Finally: South America map [Abandoned]

gavin_sidhu · Post by **gavin_sidhu** » Fri Nov 03, 2006 6:52 pm

got ur jagged edge thing happening like in brazil. I suggest not going into too much detail.

AndyDufresne · Post by **AndyDufresne** » Fri Nov 03, 2006 7:10 pm

I've still got a fear that the south could be incredibly strong...due to the southern ladder. If you are able to start in the south, you can steadily move north, without increasing borders (but accumulating countries), and keeping others from grabbing Chile and Argentina. Perhaps the additions of those islands...can kee it from being so 'ladder like' in the south.

--Andy

reverend_kyle · Post by **reverend_kyle** » Sat Nov 04, 2006 2:51 am

Andy keeps saying this and I'm going to keep disagreeing.. with your larger continents in the south it will be very hard to get that.. that actually keeps it balanced.. you have the smaller continents up north and easy to expand to and it all is about level after you combine everything...

Aesthetically your textures are horrible.. go with somethign much more subtle like on the brazil map.. also blue is a horrible border color...

AndyDufresne · Post by **AndyDufresne** » Sat Nov 04, 2006 1:10 pm

I do agree that the smaller continents in the north help offset the ladder, but I'm still not a big fan of it. Maybe I just dislike the way South America is shaped? Maybe we could revisit the map in a few billion years and hope the shape has shifted some?

As for textures such...the green texture is the one I favor. The gray isn't too bad either. But colors should definitely be tweaked. I'd like to see this map different in look than your brazil map, perhaps not so bright and flashy, but perhaps more like the Europe map or a few other of the 'darker' maps.

--Andy

Marvaddin · Post by **Marvaddin** » Sat Nov 04, 2006 3:17 pm

What are you suggesting, Andy? An ancient SA map? Well, I bet it will be in Pangea map...

And Im really doing a modern SA map... I think there is no good way to change that, since those are the real borders... I can edit the a bit, but not thaaaat much. Anyway, if you have practical suggestions, let me know

Another try, real background for the countries... and no ocean, lol. What do you think about this? (Hmmm, maybe I should reduce contrast of the gray one...)

Here is a darker version, if you like:

http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f44/M ... eraY13.png

Im also thinking about something alike to USApoc map, I will possibly post it soon. And Im strongly thinking about paratroopers idea... For now, lets not worry about borders, I will chance colours/aspect later

happysadfun · Post by **happysadfun** » Sat Nov 04, 2006 3:19 pm

Chile is... hard to see the borders. Maybe add some territory from Argentina. And make it... not blue.

reverend_kyle · Post by **reverend_kyle** » Sat Nov 04, 2006 4:21 pm

happysadfun wrote:Chile is... hard to see the borders. And make it... not blue.

Marvaddin · Post by **Marvaddin** » Sat Nov 04, 2006 10:11 pm

Here is another option, images instead of textures.

Before I even continue trying to find an image that fits well in Chile (argh!, its difficult

), give me some feedback. I can also change the images... if I can get better ones (for North Andes, I have already an image of Aconcagua

). But I would like to know if you appreciate like this... or are textures better? And before you ask me, the guy in the pink area is Simon Bolivar

So, question is, what to use:
- One texture to all continents?
- One texture each continent?
- "Natural cover", like I posted just before?
- Images like these ones?

Hoff · Post by **Hoff** » Sat Nov 04, 2006 10:17 pm

I think that one texture for the entire map would work best. I dont think the pictures are working too well, and different textures just look confusing.

AndyDufresne · Post by **AndyDufresne** » Sat Nov 04, 2006 11:07 pm

I have to agree that some sort of style texture (ripples, dots, angles, etc) would be the best for the map. Look for ones that don't stand out too much, but just kind of flow with the colors and feel realistic.

--Andy

Marvaddin · Post by **Marvaddin** » Sun Nov 05, 2006 1:24 am

I dont know how a texture can be realistic to a map background like this... I was wanting to try something different, and I liked the images.

Here is another try:

Hoff · Post by **Hoff** » Sun Nov 05, 2006 2:02 am

That texture is very pleasing, i like it. I dont know about the blue border lines though.

cowshrptrn · Post by **cowshrptrn** » Sun Nov 05, 2006 11:27 am

i prefer the bottm, Maybe you coudl make some more islands to help w/ the narrowness problem

reverend_kyle · Post by **reverend_kyle** » Sun Nov 05, 2006 6:38 pm

Hoff wrote:That texture is very pleasing, i like it. I dont know about the blue border lines though.

