
,
Moderator: Cartographers



 cairnswk
				cairnswk
			








 
		iancanton wrote:democratic republic of congo's lost its coastline! can u put it back? the angola-congo border also needs to be removed from the xml.
ian.
 
 
 thenobodies80
				thenobodies80
			






















 
		 Finsfleet
				Finsfleet
			

















 
		Finsfleet wrote:This map sucks. It is pretty, but borders are unclear. If it wasn`t for Bob, I would never know which teritory attacks which.


 koontz1973
				koontz1973
			




















 
		
 HardAttack
				HardAttack
			

























 
		koontz1973 wrote:Finsfleet wrote:This map sucks. It is pretty, but borders are unclear. If it wasn`t for Bob, I would never know which teritory attacks which.
What is exactly unclear? Not had a problem myself.
 Oh maybe the inner bridges...i think I'll leave bridges only for connections between different territories, for internal connections I'll do something like this:
 Oh maybe the inner bridges...i think I'll leave bridges only for connections between different territories, for internal connections I'll do something like this:
HardAttack wrote:One thing if easy to handle, can we resize the map to decrease the size down to % 80 or % 75 of the current size ? Asking this to have the map to fit in screen

 thenobodies80
				thenobodies80
			






















 
		thenobodies80 wrote:i think I'll leave bridges only for connections between different territories, for internal connections I'll do something like this:
 Should make things clearer.
  Should make things clearer.

 koontz1973
				koontz1973
			




















 
		DoomYoshi wrote:Hey all! Beautiful Map.
However, I am wondering if you can change the 'interterritory' bridges to a different graphic from the 'intraterritory bridges'. I know the map, but it still is difficult to see sometimes and might make the map more 'n00b-friendly'.
 chapcrap
				chapcrap
			






























 
		thenobodies80 wrote:koontz1973 wrote:Finsfleet wrote:This map sucks. It is pretty, but borders are unclear. If it wasn`t for Bob, I would never know which teritory attacks which.
What is exactly unclear? Not had a problem myself.
I think (hope) that with unclear he means un-common. The fact we didn't use colors on the land for continents...because a part for that I don't understand how a black line could be unclear...Oh maybe the inner bridges...i think I'll leave bridges only for connections between different territories, for internal connections I'll do something like this:

 AndyDufresne
				AndyDufresne
			











 
			thenobodies80 wrote:koontz1973 wrote:Finsfleet wrote:This map sucks. It is pretty, but borders are unclear. If it wasn`t for Bob, I would never know which teritory attacks which.
What is exactly unclear? Not had a problem myself.
I think (hope) that with unclear he means un-common. The fact we didn't use colors on the land for continents...because a part for that I don't understand how a black line could be unclear...Oh maybe the inner bridges...i think I'll leave bridges only for connections between different territories, for internal connections I'll do something like this:

 DiM
				DiM
			















 
		 ManBungalow
				ManBungalow
			






















 
		

 thenobodies80
				thenobodies80
			






















 
		 So those who want to play on small maps can do so, and those who want to take in the work can play on the large.
 So those who want to play on small maps can do so, and those who want to take in the work can play on the large. 

 AndyDufresne
				AndyDufresne
			











 
			chapcrap wrote:DoomYoshi wrote:Hey all! Beautiful Map.
However, I am wondering if you can change the 'interterritory' bridges to a different graphic from the 'intraterritory bridges'. I know the map, but it still is difficult to see sometimes and might make the map more 'n00b-friendly'.
Maybe, it could have a little bit of connection with the land instead of a bridge... I have been confused by this multiple times while playing.
DiM wrote:the rivers are usually impassables and when you see a river you automatically think that whatever is beyond is a different terit.
this means that some connections aren't visible at a glance.
eritrea to sudan or mozambique to swaziland.
obviously if you pay attention and take your time to study the borders it's all clear but i can see how confusion may appear in a fast paced speedgame.
 chapcrap
				chapcrap
			






























 
		
 thenobodies80
				thenobodies80
			






















 
		thenobodies80 wrote:Not ignored, I'll fix it.
 chapcrap
				chapcrap
			






























 
		thenobodies80 wrote:koontz1973 wrote:Finsfleet wrote:This map sucks. It is pretty, but borders are unclear. If it wasn`t for Bob, I would never know which teritory attacks which.
What is exactly unclear? Not had a problem myself.
I think (hope) that with unclear he means un-common. The fact we didn't use colors on the land for continents...because a part for that I don't understand how a black line could be unclear...Oh maybe the inner bridges...i think I'll leave bridges only for connections between different territories, for internal connections I'll do something like this:
HardAttack wrote:One thing if easy to handle, can we resize the map to decrease the size down to % 80 or % 75 of the current size ? Asking this to have the map to fit in screen
Look at page 5, that version is the possible new small, is it good in that size for you?

 HardAttack
				HardAttack
			

























 
		

 koontz1973
				koontz1973
			




















 
		
 thenobodies80
				thenobodies80
			






















 
		

 thenobodies80
				thenobodies80
			






















 
		thenobodies80 wrote:The new images are in the OP, for now I've left the bridges....the option I've proposed above looks terrible on the map...I have to think a bit about it and find something that really works.
Btw, files sent to Lack!
 chapcrap
				chapcrap
			






























 
		cairnswk wrote:3. The title is too close to the right hand border, and doesn't have the same spacing that it has on the top side. I can appreciate that it is probably trying to be fit on the land mass there, but it simply looks odd to me.
Debatable...I think the title is ok in the current position


 cairnswk
				cairnswk
			








 
		

 thenobodies80
				thenobodies80
			






















 
		thenobodies80 wrote:Will do cairnswk, will do. Just trying to get rid of some things on my to do list before to work again on the map.
Btw, are the new size better? Is people happier with this small version?

 chapcrap
				chapcrap
			






























 
		Users browsing this forum: No registered users