Conquer Club

RjBeals wrote:

miniwally wrote:

qwert wrote:

porkenbeans
Day two, OK here's the deal, I am not a mapmaker.

So what? Im also not a mapmaker,

so they decided to put map maker under your name for no reason

he added that himself. It's part of his avatar.

oh cool still continues my point though

miniwally wrote:

RjBeals wrote:

miniwally wrote:

qwert wrote:

porkenbeans
Day two, OK here's the deal, I am not a mapmaker.

So what? Im also not a mapmaker,

so they decided to put map maker under your name for no reason

he added that himself. It's part of his avatar.

oh cool still continues my point though

Yeah lol, his post and avatar are contradicting each other.

Face it qwert, you're a mapmaker, the first step is acceptance.

I meant to say,when i whas first two day in Map foundry,im not been any map maker,like porkenbeans say in hes sentence-

Day two, OK here's the deal, I am not a mapmaker.

well maybe now im some kind of map maker
For mine first map i spend 6 month(epic work on that map) over 2000 post and over 60000 views.

qwert wrote:
I meant to say,when i whas first two day in Map foundry,im not been any map maker,like porkenbeans say in hes sentence-

Day two, OK here's the deal, I am not a mapmaker.

well maybe now im some kind of map maker
For mine first map i spend 6 month(epic work on that map) over 2000 post and over 60000 views.

was that a world war 2 one?

was that a world war 2 one

no-WWII Eastern Front, topic with most post and views.
Any way,if he want to learn how to make map,then is better to start with some country,region,because he will very easy to find all relevant things- territory borders,names,impasabile borders. Well these is what i can recomend.

The Neon Peon wrote:1. You should start with the small map, then make a large later. Making a small from a large is a lot harder than the other way around.

This is bad advice. It is always better to go from larger to smaller, and not the other way around.

mibi wrote:This is bad advice. It is always better to go from larger to smaller, and not the other way around.

I think starting small is best. Big maps can't always be made smaller.

If you have a lot of raster graphics that look fuzzy when they're enlarged, then you should save the large versions in a separate file.

mibi wrote:

The Neon Peon wrote:1. You should start with the small map, then make a large later. Making a small from a large is a lot harder than the other way around.

This is bad advice. It is always better to go from larger to smaller, and not the other way around.

I have a friend that turned me on to Photoshop. He is a professional Graphic Artist, that makes commercials for a local TV station.

He says, (and I hope that I am quoting him correctly), make your work copy in its largest intended size. If you want a smaller version later, it can easily be shrunk without loosing any detail. The same can NOT be said if you try to enlarge it. Think about it, If you want to shrink it, all the info is there for the computer to extrapilate. But, if you want to enlarge it the computer has to add pixels, and it is forced to guess on a bit of the info. This is where you'll notice the loss in detail.

If you are worried about the territs. being to small, then just remember not to make them smaller than a certain size.

porkenbeans wrote:I have a friend that turned me on to Photoshop. He is a professional Graphic Artist, that makes commercials for a local TV station.

He says, (and I hope that I am quoting him correctly), make your work copy in its largest intended size. If you want a smaller version later, it can easily be shrunk without loosing any detail. The same can NOT be said if you try to enlarge it. Think about it, If you want to shrink it, all the info is there for the computer to extrapilate. But, if you want to enlarge it the computer has to add pixels, and it is forced to guess on a bit of the info. This is where you'll notice the loss in detail.

If you are worried about the territs. being to small, then just remember not to make them smaller than a certain size.

To each his own I guess. Normally you'd be right, but I think CC maps are an exception. If I had started my Chess map large and had to shrink it, and found out that you can't distinguish between the pieces or can't read the isntructions or something, then I would have to find new graphics and possibly rework the whole thing so it can be legible. When I made the large version, I just scaled the image, changed the textures back to 100%, changed a few glow effects, and replaced the pieces with scaled down images of the original pic I got them from (just like I did for the small version).

However, if there are a lot of raster graphics and you try to enlarge it, then I agree that you should start with large. But usually it's easier to use shapes, vectors, paths, etc., as they can be easily enlarged.

john9blue wrote:

porkenbeans wrote:I have a friend that turned me on to Photoshop. He is a professional Graphic Artist, that makes commercials for a local TV station.

He says, (and I hope that I am quoting him correctly), make your work copy in its largest intended size. If you want a smaller version later, it can easily be shrunk without loosing any detail. The same can NOT be said if you try to enlarge it. Think about it, If you want to shrink it, all the info is there for the computer to extrapilate. But, if you want to enlarge it the computer has to add pixels, and it is forced to guess on a bit of the info. This is where you'll notice the loss in detail.

If you are worried about the territs. being to small, then just remember not to make them smaller than a certain size.

To each his own I guess. Normally you'd be right, but I think CC maps are an exception. If I had started my Chess map large and had to shrink it, and found out that you can't distinguish between the pieces or can't read the isntructions or something, then I would have to find new graphics and possibly rework the whole thing so it can be legible. When I made the large version, I just scaled the image, changed the textures back to 100%, changed a few glow effects, and replaced the pieces with scaled down images of the original pic I got them from (just like I did for the small version).

However, if there are a lot of raster graphics and you try to enlarge it, then I agree that you should start with large. But usually it's easier to use shapes, vectors, paths, etc., as they can be easily enlarged.

I am just barely able to create anything now. maybe when I am a little further down the line, I will learn how to use shapes, vectors and paths. There are still a lot of things that I would like to do, but do not exactly how to do them properly. I have never read a tutorial or anything. I just got in there and started farting around. My first project was my cat avi that I made for a poker site. And, my sig.
My friend that I mentioned before, has been there to answer some of my questions. All I can say is, I sure wished they had photoshop when I was much younger.

Back to what I said before. -Just remember to make your territs. and text, a minimum size that will be able to retain the detail. In other words, While working on the big map, I guess you could take the text all the way down to the smallest legible scale, and then scale it back up just a tad. So you know that when you go to make the small map, all you have to do is zoom out.

map seems to be a ok idea, i like the art going on and it seems your starting to get the hang of photoshop and all that ,

but 2 things ........................
#there is under 10 places, the smallest map is doddle and it has at least 16 (i think)
#try out the map making your selfduring free time and you'll probally get the hang of it and that way you dont have to wait on anyone else. most good map makers always have a list of maps to do.

this is advice from a player not a map maker, do not quote me but this map needs alot of work on practical CC map making.

i like to end on a good note, you are good at making maps look good maybe try practising using CC software and this coust be the first of many good maps.

riodeishere wrote:doddle and it has at least 16 (i think)

18 actually, and Luxembourg has 19

riodeishere wrote:map seems to be a ok idea, i like the art going on and it seems your starting to get the hang of photoshop and all that ,

but 2 things ........................
#there is under 10 places, the smallest map is doddle and it has at least 16 (i think)
#try out the map making your selfduring free time and you'll probally get the hang of it and that way you dont have to wait on anyone else. most good map makers always have a list of maps to do.

this is advice from a player not a map maker, do not quote me but this map needs alot of work on practical CC map making.

i like to end on a good note, you are good at making maps look good maybe try practising using CC software and this coust be the first of many good maps.

Thank you for your interest. I only threw up some possible territory names, in hopes that people would offer up some suggestions for others. I would like to see some names that are take-offs of members names. There is room for many more territories.