I agree the texture is good now but the blue is bloody awful.. change it.

Marvaddin · Post by **Marvaddin** » Mon Nov 13, 2006 11:10 pm

Not really an update. I changed a bit the colours scheme. Chile is no more blue, lol.
I would like to know what do you think about this ocean, and of course I can dark it a bit, as the whole map. And I got 2 version for the mountains. In the North, mini mountains... I think they look good. In the south, a thin area filled with rock texture, like in NA map and, well, not so good, but it maintains the map clearer... What should I use? Another options? If someone can design some mountains to me, I would like a lot.

Hoff · Post by **Hoff** » Tue Nov 14, 2006 12:43 am

The ocean is no good. The texture stands out too much. Maybe a softer texture for the water. And as for the mountains i like the ones in the north better.

reverend_kyle · Post by **reverend_kyle** » Tue Nov 14, 2006 2:15 am

Marvaddin wrote:
Not really an update. I changed a bit the colours scheme. Chile is no more blue, lol.
I would like to know what do you think about this ocean, and of course I can dark it a bit, as the whole map. And I got 2 version for the mountains. In the North, mini mountains... I think they look good. In the south, a thin area filled with rock texture, like in NA map and, well, not so good, but it maintains the map clearer... What should I use? Another options? If someone can design some mountains to me, I would like a lot.

Like everything .. I like he north mountains alot better... but the map needs more of them.. or barriers because its un playable now.. get rid of the blue borders and soften the ocean.

cramill · Post by **cramill** » Tue Nov 14, 2006 10:11 am

Its looking pretty good, Chile is good with the red.

happysadfun · Post by **happysadfun** » Tue Nov 14, 2006 4:36 pm

Grey continent is terrible. You can't get to the one place in the west.

Marvaddin · Post by **Marvaddin** » Tue Nov 14, 2006 10:09 pm

Can you explain the problem about the grey continent?

happysadfun · Post by **happysadfun** » Wed Nov 15, 2006 4:22 pm

Look at the placement of the rivers and mountains. It's inpossible to get to the western three.

sully800 · Post by **sully800** » Wed Nov 15, 2006 5:24 pm

The only impassable borders he has drawn (as far as I know) are the mountains. It's just confusing because half of the borders are blue and half of them are black. I don't believe there are any uncrossable rivers at this point.

zarvinny · Post by **zarvinny** » Wed Nov 15, 2006 6:52 pm

you should make the big countries worth a little (1-3) and smaller coutnries worth more (3-5). Then, people won't bother breaking big countries as much as the little ones.

sfhbballnut · Post by **sfhbballnut** » Wed Nov 15, 2006 8:03 pm

I like it

dafranca · Post by **dafranca** » Tue Dec 19, 2006 6:13 am

My sugestions to save this map.

Devide the map like this:

1 ) South Argentina (Malvinas, Tierra del Fuego, Santa Cruz, Chubut, Rio Negro and South Georgia*) +4
2 ) Pampas (Cordoba, tucuman, Buenos Aires, Uruguay, Corrientes, Rio Grande and Paraguai) +5
3 ) Pantanal (La Paz, Santa Cruz, Cuiaba and Campo Grande) +2
4 ) Guianeas (French Guiana*, Guyana and Suriname) +1
5 ) Amazonas (Aripuanã, Roraima, Acre, Loreto, Xingu, Belem) +4
6 ) Chile ( Tarapaca, San Felix, Atacama, Santiago, Valdivia, Aisen and Magallanes) +4
7 ) East Brasil (Sao Paulo, Minas Gerais, Goias, Bahia, Maralhao, Ceara and Fernando de Noronha*) +5
8 ) North Andes (Arequipa, Lima, Equador, Galapagos, Colombia* and Venezuela*) +4

* = New Territories
remove: Caracas, Tachira, Bogota and Vichada

Connections:
- In order to improve playability add a connection from Malvinas and/or South Georgia to Fernando de Noronha and from Fernando de Noronha to Venezuela.
- You should change the conection of San Felix: remove conection with Arequipa add connection to Galapagos.

Let's get this map moving... I am sure it will fit better now.