View Full Version : "High-Visibility Low-Clutter" resources.pcx
Dr Alimentado May 03, 2003, 09:28 PM This is a small mod I have made for the resources.pcx.
[ok, mistakes fixed, only outlined version posted as it's better than the orig version I did]
Outlines Preview:
http://www.danwilliamson.net/forum/uploaded/dralimentado/200355203119_resourcesOL.jpg
grab it here:
Resources_OL.zip (http://www.danwilliamson.net/forum/uploaded/dralimentado/200355202813_resourcesOLv2.zip)
Please note, only the 'bonus indicators' icons are mine, and I got the idea from ejday's quicklook resources (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=33715). The strategic and lux indicators are from skankyburns easy to spot resources (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=15022&perpage=20&display=&pagenumber=1). The actual resources themselves are a bit of a mix from several sources.
If anyone wants them I can post just the bonus layer so it can be added to any resources.pcx
[posted 4 posts down]
zulu9812 May 04, 2003, 01:46 AM yep - please post the bonus layer (nice work, btw)
Ville May 04, 2003, 01:48 AM Looks great
Taé Shala May 04, 2003, 06:02 AM Good work!
:D
Dr Alimentado May 04, 2003, 09:22 AM Hi All, here's the bonus layer only:
[EDIT: removed orig version, posted fixed OL version]
download:
lowclutterOL_overlayONLYv2.zip (http://www.danwilliamson.net/forum/uploaded/dralimentado/20035601321_resources_lowclutterOL_overlayONLYv2.z ip)
and why not, a preview:
http://www.danwilliamson.net/forum/uploaded/dralimentado/20035601551_resources_lowclutterOL_overlayONLY.jpg
Enjoy :)
Dr Alimentado May 04, 2003, 09:25 AM Hmmm, I'm still testing/tweaking this... on Snoopy's terrain at least the food icon is a little hard to spot on plains, so I might change it to a green icon or maybe try an outline around the icons, we'll see.
Dr Alimentado May 04, 2003, 02:02 PM version with outlines added to first post (MUCH clearer for gold/wheat icons on plains)
how can you tell I've been waiting for my pbem opponents to show up today...
Tacit_Exit May 05, 2003, 03:27 PM Furs only give +1 production, or is this for a Mod?
Dr Alimentado May 05, 2003, 06:44 PM Tacit, not for a mod, I'm just a little :crazyeye:. (Also, Game has +2 food not +1...)
Me fixed now :)
Tacit_Exit May 06, 2003, 05:07 PM :lol: I can imagine working on this stuff would make you a little :crazyeye:
:goodjob: fits the game 'look' very well.
Dr Alimentado May 06, 2003, 06:55 PM Originally posted by Tacit_Exit
:lol: I can imagine working on this stuff would make you a little :crazyeye:
:goodjob: fits the game 'look' very well.
hehe, the funniest thing is that in the original version I posted the furs were correct :lol: I think I just got a little over-enthusiastic when I was copying the outlined versions from my 'master' onto the overlay!
And I agree it looks dam good in-game :D even if I do say so myself.
btw- I heartily recommend using it on top of Snoopy's Terrain (greener version) for best effect. (and I have a sneaky suspicion the whale resource graphic will only 'work' with that terrain set :eek: )
Ukas May 06, 2003, 10:02 PM Hey, can you make version of GIDustin's resources icon compilation with these graphics? :D
Dr Alimentado May 07, 2003, 10:46 AM Originally posted by Ukas
Hey, can you make version of GIDustin's resources icon compilation with these graphics? :D
:eek: I know your joshing me but that's a very scary idea!!
Thankfully it's also impossible, as the resources have no set value until they're integrated into an actual mod. If any modmakers want to incorporate these into a mod their welcome though :)
There is also a slim chance I'll do TeT/TAM/MEM conversions as I actually play these mods myself... just depends as atm I am having too much fun playing pbem to play much solo :D
cracker May 10, 2003, 02:24 AM Unfortunately upon reviewing these graphics in game, I have to say that these images look cool but are a form of cheating because the images get too large and peak out from under the FOW by way too much.
