Moderator: Cartographers


porkenbeans...thanks for your comments, i appreciate the time you've taken to come in and post.porkenbeans wrote:Here for the review.
Well, right off the bat I would have to say, that, I am not very keen on "cricket". Being an American, I just do not have any knowledge of the game. That being said, I am sure that with cairns name on this map, it WILL be very accurate and well thought out. And I am sure that if I took the time to learn the game and the map, I might even like it. Its just that I am not really interested in it. Sorry brother, just my honest reaction. If it is any consolation, Prohibition Chicago is my favorite map. All the research that went into making it historically accurate is acknowledged and appreciated. I absolutely love that map.
You can't please all the people all the time, I guess.

pleae refresh your browser...lord voldemort wrote:your update solved my problem with the sixes..the borders and stuff..
still confusion with tc6 and sc6 as to who is the closest fielder ie the legend
public 1 to pulic 14...on the map it looks kinda tacky imo the dotted line tunnel
also not sure if you answered this public into pavillion?? i suppose thats the same problem with the tackiness of the tunnel..in that its cluttered and a lil bit confusing..
just general thoughts..i have more but im off now



LV. i'm moving some fieldsmen around, but in doing so and checking positions...i realise that all the shot positions that are named on field, should be coming from Batsman 2.lord voldemort wrote:ok nice update..pavillion looks good now and the police bordering the public to there is good..makes it not confusing...and is prolly correct cricket wise..ie security for players..
in my opinion these 6's hs6 and as6 are still confusing...
i suggest hs6..move it to a more forward square leggish position
as for as6..i dont know how to remove the confusion of which it borders unless u move the cover fielder
also just to clarify..spectators dont acculumate a bonus??? except barmy and ozzy army



Sort of, yes. Its up to the captain and bowler where they want the fielders, and this will depend on who the batsman is.cairnswk wrote: LV. i'm moving some fieldsmen around, but in doing so and checking positions...i realise that all the shot positions that are named on field, should be coming from Batsman 2.
What happens in our case, when Batsman 1 is on strike at his end of the field and the bowler is bowling from the opposite direction (ie from near where wicket-keeper is), do the field positions get changed over to suit the view of the batsman.
No!......I mean, yes I understand, but the answer is no. They change ends after every over(fielding side, not the batsmen), so it wont apply to this map.cairnswk wrote:If this is the case, then there should be replication of the southern end positions on the northern side....if you understand what i mean.


Thanks LV....that's what i thought.lord voldemort wrote:i can help you with field positions..having played cricket...
the naming of the positions is relative to the batter on strike...
however i think for this map you should name the fielding positions on where they are as we see them if a rh batter was batting...

i reckon strikers end...cairnswk wrote:Thanks LV....that's what i thought.lord voldemort wrote:i can help you with field positions..having played cricket...
the naming of the positions is relative to the batter on strike...
however i think for this map you should name the fielding positions on where they are as we see them if a rh batter was batting...
So do i need to change all the dotted lines so that they are coming from the strikers end, or are they OK as is?

OK, if that the case, then we'll need to put some conditions on the batsmen.lord voldemort wrote:i reckon strikers end...cairnswk wrote:Thanks LV....that's what i thought.lord voldemort wrote:i can help you with field positions..having played cricket...
the naming of the positions is relative to the batter on strike...
however i think for this map you should name the fielding positions on where they are as we see them if a rh batter was batting...
So do i need to change all the dotted lines so that they are coming from the strikers end, or are they OK as is?
though this will change gameplay quite a bit...
though i think i saw you mention neutrals somewhere

yer i agree...cairnswk wrote:OK, if that the case, then we'll need to put some conditions on the batsmen.lord voldemort wrote:i reckon strikers end...cairnswk wrote:Thanks LV....that's what i thought.lord voldemort wrote:i can help you with field positions..having played cricket...
the naming of the positions is relative to the batter on strike...
however i think for this map you should name the fielding positions on where they are as we see them if a rh batter was batting...
So do i need to change all the dotted lines so that they are coming from the strikers end, or are they OK as is?
though this will change gameplay quite a bit...
though i think i saw you mention neutrals somewhere
If i change all the fielding positions to coming off batsman 2 (receiver) then i think perhaps it would be good to implement that both batsmen have to be held plus any 4/6 whatever for the bonus to take effect.
(sorry, bedtime now, early lectures tomorrow)![]()
Thanks for the discussion LV.



ponting and clarke ran out...that right there ended itbrian fletcher wrote:thanks cairns.
we did play better than your lot over the 5 tests but im sure you`ll have rebuilt and hammer us again in 18 months time.


bolded fyilord voldemort wrote:yer i agree...cairnswk wrote:OK, if that the case, then we'll need to put some conditions on the batsmen.lord voldemort wrote:i reckon strikers end...cairnswk wrote:Thanks LV....that's what i thought.lord voldemort wrote:i can help you with field positions..having played cricket...
the naming of the positions is relative to the batter on strike...
however i think for this map you should name the fielding positions on where they are as we see them if a rh batter was batting...
So do i need to change all the dotted lines so that they are coming from the strikers end, or are they OK as is?
though this will change gameplay quite a bit...
though i think i saw you mention neutrals somewhere
If i change all the fielding positions to coming off batsman 2 (receiver) then i think perhaps it would be good to implement that both batsmen have to be held plus any 4/6 whatever for the bonus to take effect.
(sorry, bedtime now, early lectures tomorrow)![]()
Thanks for the discussion LV.
perhaps change batsmen 1 and 2...
seeing batsmen 1 on strike makes more sense...to me that is

Noted.bolded fyilord voldemort wrote: yer i agree...
perhaps change batsmen 1 and 2...
seeing batsmen 1 on strike makes more sense...to me that is


they are no goodcairnswk wrote:what's happened to England?
