Font choice choice hard to read!
Moderators: hammy, philqw78, terrys, Blathergut, Slitherine Core
-
- Senior Corporal - Ju 87G
- Posts: 83
- Joined: Sat May 17, 2008 11:41 am
- Location: Melbourne, Australia
Font choice choice hard to read!
Not sure if this is mention elswhere but the choice of font for the rules has to be reviewed for future editions, army lists etc. The size of the numbers is my main gripe especially "2" and "4" when placed next to the "MU". Also the numbers often seem positioned as "subscripts" ie. below the level of the line of text. The numbers are the imortant piece of information that need to be prominent so as to be found easily. FogA and FogR don't seem have this problem so why was there a change.
Re: Font choice choice hard to read!
I would think it has to do with cost the font style allows for less printed pages thus cutting printing costs.
Dave
Dave
-
- General - Carrier
- Posts: 4957
- Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 9:53 pm
- Location: Capital of the World !!
Re: Font choice choice hard to read!
The type face appears to also be a homage to the period "1786 GLC Fournier Normal"david53 wrote:I would think it has to do with cost the font style allows for less printed pages thus cutting printing costs.
-
- Field Marshal - Me 410A
- Posts: 5286
- Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2008 12:41 am
Re: Font choice choice hard to read!
Personally a plain page without the lines in the background would have made it much easier to read, I think that is more distracting than the font. That is what I have always found makes it harder to read than the previous rules.
-
- Sergeant First Class - Elite Panzer IIIL
- Posts: 437
- Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 12:42 pm
- Location: Scotland
Re: Font choice choice hard to read!
I'd put up with the poor choice of font if only the rules didn't contain so many errors. Having played my first game I really like the rules. But please Osprey/Slitherine, can we have future publications published after far better proof-reading.
-
- General - Carrier
- Posts: 4957
- Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 9:53 pm
- Location: Capital of the World !!
Re: Font choice choice hard to read!
AN understatement. If it was not for the period and the authors, well...AlanCutner wrote:I'd put up with the poor choice of font if only the rules didn't contain so many errors. Having played my first game I really like the rules. But please Osprey/Slitherine, can we have future publications published after far better proof-reading.
Re: Font choice choice hard to read!
hazelbark wrote:AN understatement. If it was not for the period and the authors, well...AlanCutner wrote:I'd put up with the poor choice of font if only the rules didn't contain so many errors. Having played my first game I really like the rules. But please Osprey/Slitherine, can we have future publications published after far better proof-reading.
I too like the rules, but their do seem like a lot of mistakes due to proof reading.
I only hope this will not put of those that don't know FOG or the rule writers,
Dave
-
- Field Marshal - Elefant
- Posts: 5882
- Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 1:44 am
- Location: Southern Ontario, Canada
Re: Font choice choice hard to read!
I would hope that both an errata list and a revised QRS would be offered to either the original beta testers (if they didn't miss many of these errors) or to a new group perhaps (better to get fresh eyes and minds looking specifically for errors as opposed to playing games and testing that) before it is issued at large. The errors are unsettling, but as previously stated, i think there is a very enjoyable game here. It's normal gamer nature to want to be able to follow the rules exactly, and it becomes frustrating when you can't. But also, again, I appreciate the authors popping on here to respond to questions that sometimes can be answered with a careful read of the bits without the errors.hazelbark wrote:AN understatement. If it was not for the period and the authors, well...AlanCutner wrote:I'd put up with the poor choice of font if only the rules didn't contain so many errors. Having played my first game I really like the rules. But please Osprey/Slitherine, can we have future publications published after far better proof-reading.

Re: Font choice choice hard to read!
I'm putting together an errate at the moment, and have to admit that the proof reading of the army list section has been poor.
So far I have 11 update for the rules (most quite minor), and more than double that for the 20 pages of army lists.
I will get selected Beta testers to check them before publishing them in general.
So far I have 11 update for the rules (most quite minor), and more than double that for the 20 pages of army lists.
I will get selected Beta testers to check them before publishing them in general.
-
- Field Marshal - Elefant
- Posts: 5882
- Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 1:44 am
- Location: Southern Ontario, Canada
Re: Font choice choice hard to read!
Thanks, Terry! You could ask any of us for help anytime. Your rules have stirred a new interest/re-interest in Napoleonic battles here!
(I even have an eagle again! Last dude seen holding one had a red tunic and spoke Latin!)
