Moderator: Cartographers
ZeakCytho wrote:I don't like the look of the new roads. They look like they were drawn haphazardly and just don't have a nice feel to them. Maybe if you smoothed out the transition from light to dark it would be better.
KewlI like the new colors - it's much easier to tell the 2nd and 3rd Cataracts apart.
I suggested this earlier, but didn't get a reply. I think the pillar Taharqa sits on was better when it the main color was light and the flourishes on it were dark. Right now, the main part of the pillar is dark and the design-bits are light. I don't think flipping the current colors would work, since the pillar would blend into the desert then, but you could lighten the pillar a few shades and use a very dark color for the designs.
TaCktiX wrote:I'm pretty sure I made the comment before that the space between the columns at the bottom of the map is kinda dead compared to the liveliness of the rest of the map.
Are Nobo-arba and Nobo-sitta able to attack each other, the well, and Nobo samsa? I find that jumble of attack routes fairly confusing.
max is gr8 wrote:The bits in the middle are a bit bland, maybe add farms or something along the side as scenery.
Lone.prophet wrote:nice looking map here
though i dont like how the roads are now cause
1. they look messy and choppy
2. they are a bit to blended i think i didnt see them at first hand
3. they are confusion in direction and route
Lone.prophet wrote:and maybe the stones at Aniba and Askut it looks asif the connect the 2 territories i dunno if that also is the case
the rest look awesome
AndyDufresne wrote:Yes, they look like they are shallows connecting regions...maybe if you adjust the placement so at least 1 side is touching non-gameboard areas, that may clear up the issue.
--Andy
Lone.prophet wrote:nice looking map here
though i dont like how the roads are now cause
1. they look messy and choppy
2. they are a bit to blended i think i didnt see them at first hand
3. they are confusion in direction and route
Lone.prophet wrote:def better but i think you can make them more noticable.
No. Perhaps i need to put there: The River Nile is passable only to territories opposite each other using the Dows....and as a question do the boatsterritories also connect to other boatsterritories on the same nile piece, like KUBBAN connects to SERRA?
TaCktiX wrote:I don't think it's necessary as this wasn't an issue with Lower (quenched) or Upper (I,Gp,Gr) Egypt, which have the exact same Dow mechanic. I think everyone's simply assumed that it's "directly across" and nothing more spectacular, especially since you're selling all three maps as simple classic gameplay.
natty_dread wrote:I was wrong
gimil wrote:I got a few small questions.
1. The use of dows and cataracts may be a confusing aspect from a gameplay point of view. Would you consider using bridges instead? I feel it will cut out some headache that it may cause.
Fair enough, but this is the same style used on the other maps and i'd like to keep it. However, i may adjust the bottom somewhat.2. I dont really like the layer effects used the the top part of the legends/title, I prefer the simplier and cleaner text you have used on the lower legends on the map.
natty_dread wrote:I was wrong
gimil wrote:I can live with the dows personally
But the title area and the dow and cataracts explaination text jsutdoesnt do it for me, Its to bold and clumpy feeling rather than crisp and neat like the text throughout the other edgyt maps.
yeti_c wrote:Not been back in here for a while - but this map has come on a lot.
1 small nitpick "Well of Ramessess" -> "Well of Ramessess II" (Can you make the name consistent between the 2)?
C.
Users browsing this forum: Hansei