This is one of those deceptive issues where you need to overlay the resources with a diamond shaped mask that represents what should be covered up when the resource location should be hidden in the game.
By extending all the stuff that you put in the images up into the corners you basically add graphics flags that cause the resources to be exposed even when they should not be.
I know you ment well here but the impact is basically to give away a cheat instead of just making the resources easy to see after they have been revealed in the game.
anarres May 10, 2003, 10:46 AM cracker, even the smilie faces are just visable through the FOW, how come you haven't raised this in that thread, or any of the other threads that have similar graphics?
Even in the GOTM you havent banned the smilie mod for lux resources, and I think it's getting petty to call this a 'a form of cheating'.
Lots of mods change the outside of the tile, so would you advocate only playing without modded graphics?
Dr Alimentado May 10, 2003, 11:56 AM Originally posted by cracker
Unfortunately upon reviewing these graphics in game, I have to say that these images look cool but are a form of cheating because the images get too large and peak out from under the FOW by way too much.
...snip...
I know you ment well here but the impact is basically to give away a cheat instead of just making the resources easy to see after they have been revealed in the game.
Hi Cracker :)
I'm glad you think my mod looks cool in-game but a little dissappointed that you consider it a form of cheating.
I see what your referring too, the fact that if a resource is in a tile right on the edge of the fog of war you'll get some info you wouldn't otherwise get. However, this is IMHO a fairly trivial 'extra', not to be entirely discounted for sure, but acceptable to many I suspect.
No-one has to my knowledge raised this issue before with any of the other similar resource mods, indeed the reactions to all these types of mods have been positive. A good quote from skankyburn's "easy to spot" resource mod (which mine gets the smilies and strat indicators from) is:
Originally posted by Thunderfall
They are nice indeed. I would say it's one of the must-have mods. :goodjob:
Now if you want to ban these types of mods from GOTM that is of course your decision, but IMHO people using these mods (for non GOTM games at least) should not be branded cheaters. I play pbem, and I know at least 2 of my current opponents (and other pbem players) also use this mod, none of us consider it a cheat in any way.
If I appear to be a little over-sensitive it is because your remarks carry the weight of a moderators opinion, and it would be a shame if these mods went unused because of that.
So go ahead people, use these mods and do not consider yourself a cheater.
cracker May 10, 2003, 01:08 PM Unfortunately Dr. Alimentado your actions here are irresponsible and harmful to others.
Urging people to use your graphics for you own gratification when you now know that they are cheating is deliberately creating conflict that you could fix by being a little more aware of the negative impact you have here.
You can easily re-arrange the graphics elements to have your good work not cross the reasonable boundary between being an asset and becoming a full fledged cheat.
The problem here is that the modification in this case turns virtually all the resources into cheat exposure in almost every case. If you will overlay a working layer in the sahpe of an appropriately shaped diamond and then relocate the cehating parts of the graphics to be under the diamond then you will have done the responsible thing on multiple levels.
A player using these graphics would have an unfair advantage over all other players and would be able to alter the game events. This may not matter much to you but in the big picture it demonstrates a fundamental problem.
What it ends up doing is sucking away human resources from positive things we are doing.
This forum is slightly out of my jurisdiction but issues of technical game play and cheating are not. If you post any additional messages that conflict with this determination that your graphics mod is a banned cheat in its current form that will require stronger intervention to protect players from having their games disrupted by your choices here.
If you proactively modify the graphics to accomplish your objectives without actively being a cheater then you will satisfy all concerns.
Bamspeedy May 10, 2003, 01:38 PM Unfortunately Dr. Alimentado your actions here are irresponsible and harmful to others.
And you are being unreasonable.
