USA 2.1 [10 Mar 2013] Beta Baby!!

Criticalwinner · Post by **Criticalwinner** » Wed Sep 21, 2011 9:36 am

Are you planning on doing a capital bonus or a D.C. bonus, as well as territory bonuses?

Gillipig · Post by **Gillipig** » Wed Sep 21, 2011 12:26 pm

isaiah40 wrote:New version, hopefully it is less cluttered looking. I am currently working on the color scheme. I am working on doing the colors for each region. The Southwest bonus is done and I am working on New England.

Interstates have been reduced, along with the circles and stars. The circles are currently at 18x18, the smallest I can go on them.

Click image to enlarge.

Yes less cluttered.

RjBeals · Post by **RjBeals** » Sat Sep 24, 2011 3:49 pm

i think the glow on all the territories makes it look more cluttered. You don't need it for most of those colors.

danfrank · Post by **danfrank** » Sun Sep 25, 2011 12:27 am

i would not worry too much about the clutteredness , since you will also be adding road lines to connect all the cities ( i think ) .. and besides road maps are pretty cluttered anyway.i am looking forward to this one becoming playable

machrs · Post by **machrs** » Wed Sep 28, 2011 12:19 am

COOL MAP!!! if you could it would be great to get alaska and Hawaii in the map as well... maybe a sub map!!! keep up the great work!!

Gillipig · Post by **Gillipig** » Wed Sep 28, 2011 3:51 am

machrs wrote:COOL MAP!!! if you could it would be great to get alaska and Hawaii in the map as well... maybe a sub map!!! keep up the great work!!

Yeah I was thinking of that too. Not sure how you could fit in even with a supersize stamp. But that would really make this map even better. Hawaii will be a lot easier to fit in than Alaska. Especially if you want to keep it proportional. On second thoughts I don't think it's going to be possible to make Alaska proportional. and since you can't do that I'd say skip it all and just go with the image you have now. It will be enough trouble to fit in a mini map, or all the bonuses listed if the mini map won't be clear enough. So my vote is on skipping it.

natty dread · Post by **natty dread** » Sat Oct 01, 2011 3:15 am

I think it would help with the clutter if you adopted a more "road map" like style - which would also fit the theme of the map better than the current cartoonish style.

Something like this:

Click image to enlarge.

porkenbeans · Post by **porkenbeans** » Thu Oct 06, 2011 9:15 pm

The style is perfect as it is. It is after all an addition to the map pack family, ...is it not ?

natty dread · Post by **natty dread** » Sat Oct 08, 2011 6:36 am

Yeah... the current map pack doesn't look too good either. But since those aren't likely to be changed, and this one still can be... I see no reason to restrict the style of this map to some arbitrary specifications.

isaiah40 · Post by **isaiah40** » Sat Oct 08, 2011 8:52 am

Just to let everyone know, I'm still working on this. Working on fitting in a mini-map and so forth, so I can possibly work in Alaska and Hawaii, since what is a MEGA USA Map without our 49th and 50th states?

koontz1973 · Post by **koontz1973** » Sat Oct 08, 2011 9:40 am

isaiah40 wrote:Just to let everyone know, I'm still working on this. Working on fitting in a mini-map and so forth, so I can possibly work in Alaska and Hawaii, since what is a MEGA USA Map without our 49th and 50th states?

This is good news all round.

But I reckon when this is done, I will have to play it on my TV as my monitor is pretty small.

Victor Sullivan · Post by **Victor Sullivan** » Sat Oct 08, 2011 9:44 am

koontz1973 wrote:
isaiah40 wrote:Just to let everyone know, I'm still working on this. Working on fitting in a mini-map and so forth, so I can possibly work in Alaska and Hawaii, since what is a MEGA USA Map without our 49th and 50th states?
This is good news all round.

But I reckon when this is done, I will have to play it on my TV as my monitor is pretty small.

That sounds amazing. I'd love to play Conquer Club on a giant HD TV!

Glad to hear this is still up-and-running! Tell Alaska and Hawaii I said hi.

-Sully

porkenbeans · Post by **porkenbeans** » Sat Oct 08, 2011 12:09 pm

natty_dread wrote:Yeah... the current map pack doesn't look too good either. But since those aren't likely to be changed, and this one still can be... I see no reason to restrict the style of this map to some arbitrary specifications.

