Part 1

I'm bringing up this issue up yet again because the lack of control over how neutral territories look is an obstacle that constantly gets in my way, so I'm thinking that surely it frustrates many other designers here.

I feel the simple ability to select the neutral color and it's "unit value color" is huge for designers.

I have re-read a few of the threads on this, and the most common and prevailing argument to date against it is that non-grey neutral colors will be too confusing for players. I just don't understand this argument.  It is up to the designer to make sure that the use of the neutral color is reasonable, has function, makes things more aesthetically pleasing, and possibly even less confusing for players.

Not unlike just about any designer feature that comes down the pike, of course there will be a way for a designer to make a mess of things.  The job of the review board is to make sure that the use of alternate neutral colors on a board meets the above conditions. 

Let me give an example of how they could be used in a way that doesn't cause confusion, and would clearly make the board look much better - which ultimately is a draw for creative talent and therefore a plus for the site.

Right now the Go-Gear board is Neutral Grey.  I was forced to make it this color to "hide" the neutral territories.  Unfortunately, the grey looks HORRIBLE.  The color I want it to be is the Go-Board yellow that currently borders the board.  Additionally, if I could make the neutral "unit number" color the same yellow, then all those zeros on the the neutral territories would "disappear".   This would create a much more aesthetically pleasing experience for the player and the lack of 0's all over the board would create less clutter, possibly even making play less confusing for some.

Part 2

Hold on to your hats, folks.. I would like to suggest as an alternative, something even more powerful than simple pull-down neutral color choice selector. I propose that designers be able to upload a Neutral Color image. If this could be done, I would propose a corollary to the idea, which is that designers could also upload an Alternate Territory Board image.

The Neutral Color image would work like much a fog image. When a territory is neutral, that corresponding portion of the Neutral Color image replaces the regular Board image. The portion of the image invoked is always determined by the normal Fill map image being used. On the other hand, when a territory is held by a player, a different paradigm is used and the corresponding portion of the Alternate Territory Board image is used instead of the Board image.

Consider what could be accomplished with the Go-Geared board.  I could move the "territory bulls-eyes" in the designer such that the stones could be played directly over the intersecting lines (just like they are in the real game) by creating a Neutral color fill map that looks just like the board, with intersecting lines and all..  Then, I could make the  Alternate Territory board force "solid colors" where the intersecting lines would normally have been, so the player's stones would play "on top" of the intersecting lines.

Really, the Neutral Color Map should completely replace a neutral color selection feature.  Any designer savvy enough (and with good enough reason) to want to change the neutral color globally would simply upload a solid Neutral Color image. 

Tom has mentioned in previous threads that for technical reasons the neutral color can't be a pattern.  This makes me think that perhaps it might not be possible to implement this idea, but perhaps he wasn't thinking of it in terms of it being an image like a fog map.

So, M, if I understand this correctly: The Neutral image would be a new layer for the board, with the layer only showing through the normal Board layer when the territory is neutral. Is this correct?

From a player's perspective I would be fine with this idea as long as what I perceive to be "Neutral" is consistent across boards.  i.e. it would be beneficial for player's to not have to recalibrate on what is Neutral when switching from Go-Geared to Spy v Spy to Gauntlet etc.

AttilaTheHun wrote:

So, M, if I understand this correctly: The Neutral image would be a new layer for the board, with the layer only showing through the normal Board layer when the territory is neutral. Is this correct?

Yes

From a player's perspective I would be fine with this idea as long as what I perceive to be "Neutral" is consistent across boards.  

In obvious cases I think neutrals "masked" using this the Neutral Color image will be empty ..i.e, have no units in them. Regardless, it should be absolutely clear to players what's going on.  That is the job of the designer ..and responsibility of the reviewers to keep in check.

I wasn't really for it, until you gave the example of your go board, which I think illustrates how this could be used effectively.

I'm still a bit confused about the more advanced suggestion.  Alternate Territory Board image.  This is used for territories a player controls? 

Basically what M is proposing is that the neutral "player" and each actual player have their own image layer, equivalent to the custom fog layer currently available, rather than just their own plain color.

Graphically, this would open up a whole host of intriguing possibilities, but would be very time-consuming for the designer for boards with large numbers of players -- however, for smaller boards, this could be really cool and I would be in favor.

Kjeld wrote:

Basically what M is proposing is that the neutral "player" and each actual player have their own image layer, equivalent to the custom fog layer currently available, rather than just their own plain color.

K, I hadn't though of it that way, but how cool would that be?

My alternate "player" layer was conceived as applying to ALL but neutral.  What I envisioned it doing was enabling a way to force a fill map "on top" of the board map.  I just realized that this alone would do what I need (without the neutral fill map), because I could let the regular board cover the territory whenever a player doesn't own it.  Question is, can you still select a territory when it's "covered" when you need to attack it?  ..I'm thinking the unit count would show.

