a second arctic map! this map is very clean but, at these northerly latitudes, the traditional mercator projection (where north is directly upward on all parts of the map) distorts the distances a lot: the two land masses ought to be closer to each other at the top of the map than they are just now and further away at the bottom. to give the right shape of land and sea, the lines of latitude must curve in a smiling way. this can be approximated reasonably easily (if not entirely accurately) by cutting the map in two, then rotating north america anticlockwise.
lanyards wrote:Joodoo wrote:Yukon is part of Canada, not USA.
Maybe you should make it North American Continents instead of American continents to make it more geographically correct.
Canada is in America. Right?
if canada is in america, then russia is in asia. the legend is inconsistent. the continents can be either be russian, american (of the usa) and canadian or asian and american (of north and south america). having only russian and american clearly implies that yukon is part of the usa and will be interpreted by many people as such.
can u rename siberia continent as chukotka? the entire visible left-hand landmass could perhaps be described as siberia in a loose sense, but none of it is part of the russian federal district of siberia. pepperonibread's soviet union map shows the boundaries of chukotka.
http://www.conquerclub.com/maps/Soviet_Union.S.jpg
i dislike the use of each continent's colours twice. it suggests that there is some gameplay or bonus link between continents of the same colour, which there isn't.
Coleman wrote:I'm a bit confused by the ports being the same color as two corresponding continents instead of their own color.

That's the only improvement I can see, as their being their own color would help further clarify that they are not a part of any existing continent.
the ports need to be a neutral-looking colour (white or grey, perhaps?) rather than being the same colour as one (or two!) of the continents. the attack routes from the ports are very clear.
ian.
