MrBenn wrote:yeti_c wrote:What's the Paw with BP in it for?
It's my 'signature'...
But what does BP stand for?
C.
Moderator: Cartographers
Cairnswk
MrBenn...forgive me for not trolling all the way back through the thread if this has already been discussed,,,but how is this going to go for downsizing to the small map...are the armies going to fit onto some of these smaller terts.
rebelman wrote:why has the point about the balkans raised by me (p13) and others been ignored by the map maker ?
on a more general point this map really needs a lot of work to get it to ff standard
MrBenn wrote:Qwert, I just mocked up a version of Map F just for you, but I can't add it to the poll
If enough people vote to split up the Med Islands, then I'll give this further consideration.
natty_dread wrote:I was wrong
john1099 wrote:Why do we need two versions of one map?
saxitoxin wrote:Your position is more complex than the federal tax code. As soon as I think I understand it, I find another index of cross-references, exceptions and amendments I have to apply.
Timminz wrote:Yo mama is so classless, she could be a Marxist utopia.
MrBenn wrote:Qwert, I just mocked up a version of Map F just for you, but I can't add it to the poll
If enough people vote to split up the Med Islands, then I'll give this further consideration.
MeDeFe wrote:john1099 wrote:Why do we need two versions of one map?
Good question, delete World 2.1 someone, and extreme global warming is also a world map, as is Doodle. And one of the AoR maps, not to mention two of the three US based maps.
john1099
Joined: 10 Feb 2007
Posts: 2191
Location: St. Catharines, ON
Posted: 07 Feb 2008 23:36 Post subject:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why do we need two versions of one map?
MrBenn wrote:Ruben, thanks for your input, and the thought you've been putting into this map... I appreciate your honesty, criticism (constructive), and creativity.
Here's my vaguely thought-out response to your post above:
1. I'm toying with the idea of Gibraltar/England being connected, but there isn't a lot of room for an ocean path there... I'm not overly concerned about keeping it on the map, so I'm open about keeping it or not!
2/3. I like the 'Micro-state' idea, and the Latin Europe grouping makes sense. However, all of the micro-states would be inside Latin Europe (except Cyprus)... I need to think about this a bit more to see how it could work...
4. I originally had BeNeLux as part of Central Europe; is your suggestion to have them merged together again, or as some sort of World 2.0 sub-continents? If they're merged completely, then Central Europe becomes 7 territories, defended by 5 borders... just throwing that into the mix for discussion...
5. Depending what happens with the rest of the Med Isles (outcome of 2/3 above), I've no qualms about putting Crete with Greece in the Balkans...
This is my intial thoughts about your suggestions... I've a feeling that there isn't going to be a nice easy solution! As i said before, i really do appreciate your input.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users