deepblue,
the colours on the map that Positronica did (the orangish Japan and all that) were fine by me. I printed the adjustment you made, and that came out equally as well. I have no problem with Russia, Germany, UK, USA or Italy in terms of colours.
Yeah as far as gameplay goes acouple of tweaks are needed I noted a few a while back. I don’t have my map handy but some anchors are dumb, cause they are. Coroline islands i think it is, doesn’t reach japan it should. The sea zones adjacent to Normandy and Spain and the anchor don’t work. In other words useless to Axis. and they control it. Both sides of Japan need an Anchor. I made some notes but I don’t have them with me I’ll get back to you.
OK on Jpeg… but please maximum quality possible. I will print this out… perhaps ill pay you Jim? That way it will be decent.
Also on the azores i think the islands should be completely inside of #31… the aesthetic if the overlap of those lines into 32 does not look right IMO.
On the issue of bombing range… understand that germany does have to actually Control these SZ around the islands or the Allies will just invade and take out the air. I suspect this Azores thing will be a late war startegy for the axis which incidently would reflect on development of long range planes
In the beginning period of ther game probably serve the allies better as a ASW platform to attack by air enemy german subs.
Ok, Imperious, no need to pay for an export. I just charge for printing, 'cause when that machine goes on, it bleeds money. The cost in ink is what kills you.
But what is it you would like? All I have is the original that started this thread, nothing of this new stuff everyone is exited about. Do you want a .jpg of the orignal?
-jim lee
Yea something that when i expand it in illustrator CS2 it will not pixilate. The previous Jpeg is no good for printing. I can barely read the territories to check them.
When everythings done then ill get a print… but right now things are in flux
Imp,
I agree with your aesthetic point, I am hoping to get more feedback on the Azores in time for the next draft.
What is your issue actually, with the file formats and all? What are you trying to do, maybe I can help?
Death Head 420,
Keep the game play input coming.
The ports/air field markers need a serious overhaul. But let’s get the map the way we like it before we go to far down that road.
Pdel21,
Thanks for printing a test of the new colors. Invaluable input.
Jim,
Thanks for the info on the PDF file. I did a quick Google search and found that TIFF is considered the best format for printing. Do you find this to be true?
$4.32 a square foot WOW!! Now were talking. Can you print on heaver paper?
What is your issue actually, with the file formats and all? What are you trying to do, maybe I can help?
Yes can someone please come up with an actual size Jpeg that when printed or looked at closely will not pixelate? Supreme quality… if not PDF then auto cad or some other extension…
what extentions do you have available under PSP format? Can you list what you got?
I am close to finished with AARHE and need to work on something else and that is to help you make the best varient possible.
I like the simplicity of your rules…. Id like to contribute some goodies to it but the map is the first step.
Deepblue : What I’ve found so far is .jpg at 300 dpi with some compression to make it managable is best. I’m not fond of .TIFF 'cause its somewhat variable and many times the file is just huge without any noticable increase in quality. So far, and I’m new at this too, I’ve found that with these large printouts you can compress things pretty much without it being noticeable.
24lb coated paper is the heaviest I have now. And, until this is set in stone, maybe we should stick to the less expensive 24lb.
Imperious : To get higher dpi than the original, the map needs to be opened with Photoshop Pro and re-rendered at a higher dpi. { And this may or may not help. } I -think- this will only help the text and effects, but I don’t know. That initial image that this all started with doesn’t have all that much resolution. 100 dpi. at something like 32 inches. It still printed fine for a playable gameboard. My PC is somewhat weak and can’t increase the dpi on this layout its too big for its memory.
Wrapping any bit image in some other file format will not make it scalable. Once its a bit image, your bits are set. Bigger images only give bigger bits. Some things do a better job at smoothing these bits than other things.
Why do many .pdf files print so well? Becuse they are usually vector images with mixed in very high resolution bit images. And vector images -are- scalable.
I hope this helps…
-jim lee
Guys,
I’m not sure what the issue is with the jpgs. Mine printed out really well on my HP plotter with crummy paper, (didn’t want to use the good stuff until a final map is ready). I just printed out the map that was in the ZIP file that is on page 1 of this post.
