Show your support for either or both.
jas_in_obit

KEYOGI

Moderator: Cartographers


It's not about competition, it's about choice. There's plenty of room for both maps. The first is more representative of the country 200 years ago, the second is more modern.Kayla wrote:so i dont understand why we have some competition going on over who gets theres on cc. its not just about accuracy, its about playability, and the first is much better, ignore the splits
Go read the thread for the first map, I posted to see if it would be rude. 1 reply and it was a no. I'm not responsible for people not expressing their opinion. I waited over a week before starting my map.Kayla wrote:i actually find it pretty rude that someone started another one, even if they could've done better.
Maybe you need to adjust your monitor, there is clearly a river system running through there with bridges connecting territoies within their own continent bounderies. Where there is no bridge, you can't cross. Same goes for the mountain range. Have a look at a number of other maps on the site, they all use the same principle.Kayla wrote:cant understand why the border for the territories in the second one, in new south wales is darker than the others, is that blocking riverina from attacking broken hill. ?????
Seriously, adjust your monitor... there's nothing wrong with them. They're very clear and obvious on my crappy 15" CRT.Kayla wrote:never even noticed the bridges, they should be changed. and what are the point in the rivers if they dont block anything. that just makes ppl think they block something and they look and theres nothing there