Moderator: Cartographers
in that case, it's logical to connect iceland to both denmark and norway. however, i think it would be wrong to have iceland as more than one territory, since it really is of very minor significance compared with the other countries. perhaps it is better to exclude iceland.snufkin wrote:norway also used to be danish territory, hell england used to be danish territory as well.. Iceland is traditionally of norwegian origin (they wanted to escape the norwegian king).. I think it would be really odd to not have iceland connected to norway..
although I would like to see Iceland (so that all the nordic/scandinavian/norse/former viking homelands are included..) Gustaf do have a point with the city comment; every one of those cities has a population larger than the country of Iceland.Gustaf Wasa wrote:No Iceland, and call it Scandinavia!
I think the major cities should be there: Stockholm, Gothenburg, Oslo, Copenhagen, Helsinki. It's just weird to look at a map of Scandinavia and not see the cities.
Damn...I wanted Iceland. Hehe.TaCktiX wrote:He's already decided no Iceland, just hasn't updated the topic title (note latest revision on February 20th).
Top Score:2403natty_dread wrote:I was wrong
This is a good suggestion but the situation is not the same in Finland as in Sweden if I've understood correctly, the new Läänit is more used and associated with there. But, that should not stop a change if it's better gameplay-wise! Does anyone else have a suggestion/opinion regarding this before I decide to change (or not) ?having the traditional läänit for finland means that the territory count for finland is 12, not 15. this makes a clear difference in development between finland and norway and maybe more of a choice in gameplay. u can perhaps say it's justified because norway has oil and viking history, while finland has only mobile phones and some good racing drivers!
by tradition, there is a clear "pecking order" of importance: sweden first, denmark second, norway third and finland fourth. we can't do much about denmark because it's so small, but having a 12-territory finland seems to fit better with this.
do u think it would work if finland has only 11 territories, excluding aaland (because finland does not have complete sovereignty over swedish-speaking aaland)? we can then make aaland a special territory that is not part of a continent, but gives a +1 bonus to the holder of the nearest finnish and swedish subcontinents. this can be our version of the aaland dispute after the end of the first world war.
On especially the small map things are a bit too tightly packed in the bottom, but I'm not sure what to do about it. I cannot expand the map because of the size requirements. However, the entire Denmark is included! The border to Germany goes pretty much exactly where the map is cut. I have tried to make small improvements generally now to the graphics anyway.also the bottom looks scruffy, can u include all of denmark not just parts
i'm unsure how easy this will be to do, but have u considered using perspective, that is tilt the map away from us at an angle, so that denmark looks closer (and therefore bigger) and the large arctic territories look further away (and therefore smaller)? for the small map, this will let u have an image of 495 x 495, which u can resize to 600 x 600 to give more space for territory names. by using perspective, there might also be room to include a very small part of germany.CoolC wrote:On especially the small map things are a bit too tightly packed in the bottom, but I'm not sure what to do about it. I cannot expand the map because of the size requirements. However, the entire Denmark is included! The border to Germany goes pretty much exactly where the map is cut.also the bottom looks scruffy, can u include all of denmark not just parts
the mountain impassables need more work. the dotted lines look like they're more passable than the normal solid borders.CoolC wrote:I am not sure what else need to be done, I think it's pretty much playable now...
i think that a sea route unnecessarily disrupts the natural impassable that is the gulf of bothnia. 11 to 15 territories, depending on whether u adopt my suggestions above, are rather difficult to win and hold. this is similar to the combined north and south america on the classic map. it looks as if the gameplay will be shaped largely by the sub-continent bonuses, so the exact position of the mountain impassables in norway is important to let u achieve ur desired balance.CoolC wrote:One thing I'm thinking of is a water path between Norrbotten and Keski-Pohjanmaa to give Finland another territory to defend.
Interesting idea but I don't think it's possible except by re-doing the map from scratch, I might give it a shot though just to tryiancanton wrote: i'm unsure how easy this will be to do, but have u considered using perspective, that is tilt the map away from us at an angle, so that denmark looks closer (and therefore bigger) and the large arctic territories look further away (and therefore smaller)? for the small map, this will let u have an image of 495 x 495, which u can resize to 600 x 600 to give more space for territory names. by using perspective, there might also be room to include a very small part of germany.
Check! I shall give it more work later to improve it visually, but I think it's a good start!iancanton wrote: the mountain impassables need more work. the dotted lines look like they're more passable than the normal solid borders.
I really hope so to. Then we might have this map in our championships.Gustaf Wasa wrote:I really hope this will be done! It looks good so far
