Font choice choice hard to read!

General discussion forum for anything related to Field of Glory Napoleonics.

Moderators: hammy, philqw78, terrys, Blathergut, Slitherine Core

Post Reply
vichussar
Senior Corporal - Ju 87G
Senior Corporal - Ju 87G
Posts: 83
Joined: Sat May 17, 2008 11:41 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Font choice choice hard to read!

Post by vichussar »

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.
david53
Major-General - Jagdtiger
Major-General - Jagdtiger
Posts: 2859
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 9:01 pm
Location: Manchester

Re: Font choice choice hard to read!

Post by david53 »

I would think it has to do with cost the font style allows for less printed pages thus cutting printing costs.

Dave
hazelbark
General - Carrier
General - Carrier
Posts: 4957
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 9:53 pm
Location: Capital of the World !!

Re: Font choice choice hard to read!

Post by hazelbark »

david53 wrote:I would think it has to do with cost the font style allows for less printed pages thus cutting printing costs.
The type face appears to also be a homage to the period "1786 GLC Fournier Normal"
deadtorius
Field Marshal - Me 410A
Field Marshal - Me 410A
Posts: 5286
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2008 12:41 am

Re: Font choice choice hard to read!

Post by deadtorius »

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.
AlanCutner
Sergeant First Class - Elite Panzer IIIL
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!

Post by AlanCutner »

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.
hazelbark
General - Carrier
General - Carrier
Posts: 4957
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 9:53 pm
Location: Capital of the World !!

Re: Font choice choice hard to read!

Post by hazelbark »

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.
AN understatement. If it was not for the period and the authors, well...
david53
Major-General - Jagdtiger
Major-General - Jagdtiger
Posts: 2859
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 9:01 pm
Location: Manchester

Re: Font choice choice hard to read!

Post by david53 »

hazelbark wrote:
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.
AN understatement. If it was not for the period and the authors, well...

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
Blathergut
Field Marshal - Elefant
Field Marshal - Elefant
Posts: 5882
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 1:44 am
Location: Southern Ontario, Canada

Re: Font choice choice hard to read!

Post by Blathergut »

hazelbark wrote:
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.
AN understatement. If it was not for the period and the authors, well...
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. 8)
terrys
Panzer Corps Team
Panzer Corps Team
Posts: 4234
Joined: Thu Mar 16, 2006 11:53 am

Re: Font choice choice hard to read!

Post by terrys »

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.
Blathergut
Field Marshal - Elefant
Field Marshal - Elefant
Posts: 5882
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 1:44 am
Location: Southern Ontario, Canada

Re: Font choice choice hard to read!

Post by Blathergut »

Thanks, Terry! You could ask any of us for help anytime. Your rules have stirred a new interest/re-interest in Napoleonic battles here! :D (I even have an eagle again! Last dude seen holding one had a red tunic and spoke Latin!)
Post Reply

Return to “Field of Glory : Napoleonic Era 1792-1815 : General Discussion”