If you want to disallow this modpack or any other for the GOTM, fine. But that does not mean you have the right to shut down any modpacks just because of that. The GOTM does not (and should not) control all other aspects of Civfanatics. Some competitions disallow mapstat and apollo, should those be taken off the civfanatics forum? How about the various save game editors?
Urging people to use your graphics for you own gratification
Many other people enjoy these graphics, so perhaps he is posting this as a convenience for other people who want to enjoy the game more, and not have to bring out their magnifying glass to see a few pixels that some of the game's default graphics sneaks out from under the fog.
You need to set your personal opinions aside. Not everyone wants to play the game the same way you do.
I don't see what the problem is if someone wants to use this for their own games, or games where all the participants are aware of this. It is up to the participants to decide what is allowed and what isn't. And in that sense it is NOT a cheat.
The world does not revolve around the GOTM.
Cartouche Bee May 10, 2003, 01:49 PM :lol: I was against mod packs for ages, about a month ago I installed my first graphic mod cause I was about the only one on the planet not using them. All mod packs are provided for the intended target users and every mod pack changes game play in many ways, unless you don't mod at all, it's an advantage in some way over the original game, even if it's just for your own enjoyment.:) But from the number of users playing mods, no one cares. Have fun or stop playing mods. :)
cracker May 10, 2003, 01:54 PM Originally posted by Bamspeedy
I don't see what the problem is if someone wants to use this for their own games, or games where all the participants are aware of this. It is up to the participants to decide what is allowed and what isn't. And in that sense it is NOT a cheat.
The issue is not my personal opinion because I agree with you here in this personal choice concept. If players in a group want to play with revealed maps of turned off FOW, or known maps that is their choice.
The only issue is actively promoting the graphics mod as not being a cheat which it clearly is.
It's OK to say we will allow the cheat by mutual agreement if that is what players choose to do.
It just isn't right to delude ourselves and say the mod is not a cheat.
What if the mod included a broad visible X from corner to corner on each resource square under the resources? Would that be cheat? You betcha.
What if you took the same nifty thought process and modified the goody hut graphics to add marking at the edges and eliminate the transparency fringe? Would that be a cheat? Again, absolutely.
The only real issue is understanding what you are doing with the graphics. If the objective is to improve visibility once the graphics are supposed to be revealed then some better work needs to be done to eliminate the inadvertent cheat that is incorporated in an otherwise worthy attempt to do something nice.
If the objective of the graphics mod is to promote cheating then it needs to push revealing content out into the corners of the squares beyond the expected diamond limits just like what is being done here.
anarres May 10, 2003, 02:11 PM cracker, you need to chill out.
From what you say everyone who plays a full game mod is a "cheater". I for one think your choice of words is wholly inappropriate, and your comments about it "sucking away human resources from positive things we are doing" is just nonsnese, and unfair to say the least.
DrAlimentado has not "had a negative impact" on anyone at CFC, except maybe you, since you seem to be the only one who cares.
I hope you stop calling people cheaters and you think about what peole bring to CFC and why, then maybe try to encourage it instead of stamping on anything that isn't to your liking.
Dr Alimentado May 10, 2003, 02:13 PM Ummm, Cracker, I don't understand why we are in conflict over this :confused:
Let me clarify, if this mod (but why only this mod??) is deemed a cheat in GOTM that's fine, I have no problem with this. However, this is not the GOTM forum and I suspect the majority of people reading the civ3 forums are not GOTM players.
Your comments read as a blanket statement that people using this mod in ANY game, solo, pbem, whatever, are cheaters. If that is your intention I stand by my previous statement, that IMO people should not be made to feel like cheaters for using mods of this type (except of course in GOTM games, in which case they should follow the rules for GOTM.)
Nowhere in your posts on this thread have you made it clear whether you are talking about GOTM only, I have tried to be clear that I am talking about NON-GOTM games only. So let me ask you directly, are you talking about GOTM games only or are you making a broader comment? If you are only talking about GOTM games then it seems a little arrogant of you to assume that they are the only civ3 games anyone plays.