I agree that the Azores could be bit more to the center of the sea zone, I don’t think a slight nod away from reality of location is a big deal, much of the map is not quite to scale anyhow.
As for the colors, I think they should work fine.
deepblue,
any chance you could post the latest draft, the last one I’ve seen is before the sahara and azores, (like back on page 9 of this thread)
Thanks!
It’s Friday!!
The second draft has arrived!
Gentlemen,
I plan to post new drafts on Fridays as long as there are enough changes to warrant one.
I have made the following changes from the first draft:
Added:
The Sahara Desert.
Chinese roundel.
City area for Chunking.
Victory Cities. (Not Final, figured it was time to start the discussion)
Ceylon
The Azores (I did not like the fact that they were the only islands in the Atlantic so I added a few more just for flavor if you don’t like them they can be removed or changed.)
Bermuda
Canary Islands
Cape Verde
St. Helena
Changed:
Made Brazil Neutral. (I do not like the way this looks. I prefer to have some sort of contrast in South America. This is purely an aesthetics comment.)
Corrected Yucatan.
Gilbert Islands are now British.
Reminders:
When reviewing the map please consider both historical accuracy and game play.
The image has been reduced by 50% for faster downloads. (Makes it a little fuzzy)
Unfinished elements have been removed.
This is a work in progress.
Victory Cities
Ok, now for our VC discussion. This should be fun. I found this list on Larry Harris’s board (creator of A&A) and thought it would be a good starting point for our discussion. For the most part I like this list except for a few cities which I have noted. I have also listed some possible replacements/additions.
The VCs are tiered with 20, 15 and 10 point cities. Each nation has one 20 and 15 point city and three 10 point cities. (I may be in favor of reducing this to two 10 point cities for a total of 4 cities per nation.)
20 point cities are:
Washington
London
Moscow
Berlin
Rome
Tokyo
15 point cities are:
San Francisco
Calcutta
Stalingrad
Paris
Athens
Peiping
10 Point cities are:
Honolulu
Manila
Panama City (Not sure if I like this one)
Canberra
Cairo
Singapore
Leningrad
Baku
Vladivostok
Oslo
Warsaw
Budapest
Tripoli
Mogadiscio (Not an Option on our Map Needs to be replaced)
Palermo
Okinawa
Seoul (Not sure if I like this one)
Taipei
Others Options
Cape Town
Bangkok
Shanghai
Chungking
Milan
Taranto
Larry Harris’s Thread
http://www.harrisgamedesign.com/bb/viewtopic.php?t=546&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0
South America is fine now. It wasn’t really involved in WWII… Still, I would like Portugal to be added, you add the Azores (colony of Portugal, but not the Homeland) while I know it is only neutral… and add the name of Corsica.
On victory cities I have some more suggestions;
Batavia on Java. (East Indies where important to Japan!!)
Guadalcanal on the Solomon Islands (not really a city, but the most known area and historical important)
Madrid (Spain), Istanbul (Turkey), Stockholm (Sweden)
Tobruk (see it on the map, but not in your list)
Cape Town (South Africa)
Basra (Iraq)
Kiev (Ukraine)
Ploesti or Bucharest (Roumania) Very important to Germany
Rangoon (Burma) Important to the Burma Road
Gibraltar (Was very important to the Allies for entrance to the med. and to Italy)
Valletta (Malta) Most bombed place of WWII
Micoom,
Tobruk (see it on the map, but not in your list)
Yes, there are cities on the map that are not victory cites. Hong Kong, Tobruk, Chungking are not victory cities.
Thanks for the suggestions on the victory cities but…
I think your list is way to long, actually I think my list may be a bit too long. We can’t add every city that had conflict or that was a point of interest. We need to keep it concise balancing game play with historical fact. I am also not in favor of victory cities in neutral counties, they encourage players to invade neutral territories that were not invaded during the war, I can understand why some might want them on the map but in my opinion they are unnecessary.
You make a good counter point on Portugal. The difference is that Portugal allowed Britain to use the Azores as an airbase. Not really neutral is it? I will make a test and see what the group thinks.
