I think it's been brought up before, but in the Native Player the territory fill seems to extend beyond its designated area by about 1 pixel.  For a lot of boards this doesn't really make a difference, but there are quite a few that are coordinated down to the pixel and this can cause unintended confusion/issues.  Any possibility of this working exactly like the Flash Player when it comes to territory fill?

It's a tricky one actually Yertle - I'm not sure what can be done about it. Is it short by one pixel or over? Can you give me a good example of a board where it's a problem so I can try and fix it? It may be an option to underfill or overfill by 1 pixel.

For a basic example notice the center and top areas of Escalation.

Native Player:

<Insert Mac support for Image Upload functionality.>

Escalation Native...Notice top and middle sections where there is no black line border and thus territories run together when owned by the same player.

Flash Player:

<Insert Mac support for Image Upload functionality.>

Escalation Flash

I think that's a resolution difference.  The line is still there, but it's a lot thinner in the Native Player.

ratsy wrote:

I think that's a resolution difference.  The line is still there, but it's a lot thinner in the Native Player.

Interesting...after looking in Firefox I do see the line for the territories in the center in the Native player, but not in top area.  Chrome has the lines completely gone...this is on a Mac with Retina display too so that may play a role (although in Chrome and Flash I do not see the lines).

I noticed this too.  Basically any single layer board, the fill gets an extra pixel in all(most?) directions with the native player.

It seems dependent on browser.  IIRC, Chrome wasn't too bad, but firefox was worse (windows  for both).

An example of where it looks bad is the Battle for New York map, because it has thin 1 pixel borders between territories:

http://www.wargear.net/games/player/203481?player=native

Also, the shogun map I remember had particular problems:

(although this game seems to have other problems too)

http://www.wargear.net/games/player/182972?player=native

It looks like that never passed review, but any map that is a single layer, and has text in the middle of a fill area (for example continent bonuses), can be a problem.  Especially if the font is thin already, the missing pixels around the edges can make the text unreadable.

The thing is the way that the Flash and Native player fill the areas is fundamentally different - the Flash player does a flood fill, whilst the Native player has to first build an SVG document which is a vector description of the fill image and then it draws into the vector representation of the fill area.

I can bump up the accuracy of the SVG encoder but this has the downside of increasing the size of the SVG file which has to be loaded by your browser every time you load the game board. I'll see if this helps anyway for the above boards, it could perhaps be a designer set option for troublesome boards.

Interesting.  That does sound tough.  I guess each browser can have a different implementation of the SVG library, so the minor differences would be very hard to reconcile.

Any idea how the size of an SVG file compares to the bitmap used by the flood fill?  I would guess that even a high resolution SVG file would be smaller (in memory) than the bitmap.

It does not affect me, because I use dual layer which always looks good, but I bet most 1st maps created by a new map maker are single layer.

My Lord of the Gears map is affected as well, though not in a serious way. The icons that denote the special territories look faint and washed out in the Native player compared to the Flash:

http://www.wargear.net/games/player/200548?player=native

http://www.wargear.net/games/player/200548?player=flash

They look OK in Chrome for me, but they are missing a lot more in Firefox.