Let me state again (with more clarity I hope):
So go ahead people, UNLESS you are playing GOTM or another competitive game (in which case follow the appropriate rules obviously) use these mods and do not consider yourself a cheater.
Please believe me, I am not trying to undermine or subvert the GOTM rules. I am trying to redress the fact that you seem to be equating using this mod with hacking the savegame or using save-reload in a solo/pbem game. I feel this is unwarrented.
I might add that comments like this;
Originally posted by cracker
Unfortunately Dr. Alimentado your actions here are irresponsible and harmful to others.
I take offence to, as I feel it is you that needs to qualify your statements better, not the other way around.
Dr Alimentado May 10, 2003, 02:31 PM Originally posted by Bamspeedy
You need to set your personal opinions aside. Not everyone wants to play the game the same way you do.
I don't see what the problem is if someone wants to use this for their own games, or games where all the participants are aware of this. It is up to the participants to decide what is allowed and what isn't. And in that sense it is NOT a cheat.
The world does not revolve around the GOTM.
Agreed :)
Cracker, you appear to be in a minority of one. If you want further proof I will ask all my pbem opponents to weigh in on whether they consider it a cheat or not.
You know if you had left out the invective and said, "this looks great but would unfortunately be a cheat in GOTM - any chance of doing a GOTM version with less-revealing edges?" I would have been happy to do so.
Bamspeedy May 10, 2003, 02:48 PM Originally posted by Dr Alimentado
I would have been happy to do so. As it is I'll wait until someone I can respect puts that question to me.
Well, since SkankyBurn's smiley graphics are coming under fire due to the same problems (the smiley sticks out under the FOW), then it would be nice if someone could make graphics that makes the resources more visible, while not giving the player any extra advantage. But the graphics are awfully small as it is, this could be difficult to do. The wheat, by default sticks a little bit out from under the fog.
I know there are a few others that would appreciate it, if you wanted to do this and keeping the resources looking great like you have.
cracker May 10, 2003, 03:10 PM Sorry Dr Alimentado,
This is not a vote and having 73 individuals who agree with a cheat raise their hands and say we agree with it being OK is like asking the same group to vote on if pot should be legal and distributed free at the library.
We are working to implement a non-cheat version of the graphics as well as some detection systems. It just measn that there are one or two other priority things that we have to drop in order to deal with this exploit issue that could have been resolved here by attention to detail.
cracker May 10, 2003, 03:12 PM Originally posted by anarres
From what you say everyone who plays a full game mod is a "cheater".
This is not what I am saying at all anarres. You have confused the cheating protion with the graphics portion of the issue.
Dr Alimentado May 10, 2003, 03:30 PM Originally posted by cracker
Sorry Dr Alimentado,
This is not a vote and having 73 individuals who agree with a cheat raise their hands and say we agree with it being OK is like asking the same group to vote on if pot should be legal and distributed free at the library.
We are working to implement a non-cheat version of the graphics as well as some detection systems. It just measn that there are one or two other priority things that we have to drop in order to deal with this exploit issue that could have been resolved here by attention to detail.
Why are you still equating ALL civ games with GOTM games??? You still haven't qualified your cheat comments with a statement that you are only talking about GOTM. Why??
This is what I take issue with. My point is that in the pbem games I play, and in solo games it IS NOT A CHEAT. You keep stating it is a cheat, like that applies to ALL games of civ3. It dosen't, it applies to GOTM, please make that clear. It is like you are being deliberatly provactive for some reason? why??
Dr Alimentado May 10, 2003, 03:36 PM Bamspeedy, I'll be happy to take a look at it (it's gonna be tough though! that diamond is quite a small space to work in).
My time spent modding is directly related to whether my pbem opponents are online or not :D, so no promises on eta, but I'll give it top priority after pbem turns. If I can't get all the info into the diamond I'll have a think about what can most usefully be included at least.