Thanks for the input, I’m glad you have a different point of view.
It isn’t necessary to use all cities, but choose the best from all. My understanding was that your list isn’t the final one. So I made some extra suggestions.
First off its nice to see Micoom around here. Now i know this will get better.
Heres your list with my suggestions:
This is now modified according to those guidelines you just posted:
1. Equal cities for each nation. (Italy will have a hard time with this)
2. “Fairness†None of the cities should be easier to be captured than another, in theory.
3. Not so many cities that when a player loses one they say “Oh well†and move on. Losing cities should still be a big deal.
4. Keep the number down, but more than the current AA game. (I like the idea of 4 to 5 cities per nation, beyond 30 cities is just way too many.)
5. Encourage fighting in the historically correct regions of the world, but allow for creative plans of attack.
6. No two cities adjacent to one another. (I know Warsaw is next to Berlin, but I figured you guys would go nuts if I left off Warsaw and I would have to agree.)
20 point cities are: 6 total
Washington
London
Moscow
Berlin
Rome
Tokyo
15 point cities are:12 total
San Francisco-US
Honolulu-US
Singapore-JP
Hsingking-JP
Leningrad-SU
Milan-ITL
Taranto- ItL
Stalingrad-SU
Paris-GER
Canberra-UK
Ploesti oil center-GER
Cairo/ Alexandria/ Suez- UK
10 Point cities are: 18 total
Archangel-SU
Manila- JP
Calcutta-UK
Panama canal-USA
Baku-SU
Peiping-JP
Oslo-GER
Warsaw-GER
Addis Ababa- ITL ( capital of abbysinia in africa)
Tunis-ITL
Toranto-UK
Okinawa-JP
Shanghai-USA
Chungking-USA
Tobruk-ITL
Kiev-GER
Chelyabinsk (Tankograd)-SU
Cape Horn-UK
wild card points: 5 total
Ankarra-neutral
Madrid-neutral
stockholm-neutral
Istanbul-neutral
Mosul-neutral
ok now each nation has 1 -20 point , 2 -15 point, and 3 -10 point= 80 points each X 3= 240 per side and 480 total. I woulkd like to make wildcard cities variable in the game Roll one die on conquest : 1-2= 10 points, 3-4= 15 points, 5-6= 20 points
note that eastern SU is not attractive to Japan due to not points… hopefully japan will leave Russians alone.
I could make four 5 point spots for each player which would give each player 100 points to start… nice round number.
Micoom,
I apologize if my last post sounded negative that was not my intent.
I assumed that your list was an addition to the current list which I feel would be way too many cities.
But if they are replacements then some of them could work.
Some of my goals for VCs. But not the requirements, I can be persuaded by a good argument.
1. Equal cities for each nation. (Italy will have a hard time with this)
2. “Fairness†None of the cities should be easier to be captured than another, in theory.
3. Not so many cities that when a player loses one they say “Oh well†and move on. Losing cities should still be a big deal.
4. Keep the number down, but more than the current AA game. (I like the idea of 4 to 5 cities per nation, beyond 30 cities is just way too many.)
5. Encourage fighting in the historically correct regions of the world, but allow for creative plans of attack.
6. No two cities adjacent to one another. (I know Warsaw is next to Berlin, but I figured you guys would go nuts if I left off Warsaw and I would have to agree.)
7. Minimize the amount of math. Keep the scoring simple.
8. The majority of the group is happy with the final list.
I’m not too keen on the island cities; I feel that the current list has enough cities in the south pacific to entice Japan to move south.
I don’t think Toburk will work due to its proximity to the current VCs and the fact that it is in the hands of the UK. So I guess we could use it if we removed Cairo but I feel Cairo is better suited for a VC.
I like Cape Town, I have put it on the map a few times, only problem is if we keep the current count what city does UK lose to add CT?
Same with Kiev I like the fact that it is closer to the Russian border and away from Germany but what does Germany lose to add Kiev?
I could live with losing Budapest for Bucharest. It’s further away.
The others were important but I don’t feel they warrant VC status. Just my opinion.
Thanks for the suggestions that is what I and the rest of the group are looking for.
