Moderator: Cartographers

I'm not saying I don't agree with the rest of your post, but I agree with this. Moscow doesn't appear to be part of European Russia. And, ian has provided a good solution.iancanton wrote:the new colours are now suitably distinct from the non-playing area. however, to the uninformed player, brick-red moscow now appears to be a separate continent of its own and not a part of european russia. if that's not the intention, then moscow needs to be the same orange colour as the rest of european russia. the moscow bonus can perhaps be better denoted by the army circle being made a star shape, coloured red, with the star symbol also being shown in the bonus key.
looks good to me pepperpepperonibread wrote:Thanks for the posts everybody. I agree with most things you guys said, but I honestly don't want to go through all the comments right now. The next update, probably sometime next week, should have almost all of this stuff, but I'll give a reason if I don't add something.






no negative comments on the new mountains so far!pepperonibread wrote:I wanted the mts. to be uniform, so I redid all of them for this update. They might not look as good as before (I may make them a little thinner) so I'll still be tinkering with them.
accepted. it's actually part of european russia, not the baltics, so adding kaliningrad would have added a layer of complexity.pepperonibread wrote:Regarding the Kaliningrad exclave, it's actually on the map, on the very tip of "Baltics". Because it's so small, I think it would be kind of... pointless, I guess to add it in.
comments certainly needed from our more experienced players. my gut feeling is that the far east player has much more room to expand than anyone else before treading on someone else's toes and therefore ought to be handicapped by making him take over a continent of reasonable size before securing bonuses. setting the far east boundary between amur and chita has the advantage that this is a real federal district boundary and not one that we made up.pepperonibread wrote:About the power of the Far East, I personally like the gameplay how it is, but I'm not much of a gameplay expert as it stands. Maybe lowering the bonus to 2 would work? Suggestions, anybody?
Thanks for the comments, I'll be sure to add that stuff in. Also, Andy, I see you've been on a quenching/FF'ing spree, maybe FF after this next updateiancanton wrote:no negative comments on the new mountains so far!pepperonibread wrote:I wanted the mts. to be uniform, so I redid all of them for this update. They might not look as good as before (I may make them a little thinner) so I'll still be tinkering with them.
accepted. it's actually part of european russia, not the baltics, so adding kaliningrad would have added a layer of complexity.pepperonibread wrote:Regarding the Kaliningrad exclave, it's actually on the map, on the very tip of "Baltics". Because it's so small, I think it would be kind of... pointless, I guess to add it in.
comments certainly needed from our more experienced players. my gut feeling is that the far east player has much more room to expand than anyone else before treading on someone else's toes and therefore ought to be handicapped by making him take over a continent of reasonable size before securing bonuses. setting the far east boundary between amur and chita has the advantage that this is a real federal district boundary and not one that we made up.pepperonibread wrote:About the power of the Far East, I personally like the gameplay how it is, but I'm not much of a gameplay expert as it stands. Maybe lowering the bonus to 2 would work? Suggestions, anybody?
in addition, let's up the western republics bonus to 3. it has 4 territories and 4 borders, which makes it harder to hold than both of the other small continents.
now some changes to make to sakha. it was known to the outside world as yakutia (or, more formally, the yakut assr) for almost 70 years, then changed its name to sakha just before the soviet union was dissolved in 1992. yakutia is therefore the logical name for a soviet-era map.
http://www.yakutia.org/index.php?option ... &Itemid=31
spelling: verkhayansk is actually verkhoyansk and srednekdymsk is actually srednekolymsk.
http://www.spri.cam.ac.uk/resources/rfn/sakhamap.html
"novo ostrova" means "new islands", which leaves out the most significant part of the name! perhaps we can use the english translation, "new siberian islands", which is less of a mouthful than the full russian name?
http://www.spri.cam.ac.uk/resources/infosheets/8.html
after a brilliant start (as a mark of how good the first draft was, the current map looks virtually identical at first glance), the map still has a few updates to go before we arrive, as we can't do much with the xml till everyone's happy with the gameplay. however, we are surely progressing toward final forge.
ian.
Actually the armies would appear in front of the explosion, obstructing most of it. I think it would probably look really dumb, I'd vote no if it came to that.1st chair flute wrote:no poll conor. you cant see the armies on moscow if that happens.wrightfan123 wrote:See? How cool is that A-Bomb! Do a poll to see who wants it in for real.
-W123
I was never planning on using the gif, anyway. If I did, it would probably not be in a loop, just once at the beginning of your turn. Loss of detail or not, it still wouldn't really fit with the map. Conquer Man, on the other hand, looks freakin' awesome...Coleman wrote:Actually the armies would appear in front of the explosion, obstructing most of it. I think it would probably look really dumb, I'd vote no if it came to that.1st chair flute wrote:no poll conor. you cant see the armies on moscow if that happens.wrightfan123 wrote:See? How cool is that A-Bomb! Do a poll to see who wants it in for real.
-W123
In addition, there is some loss of color and contrast in the gif version that I don't like.
MrBenn wrote:Your map looks really good... I've only had a quick look at it, and I'm impressed.
My only niggle is that I thought the writing in the bottom left said 'Impossible Gardens'; and it took me a while to twig that that wasn't your signature... perhaps it's worth making the B look more like a B, to stop muppets like me getting confused