And thanks (and thanks also to others here) for having an understanding of my position :)
anarres May 10, 2003, 03:46 PM Originally posted by cracker
We are working to implement a non-cheat version of the graphics as well as some detection systems. It just measn that there are one or two other priority things that we have to drop in order to deal with this exploit issue that could have been resolved here by attention to detail. Until you can tell me you've found a way to show if someone has used other utilities when they play GOTM your comments make no sense.
Since there are utils to reveal maps and city info, and the infamous C3MT, how can you complain about GOTM players needing to be 'vetted' for having used graphics mods?? Your concern for this particular issue seems to be out of proportion to the effect it has on your life and the GOTM.
Where are the smiliar posts of yours in other graphics mods in this forum? :hmm:
cracker May 10, 2003, 04:13 PM Originally posted by anarres
Until you can tell me you've found a way to show if someone has used other utilities when they play GOTM your comments make no sense.
We have found three ways to detect when someone has used the cheat mode graphics and will implement the 2nd and 3rd level protections effective with Gotm20-Spain.
The approved resource graphics will be available to all players in their game packs without further need for additional downloads.
mrtn May 10, 2003, 07:41 PM I have not downloaded this modpack (as I have a very modded game). I have also never played a GOTM. I probably never will. I do think that Dr Alimentado has done a good thing in posting this modpack, for those that like it. And I think that cracker should calm down a bit. It's one thing to say "Don't use this in my games." and it's another thing to say "If you use this you're a cheater." The first statement is IMO appropriate, the other is not. Just my 20 öre.
zulu9812 May 11, 2003, 03:36 AM Actually, cracker is correct in one sense - if the resourese are viewable through the fog of war, then both they and the outlines should be dulled down.
Dr Alimentado May 11, 2003, 01:45 PM The resources aren't visible through the blackness but are visible at the very edge, in the same way a few pixels of ordinary wheat are visible in an un-modded game (but more so).
I am working on a GOTM compliant version that won't suffer from this.
cracker May 11, 2003, 03:49 PM I want to post this reference image here because it clearly shows why these added graphics end up being something that creates much more of a problem that past graphics mods.
This image was prepared by an experienced player DaveMcW and shows the range off the resources that would be covered by 95-97% fog opacity in the game. Around the solid fog there would still be a fringe of partially transparent area where added graphics features could be visible if the mod maker is not careful to properly position the content.
I made a resources.pcx overlay (http://www.civfanatics.net/uploads4/FogOfWar_Resources_Overlay1.pcx) from the 3 darkest colors in FogOfWar.pcx. This provides a pretty accurate measurement of what is visible in the fog.
Here it is applied it to various resource mods.
Clockwise from top left: Firaxis's, Harlan's, Dr Alimentado's, SkankyBurns's
http://www.civfanatics.net/uploads4/resourcetest.jpg
The upper left hand image is the way firaxis designed the game to be visible from under the fog. You have to keep these images in context that most of the strategic resources that would get the Shankyburns type visibility helpers would not be visible on the map in most cases until after the FOW had long sense been rolled back. Only the risk of exposure for the Horses and Iron was really present in prior graphics mods and even then the visibility was limited to one direction and would only result in a "cheat" or excess benefit in just a few limited cases.
This graphic mod pushed the Shankyburns visibility blips out towards the corners and virtually doubled the leaky exposure risk plus the extra shield/food/gold blips where added into the upper right corners resulting in an increase in the extra visibility risk by more than 300%.
The most negative impacts that come from these graphics mods that could be categorized as "cheats" or "exploits" are in the bonus food categories that occur down in the lower rows because in previous graphics mods these items had not been disrupted.
Adding the shields/food/gold production bonuses into the graphics also can have a sever negative impact on game play for the less expereinced players because they will tend to use these fixed graphics displays as a substiture for understanding the terrain status display that is built into the game plus they will not be able to relaible integrate these icons into the process of undertanding and planning for the actual results that will be obtained from the various terrain squares where the resources are located depeding on the government status plus the installed improvements and/or Golden Age or Mobilization status.