It does NOT need to follow the style exactly to a T, but it DOES need to carry the flavor of the PACK. Just so that it is obvious that they ARE related to each other.

isaiah40 · Post by **isaiah40** » Sat Oct 08, 2011 12:43 pm

As for the clutterness of the map, I am also working on it while doing the mini-map, highways, interstates etc. Right now I have reduced the glow around the territory names (which helped tremendously), removing the outlines where the names cross them, as well as removing the highways under the names as well. So stay tuned as I should have a new version sometime this weekend.

porkenbeans · Post by **porkenbeans** » Sat Oct 08, 2011 11:54 pm

desaturate the colors of the land and lighten and brighten the roads. This should help out in your quest to declutter. Also sense your circles and stars are over the top of the roads mostly, it would be appropriate to drop shadow them as well.

gimil · Post by **gimil** » Sun Oct 09, 2011 4:24 am

porkenbeans wrote:desaturate the colors of the land and lighten and brighten the roads. This should help out in your quest to declutter. Also sense your circles and stars are over the top of the roads mostly, it would be appropriate to drop shadow them as well.

I think porkenbeans may be onto something here.

natty dread · Post by **natty dread** » Sun Oct 09, 2011 8:06 am

porkenbeans wrote:it DOES need to carry the flavor of the PACK. Just so that it is obvious that they ARE related to each other.

No, it actually doesn't. There's not a single good reason why it should.

gimil · Post by **gimil** » Sun Oct 09, 2011 8:09 am

natty_dread wrote:
porkenbeans wrote:it DOES need to carry the flavor of the PACK. Just so that it is obvious that they ARE related to each other.
No, it actually doesn't. There's not a single good reason why it should.

It doesn't have to, but I think that is what isaiah40 is aiming for. Is it not?

koontz1973 · Post by **koontz1973** » Sun Oct 09, 2011 8:12 am

gimil wrote:
natty_dread wrote:
porkenbeans wrote:it DOES need to carry the flavor of the PACK. Just so that it is obvious that they ARE related to each other.
No, it actually doesn't. There's not a single good reason why it should.
It doesn't have to, but I think that is what isaiah40 is aiming for. Is it not?

I would hope so. The map pack may not be the best maps on the site, but as a whole, it would be strange to have them different.

natty_dread asked for one good reason - how about continuity. Changing them so much as it would be unrecognisable, you end up with just another USA map, just bigger.

natty dread · Post by **natty dread** » Sun Oct 09, 2011 8:15 am

gimil wrote:
natty_dread wrote:
porkenbeans wrote:it DOES need to carry the flavor of the PACK. Just so that it is obvious that they ARE related to each other.
No, it actually doesn't. There's not a single good reason why it should.
It doesn't have to, but I think that is what isaiah40 is aiming for. Is it not?

And why is that? You can have a spiritual successor to those maps, in theme, gameplay etc. Why should you imitate a graphical style that is entirely wrong for a project of this caliber just to make the map "fit in" to some arbitrary definitions?

The USA map pack was made ages ago, and if it were made today it would probably look very different (and it'd be on a different site, heh heh

) so why should isaiah try to imitate those old maps when the style clearly isn't working for this map?

gimil · Post by **gimil** » Sun Oct 09, 2011 8:24 am

natty_dread wrote: And why is that? You can have a spiritual successor to those maps, in theme, gameplay etc. Why should you imitate a graphical style that is entirely wrong for a project of this caliber just to make the map "fit in" to some arbitrary definitions?

The USA map pack was made ages ago, and if it were made today it would probably look very different (and it'd be on a different site, heh heh ) so why should isaiah try to imitate those old maps when the style clearly isn't working for this map?

I didn't say he had to. What I said was that is what isaiah40 is aiming for. It is his map and I believe he is aiming for that particular graphics style (with Widowmakers blessing). It is his map and if that is what he wants to do, then that is what he want to do.

The Bison King · Post by **The Bison King** » Sun Oct 09, 2011 8:31 am

natty_dread wrote:
gimil wrote:
natty_dread wrote:
porkenbeans wrote:it DOES need to carry the flavor of the PACK. Just so that it is obvious that they ARE related to each other.
No, it actually doesn't. There's not a single good reason why it should.
It doesn't have to, but I think that is what isaiah40 is aiming for. Is it not?
And why is that? You can have a spiritual successor to those maps, in theme, gameplay etc. Why should you imitate a graphical style that is entirely wrong for a project of this caliber just to make the map "fit in" to some arbitrary definitions?

