was recently directed to version 3.0 mod when looking for mod to play. Have since been informed 3.0 does not work. does anyone know where I can get a working copy which works for this game?
Thanks
I see that the CB+GBII 3.0x is removed, but the module page lists an alternate download site. The main problem with this module is the size imo. It uses jpgs for most all the counters and the maps. Not sure if this is why it also demands a lot of resources when playing. I have only the 2.5 vmod. I think the 3.0 incorporates Fog of War automatically.
Yes 3.0 incorporates Fog of War.
you say that if the module was make in PNG format should be less heavy (for CPU and gameplay of course)?
I don’t know if it’s the files, but jpg files are larger, sometimes 5-10 times. CB+GBII is a huge module anyhow, but maybe it would be better with pngs for all the maps and counters…It’s recommended anyhow.
Thus spake Aries:
you say that if the module was make in PNG format should be less heavy
(for CPU and gameplay of course)?
I do not believe this will make any difference; however, I would be
happy to see evidence to the contrary.
–
J.
Thus spake zajuts149:
I don’t know if it’s the files, but jpg files are larger, sometimes 5-10
times. CB+GBII is a huge module anyhow, but maybe it would be better
with pngs for all the maps and counters…It’s recommended anyhow.
It’s not always the case that JPEGs are larger. If you take a scan and
don’t clean it up, it will usually be much smaller as a JPEG than as a
PNG. If you do clean up the scan (i.e., you make areas which are
supposed to be uniformly colored actually be so) then you’ll find that
the PNG will be dramatically smaller than a JPEG, in addition to having
no visual artifacts. Simply converting a JPEG to a PNG won’t do that
for you. We do recommend using PNGs, but we also recommend cleaning
them up, because it gives you a better looking module.
–
J.
Joel, do you have any suggestions with how to clean up scans? I’ve never
been particularly good at that and I usually just resort to JPEGs to smooth
out the glitches.
- M.
It’s not always the case that JPEGs are larger. If you take a scan and
don’t clean it up, it will usually be much smaller as a JPEG than as a
PNG. If you do clean up the scan (i.e., you make areas which are
supposed to be uniformly colored actually be so) then you’ll find that
the PNG will be dramatically smaller than a JPEG, in addition to having
no visual artifacts. Simply converting a JPEG to a PNG won’t do that
for you. We do recommend using PNGs, but we also recommend cleaning
them up, because it gives you a better looking module.
If you have Adobe Illustrator, what you can do is use the trace command of the dirty image and set the number of colors the tracing will allow. This effectively cleans up the image (while vectorizing at same time). The trick is to get the lowest number of colors without losing the definition of the image (can happen). What I use anyways - I think there is something similar in Gimp
Thus spake Michael Kiefte:
Joel, do you have any suggestions with how to clean up scans? I’ve never
been particularly good at that and I usually just resort to JPEGs to smooth
out the glitches.
The most important thing is to make areas of constant color in the originals
also be that way in the digital image. Often this can be done with judicious
application of fuzzy selection (the wand tool) and bucket filling. It’s
tedious. There’s no magic bullet that I know of. I’d like to hear of it if
there is.
–
J.
The algorithms I’ve used always have problems with corners of jagged
shapes. How does Adobe do?
- M.
On 9 February 2011 12:14, Tim M timothy.mccarron@sbcglobal.net wrote:
If you have Adobe Illustrator, what you can do is use the trace command
of the dirty image and set the number of colors the tracing will allow.
This effectively cleans up the image (while vectorizing at same time).
The trick is to get the lowest number of colors without losing the
definition of the image (can happen). What I use anyways - I think
there is something similar in Gimp
Despeckling can help too.
- M.
The most important thing is to make areas of constant color in the
originals
also be that way in the digital image. Often this can be done with
judicious
application of fuzzy selection (the wand tool) and bucket filling. It’s
tedious. There’s no magic bullet that I know of. I’d like to hear of it if
there is.–
J.
messages mailing list
messages@vassalengine.org
vassalengine.org/mailman/listinfo/messages
–
Michael Kiefte, Ph.D.