This is one of those things that may look like a good idea at first even if the images are altered to eliminate the game altering aspects, but in later assessments it will be just an increase in map clutter if the extrananeous bonus graphics are included.
Producing a GOTM compliant version of this mod will probably not fully address the bigger picture issues where we now have to do things to try and disable the ability to use graphics that take unfair advantage of the image content systems the way that this graphics mod accidentally ended up doing.
Dr Alimentado May 11, 2003, 08:46 PM I don't know why I bother (well I do, it's because I feel victimised and insulted) but...
I agree my mod gives extra info at the edge of the fog. I agree it is a 'cheat' if used in a GOTM. The mod was NOT made for the purpose of cheating, it was made to look good (which it does!)
I feel Cracker has over-reacted. There are various utilities available that allow players to hack the save game etc. Does this mod affect gameplay more than those? How about reloading a turn if you lose a battle? I think if you want to cheat there are some much more obvious and much more game damaging ways to do do. I just don't understand why this mod has attracted such wrath when there are other means to *really* subvert a game. But look, if you don't want the extra info this mod gives you, or as Cracker puts it "to cheat", don't use it.
Will it stop new players from playing the game well? I find that a hard argument to swallow, in fact I think it's a fairly lame complaint altogether, but make your own minds up people. If your a new player and you find the info you get from this mod confusing, don't use it.
Is this mod 'evil', or a 'very very bad' thing? IMHO no it isn't, but again, decide for yourselves. IMHO there are far worse ways of cheating than using a mod such as this. As long as my opponents agree I will continue to use this mod in pbem. I suggest civ3 players decide for themselves whether they wish to use this mod in their solo games, or with opponents agreement in their pbem games. but,
DO NOT USE THIS MOD IN A GOTM GAME!!!
Cracker, it's obvious you will never use this mod, that's fine. You think it's bad and wrong this mod was made, I cannot agree. Like I said, I think your over-reacting here. I also think your slightly puritanical about how the game should be played, again, that's your right. I choose to play it with nice graphics and (incidentally) slightly more info at the edge of the fog, that's my choice.
I also choose not to reload turns, load the other players turn in pbem, hack the savegame, take the first turn and run it hotseat to reveal the other players start, or any of the other obvious or not so obvious methods of cheating that would give you a much more decisive edge than seeing what is on the edge of the fog.
ProPain May 13, 2003, 04:20 AM Originally posted by Dr Alimentado
You know if you had left out the invective and said, "this looks great but would unfortunately be a cheat in GOTM - any chance of doing a GOTM version with less-revealing edges?" I would have been happy to do so.
I have to agree with dr. A here. I think that would have been a normal reaction acknowledging dr. A's intention to improve gameplay instead of insinuating he did this to provide a way to cheat.
I also read up on the discussion in the GOTM thread where dr. A went out of his way to provide a GOTM safe version of his mod. That clearly shows he had no malintent.
I can imagine dr. A feels insulted an apology would be in place imho.
PP
Smirk May 13, 2003, 10:06 AM Originally posted by cracker
Adding the shields/food/gold production bonuses into the graphics also can have a sever negative impact on game play for the less expereinced players because they will tend to use these fixed graphics displays as a substiture for understanding the terrain status display that is built into the game plus they will not be able to relaible integrate these icons into the process of undertanding and planning for the actual results that will be obtained from the various terrain squares where the resources are located depeding on the government status plus the installed improvements and/or Golden Age or Mobilization status.
Wow that is on *big* sentence! However, I disagree, the despot rules are the biggest difficulty to new players learning resources and their values and considering every game starts there and goes for many turns still there once you are able to get the full potential of a tile they have most likely been modified already. So backtracking to what they used to be becomes a reverse process which is usually more complex. This mod shows the base values and it should be trivial to anyone to see how that differs from what they currently see. Because what they see is what has modifed the base value, no hidden stuff.