The USA map pack was made ages ago, and if it were made today it would probably look very different (and it'd be on a different site, heh heh ) so why should isaiah try to imitate those old maps when the style clearly isn't working for this map?

I'm on Natty's side. If we can aspire to something higher graphically I say go for it. I think that latching onto the map pack's style will only serve as a hinderence on a project of this scale. Also there are things about that map packs style that I just think fail.

isaiah40 · Post by **isaiah40** » Sun Oct 09, 2011 8:44 am

gimil wrote:I didn't say he had to. What I said was that is what isaiah40 is aiming for. It is his map and I believe he is aiming for that particular graphics style (with Widowmakers blessing). It is his map and if that is what he wants to do, then that is what he want to do.

This!! If I wanted to make it look exact, I would have traced every single state from WM map pack and placed them on mine. If I did, I would not have had them fit into the max supsize small. I would have actually need about 200 px in width more to get them to fit.

koontz1973 wrote:natty_dread asked for one good reason - how about continuity. Changing them so much as it would be unrecognisable, you end up with just another USA map, just bigger.

This again. After my many talks with WM, we came to the agreement that it would be done in basically the same style and theme, with basically the same bonus structure. So, if people want this to continue then this is what is going to happen, this WILL be done as close to the SAME style and theme as the USA map pack as I can get it! If not then I will be forced to stop development of this map, because I WILL NOT break my agreement with WM on it, PERIOD, END OF DISCUSSION!

isaiah40 · Post by **isaiah40** » Sun Oct 09, 2011 10:30 pm

Okay here is a taste of this with Alaska and Hawaii on it (just have the outlines for now), along with the title and more of the secondary roads added in. Colors will be worked on along with some other clarity items.

Click image to enlarge.

natty dread · Post by **natty dread** » Sun Oct 09, 2011 10:34 pm

isaiah40 wrote:This again. After my many talks with WM, we came to the agreement that it would be done in basically the same style and theme, with basically the same bonus structure. So, if people want this to continue then this is what is going to happen, this WILL be done as close to the SAME style and theme as the USA map pack as I can get it! If not then I will be forced to stop development of this map, because I WILL NOT break my agreement with WM on it, PERIOD, END OF DISCUSSION!

1. Why exactly would WM care? Hasn't he already ditched this site for "greener pastures"?

2. Why should WM:s opinion count regarding the creation of a completely new map? WM does not own the copyright on the map of USA.

USA 2.1 [10 Mar 2013] Beta Baby!!

Re: Mega USA Map [20 Sept 2011] V6 pg 5

Re: Mega USA Map [13 Sept 2011] V5 pg 4

Re: Mega USA Map [20 Sept 2011] V6 pg 5

Re: Mega USA Map [20 Sept 2011] V6 pg 5

Re: Mega USA Map [20 Sept 2011] V6 pg 5

Re: Mega USA Map [20 Sept 2011] V6 pg 5

Re: Mega USA Map [20 Sept 2011] V6 pg 5

Re: Mega USA Map [20 Sept 2011] V6 pg 5

Re: Mega USA Map [20 Sept 2011] V6 pg 5

Re: Mega USA Map [20 Sept 2011] V6 pg 5

Re: Mega USA Map [20 Sept 2011] V6 pg 5

Re: Mega USA Map [20 Sept 2011] V6 pg 5

Re: Mega USA Map [20 Sept 2011] V6 pg 5

Re: Mega USA Map [20 Sept 2011] V6 pg 5

Re: Mega USA Map [20 Sept 2011] V6 pg 5

Re: Mega USA Map [20 Sept 2011] V6 pg 5

Re: Mega USA Map [20 Sept 2011] V6 pg 5

Re: Mega USA Map [20 Sept 2011] V6 pg 5

Re: Mega USA Map [20 Sept 2011] V6 pg 5

Re: Mega USA Map [20 Sept 2011] V6 pg 5

Re: Mega USA Map [20 Sept 2011] V6 pg 5

Re: Mega USA Map [20 Sept 2011] V6 pg 5

Re: Mega USA Map [20 Sept 2011] V6 pg 5

Re: Mega USA Map [20 Sept 2011] V6 pg 5

Re: Mega USA Map [20 Sept 2011] V6 pg 5