Moderator: Cartographers
oaktown wrote:dropping the montegiardino bonus to +1 looks like a winner of an idea. I would encourage the same for chiesanuova.
Or better yet, you could put a bridge across the river from the chiesa and fiorentino territories; this would
1) add a border for the region to defend and makes it a more reasonable +2,
2) make starting in that corner a bit less of an advantage because you can't expand out quite as easily,
3) eliminate what is now a three-territory dead-end, and
4) eliminate the bottlenecks at both La Venezia and Casole.
As for the graphics, i agree that it's annoying when you like something as a mapmaker yet everybody else is pushing you to change it. But I encourage you to think about what the comments will be when the map is quenched and goes up for live play... for every voice now telling you that the rivers or towers look off there will be 1,000 users saying the same thing in a month or two.
yeti_c wrote:Ruben - how's about doing the towers like the ones in the Stamp on the left?
If you could make them look like that I think it would solve everything?!
C.
Ruben Cassar wrote:yeti_c wrote:Ruben - how's about doing the towers like the ones in the Stamp on the left?
If you could make them look like that I think it would solve everything?!
C.
Yeti...I actually used the same tower in the stamp this time!
yeti_c wrote:Ruben Cassar wrote:yeti_c wrote:Ruben - how's about doing the towers like the ones in the Stamp on the left?
If you could make them look like that I think it would solve everything?!
C.
Yeti...I actually used the same tower in the stamp this time!
Yeah - I quite like the way the three towers get smaller could you do that for the icon towers is what I meant?!
C.
natty_dread wrote:I was wrong
gimil wrote:The new rivers are less than impressive. I liked the last set you had or the set I have you
Ruben Cassar wrote:gimil wrote:The new rivers are less than impressive. I liked the last set you had or the set I have you
I know...sadly only you and I liked the old rivers so I was forced to change them. People commented that they looked like plastic (or plasticine!) tubes. Perhaps the majority like these better?
Edit: I added a poll about the rivers.
natty_dread wrote:I was wrong
gimil wrote:Voted
AndyDufresne wrote:I was "indifferent" to the previous version's rivers. What bothers me most about the Tower Graphics...they just seem to oddly sit on the map, independently, rather than being intergrated as a part of it...
--Andy
AndyDufresne wrote:Perhaps. And if that doesn't work, you could always use a "flat" alternative, a circle, a star, etc. I'd you rather not use those, but they might look more a part of the map.
--Andy
oaktown wrote:here's a question that may get you all upset at me, but stay with me...
What is the idea behind the towers anyway? My understanding of San Marino is that there are three famous towers in the country. You have nine. Well, you have 27 when you consider that each of the towers is represented by an image of three towers.
As I see it the three tower graphic is just a way of indicating where the town is in that district. So really it's not a bonus of the three towers, it's a bonus for holding towns.
Maybe it would be easier to just make the graphic a single tower?
edbeard wrote:I really don't like either of them, but 18 is way better than 16. 16 looks like someone painted tree roots grey for some weird reason.
Maybe consider not having the map be floating? Insert the surrounding non-playable area and then the river probably will look better rather than starting and ending somewhat randomly. Also, it'll just make the whole map look better.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users