That sounds pretty cool. If it is too time consuming, it doesn't have to be done for larger boards. If enough designers can think of cool ways to enhance a board, or make a new experience, it could really get some backing. Lets hope they find this then.

hey M, maybe some images of examples could help others visualize and help your argument.

weathertop wrote:

hey M, maybe some images of examples could help others visualize and help your argument.

http://www.wargear.net/boards/designer/3199

A customizable Neutral color is definitely possible. A customizable Neutral image / layer is not possible with the Flash player. It may be possible with the Java player which I am working on.

In the example board, pretty much everything you see is not currently possible.  Even the examples of what I don't want are technically not possible because the intersecting lines on the board image would be superimposed over any fill color (both player and neutral).

One of the things I didn't discuss in my proposal were issues regarding where and how troop values are applied.  Ideally, when you click on a "masked" neutral territory, you want a circle to pop up with the unit number in it.

There are also potential issues regarding neutral troop value colors that might need to "change" dependent on the possible colors that different territories on the Neutral Color image have.  Designer's will either have to be very careful to make sure that the numbers are visible on every territory, or perhaps there could be a map just for number colors (surely tom is scratching his head right now).   But these are minutia.  For the moment, I think the larger issue is regarding how the basic images might be set up. Kjeld's suggestion is very cool, but adds an extra layer of sophistication.  I'm trying to come up with the most efficient way (i.e. the least amount of uploads) that solves the most problems and gives designer's even more powerful tools.

I wondering that the simplest implementation would be to scrap the "neutral color image" as described and go with the "alternate board image" in concert with your basic pull-down control of neutral color and it's corresponding unit value color.  That might be a place to start, but I have to think about it more to come to an opinion of which of the proposed image maps yields the most options to designers.

tom wrote:

A customizable Neutral color is definitely possible. A customizable Neutral image / layer is not possible with the Flash player. It may be possible with the Java player which I am working on.

If it can't do it for neutrals only, I can only assume that it can't be assignable to players as well.

How about a "global" image layer that trumps the primary board image by territory?

I mentioned something like this before basically adding a triple layer designer function for neutral territories but it never gained any traction.

Hope it does this time.  I have a finished board just waiting for that functionality.

Perhaps a better description would be a neutral type fog layer that applies over the top of the board layer.

tom wrote:

A customizable Neutral color is definitely possible.

I argued for this during the Arm Wrestle dev.  If the players "arms" were flesh tone instead of grey it would look so much nicer and would actually be less confusing because you would see your color, your opponents color and "uncolored territories" rather than grey ones. 

I also agree with M57 that it is the responsibility of the designer and review board to make sure it is not a disaster.  This is another design tool, just like factories.  It is possible to make a real mess with that tool as well, but we all work hard to make sure the boards work.

It would be possible to do an extra layer but only by replacing the Fog layer. The way the layers work for dual layer is:

TOP

Board Image --> Main board image. Transparency areas allow territory color to show through
Fillmap --> filled with territory colors
Fog Image --> Visible when the territory color is transparent

BOTTOM

So we can't stick an additional layer in there because if it is on top of the Fog Image the Fog Image will not be visible and if it is below it then it will not be visible.

The above is a limitation of Flash in that you can't use a complex brush (e.g. a bitmap) to paint an image into an area like a territory. This may be possible using Raphael which is the toolset I am using for the native javascript version (or may well not be!).

Raptor wrote:

tom wrote:

A customizable Neutral color is definitely possible.

I argued for this during the Arm Wrestle dev.  If the players "arms" were flesh tone instead of grey it would look so much nicer and would actually be less confusing because you would see your color, your opponents color and "uncolored territories" rather than grey ones. 

I also agree with M57 that it is the responsibility of the designer and review board to make sure it is not a disaster.  This is another design tool, just like factories.  It is possible to make a real mess with that tool as well, but we all work hard to make sure the boards work.

Let's hope its time has come.  A custom neutral color (can you please include a custom "unit counter" color too, tom?) would be a great start.

tom wrote:

It would be possible to do an extra layer but only by replacing the Fog layer. The way the layers work for dual layer is:

TOP

Board Image --> Main board image. Transparency areas allow territory color to show through
Fillmap --> filled with territory colors
Fog Image --> Visible when the territory color is transparent

BOTTOM

 

I'm not understanding.. if the Fog Image is below the fillmap, then you would never see fog.. Isn't the Fillmap on the bottom?

M57 wrote:

tom wrote:

It would be possible to do an extra layer but only by replacing the Fog layer. The way the layers work for dual layer is:

TOP

Board Image --> Main board image. Transparency areas allow territory color to show through
Fillmap --> filled with territory colors
Fog Image --> Visible when the territory color is transparent

BOTTOM

 

I'm not understanding.. if the Fog Image is below the fillmap, then you would never see fog.. Isn't the Fillmap on the bottom?

that was my interpretation of how things worked too, otherwise if it was the way tom just wrote my Labyrinth board wouldn't work (and we know it does...).