Can you explane,why hurts your eyes?

qwert wrote:Can you explane,why hurts your eyes?

I look at it - and it hurts... I suspect it's the fuzziness of the lettering due to the light edges bleeding into the dark writing.

The first one doesn't hurt at all.

C.

But then why you support Mrbeen,if you all ready satisfy with old version?

qwert wrote:But then why you support Mrbeen,if you all ready satisfy with old version?

I wasn't supporting Mr Benn?!

I was agreeing with his comment that the wordings *could* be better...

And now I am saying the newer version is a retrograde step...

At the moment - the 1st version is OK. - it is neither great nor perfect - it is OK.

If that's OK enough to pass the standard - then so be it...

The new lettering is NOT OK.

C.

If that's OK enough to pass the standard - then so be it...

Now these is very interesting,for all mine work here i never find who is responsibile to create standards for text in maps? I belive that mine decision for these map is good,its these mean that i decide these,or do we have some not writen rules for that?

I can't actually tell any substantial difference, except the text, and who actually reads that anyway?

I think the text is much better on the second version personally... easier to read.

I think the text is bad on both versions. I don't see why the spacing between each letter needs to be so wide.

OK,i think is time for poll.
Question will be:
who text option is better.
option A
option B

POLL OPTIONS FOR TEXT ON MAP
OPTION A OPTION B ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Can there be a neither option?

I like the black best, It gives more Power to the map:D

The red is dashling into the background, but what makes the red good is bigger letters some of the black letter on the map is verry small and hard to read.

So i voted A. But i probbably would have voted none of theese if that was an option atm.