Your statement about learning is in general counter-intuitive, people learn by seeing, doing and repetition. There is no logical way to arrive at what each resource gives so they must be memorized, and there is no better way to memorize than repetition. Seeing the base values many times through-out a game is an excellent and *subtle* form of repetition. I don't consider myself an inexperienced player but since I tried this mod out I have now firmly memorized all the different gold values that luxuries give, which up till then I haven't bothered to remember.
And if the above was just about How to Right Click on the Map, then I can only disagree because that is a very tedious chore. But by the same token I can only assume you also disagree with playing with Food and Shields displayed in the preferences? This shows the base tile values, which will be quite a bit different than what they may eventually be.
chesspatzer May 13, 2003, 12:09 PM Dr.A: Terrific mod!! I think it looks great and I plan to use it extensively. I never really paid attention that some of graphics were peaking out of the FOW. It never entered my thinking until it was pointed out. I guess it's kind like someone wearing a skirt! You know that there must be some kind of a view from the ground up, but unless you expend effort looking, it's not an issue.
Don't let the disgruntled folk get you down. There's about 99% of us are 'gruntled' and appreciate your effort.
zulu9812 May 13, 2003, 04:20 PM I don't understand ppl's problem with Cracker's point. However much you may dislike the manner in which he posted, he is nonetheless correct. Why do you think he posted, unless he actually cared?
Ribannah May 13, 2003, 04:38 PM Better not try and answer that question. :)
It would be nice to have a graphics mod that helps people to more easily recognize the specials but won't show from under the fog.
Then they can be used without changing the game, and even in the GOTM without cheating.
Dr Alimentado May 13, 2003, 07:44 PM Ribannah, what do you think to the 2 'GOTM complient beta' versions I've posted in the GOTM thread?
If you want something else then tell me specifically what it is you want and I'll do my best to provide :)
Cartouche Bee May 13, 2003, 08:13 PM Dr. A, if the problem was with positioning, as presented, then the complainant would have responded one way or the other by now, it would seem that you have stepped on the foot of a future yet unannounced GOTM, umm, forced enhancement. Your willingness to comply with pertinent changes, speaks for itself, and you could rest your case on the basis of 'frivolous confrontation'. ;)
CruddyLeper May 13, 2003, 08:48 PM Dr A, thumbs up for keeping your head when some around you are losing theirs.
I like your graphics - but I don't use geaphics mods at all because I don't need to.
The visually impaired, on the other hand, do not have a choice - and that's the reason why I approve of your graphics.
The fact that they look cool is a bonus.
Ribannah May 14, 2003, 03:58 AM Originally posted by Dr Alimentado
Ribannah, what do you think to the 2 'GOTM complient beta' versions I've posted in the GOTM thread?
If you want something else then tell me specifically what it is you want and I'll do my best to provide :)
I think they look pretty good, and could be helpful to new, forgetful or visually handicapped players. :)
I don't like the use of outlines though as they seem to lift the specials out of the map, which looks ugly IMHO. But others might think different, so don't let that stop you.
Smirk May 14, 2003, 03:38 PM Other do think different in fact, I would like a better contrast outline. Lifting the special out of the map is the point I think, to make it more visible. Its not like I believe coal is found in many round bits lying on top of jungles. ;)
Dr Alimentado May 14, 2003, 04:14 PM Smirk, I'll produce an outlined version then, I'll take care to make sure the outline dosen't stick out from under the fog too :) (as it did in my first wheat-outlined prototype.)
But umm, maybe not tonight, as I've got 3 opponents online right now and want to go kick some korean/us/mongol backsides ;)
rflagg Jul 09, 2003, 03:16 PM According to Cracker, then, everyone who is using the standard pcx version shipped by Firaxis is cheating, since you are able to see wheat through the fog of war. I hope for his sake, he's using a modified pcx with just a black letter in the center of the square identifying what the resource is, otherwise he's a dirty dirty cheater like the rest of us.
-rflagg.
|
|