Associate Professor
School of Human Communication Disorders
Dalhousie University
Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
tel: +1 902 494 5150
fax: +1 902 494 5151
Easier to show you a before and after with its dialog box, so whipped this up real quick - kind of rough but you’ll get the idea 
The image on left of dialog box is before and the results are on the right. Note I’ve zoomed in on the counters to 1200% so you can see what it has done.
Have you tried comparing image size between PNG, JPEG, and SVG? I would
guess SVG would be very small.
- M.
On 9 February 2011 12:51, Tim M timothy.mccarron@sbcglobal.net wrote:
“mkiefte” wrote:
The algorithms I’ve used always have problems with corners of jagged
shapes. How does Adobe do?
- M.
On 9 February 2011 12:14, Tim M wrote:
If you have Adobe Illustrator, what you can do is use the trace
command
of the dirty image and set the number of colors the tracing will
allow.
This effectively cleans up the image (while vectorizing at same
time).
The trick is to get the lowest number of colors without losing the
definition of the image (can happen). What I use anyways - I think
there is something similar in GimpEasier to show you a before and after with its dialog box, so whipped
this up real quick - kind of rough but you’ll get the ideaThe image on left of dialog box is before and the results are on the
right. Note I’ve zoomed in on the counters to 1200% so you can see what
it has done.
Thus spake Tim M:
It’s not always the case that JPEGs are larger. If you take a scan
and
don’t clean it up, it will usually be much smaller as a JPEG than as
a
PNG. If you do clean up the scan (i.e., you make areas which are
supposed to be uniformly colored actually be so) then you’ll find
that
the PNG will be dramatically smaller than a JPEG, in addition to
having
no visual artifacts. Simply converting a JPEG to a PNG won’t do that
for you. We do recommend using PNGs, but we also recommend cleaning
them up, because it gives you a better looking module.If you have Adobe Illustrator, what you can do is use the trace command
of the dirty image and set the number of colors the tracing will allow.
This effectively cleans up the image (while vectorizing at same time).
The trick is to get the lowest number of colors without losing the
definition of the image (can happen). What I use anyways - I think
there is something similar in Gimp
I can see that working in many cases.
On reflection, though, I think that the best way to clean up scans is
start with vector art and never scan at all.
–
J.
Thus spake Tim M:
Easier to show you a before and after with its dialog box, so whipped
this up real quick - kind of rough but you’ll get the ideaThe image on left of dialog box is before and the results are on the
right. Note I’ve zoomed in on the counters to 1200% so you can see what
it has done.
That’s not bad. It’s only the solid-colored areas that you can clean up
anyhow.
–
J.
Surprisingly not.
The original JPG in this example was 60.9 kilobytes. After converting with trace and saving as a PNG (which flattens it) it was 554 bytes (yes thats correct!) and the SVG file was 57.2 kilobytes.
I suspect there may be some code in the SVG file that Adobe is putting in there for use with illustrator etc… I would think it should be smaller.
Thus spake Tim M:
Surprisingly not.
The original JPG in this example was 60.9 kilobytes. After converting
with trace and saving as a PNG (which flattens it) it was 554 bytes
(yes thats correct!) and the SVG file was 57.2 kilobytes.I suspect there may be some code in the SVG file that Adobe is putting
in there for use with illustrator etc… I would think it should be
smaller.
Illustrator-generated SVG tends to be garbage.
–
J.
it’s very easy to clean up in Inkscape.
- M.
Illustrator-generated SVG tends to be garbage.
–
J.
messages mailing list
messages@vassalengine.org
vassalengine.org/mailman/listinfo/messages
–
Michael Kiefte, Ph.D.
Associate Professor
School of Human Communication Disorders
Dalhousie University
Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
tel: +1 902 494 5150
fax: +1 902 494 5151