Moderator: Cartographers
thx and i like that comment tooaktown wrote:nice work keeping the original feel of the map.
Could you extend the colored regional colors to show where the regions border?
And I like the above comment about porn.

Goddamnit, not this monster again!MrBenn wrote:size restrictions

i just used the orig pic that was on the XKCD site, why whats wrong this time?MrBenn wrote:Did you actually redraw it completely, or have you just edited the original image you started out with?
In either case, can I reiterate my concern about keeping the map within the size restrictions
I agree with you wholeheartedly, but for now, we have to work within the constraints laid down from aboveDitocoaf wrote:...I really think exceptions to the size restriction should be allowed for maps that actually need the extra size.MrBenn wrote:size restrictions

the current posted version is reported by Photoshop to have dimensions 740x699MrBenn wrote:I agree with you wholeheartedly, but for now, we have to work within the constraints laid down from aboveDitocoaf wrote:...I really think exceptions to the size restriction should be allowed for maps that actually need the extra size.MrBenn wrote:size restrictions
Having said that, I still think this map would easily fit within the prescribed size...

And as was pointed out right at the beginning, you've got to get it down to 630x600 for the small map...MrBenn wrote:You also need to explain any attack rules and bonus values within the size limit.edbeard wrote:max size you can use for the small CC map image is 630x600 so you have to fit it into that. if you can't then there's no point working on the map.

honestly i hate them too but they exist for places like Pizco and FlckrRjBeals wrote:i think those army circles ruin it for you. They do not fit at all with the feel of this map. And do you really even need them in the first place?

Hmm... some more (unimportant, but funny) stuff becomes unreadable in the small version. But since it's readable in the large version, it's all fine--a loss of visual detail is to be expected in the small version.a.sub wrote:this is the small image size 630x595 which is the largest it can be while fitting the restrictions
Image
the only ones that may have a problem in this version is faciparty and second life
Turn down the opacity on the layer(s) with the army circles (make them partly see-through). The army numbers will still be readable, but it won't be as distracting.a.sub wrote:honestly i hate them too but they exist for places like Pizco and FlckrRjBeals wrote:i think those army circles ruin it for you. They do not fit at all with the feel of this map. And do you really even need them in the first place?
I disagree... I think this can go somewhere, with effort.hecter wrote:Seriously dude, I think you're gonna have to redraw an image from scratch...

I'll let people a little more knowledgeable handle this one, buta.sub wrote:right now i think it would be best to discuss minor game play options so i can add those to the map
1) what are the bonuses?
I'd say it depends on how you want the seas to function. What do you want them to be?2) what should the seas reset to?

I think it would be nice to have them all the same, just so that it's a bit easier to explain (with a note in the corner or key that says, "seas reset to _ neutral at beginning of turn." But if you're going to do it varying, what you have above seems fine to me...a.sub wrote:this is what i sorta think would work
Bay of Angst........................2
Gulf of Youtube.....................2
Irc Isles Water......................1
Noob Sea............................4
Ocean of Subculture...............4
Sea of Culture......................3
Sea of Memes......................2
The Blogipelago Water............2
as for bonuses:
Practicals (blue) i think should be 3 since its small and has all its land connected
Focus on real life (yellow) i think should be 3 since its small and has all its land connected
Intellectuals (green) i think should be 5 since it has 2 seas to cross
Focus on web (purple) i think should be 6 since it has 3 seas and can be attack from the most directions
ideas? comments? think what i just said was retarded?

I agree with oak. You should PM lack before you go any further. No point in spending TONS of time if it is not going to happen. Virtually every territory on the map is a company or organization that you have not gotten agreement to use their name.oaktown wrote:I am certainly not saying that you can't go ahead with this... I don't make those decisions, nor does anybody else who has posted in this thread. I think it's an interesting idea and that it could make for a very popular map. What I am saying is that if you are going to proceed you should be aware that this map is treading on unsteady ground right now, so don't be surprised if in two months you are told that you can't do this.

i was going to have a note sayingDitocoaf wrote:I think it would be nice to have them all the same, just so that it's a bit easier to explain (with a note in the corner or key that says, "seas reset to _ neutral at beginning of turn." But if you're going to do it varying, what you have above seems fine to me...a.sub wrote:this is what i sorta think would work
Bay of Angst........................2
Gulf of Youtube.....................2
Irc Isles Water......................1
Noob Sea............................4
Ocean of Subculture...............4
Sea of Culture......................3
Sea of Memes......................2
The Blogipelago Water............2
as for bonuses:
Practicals (blue) i think should be 3 since its small and has all its land connected
Focus on real life (yellow) i think should be 3 since its small and has all its land connected
Intellectuals (green) i think should be 5 since it has 2 seas to cross
Focus on web (purple) i think should be 6 since it has 3 seas and can be attack from the most directions
ideas? comments? think what i just said was retarded?
alright, i will PM lack. i guess u and oaktown are right.WidowMakers wrote:I agree with oak. You should PM lack before you go any further. No point in spending TONS of time if it is not going to happen. Virtually every territory on the map is a company or organization that you have not gotten agreement to use their name.oaktown wrote:I am certainly not saying that you can't go ahead with this... I don't make those decisions, nor does anybody else who has posted in this thread. I think it's an interesting idea and that it could make for a very popular map. What I am saying is that if you are going to proceed you should be aware that this map is treading on unsteady ground right now, so don't be surprised if in two months you are told that you can't do this.
Check it out first.
WM